Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Glasses-Free 3D On iPad (Sorta)

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the where-all-the-blue-women-at dept.

Apple 96

johkir writes "The Engineering Human-Computer Interaction (EHCI) research group has created an apparent 3D effect on the iPad 2. Called the Head-Coupled Perspective, it uses the front camera to track the relative changes in the position of the user's head."

cancel ×

96 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Smart... (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792584)

But I wonder how it'll react to being touched. They should put out an API for this sort of thing. Could truly change the industry.

Re:Smart... (1)

Lunaritian (2018246) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792640)

Dunno about that. I still believe that 3D is one of those things that is interesting for a while, and then you move on. The only thing that remains for me is a headache.

This feels better than promoted "3D" / stereoscopy (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792974)

Something very similar showed up also on DSi [youtube.com] . It generally feels almost as great as when you hold a "proper" hologram (unfortunately only static ones have good quality so far; for good holographic dynamic display we need pixels smaller than the wavelength of light + processing and memory we're nowhere near yet - but once there, a screen could be felt essentially like a window or mirror)

Stereoscopy feels very flat to me in comparison - yes, there's depth of course, but the usual very deep focus makes everything feel like few disconnected planes, kinda similar to many backgrounds in SNES platformers (most noticeable on many / most(?) Vievmaster photos; and a stereoscopic image with shallow focus brings even more issues; generally, I have an impression that stereoscopy bets on the wrong parts of depth perception: if you think about it, the parts it uses cannot be the primary hints for our brains, since they are the result of our eyes converging on a particular object & its depth... so the brain must have a good idea about depth beforehand)

Re:This feels better than promoted "3D" / stereosc (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35793634)

Not just the DSi, but some guy also did something similar for the Wii a few years back:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw

Re:This feels better than promoted "3D" / stereosc (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35794094)

I have an impression that stereoscopy bets on the wrong parts of depth perception: if you think about it, the parts it uses cannot be the primary hints for our brains, since they are the result of our eyes converging on a particular object & its depth... so the brain must have a good idea about depth beforehand)

Not necessarily. I don't pretend to be a neuroscientist but it seems entirely possible that the brain uses a simple minimization-of-fuzziness algorithm to focus the eyes, then once they're both focused on the same object depth can be computed.

Re:This feels better than promoted "3D" / stereosc (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35794234)

And stereoscopy ignores fuzziness by using deep focus... (or, again, when it doesn't - it brings even more troubles, very conflicting stimuli)

Re:Smart... (5, Informative)

JustinOpinion (1246824) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793036)

To recap [slashdot.org] the reason why current 3D implementations are lacking (and thus give some people a headache)... Humans use at least 5 tricks to determine the three-dimensional makeup of a scene:
1. Focal depth: based on how much the eye's lens has to focus
2. Convergence: based on the slight differences in pointing of the two eyes to a target
3. Stereopsis (static parallax): based on the slight differences between the left and right eye images
4. Motion parallax: based on the different displacements/motions of objects at different distances (e.g. as you move your head)
5. Visual inference: reconstructing using cues like occlusion, lighting, etc.

In the real world, all 5 of those systems work in concert, giving you a consistent understanding of your environment. The problem with modern 3D implementations is that they only trick you using only two, or maybe three, of the above. For instance "3D glasses" are showing you different left/right images, creating fake stereopsis, but the focal distance is still "to the screen" and doesn't match the apparent parallax-based distance to objects. So your brain is rightly confused because the various systems are giving conflicting answers. Amazingly our brains have no problem looking at two-dimensional images like pictures and conventional movies: in such cases 1-4 don't work, and our brains instead just use #5 to fully reconstruct/guess at the three-dimensional nature of the scene. A few optical illusions notwithstanding, this works remarkably well.

What's presented in the above video is fooling your brain using motion parallax. This is neat, but because the image is still flat, your other brain systems (1-3) will be giving a different answer and so the illusion won't be perfect.

