Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Friday September 22 2017, @03:43PM   Printer-friendly
from the nauseatingly-fun dept.

The China-based VR company Pimax has launched a Kickstarter for what they call "8K" and "5K" VR headsets. The cheapest version of the "8K" headset is listed at $500 and the company has more than quadrupled its funding goal. The Pimax 8K has a 3840×2160 resolution per eye for a total resolution of 7680×2160 and 32:9 aspect ratio (an actual 8K resolution would be 7680×4320). The field of view (FOV) for the headset is 200°, and is similar in design to the StarVR headset which has an FOV of 210°. By comparison, the latest HTC Vive and Oculus Rift headsets have a 110° FOV.

While the headsets have a listed refresh rate of 90 Hz, Pimax claims that its "Brainwarp" software technique can effectively double the perceived frame rate:

You may be asking yourself how a VR-ready gaming computer could possibly drive these sorts of graphically demanding resolutions. Pimax's answer is a software technique they call 'Brainwarp', which renders a 4K image only on a single display at time, doing it 150/180 times per second. Pimax says users "perceive a complete 8K at 150/180 Hz with high frame rate," and that it "boosts refresh rate, reduces latency and decreases GPU pressure for Pimax 8K."

Pimax showed off its headset prototypes at CES in January. The company is also developing modular accessories for its headsets.

Just 4.73 times more pixels to reach the "ideal" resolution.


Original Submission

Related Stories

Google Partnering With HTC and Lenovo for Standalone VR Headsets 7 comments

Google is partnering with HTC and Lenovo to produce standalone (no smartphone or tether) virtual reality headsets. The headsets could cost around $500-$700, comparable to the Oculus Rift or HTC Vive. As they will have less computational/graphics power than flagship smartphones or desktops, Google has developed a rendering system that they claim can compensate by decreasing the amount of polygons needed to render a scene (related video):

Meanwhile, a rendering system called Seurat — named after the pointillist painter Georges Seurat — is supposed to offer image quality that rivals what you'd get on a high-end PC. Andrey Doronichev, Google's director of product management, describes Seurat as "computational magic." It takes a rendered three-dimensional scene and samples shots of it from many different angles. As seen [here], Seurat uses these images to assemble a facade that drastically reduces the number of polygons the headset needs to render, without a visible loss of quality.

Google can also use the same Daydream user interface it's been fine-tuning for the past year on phones. A software update codenamed Euphrates will add the features you need for devices that users can't just pop apart and use as a phone, like a full-featured web browser and a dashboard for accessing settings and other non-VR parts of Android.

Google envisions VR and AR converging into mixed reality headsets, building on the augmented reality technologies developed under Project Tango as well as Daydream VR:

To make VR more transporting, and AR more convincing and useful, everything behind these experiences must improve: displays, optics, tracking, input, GPUs, sensors, and more. As one benchmark, to achieve "retina" resolution in VR — that is, to give a person 20/20 vision across their full field of view — we'll need roughly 30 times more pixels than we have in today's displays. To make more refined forms of AR possible, smartphones will need more advanced sensing capabilities. Our devices will need to understand motion, space, and very precise location. We'll need precision not in meters, but in centimeters or even millimeters.

Both the Rift and Vive have 2160×1200 displays. Roughly 30 times more pixels would mean a resolution of around 11880×6600, or 16704×4698 (32:9 aspect ratio).


Original Submission

AU Optronics to Ship 8K Panels to TV Manufacturers in H1 2018 21 comments

More 8K (4320p) TVs will be coming soon. AU Optronics has announced plans to ship 8K panels to TV manufacturers starting in the first half of 2018:

The lineup of panels featuring a 7680×4320 resolution will be aimed at ultra-high-end TVs and sizes will range from 65 to 85 inches, said Liao Wei-Lun, president of AUO's video products business group, at a press conference. The high-ranking executive did not disclose other specifications of the panels, such as luminance and contrast ratio, but given their positioning, it is logical to expect their characteristics to be comparable to 8K UHDTVs to be offered by LG and Samsung.

Multiple TV makers demonstrated various 8K UHDTVs at various trade shows in the recent years, but so far no one has started to sell them. Given the lack of content, it is hard to expect high demand for 8K televisions in the next couple of years, aside from the halo factor - nonetheless, AUO expects 8K panels to account for 10% of its '65-inch and above' panel shipments in 2020. The presumably high-cost of the panels would indicate that in terms of unit shipments this might still be a low-ish number. However, as with 4K displays, someone has to release 8K TVs to stimulate content providers to offer appropriate material. At this year's CES, Samsung demonstrated its Q9S, its first commercial 8K TV-set, but it did not announce its pricing or availability timeframe. LG and Sony also demonstrated their 8K TVs at CES 2018, but nothing is clear about their plans regarding these products.

