By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Sony releasing 3d headset looks awesome

 

would you buy it

yes 49 31.61%
 
no 41 26.45%
 
maybe 9 5.81%
 
depends on price 56 36.13%
 
Total:155
disolitude on 04 September 2011
Necromunda said:
killerzX said:
disolitude said:
killerzX said:
disolitude said:
Necromunda said:
 


This is where your reading it wrong, they are NOT blowing it up, that makes no sense, how it works is it uses an optical lens, which makes it APPEAR that size. All they are really doing is using an optical illusion, they are tricking the eye, so the eye will be able to focus on the picture, as it wouldn't normally at that distance from the eye without strain, etc etc. Therefor, respective pixel size is all the same, and you will not be able to see the pixels. If your theory was correct, it would of been MAJORLY pointed out at this point, yet there hasn't been a single report of pixelation from anyone who has has the privlidge to use the product.

I think your main problem is your comparing a projector, which literally takes an image and blows it up to a bigger size, to these glasses, which instead fool the eye/viewer into thinking the screen is bigger then it is. It all essentially has to do with how the eye/brain/optics work together in the HMD. Get what I'm saying?

I am not sure you realize how projectors work.  

Most 1080p projectors have a 0.7 inch-1 inch DLP chip, which contains 2 million tiny mirrors which reflect light that passes through a colorwheel on to a LENS. The LENS then blows up the image to whatever size you want...

This sounds to me exactly what Sony is doing with this, except they are not using DLP technology but LCD based pannel (OLED is still a form of LCD). I guarantee you there is no "optical illusions" or similar and that its just a straightforward image sent through a lens which makes it appear larger than it is. If there was, they would be using this tech to combat resolution loss on their TV's and projectors which make them way more money than this thing ever will...

Im sure that this is an incredible product and that only people looking for pixel density would notice it. Regular people looking at this will not see anything other than how cool and unique it is. One thing is for sure, for 3D this will ne king as there is absolutely no image crosstalk since you're dealing with 2 displays.

 


but the thing is, they arent blowing up any image.

projectors take, an image from a small lens, then PROJECT it onto a surface, making it bigger, therefore making each pixel bigger, so pixel density is much much lower.

this isnt projecting any image on any surface, and its not blowing up any image. there are 2 .7 inch (diagnol) screens that are really close to you face, and through special optics, fool your eye into percieving that the image is bigger. its not really 150 or 750 inches, so its not blowing up the pixels. on prejection tv, the image is actaull 150 inches, there for you have some fricken big pixels, and 720p would be trash.


It doesn't matter that they are not "blowing it up"...they are still blowing it up by putting it 1/2 inch away fro your eye. It all goes back to the screen size vs optimal viewing distance formula. 

 

VD: Viewing distanceDS: Display's diagonal sizeNHR: Display's native horizontal resolution (in pixels)NVR: Display's native vertical resolution (in pixels)CVR: Vertical resolution of the video being displayed (in pixels)

Luckily I found online an excel sheet which just asks for resolution and screen size and gives me optimal viewing distance, so I don't have to look for my scientific calculator every time I want to calculate this. :)

yeah, too bad none of that matters, because at 720p on .7 inch screen, no matter how close you eyes are, you wont be able to destinguish each pixel..

if i put my eye up against a object, im still not going to see a sub atomic particle. silly comparison put still works. 

when pixel density is that high, it doesnt matter. show me another .7 inch oled screen with a 1280x720p resolution, and then we can talk. 

if you wear these things and are able to make out the pixels, the you deseved to be worshiped, for you have suprhuman eye sight, and will have no use for microscopes


I also just realized something, which essentially crushes disolutudes argument in full. They are NOT blowing up the picture, at all, not one bit actually. All the optics in this particular set are doing is actually allowing your eye to focus, which gives you the IMPRESSION that it is farther away, due to your eye not normally being able to focus on an object so close. I realized this when reading around and finding out that this particular screen will completely full up, even the peripheral vision, for the average person, and also some interviews with sony reps I've watched buried in youtube back from CES.

Take this in conjunction with what killerzX and I have been saying regarding the sheer pixel density, and the BIOLOGICAL THRESHOLD (You can ramp up Resolution all you want, but that will ALWAYS be limited by the human eye, that also concurs for the size of pixels and what the human eye can visually see.) Taking this all into consideration, there should be no pixelation, and since it is OLED, it WILL rival most HDTV's out there today, making this nothing short of a superb product.


That crushes nothing I've been saying. Its jsuta  game of "they said, I heard".

Mathematical proven fact - 720p image which appears 750 inches at 20 meters will have more pixelation than a 32 inch 720p TV at 5 feet. Doesn't matter how small the initial image is, how close/far to the eye it is. 