In principle we could combine techniques to make for a more convincing sort of 3D. E.g. combine motion parallax (eye tracking) with stereopsis (3D glasses). But it won't be truly convincing (and thus headache-free) until we fully reconstruct the three-dimensional light-field that should properly be emanating from the virtual objects. Doing this requires some very good holography, to fully reconstruct the required light waveforms, or something like anisotropic pixels that can control their emission as a function of viewing angle. In the meantime, 3D will remain a bit of a gimmick outside of some niche applications.

Re:Smart... (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793626)

For instance "3D glasses" are showing you different left/right images, creating fake stereopsis...

A really "fake" one at that - as in, working in a "wrong" (not merely "incomplete") way: when the time comes to look at an object which is at a different depth (which is pretty inevitable - that's the point of "3D"), there's none of the "dance" of translucent scenery in front of and behind the momentary focus plane.

Also, in "2D" images and movies, a shallow focus can give a nice illusion of many effects... so it's also partly #1 and #3 (this shallow focus often resulting in a kind of translucence of objects); definitely #4, in some shots.

Re:Smart... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35795846)

Bullshit. If focal depth is such a problem then 2D movies cause headaches too. (Oh wait, they don't)

Re:Smart... (1)

ByteSlicer (735276) | more than 3 years ago | (#35795950)

But it won't be truly convincing (and thus headache-free) until we fully reconstruct the three-dimensional light-field that should properly be emanating from the virtual objects.

A big part of the problem is that your inner ear stays motionless while the 3D movie/game depicts motion. Most people's brains have difficulties processing those conflicting information streams, resulting in motion sickness (headache, nausea).
So even holographic 3D would be problematic once it starts moving...

Re:Smart... (1)

anomaly256 (1243020) | more than 3 years ago | (#35801658)

Most people's brains have difficulties processing those conflicting information streams

Well, you could always start killing everyone who experiences the problem then after a few generations everyone will be able to process conflicting information streams easily.

Re:Smart... (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35904496)

Huh, "killing"? Helloooo, what about the established practice of sterilization?

(so crude, such lack of subtlety and finesse... you have no chance of becoming the hegemon. Good, less competition for me)

Re:Smart... (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35950594)

From what I've seen, motion sickness in trains doesn't really happen when they roll slowly on perfectly smooth track, when you can't feel movement - but when the scenery outside the window (very 3D) moves.

I don't get headache, nausea with stereoscopy; can easily see it instantly with "rough" methods, the "crossing eyes" one for example, also for such videos. It just looks weird (even unreal & more flat) & wrong to me, and I can hypothesize why (other responses under top GP); the stimuli is conflicting also when looking just at visual parts.

Re:Smart... (1)

sh00z (206503) | more than 3 years ago | (#35796914)

But it won't be truly convincing (and thus headache-free) until we fully reconstruct the three-dimensional light-field that should properly be emanating from the virtual objects.

I've seen that 3D box. It's called a "puppet show."

Re:Smart... (0)

egamma (572162) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793340)

Flashback:

I still believe that these 'talking' movies is one of those things that is interesting for a while, and then you move on.

(a few years later)

I still believe that these 'color' movies is one of those things that is interesting for a while, and then you move on.

(2011)

Dunno about that. I still believe that 3D is one of those things that is interesting for a while, and then you move on. The only thing that remains for me is a headache.

Re:Smart... (3, Informative)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793660)

Stereoscopy is almost 2 times older than "'talking' movies"... it is, in fact, pretty much the only such thing reliably proving (few times already) to be a passing fad.

Re:Smart... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35799272)

yep... don't it as revolutionary yet.. doen't have any pratical use in real life... it's only entertainment i think. Or maybe I'm just ignorant.. but yes, I agree with you. at least for now

API: Already done. Sort of. (1)

DrYak (748999) | more than 3 years ago | (#35809244)

OpenCV already provides you the necessary building blocks.
And the best part : it's a library in C, and can be used on almost any device under the sun (not restricted to iOS).

Will there be a slashdot story... (0, Offtopic)

reebmmm (939463) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792606)

... for each instance of this being implemented on another device? Seriously.