[...] As for 8K displays for PCs, Dell is currently the only company to offer an 8K monitor (this one is based on a panel from LG, so the latter might introduce its own 8K display at some point). Philips last year promised to start shipments 328P8K monitor in 2018, so expect the product to hit the market in the coming months too.

Need something to watch on your 8K TV? How about the 2020 Olympics?

Also at DigiTimes.

Related: LG to Demo an 8K Resolution TV at the Consumer Electronics Show
Dell Announces First "Mass-Market" 8K Display
Philips Demos an 8K Monitor
Pimax Launches Kickstarter for "8K" Virtual Reality Headset
HDMI 2.1 Released
LG's 88-inch 8K OLED TV


Original Submission

Google and LG to Show Off World's Highest Resolution OLED-on-Glass Display in May 22 comments

Google and LG will show off an OLED display for virtual reality headsets that could have a resolution of around 5500×3000:

Google and LG are set to present an 18-megapixel 4.3-inch OLED headset display with 1443 ppi and a higher refresh rate of 120Hz during the Display Week 2018 trade show in late May. The display will have a wide field of view and high acuity. The advanced program for the expo was spotted by Android Police via OLED-Info.

Those specs make the forthcoming headset better than most of what's on the market. Screens like the new HTC Vive Pro and Oculus Rift only boast total resolutions of 2880 x 1600 and 2160 x 1200, respectively.

From the Display Week 2018 Symposium Program:

The world's highest resolution (18 megapixel, 1443 ppi) OLED-on-glass display was developed. White OLED with color filter structure was used for high-density pixelization, and an n-type LTPS backplane was chosen for higher electron mobility compared to mobile phone displays. A custom high bandwidth driver IC was fabricated. Foveated driving logic for VR and AR applications was implemented.

The competing "Pimax 8K" uses two 3840×2160 panels to hit 7680×2160 with a 200° field of view. Shipments of that headset have been delayed to April or later. A 2017 StarVR headset used two 2560×1440 panels for a 210° field of view. Two of the panels from Google and LG could add up to around 11000×3000 (based on The Verge's guess), 12000×3000 (36 megapixels), or 11314×3182 (36 megapixels, 32:9 aspect ratio).

Recall that AMD has envisioned VR resolution reaching 16K per eye (a grand total of 30720×8640, or over 265 megapixels).

List of common resolutions.

Also at UploadVR and Android Authority.

Related: Is Screen Resolution Good Enough Considering the Fovea Centralis of the Eye?
AU Optronics to Ship 8K Panels to TV Manufacturers in H1 2018


Original Submission

Pimax Announces "12K" VR Headset With Wide Field of View 11 comments

Pimax Announces $2399 Standalone Headset With 5.7K Per Eye & 200° Field Of View

Pimax just announced Reality 12K QLED, a future $2399 standalone VR headset with 5.7K per eye resolution and an astonishing 200 degree horizontal field of view.

Reality will use dual 5620×2720 200Hz HDR LCD panels with Mini LED backlighting and a quantum dot layer. While traditional small LCD panels use a single backlight behind the entire display, Mini LED instead uses thousands of tiny LED elements, delivering contrast levels close to OLED – though with the tradeoff of some blooming. The quantum dot layer should deliver an extremely wide color range, which Pimax claims surpasses even OLED.

Pimax says Reality will use a compound lens design combining a fresnel and aspheric element to get the advantages of both. The company claims the geometric distortion seen in the peripheral view on its current products will no longer be present in Reality. The field of view is listed as 200 degrees horizontal and 135 degrees vertical – covering the majority of human vision.

Four cameras on the front edges of Reality are used for inside-out tracking of the headset and its Oculus Touch-like controllers – or your hands freely. Through a partnership with Tobii it will have integrated eye tracking cameras, powering automatic lens separation adjustment and dynamic foveated rendering.

That covers pretty much every feature a VR headset should have.

It also has additional cameras for body tracking and facial expression tracking.

Also at Tom's Hardware and VRFocus.

Previously: Pimax Launches Kickstarter for "8K" Virtual Reality Headset


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.
(1)
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @04:41PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @04:41PM (#571697)

    It just seems like the world doesn't really need this; am I getting old?

    • (Score: 3, Touché) by jcross on Friday September 22 2017, @05:30PM

      by jcross (4009) on Friday September 22 2017, @05:30PM (#571709)

      Yes, it's clearly for porn.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @06:20PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @06:20PM (#571728)

    Most can't handle the real reality in front of them. Do we need this fake reality? Let's fix the real one first.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @08:39PM (8 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @08:39PM (#571796)

    what the hell is the "real 8K" comment supposed to mean?
    Are we completely giving up on the meaning of "kilo"?
    8K = 8000.
    2K = 2000. not 1920.

    use 4HD if you really want to have a cool looking number letter thing.
    or use 16HD.
    whatever.
    but please don't give in to the marketters misusage of "K".
    please.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Friday September 22 2017, @08:47PM (1 child)

      by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Friday September 22 2017, @08:47PM (#571802) Journal

      Cinematic 4K = 4096 × 2160. The 8K equivalent would be 8192 × 4320.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @03:01AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @03:01AM (#571969)

        That is sure what it sounds like to me.

