Vuzix Wrap VR1200

[Johnny-Mnemonic]

Vuzix just announced new VR headset with:
- wide-screen (16:9) 852 x 480 screens (1280 x 768 input available),
- 35 degree FOV,
- adjustable optics,
- 6DOF built-in head-tracker.
- HMD will support VGA \ DVI input, as well as analog video formats.

More info here:
http://vuzix.com/consumer/products_wrap ... ifications

Besides, unit will be fully compatible with current Vuzix software, drivers and SDK.

Expected to be available during spring 2011.
Price currently unknown.

[android78]

Wow... now I think this is something I could be excited about.
The main feature though is:
- The Wrap 1200 series of video eyewear now includes IPD adjustment for varied eye separation requirements

Is it just me, or are all the other HMDs made for people with odd IPD? With these, maybe I'll be able to have one that is comfortable for my eyes.

[cybereality]

Thats cool that Vuzix is moving this game forward. I really like the Wrap form-factor and I'm really happy to see that they added IPD adjustment, which are very much needed. The optics on the Wrap series are also adjustable and comfortable, so I do not have to wear glasses with them (like I do with the VR920). But only supporting side-by-side 3D? Fail. At a resolution of 852 x 480, in 3D you would effectively only get 426 x 480 per eye. Meaning that the VR920 at full 640 x 480 page-flipping would actually be better image quality (ignoring framerate). WTF kind of crap is that?

426 x 480 = 204,480 pixels of data per eye
640 x 480 = 307,200 pixels of data per eye

Making the VR920 practically 50% better quality in 3D. What a joke. At least the FOV is a small step up: from 32 degrees to 35 degrees. And the side-by-side mode does mean it will also work with the DDD driver in addition to IZ3D. YouTube3D and 3D Blu-Ray (with Total Media Theater 3) are also in the cards but, again, only at sub-standard-def resolutions. I wish Vuzix could have found a way to support their existing 3D driver or IZ3D at the full resolution (unless they have and just didn't list it on the website). That said, I am probably still going to buy it. I wanted an HMD for mobile 2D computing, and that seems like a good fit. Then I could do stuff like ride my exercise bike and browse the internet at the same time. Very nice.

EDIT: I just double-checked the specs and it does list USB 2.0 in there. They could be using it just for power and for the head-tracker, but I think they might be using it for 3D sync as well (just like the VR920). Meaning that it could do full 852 x 480 3D. If that is the case, then this truly is a step forward and I will be saving my money so I can be the first kid on the block with this kit.

[Okta]

That's a really small step forward. Mega small.

[Johnny-Mnemonic]

Let's take a look at they're 6DOF head-tracker by the way, how it will perform.
6DOF tracking is much valuable feature than actually stereo-vision for me.
It is big step forward from 3DOF.

Resolution and FOV wise it is small step forward.

But let's see.

[cybereality]

Well I was thinking about it, and maybe the situation isn't as bad. If the side-by-side source material is at 1280 x 768, then each eye has 640 x 768 worth of data. That would then by scaled to 854x480. You do have a little extra vertical resolution, but horizontally its still 640 pixels. And the scaling is not going to be as good as if you have a larger resolution at the same aspect ratio (for example, going from 1024x768 to 640x480 on the VR920). So it might not be as bad as I initially thought. However this seems like a huge design oversight on Vuzix's behalf. Why bother with all the trouble of a "high resolution" HMD when you are just upscaling 640x480?

[bobv5]

I think the best thing about this is the widescreen resolution. If they can get the masses buying them then it might increase the demand for the item we all really want.

[android78]

Well I was thinking about it, and maybe the situation isn't as bad. If the side-by-side source material is at 1280 x 768, then each eye has 640 x 768 worth of data. That would then by scaled to 854x480. You do have a little extra vertical resolution, but horizontally its still 640 pixels. And the scaling is not going to be as good as if you have a larger resolution at the same aspect ratio (for example, going from 1024x768 to 640x480 on the VR920). So it might not be as bad as I initially thought. However this seems like a huge design oversight on Vuzix's behalf. Why bother with all the trouble of a "high resolution" HMD when you are just upscaling 640x480?