Re:Will there be a slashdot story... (2)

Addict7 (2024042) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792704)

It has been done on a Nokia 1 year ago...

Re:Will there be a slashdot story... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35792828)

Will there be a Slashdot asshole whining about each and every article posted? Seriously. Why can't you just go to the next article?

Re:Will there be a slashdot story... (1)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 3 years ago | (#35814748)

Will there be a Slashdot asshole whining about each and every article posted? Seriously. Why can't you just go to the next article?

Because he *must* let people know that it's inconvenient to have to skip uninteresting stories - but doesn't want to moderate stories. Now, off to post the same thing in the Windows 8 app store article......!

Hey! (3, Informative)

Addict7 (2024042) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792630)

2008 just called, he wanted to share this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QoaklieUho [youtube.com]

Re:Hey! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35792722)

Oh my god!
Did you warn him? About Haiti and Japan?

Re:Hey! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35792802)

He didn't??? Asshole!!!!

Re:Hey! (2)

flote (1211696) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792738)

2008 just called, he wanted to share this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QoaklieUho [youtube.com]

2007 called and told 2008 to stop copying him ^^ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw&feature=fvwrel [youtube.com] heard this guy works for kinect, so could we see this tech deployed in xbox games?

Re:Hey! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35792758)

2007 just called, they also wanted to share this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw.

I don't know whether they're actually the same team, but one of the demos (the floating targets) looks pretty similar.

Re:Hey! (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793004)

I can't help but be reminded of this [xkcd.com] recent xkcd comic.

Re:Hey! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35793094)

Wow, why did they modded you offtopic? Because it wasn't an apple product? They have done this with wiimotes, webcams. But this one has to be front paged because it was "on an iPad"? (and because it has been sometime without an Apple story?)

Re:Hey! (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35794950)

2008 just called

Dude, did you warn them about Japan?

So... Holotoy? (3, Insightful)

MBCook (132727) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792638)

So it's the same thing as Holotoy [kode80.com] , which has been out since slightly after the iPhone 4 release? This isn't new, the only story here is that it's on the iPad.

Now Holotoy's effect isn't perfect, and the larger screen may help. I would be interested in seeing this in person, but it's not unique.

Re:So... Holotoy? (1)

greeze (985712) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792922)

Holotoy uses the accelerometer and calculates the viewing angle based on the iPad's orientation. This uses the camera and calculates the viewing angle based on the viewer's location in space. The main difference is that with this, you can put the device on a table and it'll adjust the angle as you move around it. You don't have to be holding and moving the device for it to work.

Re:So... Holotoy? (1)

MBCook (132727) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793178)

Since an update just after the iPhone 4 was released, Holotoy has a similar mode where it can use the front camera to do face tracking, simulating 3D the same way this program does.

Re:So... Holotoy? (1)

greeze (985712) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793250)

I stand corrected. You're right: this is nothing new.

Is Skeletor holding that pad? (0)

ciderbrew (1860166) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792662)

Eat something.

Old idea new twist (1)

mrops (927562) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793798)

I guess the only thing new here is that the camera is used for tracking. This was done with a Wii remtote year+ ago.

Go down to Head Tracking for Desktop VR Displays using the Wii Remote http://johnnylee.net/projects/wii/ [johnnylee.net]

Video for the impatient http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw [youtube.com]

Down-play this all you want... (1)

Stenchwarrior (1335051) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792670)

...but this is cool. Disclaimer: I'm not a fanboi

Re:Down-play this all you want... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35792730)

Methinks the lady doth protest too much...

Re:Down-play this all you want... (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792844)

I think you do not know how the disclaimer is supposed to work.

3D? (1)

Glarimore (1795666) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792690)

Making something that looks 3D and making something that either does, or appears to project a 3D image into space are two different things. This is nothing more than drawing a picture with perspective... next, please.

Re:3D? (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792984)

Not to mention, there is absolutely nothing new or novel presented in the video.

Re:3D? (1)

darkgrayknight (1679662) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793202)

huh, did you watch the video? yes it is a picture with perspective, but the perspective changes as you move your head.