        What is old is new again.

        Oh wait, I'm still running interlaced hardware in my house. Hell, I bet the courthouse where you'd overturn this patent still has a TV in the basement or somewhere you could use for an example :)

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @09:22PM (5 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @09:22PM (#571827)

      what the hell is the "real 8K" comment supposed to mean?
      Are we completely giving up on the meaning of "kilo"?
      8K = 8000.
      2K = 2000. not 1920.

      use 4HD if you really want to have a cool looking number letter thing.
      or use 16HD.

      Actually, if you want to get picky -- and you clearly do:
      8K = 8192 and 8k = 8000
      7.5K = 7680 and 7.68k is 7680
      4K = 4096 and 4k = 4000
      3.75K = 3840 and 3.84k is 3840

      Cinematic 4K lives up to the label as the horizontal resolution. (Why the switch to horizontal when everything to this point as been vertical?)

      What they're selling you at Sprawl-Mart as 4K (small print: "UHD") is not 4K, it's nono-HD -- 3HD, using your label suggestion, not 4HD. (Remember, folks: what we all know and love as HD is "full HD" while plain old HD is only 1280x720. 3840/1280=3 and 2160/720=3, so UHD is 9xHD.)

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @02:57AM (4 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @02:57AM (#571963)

        It's k and ki or K and Ki(B?)

        It's Kilo versus Kibi, the former have been implied as base 2 since computer began almost, with the latter being a marketing ploy by hard disk manufacturers in order to keep using MB/GB etc while actually giving you 1000/1024's the space you would have previously had under old marketing and technical nomenclature.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @12:33PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @12:33PM (#572086)

          It's Kilo versus Kibi, the former have been implied as base 2 since computer began almost

          Kilo being quite explicit in it's meaning of one thousand (in numbers: 1000) since decimal system began almost. I'll guess you grew up on freedom units?

        • (Score: 2) by rleigh on Saturday September 23 2017, @03:46PM (2 children)

          by rleigh (4887) on Saturday September 23 2017, @03:46PM (#572120) Homepage

          K is Kelvin (temperature)
          k is kilo (1000)
          Ki is kibi (1024)

          Use the appropriate prefix for the job. The literal meaning of "kilo" is "one thousand". If you mean 1000 use k, and if you mean 1024 use Ki. Simple.

          • (Score: 2) by Bot on Saturday September 23 2017, @07:37PM (1 child)

            by Bot (3902) on Saturday September 23 2017, @07:37PM (#572155) Journal

            Simple and wrong. The informal definition of kilo meatbags instinctively used before a marketing droid decided to make their hd look bigger was "kilo is base^n where n is the lowest exponent that yields a result nearest to 10^3". Used for decades by scientists and gaming kids, without incidents.

            If the international system has been unable to formalize the historical use of kilo and megabyte at the expense of usability, that does not entail the historical use was wrong, it means the international system is full of useless bureaucrats who bent over and made tons of already written documents confusing, only to please a bunch of idiot managers who pushed base 10 measures for data.

            Now the damage is difficult to revert, one has to specify k or ki, but try uttering kibi among greybeards.

            PS: n00b

            --
            Account abandoned.
            • (Score: 2) by rleigh on Saturday September 23 2017, @10:25PM

              by rleigh (4887) on Saturday September 23 2017, @10:25PM (#572180) Homepage

              No, it's not wrong. K (kelvin) and k (kilo) have long been standardised as SI units. Ki (kibi) by the IEC (ISO).

              The only problem here is that computing people (k) which has been long establised to mean 1000, and then used it to mean something completely different (1024) which was "convenient" but insane because it ignored established practice in every other field.

              All these units *are* standardised. The historical bad practice in computing needs to end, and use the units as standardised.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @03:27PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 23 2017, @03:27PM (#572116)

    The specs had my interest piqued. But holy fuck, that thing is huge! Anyone remember that old meme when Xbox controllers entered the market? HUEG! Thar she blows! Etc...
    If they're using COTS hardware, I don't see them realistically improving on size, let's hope they can minimize the weight at least.

  • (Score: 2) by rob_on_earth on Tuesday September 26 2017, @07:47AM

    by rob_on_earth (5485) on Tuesday September 26 2017, @07:47AM (#572970) Homepage

    I have been working with an HTC Vive and it only takes a few days for you to start seeing the pixels and the interlace lines. Once you have see them you cannot un-see them.

    If they can truly keep the 90fps then this could be real improvement, but anything less and the lag gives me a headache, and I would guess a large number of people.

    I want to see what the new cheap Hololens can do. Is it really as clear as all the demos show? Do virtual objects stick enough to real real world areas so that the affect is unnoticeable?

    What is the difference between the two generations and why is it so cheap?

(1)