HMD prices

[K_Freddie]

I have a HMD 'plan' that I would like to finish by late next year.. and a question I'd like to ask.

Besides getting it for free :arrow: how much would you be prepared to pay for a HMD with the following features.

- 2x optics (adjustable). Not those cheapy's that you get at the moment
- 2x 800x600x24bit (1 inch displays), upgradable to bigger displays when available.
- 6DOF sensing built into the HMD
- Plan for surround sound in the audio system, But I haven't look at this yet

This will be the basic unit that runs off the PC, so can be used directly with any game. The more expensive additions (for serious gamers who have money to waste :grin:) to come are..

- A 'power processing box' to implement a Ray Tracing version of any game, which will allow for 3D visualisation across the 2 eyepieces, and other things like a PhysX engine on steriods, video capturing in real time at full frame rate (current target FPS is 50).

I've always had this 'dream', and recently the technology has become available, so instead of drinking too much beer/wine, I've got something to do for the next year or two. Hopefully it should be ready just after BoB comes out, but I'll contact Oleg when the protoypes are ready, and see if he's interested.
:cool::idea:

[Feuerfalke]

Interesting. :cool:

Please keep us updated on your project!

[HenFre]

K-Freddie that sounds like a really, really great idear.

I have been browsing the market, but have not seen any of these HMD's (Head Mounted Display) that meets the quality that I need contra the money that they cost ;)
Most of the HMD's are very high priced and when I read reviews they are generally bad.

The common faults seem to be poor resolution and a limited field of view. And the fact that when playing games it becomes very easy to suffer from vertigo :shock:

I find it very interesting that you mention the fact, that the displays will be upgradable as newer versions with higher resolution become available. This is also something that is not on the market yet and will be a great way to prolong the life of the HMD, which othervise could prove to be an expensive adventure.
The resolution that you mention in your post is that the true resolution or do you have to split it up into RGB? So the true resolution is more like 266x200?
And will the unit show true 3D or just two identical pictures :confused:

I am under the impression that it will be hard to get good displays for a HMD because of the supply and demand of this item. The demand for small displays are very high as they are also used in mobil phones, which has a very, very big market compared to say the market of HMD's. Do you have a good and reliable supplyer? :grin:

[K_Freddie]

Specs:
- Each eye channel will have a minimum 800x600 physical/true resolution .
- The idea is to make the LCD modules detachible from the HMD, so they can be replaced by new higher res ones when they arrive on the market.
- Software upgrades should be minimal.
- At first, the same image will be screen on each eye channel, allowing for a single graphics card video connection. A dual channel (one for each eye) might be available from the start... still toying with this idea.
- Surround sound

Real 3D images would only be available if.
- You have 2 graphics card in your PC that already does 3D, using each video output into a dual channel hmd (mentioned this above)
- You have the 'black box' which contains a number of parallel processing cpus, that'll do all the number crunching needed to do each eye's visuals.
The cost of the black box, a real rough 'guestimate' at the moment would be about 80-100% of a single, latest top of the range video cards.
Comparing this to 2 SLI or seperate video cards, it's not that bad.

Hopefully by the time it's ready, hardware prices will have dropped.
Anyway.. that's the BIG idea.
:)

[HenFre]

Take a look at this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIuzv8XcqmQ

More interesting is the fact that he mentions the VR 1440 for gaming. I have read that it will have a resolution of 800x600, but this product is not yet mentioned on the Vuzix homepage, so it might be a long way off..

[K_Freddie]

Sorry I don't do youtube (my bandwidth costs), but did a search for that product... no results = no promise:grin:

I have the vuzix VR920.. and these are my personal thoughts about it.

- optics are mediocre
- the head position sensors were not engineered well resulting in reference instability.

I'm a hardware 'nut', if you wish and I stripped my VR920 to check out the inner workings. I really thought that they did half-a-job on this one. The optics and lcds came in a module, and they added their head sensoring thing to it.

My impression is that they did not know what they were doing, as there were much better position sensors on the market before the VR920 was announced. With their new products they might have learn't a few things, but I'm not holding my breath.

Another thing you must be carefull of, is that there are all types of promises about the resolution of the LCDs, essentially saying that it is greater than the physical (actual LCD elements) res. This is so called 'achieved' by interpolation (averaging across pixels) but results in poor image definition.. ie: your 1024x768 (promised res) image is really a 512x384 (physical res) LCD. And when you realise this..512x384 is not what you wanted because it's a crappy res for IL2/BoB

These guys think it's OK not to tell you this and promise you the earth, resulting in smugdy images and shitty LCD frame rates. It's essentially because these guys have no clue about the hardware they're selling.... or they're just lying.

So be carefull
:)

[K_Freddie]

Sorry I don't do youtube (my bandwidth costs), but did a search for that product... not results = no promise:grin:

I have the vuzix VR920.. and these are my personal thoughts about it.

- optics are mediocre
- the head position sensors were not engineered well resulting in reference instability.

