New to the forums? Click here to read the "How To" Guide.

Developer? Click here to go to the Developer Forums.

New 5.1 inch 2,560 x 1,440 (577 ppi) resolution screen

badmotorfingerbadmotorfinger Posts: 2
edited June 2013 in General
http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/21/qualcomm-mirasol-display-eyes-on/

Maybe something like this could be a reality for the Oculus?
«1

Comments

  • geekmastergeekmaster Posts: 2,866
    Nexus 6
    http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/21/qualcomm-mirasol-display-eyes-on/

    Maybe something like this could be a reality for the Oculus?
    Not likely any time soon. From your linked page:
    ... by "next-gen," Qualcomm means this tech has a few more years in the R&D phase before it'll be ready to hit a licensee's production line.
    And because it is a REFLECTIVE display (like a picture printed on shiny foil), it would be very difficult (and impractical) to position light sources inside an HMD containing such a display to evenly illuminate both eyes. These were targeted at Ebook readers last time around, and they were much too expensive and never caught on (besides the technical problems that the next gen aims to solve).

    The previous Mirasol fiasco:
    Mirasol is one of the several revolutionary screen techs that came and went in the past few years, and like most of its competition there were hopes that it might succeed in the consumer market where Mirasol’s low-power operating costs might provide a great enough benefit to justify the high cost of making the screen.
    And a "high manufacturing cost" also makes it an unlikely component of a future HMD device.
  • PokeyPokey Posts: 148
    geekmaster: destroyer of dreams
  • MalfateMalfate Posts: 16
    geekmaster: Realizer of reality
  • ReTReT Posts: 191
    I agree with the comment about the display being reflective and inpractical, however, I think it's a little naive to assume that "...a high manufacturing cost also makes it an unlikely component of a future HMD device". The CURRENT cost is high, granted, but then go you on to mention it being a factor for 'FUTURE' HMD devices? Kinda makes the first part of your response a bit redundant :P

    I understand its highly unlikely that something like this would make its way into the FIRST consumer based Oculus Rift, but given the history of technologies such as LCD, Plasma, LED and OLED it's pretty clear that 'things always get cheaper'. If you had told people even just 5 years ago that, today, you would be able to buy an LG (nevermind a nonname brand LCD) 55" LED for under $1000 you would probably get LOLed at. It was only in 2007 that LCD TV's surpassed CRT TV's for the first time - pretty scary if you think it was only 6 years ago, and I honestly dont even know anyone who still HAS a CRT TV today :o

    All I'm saying is, dont be surprised if it happens a LOT sooner than you think, albeit not necessarily in the first consumer version :)
  • geekmastergeekmaster Posts: 2,866
    Nexus 6
    edited May 2013
    ReT wrote:
    I agree with the comment about the display being reflective and inpractical, however, I think it's a little naive to assume that "...a high manufacturing cost also makes it an unlikely component of a future HMD device". The CURRENT cost is high, granted, but then go you on to mention it being a factor for 'FUTURE' HMD devices? Kinda makes the first part of your response a bit redundant :P
    ...
    All I'm saying is, dont be surprised if it happens a LOT sooner than you think, albeit not necessarily in the first consumer version :)
    Do you understand the complexity of the technology in a Mirasol display? It is a MEMs Interferometric Modulator display. That means it has actual MOVING parts for each pixel AND those parts must be accurate to a fraction of the wavelength of light. It makes colors like a butterfly wing (holographically). Both qualcomm AND the other companies that tried to produce these had a very poor yield. A large part of the expense is a SACRIFICIAL part (very expensive Xenon DiFluoride that must all be etched away during manufacture). And moving parts are more prone to failure.

    Think of a DLP projector chip, except expanded to the size of a display screen. Except DLP projectors typically used wobulation to mechanically multiply their resolution, and this display cannot do that so really needs a LOT more REAL pixels. And very few pixel defects, or people will reject them.

