Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Saturday March 18 2017, @06:07PM   Printer-friendly
from the flat-world dept.

Google has described a projection technique called Equi-Angular Cubemaps that can improve VR/360° video quality:

The image quality issue that plagues spherical video sources is a perspective problem. A traditional 2D video records a predetermined frame and is played back on a display of the same shape and perspective. VR/360-degree video doesn't offer that luxury. Although you can choose which perspective you wish to see, your view is always a fixed resolution and shape, no matter where you look. The image is technically flat, which means the source feed must be warped to fit a flat plane. The process is comparable to what cartographers go through when trying to map the globe to a flat surface. In order to fit the spherical earth map onto a flat image, the perspective must be altered.

[...] Google's Daydream and YouTube engineers came up with a new projection technique called Equi-Angular Cubemaps (EAC) that offers less disruptive image degradation. EAC keeps the pixel count even between cubemap samples, which produces balanced image quality across the board. [...] Google is already putting Equi-Angular Cubemap projection to work. Spherical video playback from YouTube with EAC support is now available on Android devices, and Google said support for iOS and desktop is coming soon. If you want to know more about EAC, Google's blog offers a deeper explanation of the technology, and the YouTube Engineering and Developers blog has additional details.

Original Submission

Related Stories

Google Research Proposes New Foveated Rendering Techniques for VR 15 comments

Google Is Building A New Foveation Pipeline For Future XR Hardware

Google's R&D arm, Google Research, recently dedicated some time and resources to discovering ways to improve the performance of foveated rendering. Foveated rendering already promises vast performance improvements compared to full-resolution rendering. However, Google believes that it can do even better. The company identified three elements that could be improved, and it proposed three solutions that could potentially solve the problems, including two new foveation techniques and a reworked rendering pipeline.

Foveated rendering is a virtual reality technique that uses eye tracking to reduce the amount of image quality necessary in areas covered by the peripheral vision.

The new techniques mentioned are Phase-Aligned Rendering and Conformal Rendering.

Also at Google's Research Blog.

Related: Oculus VR Founder Palmer Luckey on the Need for "Unlimited Graphics Horsepower"
Google Implements Equi-Angular Cubemaps Technique for Better VR Quality
Oculus Research Presents Focal Surface Display. Will Eliminate Nausea in VR
Virtual Reality Audiences Stare Straight Ahead 75% of the Time

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @07:45PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @07:45PM (#480901)

    NASA already has a standard for this, called HEALPix: [] .

    How is Google's EAC different from NASA's standard?

    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @08:38PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @08:38PM (#480910)

      Well, EAC is based on a single projection applied to each of the six faces of a cube, just like cubemaps -- the only difference is that this uses a different projection. Like ordinary cubemaps, it's very good at not wasting pixels in raster texture buffers (each face is a true square, and the six squares can be packed neatly in a rectangle); it approximates equal area much better than a regular cubemap, but it's not a true equal-area projection.

      HEALPix uses one (Lambert) projection for the equatorial region, and another (Collignon) for the polar regions. This is a true equal area projection, and has uniform representation of latitude, but at the cost of huge unused areas in both polar regions; roughly 30% of the bounding box is unused.

      So they really don't have much in common.