As usual, you would appear to be right. I hadn't thought about the source resolution.
I guess we'll have to wait for them to release the same thing with HDMI1.4 support, or see what sony come up with.

[Johnny-Mnemonic]

... or see what sony come up with.

Or Carl Zeiss

[Okta]

We are screwed for a while still. Even with the 720p screens coming around the HMD makers are still for too scared to make that into wide FOV because of the stretched pixel density. And rightly so because they realize how fickle the consumer is, they would be poo pooing left and right no doubt. Most of us here would be very forgiving but we are still a niche market.

It would still be nice if one of the makers goes out on a limb and offers a wide FOV option for their mainstream model. Maybe it would take off...

[cybereality]

That would be cool. Like having modular optics that could be upgraded (or maybe its a factory installed option when you order). I would certainly take the wide FOV and sacrifice whatever else was necessary. I mean, I always thought the whole point of an HMD is to make it seem like you are in the computer. If all it does is simulate a regular sized virtual screen, whats the point? I'll just use a real screen if its going to be like that. I want THE MATRIX!!!!!

[Okta]

Totally. Every one of these products are just trying to reproduce a smallish TV which seems mostly pointless given the hassles and inferior quality. Why not go for cinema size upwards

[3dvison]

I like 3D and headtracking but if I had to choose which is more impotant for the games I would like to play on an HMD, I think good headtracking is more important for game play immersion.

So with the VR1200 having a better 6dof headtracker over the VR920 3dof headtracker.
The VR1200 having a bit more resolution in 2D 852X480 (1280X768 scaled)to the VR920 640 X 480(1024X769 scaled).

So in 2D mode with headtracking, I think the VR1200 sounds a good bit better than the VR920.

And if the VR1200 only does side by side 3D than it could be about the same in 3D mode as the VR920 but with better headtracking.

Who knows maybe the VR1200 will have page flip ??? That would be very nice.

All in all, I think with it's upgrades, at a good price point and the fact that it will see the light of day and make it to market and not just be vaporware like other companys HMD's, all add up to make the VR1200 look very good to me.

[Okta]

It will be better than the vr920 for sure, but not much, its still going to be like looking at a 17 inch lcd.

[cybereality]

It will be better than the vr920 for sure, but not much, its still going to be like looking at a 17 inch lcd.

I think thats the main problem really. I would not even mind the WVGA resolution if the FOV was totally immersive. I wonder why these companies can't innovate a little bit more. I am not expecting 180 degree FOV HMDs tomorrow, but at least make it to 50 or 60, come on now. Whats the hold up?

[3dvison]

Hey cybereality, or anyone else who might know.
What does side by side 3D look like on an HMD ?
Is side by side a big step down in image quality from page flip like on the VR920 ?

It would still be better than say a shutter glasses/monitor set-up just for the fact that each eye has it's own screen, correct ? Less ghosting than shutter glasses at least...?

[cybereality]

I have only tried side-by-side on my Vuzix Wrap 310, but the resolution is so low anyway its hard to tell the difference. I bet it will still look OK, but obviously not full-quality. But who knows? If they release an SDK its possible the community could had support. And maybe they do have page-flip support and just didn't advertise it.

[3dvison]

Fast cybereality,
You replyed before I did my edit...LOL
I now asked about ghosting in that post..Ha Ha

[cybereality]

Well yeah, HMD is no ghosting, although it has other drawbacks. Namely that the displays are not of the same quality as larger sized flat panels. And the whole setup can be cumbersome to just play a game. However the 3D experience is very nice, and its possible to get to higher 3D settings that cannot be done on a monitor w/ shutter glasses. And you also get head-tracking, which opens the door to VR applications and such. So it is a give and take. I wouldn't say one is necessarily better.

[PalmerTech]

Another thing to keep in mind, in terms of side by side being better than shuttering, is that the VR920 could not deliver a full 60fps per eye. I think the maximum was 37.5?