    They will be targeted at eBooks and other low-power applications, just like before. They have been at this a VERY LONG TIME. Other technologies will continue to surpass them. I think Mirasol is cool, but the manufacturing complexity will not allow any significant cost reductions any time soon. Other technologies like AMOLED are much more likely to come down in price much faster AND do not need secondary lighting.

    But even with eBooks, Mirasol displays have some pretty bad viewing angle issues, where the color is all washed out unless you view it "just right" with optimal lighting. And there were issues using these outdoors, when outdoor use is a primary advantage of reflective or transflective display technology. They still have a number of technological, manufacturing, and cost issues to deal with before these can begin to compete with other existing and future display technologies.

    I did not say impossible or never. Just unlikely and impractical for HMD use... I still stand by that.
  • V8GriffV8Griff Posts: 241
    Hiro Protagonist
    Malfate wrote:
    geekmaster: Realizer of reality

    Yep, and don't get into a discussion about semantics... you'll lose :lol:
  • noam23noam23 Posts: 27
    But take a look at this 5" flexibale OLED by LG:

    http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/21/lg-5-inch-oled-display-hands-on/?utm_medium=feed&utm_source=Feed_Classic&utm_campaign=Engadget

    It's ready for mass market, and according to LG, it's cheaper than traditional OLED displays... close to the holy grail guys..

    "The panel is made of plastic substrates, which are both more flexible and cheaper to manufacture than their glass counterparts. In fact, cost-effectiveness seems to be the chief objective overall

    An LG rep told us the panel could sport a bigger or smaller size when it debuts in a smartphone later this year. And though the prototype on display here today was labeled merely as "HD," we're sure that resolution could be adjusted as well.
    ."

    Seems promising.
  • TgaudTgaud Posts: 788
    Best technology for HMD is and always will be OLED/AMOLED.
  • geekmaster wrote:
    Do you understand the complexity of the technology in a Mirasol display? It is a MEMs Interferometric Modulator display. That means it has actual MOVING parts for each pixel AND those parts must be accurate to a fraction of the wavelength of light. It makes colors like a butterfly wing (holographically). Both qualcomm AND the other companies that tried to produce these had a very poor yield. A large part of the expense is a SACRIFICIAL part (very expensive Xenon DiFluoride that must all be etched away during manufacture). And moving parts are more prone to failure.

    Think of a DLP projector chip, except expanded to the size of a display screen. Except DLP projectors typically used wobulation to mechanically multiply their resolution, and this display cannot do that so really needs a LOT more REAL pixels. And very few pixel defects, or people will reject them.

    They will be targeted at eBooks and other low-power applications, just like before. They have been at this a VERY LONG TIME. Other technologies will continue to surpass them. I think Mirasol is cool, but the manufacturing complexity will not allow any significant cost reductions any time soon. Other technologies like AMOLED are much more likely to come down in price much faster AND do not need secondary lighting.

    But even with eBooks, Mirasol displays have some pretty bad viewing angle issues, where the color is all washed out unless you view it "just right" with optimal lighting. And there were issues using these outdoors, when outdoor use is a primary advantage of reflective or transflective display technology. They still have a number of tecnological, manufacturing, and cost issues to deal with before these can begin to compete with other existing and future display technologies.

    I did not say impossible or never. Just unlikely and impractical for HMD use... I still stand by that.

    Could you imagine if Pixel Qi made a display for the rift? :twisted:
  • noam23noam23 Posts: 27
    Knowing the the Rift consumer version is still a full year from us, it's hard to believe it won't incroporate an OLED screen.

    Moreover, I don't think they should insist on a $300 price point. Flagship cellphone cost $700 (without a contract), and people buy millions. If the Oculus Rift will cost $500 and include a 1080p OLED screen or higher, that will be a great value for the money.
  • TgaudTgaud Posts: 788
    Agree.
    I think this product HAVE TO be the best it can.
    As long as it stay in an "affordable price" for what it is.

