Puzzling Places, Vermillion, Eleven Table Tennis, Cubism, Demeo, etc. etc.
Lots of really nice applications which already exist and just need to be MR enabled (some of them already have announced such) to allow playing these while feeling connected and surrounded by the real world.
It‘s just far too expensive for me to consider buying it mainly for such use, that‘s the main „criticism“ I have. Although I believe that the price is fair considering the estimated cost of production.
I see some pretty amazing uses for a good, wearable, AR device. The possibilities for helping those with disabilities alone are fantastic. Or just the aging (imagine, once small enough, a set of AR glasses that would help those with cognitive decline, or allow persons with poor night-vision to continue driving and enjoying other night activities, etc.)
So, this particular version; with the low FOV and not enough resolution plus the high price may not interest me, but if such technologies continue to evolve there will be many legit real-world uses.
Yep there was a fellow years ago that was using a pimax 4k with a camera and iirc rasberry pi creating a driver to use the hmd for folks with vision sensitivities(?)
Here is the topic @mirage335 might also be interested maybe.
They were successful in making it work on linux with some workarounds.
Just for the record, thanks to Oscar (@knob2001), I could update the HMDGDB with Quest Pro geometry (Oculus Meta Quest Pro (72Hz) | HMD Geometry Database).
The name of the headset is a bit convoluted, but this is what the LibOVR reports, so I left it there.
Through the lens video comparison between Quest Pro and Quest 2.
I think this video is particularly interesting from the perspective of expectations for the Pimax 12K. There has been much concern that modern GPUs wouldn’t be able to run 2x6K panels, and therefore the 12K will be useless until [insert random future nVidia series here] GPUs are available. But one of my points has been that even if you were to run the 12K at exactly the same rendering resolution as you’ve been running the 8KX, it’s going to look substantially better.
This video demonstrates part of what I mean by that. The Quest Pro and Quest 2 have the same resolution. Yet behold how the better lenses in the Quest Pro significantly improve clarity without a resolution increase. I expect to see a similar effect with the improved lenses in the Pimax 12K vs the 8KX.
Plus the higher resolution panels and local dimming can be expected to contribute significantly to the clarity of the 12K, too. All without increasing the rendering resolution by a single pixel over whatever you’ve been running on your 8KX.
Got the Quest pro last night and its honestly the ONLY headset that i’ve used that could replace my 8kx. Specs aside, in use this thing is pretty sick. Also I had forgotten that you are supposed to have eye strain in vr.
Price is steep but at least it actually exist (*cough,crystal, cough) and if it had launched at say 799 or 899 , it would be the best, period.
I am not sure I would say it looks substantially better from what I saw in the video. It‘s the effect you have when you have a slightly blurry picture and use the sharpening filter in Photoshop, it works out the edges more articulated, but the picture doesn‘t necessarily create a better overall impression.
Probably I would tend to prefer the Quest Pro look at the end, but it‘s a pretty narrow margin, because the Quest 2 footage looks smoother, more natural on the other hand.
But - better lenses not causing any blurring generally are a step in the right direction, agreed.
You have that backwards. It’s not applying a sharpening filter to the Quest 2’s image, but rather applying a blurring filter to the Quest Pro’s image. Sharpening filters can’t actually recreate the lost detail. They create only the impression of sharpness, but the actual fidelity of the image is not increased or restored. Whereas the original image before a blur is applied actually has greater fidelity.
This isn’t a matter of aesthetic taste. Clarity can be objectively measured. Among the comparisons in the video is an eye chart, and you can see that smaller text can be read on the Quest Pro image than on the Quest 2 image. This has meaningful utility.
This video is just an example of how clarity can be increased even while resolution remains the same. There should be even more difference in clarity between the 12K and the 8KX because there are additional factors besides just the better lenses.
I didn‘t mean to say it is sharpening filter being applied but it looks comparably to the effect you achieve when applying such a filter.
Looking at the comparison in the video I hardly like the Q Pro look better than the Q2 look. Backwards, forwards, sideways and up&down, all the same… 
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.