[cybereality]

Another thing to keep in mind, in terms of side by side being better than shuttering, is that the VR920 could not deliver a full 60fps per eye. I think the maximum was 37.5?

Yes, VR920 is basically 30fps (each image is held for 2 frames at 60Hz). So you do have a point. I would much rather take half res, than half framerate (if the choice needed to be made). Maybe thats why Vuzix made that call.

[3dvison]

The headtracker does sound nice
"A new generation head tracker, the Wrap Tracker 6TC with compass, is a 6-degrees of freedom tracker with automatic drift compensation that offers the best ever, “Where you look is what you see.” experience. "

We all would like this “Where you look is what you see.” experience. "

So with the new headtracker and the small bump in 2-D resolution and also the fact that it will be a wide screen format screen is great with me.

So if the 3-D is atleast as good as the VR920 that I could live with and like you say a boost in 3-D fram rate (60fps) would be a plus for the VR1200.

Guess it is just wait and see ,till we... well... see one.

[3dvison]

Quick question on the VR1200 headtracker vs the VR920 headtracker.

The headtracker on the VR1200 will have "automatic drift compensation " did the VR920 headtracker have drift compensation also ?

Just wondering if 6dof is the only new feature or if automatic drift compensation is new also ?

[cybereality]

The VR1200 has a newer headtracker than the VR920. I think it is based on the 6DOF tracker used as an add-on to the Wrap. So it should have significantly better tracking than the VR920 does (if the marketing material can be taken at face-value).

[3dvison]

Thanks cybereality

I was just wondering if the VR920 or the Wrap add on headtrackers had " automatic drift compensation " or if this is a new feature only found on the new VR1200 headtracker ?

[Johnny-Mnemonic]

Actually VR920 doesn't have drift, because it is compensated by compass (magnetometer).
So in ideal conditions virtual "North" is always facing real-world "North" even if you rotate your head very much.
But compass itself in VR920 is very sensitive to surrounding magnetic fields, even to magnetic fields of VR920 headphones and other electronics,
and so often it adds more mistakes than fixes.

In old VFX-1 headtracker also had magnetometer for drift compensation, but somehow it was not so sensitive to surrounding magnetic fields.
For example you need to calibrate it (to the Earth magnetic field) only once when you first install the helmet in your system, that's all,
and it would work perfectly even many month and years after.

VR920 have much better precision in tracking when in perfect condition and calibrated, but VFX-1 is much more reliable in this sense.

We don't know how new tracker would work in VR1200, but let's wait and try.

[mcsilvio]

Hi all,
new to the boards.

i'm having a difficult time finding a good community for head-tracking/hmd and found this one. i have a few high level questions, which may end up with me being directed somewhere else (which is fine). here they are, thank you.

1) i am interested in head tracking for "looking around" inside 3d-environments. i know there is only orientational data with the 920 and 1200, but thats good enough for me what kind of applications support this? games? pc / xbox360? are there any architectural environments that i can just look around?

2) is there an sdk for the 920 (or 1200) so that developers can make their own environments/games?

3) again, is there ANY way to use these to look around xbox 360 games?

4) is there a better board for these kinds of questions?

I am an HCI developer at university and will be ordering the 1200's when they come out. but the kid in me just wants to look around inside games.

Please and thank you, and good luck everyone!
Marco.

[Johnny-Mnemonic]

Hello Marco!
I will try to answer your questions.

1) i am interested in head tracking for "looking around" inside 3d-environments. i know there is only orientational data with the 920 and 1200, but thats good enough for me what kind of applications support this? games? pc / xbox360? are there any architectural environments that i can just look around?

There are some games that support this feature as it must - in absolute 3 degrees of freedom, like Flight Simulator - FSX, Unreal Turnament 2004 and some others. Also, using GlovePie software, you will be able to emulate mouse input - and with this you can use pretty any first-person PC game.

But you must know that VR920 have not very good built-in head tracker, you need to calibrate it often, and use in magnetically neutral environments. We still don't know what tracker will be in VR1200, because it isn't ready yet.