    Galaxy S4 is 600$, it last only 2tyears of usages... and ppl keep buying millions of units of it.

    And i Think the rift is FAR FAR more valuable than a Galaxy S4.

    Up the price from 100$ or even 200$ if It can buy us the dream of a real immersion, and a real FOV/resolution.

    If you keep at a 300$ :
    _It will be a low display, disapointting
    _All the world will purchase it, but you won't be able to deliver so many units in time.
    _You won't input an idea of "great quality" in the mind of ppl, and some others industry will ensure of copying you, adding high value Screen..
  • noam23noam23 Posts: 27
    As Palmer Luckey said it himself: the Oculus Rift is *not* some great innovation no one has thought about before. The main reason that the Oculus Rift exist, is because technology became mature enough this year (high resolution panels because of cellphone evolution, high GPU speed, etc.).

    You can be certain that Microsoft, Sony, Samsung etc. as you are reading these letters are working on their own model of a 90 degree FOV VR glasses. If Oculus Rift is not going to deliver very good quality, it is going to lose, fast. All of the games that are being developed now for the Rift, might eventually be played on Sony's VR product or Microsoft's VR product...

    Personaly I believe that without making a contract with a huge company like Sony/Samsung etc. The Oculus Rift will not be a mass market product. If you want to be a mass market product you have to have a great screen (high resolution OLED), something that the big companies can easily produce for mass market, and you also must have assembly lines big enough to supply millions of units in a short time. Oculus MUST cut a deal with someone big. They don't need to sell out, just form a tight relationship with a big company regarding this product.

    Does anyone here remember the company "3DFX" ? they unleashed the era of 3D gaming on the PC (with their Voodoo cards), and soon after went banckrupt.. there is not much margin for error when you're a small company..
  • SpacefishSpacefish Posts: 18
    Probably OLED is the best technology for a HMD currently.
    Pro:
    - Low Response time
    - True Black (which is important, because its not that bright in an HMD)
    - High Pixel Density.
    - No Backlight required

    LCD:
    - Responsetime not as good as OLED
    - True black is not archivable
    - Heavier/thicker than OLED (due needed Backlight and Driver for Backlight)
    - Lasts longer than OLED. OLED wearout would be minimal however, because it can be used with 10% brightness or less.
    - "Dead Pixels" would be a real problem, because they tend to be full brightness instead of black.
  • noam23noam23 Posts: 27
    Regarding short lifespan of OLED, I think it's an exaggeration. I have my Galaxy S2 for 2 years now, The screen is ON for about 2-3 hours per day, which means about 1000 hours of screen time so far. The colors still look great. Can't see any change from when I bought it.
  • TgaudTgaud Posts: 788
    Spacefish wrote:
    Probably OLED is the best technology for a HMD currently.
    Pro:
    - Low Response time
    - True Black (which is important, because its not that bright in an HMD)
    - High Pixel Density.
    - No Backlight required

    LCD:
    - Responsetime not as good as OLED
    - True black is not archivable
    - Heavier/thicker than OLED (due needed Backlight and Driver for Backlight)
    - Lasts longer than OLED. OLED wearout would be minimal however, because it can be used with 10% brightness or less.
    - "Dead Pixels" would be a real problem, because they tend to be full brightness instead of black.

    OLED can last far more than 3years nowadays, using it 6hours a day.
    Ps: And even more if its a pentile amoled.
  • edulinaresedulinares Posts: 275
    @tgaud, @noam23

    It`s not that simple. First of all: I doubt either Sony, MS or any other big ass company is working on a VR device right now, because in their vision, Virtual Reality is not a thing. They saw it going to the market and failing - ask Nintendo about it. They are not likely to invest in such a thing until it has proven itself viable market, we`re talking about millions of units here. So Oculus is in a comfortable position right now, being the only player with a nice headstart.

