Ready Player One: Don't Miss This Immersive VR Experience

  • Thread starter Thread starter jtlz
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the resolution and fidelity required for virtual reality (VR) to create experiences indistinguishable from reality, inspired by the movie "Ready Player One." Participants explore various aspects of VR technology, including resolution, pixel density, and the impact of lenses on immersion.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the resolution needed for VR to be indistinguishable from reality, citing their experience with the Samsung S8 Gear VR as low resolution.
  • Another participant argues that while resolution may be sufficient, the lack of fidelity, particularly in dynamic lighting, is the main limitation, predicting advancements by 2025.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that even with high resolution, pixel visibility remains an issue, proposing a theoretical resolution of 14400x12800 to eliminate pixel visibility.
  • One participant presents a formula for pixel density based on human vision, indicating that at one inch from the eye, a resolution of about 3500 pixels per inch (ppi) would be necessary.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of the fish eye lens in creating an immersive experience, arguing that it significantly enhances the perception of depth in VR.
  • A later reply introduces the idea that individual vision differences affect the ability to distinguish pixels and discusses the limitations of the RGB color model in rendering the full human visual range.
  • One participant questions the necessity of simulating reality in VR, suggesting that creating fantasy worlds may be more appealing.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the sufficiency of current VR resolution and fidelity, with no consensus reached on the exact requirements for indistinguishable virtual experiences. The discussion includes multiple competing perspectives on the importance of resolution, pixel density, and the role of color quality.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include variations in individual vision, the dependence on specific definitions of resolution and fidelity, and unresolved calculations regarding pixel density and color rendering capabilities.

jtlz
Messages
107
Reaction score
4
One movie you shouldn't miss this week!

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ready_player_one/

Because it may come to us in the not so distant future...

http://www.thisisinsider.com/death-...at-comes-after-2017-3?utm_content=buffera845c

In the movie.. a character at one point couldn't differentiate between the virtual world and real world.. may I know what resolution must the VR google be to make it almost indistinguishable from reality?

I have tried the Samsung S8 Gear VR and it is low resolution like CGA monitor back in the 1980s.
If you haven't tried any VR googles yet. What's amazing is the 3Dness effect due to the inclusion of fish eye like lens making you sense depth.. so a VR google is not just like looking at tiny monitor inside the googles but it is immersive.. you need to try it to appreciate it!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I read the book, can't wait to see the movie.

I think we're already at the resolution required to make a virtual world indistinguishable. It's fidelity that's lacking, not resolution. GPUs simply don't have the algorithms or processing power required to render anything close to photo-realism (dynamic lighting is the main bottleneck.) I'd take a guess that AAA studios will begin to punch through the uncanny valley by 2025.
 
newjerseyrunner said:
I read the book, can't wait to see the movie.

I think we're already at the resolution required to make a virtual world indistinguishable. It's fidelity that's lacking, not resolution. GPUs simply don't have the algorithms or processing power required to render anything close to photo-realism (dynamic lighting is the main bottleneck.) I'd take a guess that AAA studios will begin to punch through the uncanny valley by 2025.

What are you talking about.. even with the high resolution of our existing googles now at https://newatlas.com/gear-vr-vs-oculus-rift-specs-comparison-2017/49015/

iFkMWw.jpg


We can still see pixels inside the googles (because we are so close to the screen and it has fish lens of some kind).. so the resolution we may need not to see pixels may be 14400x12800 or so (how do you compute the resolution where you can't see any pixels anymore).. anyone?
 

Attachments

  • iFkMWw.jpg
    iFkMWw.jpg
    28 KB · Views: 652
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: newjerseyrunner
Did the math, you were right. We’re not there yet, but getting close. Resolution doesn’t matter, it’s density.

Humans can destignguish individual pixels greater than about one arcminute. So the formula for density would be

60 * distance from eyes * tan(1 deg). So at one inch from your eyeball you’d want a resolution of about 3500ppi.
 
newjerseyrunner said:
Did the math, you were right. We’re not there yet, but getting close. Resolution doesn’t matter, it’s density.

Humans can destignguish individual pixels greater than about one arcminute. So the formula for density would be

60 * distance from eyes * tan(1 deg). So at one inch from your eyeball you’d want a resolution of about 3500ppi.

Shouldn't you factor in the fish eye lens?

The fish eye lens is what causes the immersive experience in VR.. before I looked through one.. I thought it was just like looking at tiny monitors inside googles. but it was not.. it has to be tried to believe...
 
jtlz said:
...
In the movie.. a character at one point couldn't differentiate between the virtual world and real world.. may I know what resolution must the VR google be to make it almost indistinguishable from reality?
...

Depends on your vision. Some people can distinguish things that others cannot.

There is also a color quality. Blends of three monochromatic pixels make the color in most screens. Real objects are usually sunlight with some frequencies adsorbed/transmitted and frequencies scattered. We are used to thinking of objects as the same thing whether they are under florescent, incandescent, or in direct sunlight. Walk around after a snowstorm and really focus on the color of the snow. The snow under HPS streetlights is not the same as the snow under mercury vapor lights. Most peoples brains accept the difference and render it irrelevant. The conscious mind usually registers "this parking lot has snow" and not "this lot is scattering HPS light". The contrast between leaves sprouting in the spring and leaves in summer is strong in most trees. If you held the leaves next to each other you could clearly see it. You can compare leaf color to the evergreen needles nearby. Most people believe that maple leaves are one color until fall when they turn to red or orange. We also do not think of the trees and other objects changing color when the sun sets but it is happening. A lump of coal and a snowball both scatter sunlight and are essentially the same. Our brains decide which is coal and which is snow because of the relative intensity. The VR goggles can be good enough if the goggles cover both eyes even if you could easily tell which eye was seeing reality using VR monocles.

Another angle, why would you want to simulate reality? Creating fantasy worlds sounds like a much better option to me.
 

Similar threads

Virtual Reality Headset Resolutions
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
News Does 'pack journalism' shape the science news we read?
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Graduate What Makes Orodruin's Physics Journey Unique?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 241)
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 257)
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K