I'm a hardware 'nut', if you wish and I stripped my VR920 to check out the inner workings. I really thought that they did half-a-job on this one.
The optics and lcds came in a module, and they added their head sensoring thing to it.

My impression is that they did not know what they were doing, as there were much better position sensors on the market before the VR920 was announced.
With their new products they might have learn't a few things, but I'm not holding my breath.

[K_Freddie]

Don't know where the 2nd 'half reply' came from... Can the mods delete it please !

[Buster_Dee]

Count me in. I hate to hazard a price guess, but I would be willing to part with the price of a decent gaming monitor. I would suggest including a small, semi-transparent area near your cheek bones to help find controllers/ keyboard buttons.

[Foo'bar]

Count me in. I hate to hazard a price guess, but I would be willing to part with the price of a decent gaming monitor. I would suggest including a small, semi-transparent area near your cheek bones to help find controllers/ keyboard buttons.

And of course there has to be a small cut/hole that you can see if your wife is coming or sombody is standing beside you ;)

[Feuerfalke]

That's true - LOL.

If you don't see your wife/girlfriend closing in on your six, you'll be ejected from your virtual cockpit a lot faster and violent than getting a direct hit from an 8.8! :grin:

[nearmiss]

Interesting stuff

Looks like virtual reality may come to consumers soon.

Being able to see buttons and keyboard = not an issue

all you need is a voice command software with ability to program macros.

Just like in a cockpit with a co-pilot verbal instructions should work well.

It might be a departure from reality,but it would work as well with pilot only.

The video looked very shaky, so I'm thinking that may just be frame rate problem with the video.

800 x 600 is pretty lame at this point since you can't render best graphics, but it is a start.

I don't get too excited over anything that applies to games anymore. LOL

There have been so many schmaltzy products and stuff pushed at us.

[HenFre]

K_Freddie:

My biggest concern is also the resolution of the unit. I have seen a great deal of reviews on different products and all of the users have said, that these HMD's was useless in fligtsims because of the low resolution. The low resolution caused the player to not being able to read gauges or find the enemy planes, which is escential in these types of games.

I have never tried to use an actual HMD, so I have no idear if the resolution of 800x600 is enough for me to satisfied with the graphics.
So I just have a question: If I wanted to test how it looked, can I set my own display to 800x600 and then align it to one of my eyes. Distance my head from the display, so that it fills 30 degress in my field of vision and thats how it would look??

Would it not be better to use a display with say 1280x1024 straight away? Or are these dispays simply to expensive at this point in time. I have seen several units using this resolution and they have been produced since 2003, but still cost the same as they did when they where first revealed: 24.000 $

[K_Freddie]

Yeah! I was horrified at those prices too, and the cheap ones fudge the resolution numbers.
I'd say 800x600 is the bare minimum res, and if I can get the LCD manufacturer to sell them cheaper, using the 'upgradibility thing' for the HMD as motivation. all the better.

I'm thinking along the lines of what I'd want from a HMD...
- Decent real resolution, I'll start at 800x600 as this is a mixture of min res and costs. Greater resolutions would be great and might be used from the start, but I'd want to get things going first.
- LCD upgradibility by just replacing the panel. I don't want to buy a whole new HMD.
- I'd like to be able to use it either with an existing graphics card (or two), making it flexible for use in either normal or 3D visualisation. OR for extra POWER :grin: to be used with a 'black box' that consists of number crunching cpu modules.
- As the higher res screens become available, the CPU module prices should decrease in 'real terms', so scaling up costs can be minimised.
- Like IL2 I'd like to be able to use this product for at least 5 years, although most electronic devices are only guaranteed for 1-2 years. Looking after it makes it last a lot longer.

[HenFre]

Your plan sounds great. I would buy it :) Just do not ask 24.000 $ for it :grin:

You wrote earlier that you could not find any mention of the Vuzix VR1440, which I found on their website:

http://www.vuzix.com/iwear/products_wrap920av.html

Take a look under the Features tab and open the Product Sheet, which is a pdf file, that contains information about the VR1440.

Do you have an explanation for the titel VR1440?? Does the 1440 stand for anything about the resolution?

[K_Freddie]

That really looks nice... but judging from their other products the number doesn't have any relevance to the resolution. Also take notice of a few things here..

The name of the PDF file is 'Vuzix_Wrap_920AV_Brochure.pdf'. AV usually stands for Audio-Video, and I summise that it's probably HDTV format compatible res of 720x572 upwards, but not higher than 800x600 Real res.

Another give-away here is .. from their website.
PCs & Laptops with S-Video
S-Video is an analogue interface and inferior (resolution wise) to the digital I/Fs of todays graphics cards.

This tells me that the product is more geared for the Audio/Visual market where lower resolutions are more acceptable.
edt: A bit of sarcy here - Why would I watch TV through a pair of 'sunglasses' ? Then again I don't suffer from 'gadget-mania' :)

One thing that one must consider when looking for high-res, and good picture quality lcds, is that the LCD must have a digital interface (analogue I/Fs are generally not good enough). This makes this type of HMD a bit more bulkier than Vusixs glasses, but I think the trade-off will be worth it.