Re:3D? (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793344)

And? Some of the first tech demos I became aware of were done on Android over a year ago and even then, I *seriously* doubt Android was the first implementation. I strongly suspect this was first done a decade ago or more elsewhere on non-commodity hardware. Hell, the android tech demo I saw was even more interesting because they were combining a projected building with real-time video from the on board camera and aligning the rendered building with the video feed.

Really, the only thing first here is its finally possible on commodity hardware. Its just that the sensors and graphics capability, bundled together, simply didn't exist until the last five or six years.

*yawn*

Re:3D? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35793500)

huh, did you watch the video? yes it is a picture with perspective, but the perspective changes as you move your head.

There was a Nintedo DSi downloadable game that used the DSi's camera to track the head movement and display a very similar 3D effect. I don't know the name of it, but it only came out in Japan. Here's a link to a video of it in action.

http://gamevideos.1up.com/video/id/28532

Re:3D? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35793910)

Yes, they are drawing it with perspective, but that perspective is face relative, which is pretty cool, especially in real time.

Nice to see someone actually following up on this (2)

grapeape (137008) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792720)

There was a game on the ipod touch years ago called Word Fu that did something similar without a camera, when you tilted the ipod your view of the dice would change so you could see the sides...it was subtle and not even an advertised feature but it became a rather mind blowing demo to show off to friends. It was accelerometer based only but combined with head tracking it could be an amazing new way to play games if it gets support.

why not prismatic lenses? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35792746)

Why can't you put prismatic lenses aligned with the LCD matrix into a LCD panel? Have you seen the latest 3D posters and postcards? Those lenses are very good.

Re:why not prismatic lenses? (1)

jamesh (87723) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792966)

They work well with your head in just the right place, and produce stereo vision but with no sense of parallax shift. This simulates the parallax effect but doesn't give you stereo vision. I'm not sure which is better... this would be fine if you were a cyclops or a pirate.

Re:why not prismatic lenses? (1)

mikechant (729173) | more than 3 years ago | (#35795624)

But not so good if you were a cyclops *and* a pirate...

Re:why not prismatic lenses? (1)

strack (1051390) | more than 3 years ago | (#35800320)

i believe there was some tech that had the lenticular lens mechanically move around to keep the eyes that it was tracking in line with the sweet spot.

Looks Familliar (2)

Godai (104143) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792754)

There was a story on Slashdot a while ago (last year? later?) about how someone did something similar on the Wii: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw [youtube.com]

I notice the 3D target thing is the same (I mean, EXACTLY the same) but maybe that's some kind of pre-packaged 3D test everyone uses? Though I noticed that the first example in the iPad used what were clearly Mii faces; is this just an adaptation of the Wii guy's work? Granted, the Wii guy had to strap the controller on his head, so they'd have to use the facial locating software. Ironically, that's what Nintendo's had since the DSi (and greatly improved in the 3DS). In fact, I *think* that's how the 3DS works -- using this trick. I might be mistake on that, but I'm pretty sure it uses facial location; I just can't remember if that's all it needs to get the 3D effect or if it uses other stuff as well.

Re:Looks Familliar (1)

redkcir (1431605) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793018)

Johnny Lee use to work for that company (EHCI), but he doesn't seem to be on the roll anymore. You are right, old tech in a new box.

EHCI is not a company (1)

^BR (37824) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793360)

It's a research group under the publicly funded research institute CNRS. This is French people tax euros at work (with likely a sprinkle of European funds).

Re:EHCI is not a company (1)

redkcir (1431605) | more than 3 years ago | (#35796744)

As this is targeted at for the Ipad and doesn't seem to be open source and was used on the wii first (a Nintendo product), it looks like a ripoff of Johnny's work by the French for profit. Sounds like a company to me. Just saying.

Re:Looks Familliar (1)

^BR (37824) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793474)

Also Johnny Chung Lee used to work at the HCII lab of CMU, not there.