    Also, price point is a HUGE factor that should not be underestimated. See my case for example, I live in Brazil, which you might not know, but it is one of the hottest markets in gaming right now. Do you know how much the Rift cost me? About 750 reais, not counting taxes. Once it arrives I expect to pay anything between 60% to 100% in importing fees, which will make for a minimum of U$ 560 up to U$ 650, which translates to roughly R$ 1300, plus international card use fees*. That would pay my Rent for two months, or three parcels of my car. Would the devkit cost U$ 100 more, I probably wouldn`t get it. Importing prices increase exponentially and it can prove just too much for a lot of people.

    One of the reasons I grabbed the devkit was precisely fear of a more expensive consumer version or stronger dollar exchange. So keeping it affordable is probably the most important priority they should focus on if they wish Oculus to become a real thing, reaching as many users, in as many places in the world as possible. I am sure they can find a sweet spot where quality and price converges.


    *BTW, my wife has no idea I bought this, and she`ll never know how much I spent on it, :lol:
  • noam23noam23 Posts: 27
    edulinares,

    Don't be so sure about Microsoft/Sony/Samsung etc. The Oculus Rift is making tons of noise, and is making a lot of excitment among top game developers (who are calling it the future of gaming). How could it be that billion $ companies heard nothing about it ?? and some of these billion dollar companies already sell VR glasses, and so have a VR department with years of experience... What Palmer Luckey is doing, they can do too, and even though he got a head start, they got billions of dollars...

    Regarding the price of the Rift, that's a dillema, because I find it hard to believe they'll ever be able to sell good hardware for $300. When was the last time you bought any high quality piece of technology for $300 ? even tiny cellphone cost double...
  • reaktorreaktor Posts: 11
    samsung will have 3200x1800 display in 13 inch ultrabook monitor this year
  • On high manufacturing cost, I think a lot of people just don't realize what is happening globally, from the talk linked here about issues with neutrinos or cosmic rays http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGFhc8R_uO4 , to this http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-22/present-shock-and-loss-history-and-context (which kinda meshes nicely with that alan watts video in the other thread)

    The world is simply being overwhelmed. Personally I have moved to a remote part of the US because I just don't want to deal with the crowds and stresses of modern cities.

    Solyndra and other solar companies were massively subsidized (some say illegally) by our current government to compete with Asia, and yet many still failed. Now chinese solar companies are blowing up with unsustainable support thier government tried (who may wether it better than in the west). Obama is about to have a meeting with the chinese president to try and fix some trade war issues.

    Iribe already sold one company to Sony, so he has ties to them still I suppose. Maybe oculus people need to start learning to speak japanese or chinese to have a long term 40 year career?
  • TgaudTgaud Posts: 788
    @edulinares,

    Yeah but brasil has a protectionist economy.
    That's not the case of the most planet.
    America, Canada, European...
    The cost of importing Rift remain the same.
    In europe, you just pay 300euro, for something paid 300$ in US, cus we had local taxes.
    And most of gamer could pay a lot more, to have a better hardware on the rift.

    I could easily go To 2000euro myself,
    But I think most ppl could still find this affordable for 500$-600$, with great success.
    when you see that samsung sold 10 000 000 > 600$ Galaxy S4 smartphones.. in less than 2month...
    I think its more that what ppl could expect here.
  • SawersadamSawersadam Posts: 49
    The price of entry isn't $300 if you happen to be an average consumer...
    That's the marginal cost for a PC gamer who happens to have a decent rig already.
    Correct me if I'm wrong but if you wanted a two player experience then that is two rifts plus two reasonable PCs... would a single GTX 680 have the clout to run two consumer resolution displays at once? Dunno.
    Either way that's a generous Christmas gift and a step up from the family Xbox/ps3.
    I don't think it's just the Rift screen price that's prohibitive here.
    As for mainstream adoption, as soon as we can run the Rift off a smart phone I'll be taking mine to work....
  • reaktorreaktor Posts: 11
    Tgaud wrote:
    @edulinares,

    Yeah but brasil has a protectionist economy.
    That's not the case of the most planet.
    America, Canada, European...
    The cost of importing Rift remain the same.
    In europe, you just pay 300euro, for something paid 300$ in US, cus we had local taxes.
    And most of gamer could pay a lot more, to have a better hardware on the rift.