Go find a 32 inch 720p TV and go about 3-4 feet away from it and turn off all the ligts and make everything pitch dark. That is how this HMD will look like.



Around the Network
Necromunda on 04 September 2011
disolitude said:
Necromunda said:
killerzX said:
disolitude said:
killerzX said:
disolitude said:
Necromunda said:
 


This is where your reading it wrong, they are NOT blowing it up, that makes no sense, how it works is it uses an optical lens, which makes it APPEAR that size. All they are really doing is using an optical illusion, they are tricking the eye, so the eye will be able to focus on the picture, as it wouldn't normally at that distance from the eye without strain, etc etc. Therefor, respective pixel size is all the same, and you will not be able to see the pixels. If your theory was correct, it would of been MAJORLY pointed out at this point, yet there hasn't been a single report of pixelation from anyone who has has the privlidge to use the product.

I think your main problem is your comparing a projector, which literally takes an image and blows it up to a bigger size, to these glasses, which instead fool the eye/viewer into thinking the screen is bigger then it is. It all essentially has to do with how the eye/brain/optics work together in the HMD. Get what I'm saying?

I am not sure you realize how projectors work.  

Most 1080p projectors have a 0.7 inch-1 inch DLP chip, which contains 2 million tiny mirrors which reflect light that passes through a colorwheel on to a LENS. The LENS then blows up the image to whatever size you want...

This sounds to me exactly what Sony is doing with this, except they are not using DLP technology but LCD based pannel (OLED is still a form of LCD). I guarantee you there is no "optical illusions" or similar and that its just a straightforward image sent through a lens which makes it appear larger than it is. If there was, they would be using this tech to combat resolution loss on their TV's and projectors which make them way more money than this thing ever will...

Im sure that this is an incredible product and that only people looking for pixel density would notice it. Regular people looking at this will not see anything other than how cool and unique it is. One thing is for sure, for 3D this will ne king as there is absolutely no image crosstalk since you're dealing with 2 displays.

 


but the thing is, they arent blowing up any image.

projectors take, an image from a small lens, then PROJECT it onto a surface, making it bigger, therefore making each pixel bigger, so pixel density is much much lower.

this isnt projecting any image on any surface, and its not blowing up any image. there are 2 .7 inch (diagnol) screens that are really close to you face, and through special optics, fool your eye into percieving that the image is bigger. its not really 150 or 750 inches, so its not blowing up the pixels. on prejection tv, the image is actaull 150 inches, there for you have some fricken big pixels, and 720p would be trash.


It doesn't matter that they are not "blowing it up"...they are still blowing it up by putting it 1/2 inch away fro your eye. It all goes back to the screen size vs optimal viewing distance formula. 

 

VD: Viewing distanceDS: Display's diagonal sizeNHR: Display's native horizontal resolution (in pixels)NVR: Display's native vertical resolution (in pixels)CVR: Vertical resolution of the video being displayed (in pixels)

Luckily I found online an excel sheet which just asks for resolution and screen size and gives me optimal viewing distance, so I don't have to look for my scientific calculator every time I want to calculate this. :)

yeah, too bad none of that matters, because at 720p on .7 inch screen, no matter how close you eyes are, you wont be able to destinguish each pixel..

if i put my eye up against a object, im still not going to see a sub atomic particle. silly comparison put still works. 

when pixel density is that high, it doesnt matter. show me another .7 inch oled screen with a 1280x720p resolution, and then we can talk. 

if you wear these things and are able to make out the pixels, the you deseved to be worshiped, for you have suprhuman eye sight, and will have no use for microscopes


I also just realized something, which essentially crushes disolutudes argument in full. They are NOT blowing up the picture, at all, not one bit actually. All the optics in this particular set are doing is actually allowing your eye to focus, which gives you the IMPRESSION that it is farther away, due to your eye not normally being able to focus on an object so close. I realized this when reading around and finding out that this particular screen will completely full up, even the peripheral vision, for the average person, and also some interviews with sony reps I've watched buried in youtube back from CES.

Take this in conjunction with what killerzX and I have been saying regarding the sheer pixel density, and the BIOLOGICAL THRESHOLD (You can ramp up Resolution all you want, but that will ALWAYS be limited by the human eye, that also concurs for the size of pixels and what the human eye can visually see.) Taking this all into consideration, there should be no pixelation, and since it is OLED, it WILL rival most HDTV's out there today, making this nothing short of a superb product.


That crushes nothing I've been saying. Its jsuta  game of "they said, I heard".