Re:Looks Familliar (1)

redkcir (1431605) | more than 3 years ago | (#35796646)

Woops! Looks like I got some of my letters wrong. Still, it was done on a wii first, so still old tech on a new box.

Re:Looks Familliar (1)

HelioWalton (1821492) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793022)

No, the 3DS shows an interlaced image, and has a polarized layer over top that points the right lines at the right eyes.

Re:Looks Familliar (1)

Godai (104143) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793730)

Ah, ok. I knew they had facial recognition (well, location) software form the DSi. Someone told me it was doing the trick outlined in the article, but I guess not. I did wonder why that would produce the double-vision you get from the side :)

Though I *think* someone had this trick working on the DSi. I could have sworn there was a Slashdot article where some game company in Japan had used the 'locate the face' trick to create the effect. If I'm remember right, that might be why I got it confused with the 3DS. Or I could just be remembering everything completely wrong :P

Re:Looks Familliar (1)

HelioWalton (1821492) | more than 3 years ago | (#35794208)

I think you may be right, I think someone DID do this on the DSi, whether it was an actual game company or a homebrewer, I'm not sure.

Re:Looks Familliar (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35793028)

I thought the same thing. Incidentally, I don't think he had to have the controller strapped to his head. AFAICT He could have got the same effect by attaching a couple of IR leds to either side of the peak of a baseball cap.

Re:Looks Familliar (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793054)

Nope, "3D" in 3DS is just the old trick of stereoscopy (old: barely younger than "2D" photography... so largely ignored - with few "golden eras" - for quite a while now); the barrier which shows each eye a separate image is just in the screen - not in, say, glasses. Which... makes it useless with the discussed trick.

Re:Looks Familliar (2)

buback (144189) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793080)

John Carmack did this ~ten years ago, but never released it, saying it was too slow (at the time) to be used in any ID games.

it's the parallax effect, which was also used in the 2D Duke nukem games 20 years ago.

but yeah, Johnny Chung Lee made it one of the best implementations i've seen so far, using a wii sensor bar and some IR LEDs.

it is a much more convincing form of glasses-free 3d, and it doesn't give you headaches from eye strain

Re:Looks Familliar (1)

sootman (158191) | more than 3 years ago | (#35795088)

I would pay so much if someone would make a game like Time Crisis [imageshack.us] with this tech. I've been waiting for a game to be made like this ever since I first saw that Johnny Lee demo years ago but no luck yet. That kind of responsiveness plus a wall-size projection would be so awesome.

Labyrinth Anyone? (1)

theJML (911853) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792774)

The wooden looking Labyrinth game that came out years ago on the iPhone/iPod Touch did this with just the accelerometers. It's a really cool in game effect, and I'm glad they made the change to use the cameras, but without some API worked into the next OS release, this seems to not be too useful.

Also, what's the CPU load with this running? Is it the kind of thing that takes a lot of processing power, or is it something that can be done in the background of a game?

Re:Labyrinth Anyone? (1)

SirMasterboy (872152) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792976)

I'm sure it's perfect for the iPad 2 and iPhone 5 as they are dual-core so there should be plenty of background CPU cycles to add in the head-tracking.

So, it's like Looksley's Lineup for Nintendo DSi? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35792816)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEMkgVnzvdE [youtube.com]

This game also uses an embedded camera to track your head relative to the system, enabling you to "look inside" the display. It's very fun, though it requires a near perfect environment for your head's background to ensure the tracking works properly.

Basics of depth perception. (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792824)

One basic method used by almost all animals with stereoscopic vision is to look at the scene using two eyes and use the difference to perceive depth. Human babies apparently achieve this remarkable feat between three and nine months of age. (Determined by placing babies face down on a glass ledge and checking to see if they feel alarmed. When the babies have mobility they checked to see if a baby would be wary of an apparent chasm and stay on the right side of the ledge. No babies were harmed in the research).

Another is parallax, used heavily by birds. Since the birds are constantly in motion, the view keeps changing. Objects far away change their bearings much more slowly than objects nearby. Thus birds of prey are able to judge distances accurately despite having non overlapping field of vision from their eyes. That is why birds keep cocking their head rapidly when they are sitting on a branch. They are using parallax to determine depth and distance.