    I could easily go To 2000euro myself,
    But I think most ppl could still find this affordable for 500$-600$, with great success.
    when you see that samsung sold 10 000 000 > 600$ Galaxy S4 smartphones.. in less than 2month...
    I think its more that what ppl could expect here.


    agree totally
    i paid 899$ for my iphone i would easily pay double that for top of the art rift experience
    they should have 2 models one regular 300$ and second around 1000$ with the best possible hardware
  • edulinaresedulinares Posts: 275
    You guys do have a point about total costs, but keep 2 things in mind:

    1 - Smartphones comes in a variety of specs and prices, not everyone buys the flagship ones, and even people who do, mostly do it attached to a contract that keeps the purchase cost down to $ 100/$ 200.

    2 - Oculus Rift is not yet a platform of it`s own and will be seen as an accessory for hardcore gaming by most of the public. Hardcore gamers with high-end rigs will pay any price for it, for sure. But gamers in general won`t jump in if the "accessory" costs more than the game console itself.

    Besides, I think it`s pretty clear by now that by the end of the year, 5-inch 1080p panels will be cheap and available enough to be adopted on the Roft withou much impact on costs, and that will be enough for a experience that will blow away people who are still skeptical about VR at this point.
  • reaktorreaktor Posts: 11
    edulinares wrote:
    You guys do have a point about total costs, but keep 2 things in mind:

    1 - Smartphones comes in a variety of specs and prices, not everyone buys the flagship ones, and even people who do, mostly do it attached to a contract that keeps the purchase cost down to $ 100/$ 200.
    it's true but it's the same as buying it on credit
    just some people don't realize it :D
    edulinares wrote:

    2 - Oculus Rift is not yet a platform of it`s own and will be seen as an accessory for hardcore gaming by most of the public.

    you are so wrong about that i have "1000" ideas how to use it and make aloooot of money on it

    - beginning from just browsing you computer in 3D,


    -trough holodeck,

    sony_playstation_store_holodeck.jpg
    -simulators of ALL KIND when there IS FINALLY no need for stupid giant monitors , projectors etc.
    A real SAINT GRAAL for ALL simulators


    military%20brain%20injury.jpg

    -iron man style interface for learning ,designing , medicine and of coz fuuuuuuuuuuuuuun
    jorgeonline_IM2_expo_test_01.png
    - ending at piloting drones ,ships , and all the shit where is need to fell the real distance between objects
    drones_001_custom-126737e135eac34487068225f2b98a238a1fdd64-s6-c10.jpg


    keep in mind they say OCULUS is BETTER than any available VR googles even those for 20''000$



    so gaming is just a start


    Hardcore gamers with high-end rigs will pay any price for it, for sure. But gamers in general won`t jump in if the "accessory" costs more than the game console itself.
    edulinares wrote:
    Besides, I think it`s pretty clear by now that by the end of the year, 5-inch 1080p panels will be cheap and available enough to be adopted on the Roft withou much impact on costs, and that will be enough for a experience that will blow away people who are still skeptical about VR at this point.

    keep in mind perfect oculus is 8K:D

    and if you check the ULTRA HD TV you will see very big difference compared to full hd
    i tough 4k is ridiculous and unnecessary until i saw one :D
    the image start to appear like i was looking on it with my own eyes
    so this something we must have ASAP :D
  • tomhalpin8tomhalpin8 Posts: 2
    NerveGear
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuBevxQG6eo what about this technology?
  • KBKKBK Posts: 983
    Art3mis
    In the standard 16:9 and 16:10 H/W ratio panel sizing format that the screens/panels are being made in..for Rift type use, the panel size minimum for 95% of the target audience being able to fit it correctly ....this size of screen comes in at approximately 6.1" (~15.5mm) to 6.2" (~15.8mm), diagonally.