Mathematical proven fact - 720p image which appears 750 inches at 20 meters will have more pixelation than a 32 inch 720p TV at 5 feet. Doesn't matter how small the initial image is, how close/far to the eye it is. 

Go find a 32 inch 720p TV and go about 3-4 feet away from it and turn off all the ligts and make everything pitch dark. That is how this HMD will look like.


It does matter... They ARENT blowing it up, you don't get that, they are simply using the optics to FOCUS. Same way glasses work to focus. Do glasses blow up an image? NO.

Therefor, size does matter, because there is a BIOLOGICAL THRESHOLD. You don't seem to get that, I was a Biology Major for a year, and even though I switched, I learned a great deal about the eyes mechanics. There is a point, concerned with size, at which the eye loses its ability to distinguish individual objects. These pixels, since they are NOT being blown up, cannot be individually distinguished by the human eye, as they are far past the point at which an eye can recognize. Do you understand? A robotic sensor for instance, at this distance, may be able to distinguish, using your calculation, however a human eye has its limits, which your particular calculation does not account for.



kleen on 05 September 2011

If you can use it on other devices like a PC also I might get one.



disolitude on 05 September 2011
Necromunda said:
 


It does matter... They ARENT blowing it up, you don't get that, they are simply using the optics to FOCUS. Same way glasses work to focus. Do glasses blow up an image? NO.

Therefor, size does matter, because there is a BIOLOGICAL THRESHOLD. You don't seem to get that, I was a Biology Major for a year, and even though I switched, I learned a great deal about the eyes mechanics. There is a point, concerned with size, at which the eye loses its ability to distinguish individual objects. These pixels, since they are NOT being blown up, cannot be individually distinguished by the human eye, as they are far past the point at which an eye can recognize. Do you understand? A robotic sensor for instance, at this distance, may be able to distinguish, using your calculation, however a human eye has its limits, which your particular calculation does not account for.

I am sorry, I just don't agree and I am pretty sure I'm right.

Doesn't matter if they are magnifying it or not.

Even if there is absolutely no magnifying and they are placing the OLED 0.6 inches away from your eye (thats how close it needs to be to appear 750 inches at 20 meters and 150 inches at 3 meters), and then placing a lens in between to help your eye "focus" for an image that close,  you will see pixelation. Yes, human eye, with 20/20 vision will see pixels on a 0.7 inch 720p screen if its 0.6 inches away from it and in focus.

In order not to see pixels, the tiny OLED screen needs to be 1.2 inches away from your eye...but at that distance, you wouldn't be getting an image equivalent of 750 inch screen at 20 meters, so they would have to blow it up to make it look that big. Its lower pixel density no matter if they blow it up or not...

1080p for this image size would be perfect btw. And they should be able to do it, as Texas instruments can cram 1080p resolution using 2 million tiny mirrors in to a 0.6 inch chip.



Necromunda on 05 September 2011
disolitude said:
Necromunda said:
 


It does matter... They ARENT blowing it up, you don't get that, they are simply using the optics to FOCUS. Same way glasses work to focus. Do glasses blow up an image? NO.

Therefor, size does matter, because there is a BIOLOGICAL THRESHOLD. You don't seem to get that, I was a Biology Major for a year, and even though I switched, I learned a great deal about the eyes mechanics. There is a point, concerned with size, at which the eye loses its ability to distinguish individual objects. These pixels, since they are NOT being blown up, cannot be individually distinguished by the human eye, as they are far past the point at which an eye can recognize. Do you understand? A robotic sensor for instance, at this distance, may be able to distinguish, using your calculation, however a human eye has its limits, which your particular calculation does not account for.

I am sorry, I just don't agree and I am pretty sure I'm right.

Doesn't matter if they are magnifying it or not.

Even if there is absolutely no magnifying and they are placing the OLED 0.6 inches away from your eye (thats how close it needs to be to appear 750 inches at 20 meters and 150 inches at 3 meters), and then placing a lens in between to help your eye "focus" for an image that close,  you will see pixelation. Yes, human eye, with 20/20 vision will see pixels on a 0.7 inch 720p screen if its 0.6 inches away from it and in focus.

In order not to see pixels, the tiny OLED screen needs to be 1.2 inches away from your eye...but at that distance, you wouldn't be getting an image equivalent of 750 inch screen at 20 meters, so they would have to blow it up to make it look that big. Its lower pixel density no matter if they blow it up or not...

1080p for this image size would be perfect btw. And they should be able to do it, as Texas instruments can cram 1080p resolution using 2 million tiny mirrors in to a 0.6 inch chip.