For this technology to work, you need to develop the habit of cocking your head like a mocking bird constantly to get the depth perception.

More basics of depth perception... (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792916)

We also constantly perceive parallax (hence we perhaps use it - at the least, I would be disappointed if our brains didn't evolve to use such handy info) - the "doubling" of objects which are not currently on the focus plane. The rates of it very dependent on the distance from focus plane (so I suspect it might be a more useful info than the parts on which "3D" / stereoscopy depends on - allowing the brain to feel the depth of some object before focusing on it is, to know how to "set" the eyes is... kinda useful; and it might be one of primary reasons why stereoscopy feels not quite right / is virtually ignored for over 150 years already)

Re:Basics of depth perception. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35792978)

For this technology to work, you need to develop the habit of cocking your head like a mocking bird constantly to get the depth perception.

Or tilt the device (not sure what field of view the camera has, though).

Regardless, though, the effect is many times more convincing than single-viewpoint stereoscopic 3D.

Of course the kicker is that there's no reason the two can't be combined, which would make the effect even more convincing for the observer.

Re:Basics of depth perception. (1)

daid303 (843777) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793070)

We don't need depth perception for games and stuff. We need this.

I fondly remember Doom and Duke3D, and all the times that I stood up just to look down into my monitor to see how deep a pit was only to break the illusion of 3D.

Re:Basics of depth perception. (1)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793146)

One basic method used by almost all animals with stereoscopic vision is to look at the scene using two eyes and use the difference to perceive depth

...but if you try to fake this with stereoscopic images (e.g. never-to-be-sufficiently-damned 3D movies*) you set up conflicts between the stereoscopic sense and all the other methods (e.g. focal distance, head motion) and give people headaches. Plus you have to wear glasses.

From what I've seen of the similar accelerometer technique used in the Labyrinth app, this technique might be a bit easier on the eye...

Cat trap (1)

Ceriel Nosforit (682174) | more than 3 years ago | (#35792992)

I have decided. I am going to get a cat and an iPad with that software on it, and then I'm going to watch the world burn.

Re:Cat trap (2)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793338)

Simpler: hollow-face [wikipedia.org] & three dragons [grand-illusions.com]

Actually, inspired by how one preschool-theater costume (of a...cat; with proper ears) supposedly induced a panic attack in the kitten of my buddy, I essentially reworked the dragon once, to be more "danger! Possible unknown big cat!"-like. Yup, panic attack also in my cat.

(quick google search for the above wiki page even revealed one with a cat design [blogspot.com] ... I can't vouch for how convincing it is, though)

Re:Cat trap (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 3 years ago | (#35798194)

I had a cat, and my girlfriend put on a cat ear headband for a lazy Halloween costume, the cat growled, then ran away and hid for hours.

Otherwise the cat was fearless of people.

Re:Cat trap (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35950692)

I guess one can say her costume was quite unique & unusually good... actually inducing some sort of fear, for once ;p

And hey, no reason why cats shouldn't use such cognitive shortcut as the presence of cat ears.[1] I'm fine with it as long as cats are (supposedly; nvm the means) unusually good in generally realizing that humans are not cats; in comparison to, say, dogs. Even how the cats are almost certainly more stupid from them overall (and no wonder, cats don't have to function in groups), is more than balanced by how they appear less-retarded (an effect present also with humans, the more distanced ones appear wiser - perhaps because they were more likely to be a threat during our evolution, so ignoring their potential was nonadaptive; but really, consider two people, one acting and greeting you like a dog, the other like a cat - which one will appear deep and sophisticated, and which like a complete retard? ;p )