    IF ....the panel you find is smaller than that, forget about it. Very likely that it is not gonna happen. 5.1" is rinky-dink. Not gonna happen for rift use.

    Lots of research done in the area, already. Try not to be marching over ground that hundreds of people have covered before. You'd be in the 'soon to pwned newb' territory. :)

    This 5.1" diagonal screen, if it is a 16:10 panel ratio in size (the usual sizing for smartphone use), it would be good for, at BEST, an IPD of 5.5cm. Which means it is good for tiny people and children. As per usual, the screen size actual useful area, might be a hair smaller than that.

    This screen is not for Rift use.

    Even if it was a perfect 120hz low latency TFT LCD, with standard and desirable RGB layout, or even RGB OLED, with inherent 250hz or more capacity, with 179/179 degree viewing angles (another required critical factor--wide viewing angle capacity)....it would still score a big fat zero for Rift implementation. It's too small.
    Intelligence... is not inherent - it is a point in understanding. Q: When does a fire become self sustaining?
  • Not having used a rift yet, can anyone tell me what the ideal resolution for each eye is? I didn't even think it needed to be particularly high. It might be a few years off for games in any case. I have a good gaming pc and a lot of games occasionally drop below 60 fps with just one 1080p display.
  • geekmastergeekmaster Posts: 2,866
    Nexus 6
    Not having used a rift yet, can anyone tell me what the ideal resolution for each eye is? I didn't even think it needed to be particularly high. It might be a few years off for games in any case. I have a good gaming pc and a lot of games occasionally drop below 60 fps with just one 1080p display.
    Perhaps 8K for the dominant eye, and 4K for the other eye. But just to be on the safe side, perhaps each eye needs its own 8K display. It really comes down to optics and pixels per degree, especially in the central fovial view.

    At the moment, such displays are still a bit large for HMD use:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_high_definition_television



    Driving such a display will require high-speed eye-tracking, to dedicate the most processing power to exactly where the most high-definition rendering will be seen.

    It may actually be more practical to use two displays per eye, with a lower-resolution peripheral background display, and a high-speed mechanical/optical/mirror arrangement to keep a much higher pixel density display image centered over the fovial viewpoint (much like how mechanical image stabilization works in high-end digital cameras).

    Here is a nice chart showing what resolutions the eye can see at various locations of its FoV:
    http://xkcd.com/1080/
    visual_field.png

    Here is a large version of that image: http://xkcd.com/1080/large/

    Remember that this chart is PER EYE, so eye tracking would need to keep the relative resolutions shown in that chart centered over each eye.

    EDIT: It is really a shame that this website chops off the right side of XKCD comics. Can that be fixed? Please?
  • cyberealitycybereality Posts: 26,156 Oculus Staff
    The cropping of images is because of the size of the forum. If you actually upload the image to the forum (not directly embed it) then it will scale to fit the size.
    AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | MSI X370 Titanium | G.Skill 16GB DDR4 3200 | EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 | Corsair Hydro H110i
    Gigabyte RX Vega 64 x2 | Samsung 960 Evo M.2 500GB | Seagate FireCuda SSHD 2TB | Phanteks ENTHOO EVOLV
  • mscanfpmscanfp Posts: 659
    When people fork over the money for the Samsung Galaxy, they're getting more than a screen. Could someone smarter than me remind me why a rift like device or the rift itself couldn't be like a high end smartphone and run virtual reality apps without the need to be connected to a computer?

    Mike
    Like to read? Cool, check out my author page on Amazon. I run free promotions all the time, and you might read something you like, http://www.amazon.com/Michael-Scanlon/e/B00KDPB88U/ref=ntt_dp_epwbk_0
Sign In or Register to comment.