However, many of us use third party head-trackers, because they offer better and more stable tracking than VR920 can provide.

2) is there an sdk for the 920 (or 1200) so that developers can make their own environments/games?

I guess you mean Vuzix VR920 and upcoming 1200 models, yes SDK is publically available free of charge from Vuzix site:
http://vrdeveloper.vr920.com/
You just need to register as developer and download your SDK.

3) again, is there ANY way to use these to look around xbox 360 games?

So far, no

4) is there a better board for these kinds of questions?

This is most active one, and I guess many of us can be found on other boards too, so MTBS is good choice to ask.

I am an HCI developer at university and will be ordering the 1200's when they come out. but the kid in me just wants to look around inside games.

I guess you will be able to play games with VR1200

Good luck to you too!

[mcsilvio]

wonderful reply. thank you. im pretty set to buy the 1200's when they arrive. and ive also heard that there are better third party head trackers around, so i'll keep that in mind when i grab the 1200's. also i'll post my impressions.

thanks for the help. ill be around.


Marco.

[3dvison]

Whith all these adjustments could you ?.

"Seeing the Big Picture
Wrap VR1200 virtual reality eyewear can be worn over many styles of prescription eyeglasses and a +2 to -5 diopter left and right eye focal adjustment allows most eyeglass wearers to shed their spectacles. The Wrap 1200 series of video eyewear now includes IPD adjustment for varied eye separation requirements and the patented Vuzix AccuTilt® for achieving the optimum viewing angle and crystal clarity.

Could you wear low power 1x or 2x magnifying glasses to make the picture look bigger/ closer to your eyes, giving a more immersive feeling in games ? You might have to move your head more, using the headtraker to see the whole picture, but for games this could be cool... BUT, would that work ?

[Fredz]

I wonder why everybody is talking about this future Vuzix VR1200, its resolution is only 852x480 (400Mpixels) per eye and its horizontal FOV is only 30.5°. It's only marginally better than the Wrap 920 which has a 640x480 resolution (300Mpixels) per eye and it's a lot worse than the future Cinemizer OLED with a resolution of 1280x720 (900Mpixels) and an expected similar FOV.

[cybereality]

Well I think both headsets look interesting. I would like to see final release dates and prices for these units, though. Also, I am not sure if the Cinemizer glasses have been confirmed to be 720P, that still might be a rumor. And the VR1200 are 35 degrees, same as the Cinemizer, which would make them slightly more than VR920 (at 32 degrees) or the Wrap 310 (which I like) which is only 26 degrees. We also don't know the story in terms of the headtracker, that could make or break the device. Or the ergonomics, quality of the screens, etc. And the VR1200 uses side-by-side 3D, which might be lower quality, but could also open the doors to easy support with custom applications so it might be the better choice for hobbyists or garage VR researchers. Depending on all these factors it might be that the VR1200 is the more practical device.

[Fredz]

Well I think both headsets look interesting. I would like to see final release dates and prices for these units, though.

If the Vuzix VR1200 is going to be much cheaper than the Cinemizer OLED, then yes, it could be interesting. But considering Vuzix sells the Wrap 920 at $350 and many websites announced a $515 launching price for the Cinemizer OLED, the difference may not be that great and should hardly justify investment in the Vuzix VR1200.

Also, I am not sure if the Cinemizer glasses have been confirmed to be 720P, that still might be a rumor. And the VR1200 are 35 degrees, same as the Cinemizer, which would make them slightly more than VR920 (at 32 degrees) or the Wrap 310 (which I like) which is only 26 degrees.

Yes, I've seen no confirmation from Carl Zeiss either on the real resolution of the Cinemizer OLED so it's still speculation at this time, but I think nothing is definitive either for the Vuzix VR1200 since on its website it's written that specs are subject to change without notice.

The horizontal FOV will be only around 30.5° for the VR1200 though, the value given on the Vuzix website is the diagonal FOV.

We also don't know the story in terms of the headtracker, that could make or break the device.

Since previous messages said the headtracker is quite bad quality on Vuzix HMDs and it's better to use an external head-tracker, I don't think it's really a breaking point.