1. We sort of... use this one too! For example in such costumes :>
And many others, our minds operating mostly on guesses / best effort shortcut basis. We wouldn't be able to do almost anything otherwise. The illusions I linked to wouldn't work otherwise.
Likewise numerous cognitive biases. Having generally quite poor grip on ourselves: the myth of "monolithic me" while split-brain patients appear almost unchanged, while we are generally closer to our peers than to ourselves at different life stages; only believing how decent memory we have, convincing ourselves about reliability of it, not remembering how little we remember (and how, when people get older, they tend to start believing myths about the greatness of their youth... not the least because it makes us feel better when faced with "frustrating" reality of how much better in fact it is "now", for most cases of "now" - this one gives tiresome political results); there's even one very localised brain trauma which results in people becoming completelly blind... without them realising it; popular harmful BS lies / myth of "we're so important, gods love us, more of us live now than have ever lived!" & ignoring 100+ billion dead homo sapiens sapiens (at least we will be similarly ignored very quickly, so there's some "balance"...)); even about how decent and freedom loving people we are (it's a bit sad how our deep need for Just World gets derailed so easily :/ )

Yeah, cats aren't so bad. Those cute, fluffy killers of ours... ;>

Sounds Familiar (1)

mrpacmanjel (38218) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793010)

Anything done on an Apple product is new and innovating....

Actually....no.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw [youtube.com]
(Mind you. You would look pretty stupid with a wiimote taped to the side of your head!)

I imagine most devices with a front facing camera can do this.

There is also this: http://johnnylee.net/projects/wii/ [johnnylee.net]

Curb you enthusiasm fanbois nothing to see move along.

Re:Sounds Familiar (1)

^BR (37824) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793584)

Well the innovation here is obviously not the 80s video game 3D rendering but the fact that it tracks the user movement using just the camera, without the user needing to wear a ridiculous looking "tracking bar" mounted on safety goggles, if you don't see the innovation there well, can't help you.

Steve's Gonna Be Pissed (1)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793322)

Someone 3rd party jailbreaking hacker scum just stole Steve's "One more thing..." for iPad3. Release the app mods! Rape their goats and kill their women!

Now for the other part of the UI: 3D TOUCH (1)

wisebabo (638845) | more than 3 years ago | (#35793598)

It looks really cool* and I'd love to get this App on my new iPad 2 :)

The next step which I've been looking for but haven't seen yet is some means of a user "grasping" objects in 3D space. While the technology doesn't exist for a true haptic interface, you would imagine someone could use two cameras to calculate the 3D position of a user's fingers (or other body part!) or some sort of 3D depth sensor (how does the proximity sensor on an iPhone work?). So while this may not work on this generation iPad presumably it might on some of the other devices that have two cameras capable of parallax vision (Nintendo 3DS, LG tablets, various android phones).

One issue though is that these demos all show the 3D interface as if you are looking down into a "well" or into a box. Obviously since you can't put your fingers there you will need the display to appear to project "up" or "out" if you want a 3D touch interface to interact with your 3D elements. This will, of course, make the 3D volume and the view angles considerably smaller, so much so that perhaps it is only practical on a tablet sized device. There may be other problems such as occlusion caused by the fingers.

Anyone working on this?

*I know this was done before on the Wii and I believe the authors acknowledged the previous work done by a James Lee(?) at Carnegie Mellon (now at Microsoft I think).

Nintendo Handhelds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35793734)

There's a game on one of the nintendo handhelds (either the DS or the GBA) that does exactly this using a game cartridge with a built in Camera. Would love to see this more though.

Real 3D on ANY device!!! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35793982)

1) Set device on a hard surface (a desk or a table).
2) Look at the very top of the device -- the very, very top edge of the device.
3) Keep moving eyes up. There, the whole world should now be in 3D.
4) If the 3D world is blurry do not adjust your monitor -- go see en eye doctor.

Next step (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35794396)

Seems like a good next step, and we all know that doing it on the iPad will get the hits. iChat AV -> Wii -> Kinect -> Then this. I'd like to see it implemented on the big screen and even TVs instead of the current 3D glass hell we have, and the whole parallax issues. I also look forward to the day when this video will be dug up on youtube and we can smirk at the ancient graphics.