The size argument I am talking about doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the particular focus, I'm talking about the same reason we can see objects under a microscope that we can't see with the naked eye. It's the biological threshold of what we can see due to SIZE. There is a LIMIT to what the Human Eye can see, and the size of these individual pixels are far beyond that limit, regardless of how close to our eye it is, your formula, whether you like it or not, does not address that.

Also, you would be getting the equivalent of a 750 inch screen at 20 meters. You do in fact realize, that at that size, it will take up your entire field of vision, correct? Thats already been stated that this takes up, even most peoples peripheral vision, therefor giving the EQUIVALENT. You need to start understanding biology, and the limits of the human eye to understand what I'm talking about. Both Biology and Tech come into play here, you need to start addressing both.



Around the Network
d21lewis on 05 September 2011
Icyedge said:
Xen said:
It defines useless waste of money, so no.

There are loads of worst way to spend money out there, you can surely find better things that define useless waste of money :P, like purchasing a Hummer or Bentley just for social recognition.


or smoking cigarettes, buying tons of clothes, collecting handguns, drinking a bottle of epensive liquor every week--all things that friends of mine do that cost them tons of money every month while I always seem to have money left over despite being payed about the same.  $800 is a little steep when it comes to something frivolous like this headset but it's hardly a difference maker.  It's two days of overtime, a christmas bonus, an income tax return, or one night of stripping.  It won't be missed.



Xen on 05 September 2011
Icyedge said:
Xen said:
It defines useless waste of money, so no.

There are loads of worst way to spend money out there, you can surely find better things that define useless waste of money :P, like purchasing a Hummer or Bentley just for social recognition.

Okay okay.

Along with most apple products, hugeass TV's and extreme edition Intel CPU's, it defines electronic waste of money.

:P



Icyedge on 05 September 2011
disolitude said:
Icyedge said:
disolitude said:

 


It doesn't matter that they are not "blowing it up"...they are still blowing it up by putting it 1/2 inch away fro your eye. It all goes back to the screen size vs optimal viewing distance formula. 

 

VD: Viewing distanceDS: Display's diagonal sizeNHR: Display's native horizontal resolution (in pixels)NVR: Display's native vertical resolution (in pixels)CVR: Vertical resolution of the video being displayed (in pixels)

Luckily I found online an excel sheet which just asks for resolution and screen size and gives me optimal viewing distance, so I don't have to look for my scientific calculator every time I want to calculate this. :)

Great formula, lol.  Though, its somewhat an evidence that closer to the screen you are, bigger the pixel you will see. Im a bit surprise that we need to explain this.


Yeah I think the fact we did projector setups help us understanding this a bit clearer. Measuring the throw distance to get a certain diagonal and the angles for scren gain drop off ratio and such...

I do think this unit has a lot of potential for 3D due to no crosstalk, and 720p is the only resolution supported for 3D so its as good as can be in that department. But yeah, I don't see any videophile replacing his Panasonic AE4000 projector or Pioneer plasma to get this.

3D games are all in 720P, but did you know 3D blu ray are 1080P?



Icyedge on 05 September 2011
killerzX said:
 

yeah, too bad none of that matters, because at 720p on .7 inch screen, no matter how close you eyes are, you wont be able to destinguish each pixel..

if i put my eye up against a object, im still not going to see a sub atomic particle. silly comparison put still works. 

when pixel density is that high, it doesnt matter. show me another .7 inch oled screen with a 1280x720p resolution, and then we can talk. 

if you wear these things and are able to make out the pixels, the you deseved to be worshiped, for you have suprhuman eye sight, and will have no use for microscopes

Your comparison is good, but sub atomic particle are a lot smaller then pixel on a .7 inch 720P screen. When im saying seeing the pixel, its more about being able to tell the difference between 720P and 1080P. You should only be able to see the pixels (black square) on white background.

Its a basic principle really, since its the pixels that compose the image, you cannot give the illusion of  a bigger screen without giving the illusion of bigger pixels, its just impossible. Whether your projecting the image or just getting really close to it doesnt matter. Whats important is how much of your viewing range it takes. Just think about looking at 3 different 70 inches TVs from 20 meters away, will you be able to tell which is 480P, 720P and 1080P? No! But at 2 meters? Yes, easily. Same thing goes for 3 different .7 inch screen. At 20 centimeters will you be able to tell which is 480P, 720P and 1080P? No! But at 2 centimeters? Yes, easily.



freebs2 on 05 September 2011

This kind of device would be great, combined with some motion sensing tecnology, it would add lot more immersion.
However, It's not the first device of it's kind. The eyeglasses manifacturer Carl Zeiss has alredy released a similar product.

http://www.zeiss.com/cinemizer