Or the ergonomics, quality of the screens, etc.

Yes, that would be the most important point. I've read several reviews about the Cinemizer OLED saying that image quality was pretty good, but I unfortunately didn't see anything for the VR1200.

And the VR1200 uses side-by-side 3D, which might be lower quality, but could also open the doors to easy support with custom applications so it might be the better choice for hobbyists or garage VR researchers.

That's a pretty good point, didn't know that.

[cybereality]

Personally I want both HMDs, I just hope the prices are low enough that I can afford it. If they both cost $500 or more than I will probably have to pick one. Or I might just buy them both, do a review, and then sell the one I don't like (or both of them if they are crap). In fact, I might just do that.

[mcsilvio]

what is a good & cost effective, third-party, head tracking unit? for use with an hmd.

[Johnny-Mnemonic]

what is a good & cost effective, third-party, head tracking unit? for use with an hmd.

It depends on how do you want to play, on foot or on the chair.

On foot, you have an option of 3DOF and 2DOF trackers:
If you want to achieve real absolute 3DOF head-tracking, then you can consider buying one of these two:

1. Wireless Hillcrest Labs "Freespace":
http://www.hillcrestlabs-store.com/serv ... ter/Detail
It can work in 3DOF mode with absolute angles via VRPN

2. Wired "SpacePoint Fusion":
http://eclecti.cc/hardware/easy-absolut ... -in-python
Google it, to find where you can buy it...
Will have native support in next VRPN version.

Both trackers as far as I know can work in "Mouse emulation" mode, but if you need only 2DOF mouse emulation you can buy Gyration air-mouses:
http://www.gyration.com/index.php/us/pr ... rview.html

Check how you can pack gyration mouse in small package:
http://www.vrtifacts.com/build-a-3-dof- ... ker-cheap/

Besides orientation, for tracking your head-position in the room you can use Microsoft Kinect, with FAAST package:
http://projects.ict.usc.edu/mxr/faast/

On the chair - definitely TrackIR5, true 6DOF optical tracker:
http://www.naturalpoint.com/trackir/

P.S. I highly recommend you to use VRPN for tracking, this way you can easily switch between different trackers.
VRPN website:
http://www.cs.unc.edu/Research/vrpn/
Quick VRPN tutorial:
http://www.vrgeeks.org/vrpn/tutorial---use-vrpn
Also please read about VR-Geeks HMD kit, perhaps you will want to build your system VR-Geeks compatible:
http://www.vrgeeks.org/vr-kits/hmd

Hope this helps

[Johnny-Mnemonic]

The horizontal FOV will be only around 30.5° for the VR1200 though, the value given on the Vuzix website is the diagonal FOV.

Personally, there is no big deal even between 32 (VR920) and 45 (VFX1) diagonal FOV, for me they look almost the same.
But ~100 degree horizontal FOV in MRG 2.2 make enormous difference with ~30 degree.

[mcsilvio]

ah gotcha. i *rEQUIRE* 3 degrees of freedom. i will check now if the 1200's will have such head tracking.

[3dvison]

Don't know if anyone saw this on the Vuzix website but there is a chart that has the 3-D modes the Wrap vr1200 and Wrap 1200 will support.

The link is below just scroll down to "3D Video Formats"
Here is the list of 3-D modes listed on the chart
Side-by-side
Red/green anaglyph
Red/blue anaglyph
Blue/amber anaglyph
Parallel & cross view
Vuzix 3D watermark support

LINK:
http://www.vuzix.com/consumer/wrap_prod ... chart.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[cybereality]

Nice. Those are the same formats supported by the Wrap 310 (the original model, not the gimped "XL" model they sell now). I was able to play SpeedX 3D in anaglyph from my Droid on the 310, friggin' awesome! I'm really hyped for this new model, which Vuzix is now calling the Wrap 1200VR. Also of interest, it includes the 6DOF head-tracker. I think everyone assumed this, but its nice to know it is actually 6DOF, and not 3DOF like VR920. With a mobile/wearable computer this could be a really nice platform.