Re:Next step (1)

strack (1051390) | more than 3 years ago | (#35800228)

it would be really cool to see this implemented with 3d glasses. cause then you have a nice pair of glasses you can put a beacon in to locate your eyes without all this video tomfoolery, and you get the depth perception of 2 properly calibrated viewpoints that take the location of your eyes and the screen into account.

More than one person? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35794464)

What happens when there's more than one observer/user looking at the screen? :-)

Can you hear me now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35795490)

What?! My fucking phone keeps thinking I'm looking at someone else and muting the conversation to simulate an actual presence in the room!

vindication at last! (1)

fikx (704101) | more than 3 years ago | (#35795752)

So, when I lean one way or the other in FPS's trying to look around a corner, it might be useful instead of just funny looking?

more likely it'd be useful and funny looking, I'd guess....but at least some improvement ...

Shoot 3D movies for under $1000 (1)

WonderingAround (2007742) | more than 3 years ago | (#35797068)

Apparently "GoPro" camera's have made it possible to shoot your own 3D film's, on their website in states: "The 3D HERO System allows you to combine two 1080p HD HERO cameras into a single housing to record 3D video and photos while simultaneously recording in 2D. A synchronization cable plugs into the rear HERO Port on both cameras to join them together, enabling both cameras to record video and photos in perfect synchronization." So 2 of their 1080p HD camera's would run you around $270 each, plus the 3D HERO System that is actually quite simple and only costs $100 plus whatever mount's you may want. GoPro also just acquired "CineForm", which will allow you to edit the footage for free.

But is the head-tracking really important? (1)

jtara (133429) | more than 3 years ago | (#35797546)

I wonder, though, just how important head or eye tracking is? When you're viewing an iPad, I'd think that your head and eyes are pretty fixed. I noticed that in the demo, it was the iPad that was moving, not the viewer's head. Of course, that might just be because that's the best way to shoot a demo video - we might get seasick if the camera was moving around to mimic head movement!

But, given that a typical user isn't likely to move their head around while viewing an iPad, why not simply use the gyroscope (and possibly accelerometer, as well?) to track the movements of the iPad itself? Perhaps that would create the effect well enough, without the processing overhead of image processing.

Re:But is the head-tracking really important? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35798204)

I wonder, though, just how important head or eye tracking is? When you're viewing an iPad, I'd think that your head and eyes are pretty fixed.

Consider that, when using this technology, users might be more likely to tilt their head, i.e. to more naturally see around objects.

Re:But is the head-tracking really important? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35799236)

There's a part at the end of the video where the ipad is flat on a table, and the camera moves around. Also, I think the accuracy of the head tracking may be higher, since it constantly recomputes relative to a stable frame of reference, unlike the accelerometers which are just looking at motion relative to where it last thought you were. There may be latency in the image processing though, depending what kinds of techniques are being used. Fusing input from all of these sensors should be able to give the most robust results.

It's very exciting to see!

xk3d would be great on this. (1)

AnonymusCowMoo (2036504) | more than 3 years ago | (#35800024)

Actually I think that might be the place where they got the idea, it looks very similar: http://xk3d.xkcd.com/ [xkcd.com] More seriously, this will not solve the headache problem caused by the eye wanting to bring stuff in- and out- of focus and failing because it's all already focused.

one thing most people miss (1)

strack (1051390) | more than 3 years ago | (#35800162)

if this system can locate your eyes in 3d space in front of the monitor, then it should be able to compensate for the distortion of looking at your monitor at a angle. that requires not only a change in the viewpoint like you see in this video, but also distortion to compensate for the plane of the monitor being closer to your eyes at some corners. thats why most of this video dosent diverge from a head on view much. they didnt bother to code this in. it just changes viewpoints.

Re:one thing most people miss (1)

KingofSpades (874684) | more than 3 years ago | (#35804932)

Agreed. It would work as is if the camera was detached from the display and the display rotated to always be in the normal direction.

Wii (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35802684)

Done for the Wii as well. http://us.gizmodo.com/#!337068/wii-headtracking-creates-3d-window-display

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?