I got it from an old Dell laptop screen - it died for scienceTheLostBrain wrote:BTW what diffuser material did you use? Sounds like a cool idea I'd like to give a try myself on my own design.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
I got it from an old Dell laptop screen - it died for scienceTheLostBrain wrote:BTW what diffuser material did you use? Sounds like a cool idea I'd like to give a try myself on my own design.
I am in the SF bay area right now - but good to know!space123321 wrote:rfurlan - Are in located in Ontario? I picked one of these up at Princess Auto (for my HMZ) for under $10.
Looking good!Zorm wrote:Built my mask today which holds the original 7x lenses that were mentioned in this thread. Primitive design for now, using thick foam board from Michaels and wide elastic band. Played with holding the screen up to the mask to try to figure out where the optimal distance is, not sure yet. I can get a good effect going with these but the screen seems a tad close. I am going to wait for the 50mm lenses to arrive and test those next.
The ones I got were terrible too. Here is a trick that solved the noise problem for me: twist the cable (but not too tight) then tape it so it will remain twisted. Let me know if that works for youZorm wrote:Did you find a source for better LVDS cables? Mine is also of uh, extremely low quality.
I haven't heard of anything for Mac yet. Often I use Crysis 2 in SBS mode for testing but if I just need to verify focus/alignment, I use this screenshot instead (http://bit.ly/Qorfvx).Zorm wrote:Also I'm doing all of this on a Mac right now, I saw some example programs that will let you move around an environment but they are all Windows based. Has anyone done some Mac stuff yet?
Did you test them with the 5.6" panel ? Are they a perfect fit, ie. 90°x110° FOV and each showing one side of the screen for each eye ?rfurlan wrote:The new lenses recommended by Palmer just arrived (http://bit.ly/MALA4X) - and they are fantastic! Great clarity across the whole field of view (you can even read the corners) and focusing is effortless.
Yes, they appear to be perfectFredz wrote:Did you test them with the 5.6" panel ? Are they a perfect fit, ie. 90°x110° FOV and each showing one side of the screen for each eye ?rfurlan wrote:The new lenses recommended by Palmer just arrived (http://bit.ly/MALA4X) - and they are fantastic! Great clarity across the whole field of view (you can even read the corners) and focusing is effortless.
Thanks for the feedback, I bidded for two.rfurlan wrote:Yes, they appear to be perfect
I think it would be awesomermcclelland wrote: I was thinking of buying these components and designing some Rapid Prototype (3D print or CNC) parts that form a nice housing. I'm a mechanical engineer with lots of RP design experience. Do you think that would be useful? Others could just download the files, have them fabbed, and snap or screw them together.
Looking good. Seems like you'll be getting your Rift 3 months ahead of time. I'm jealousrfurlan wrote:First draft of the foldable foam-board shell:
Not quite.rfurlan wrote:Yes, they appear to be perfectFredz wrote:Did you test them with the 5.6" panel ? Are they a perfect fit, ie. 90°x110° FOV and each showing one side of the screen for each eye ?rfurlan wrote:The new lenses recommended by Palmer just arrived (http://bit.ly/MALA4X) - and they are fantastic! Great clarity across the whole field of view (you can even read the corners) and focusing is effortless.
Wow, you've really become quite the tease of late!PalmerTech wrote:The only other time I have heard of it is the Fakespace Wide5, it was also designed to have as much distortion as possible.
I can't say at the moment, it depends on several factors. Wish I could go into details, but I cannot at the moment.
Optical distortion shouldn't be a problem. It can be corrected with pre-warp correction. Pushing more of the pixel density into the center FOV is actually a smart idea.bobv5 wrote:I think this is the first time I have ever heard somebody being proud of adding more distortion! Any idea what the higher res fov will be, and what the density will be in that area? (I know it will be a gradual change, just asking for a rough idea)
Are you talking about the 7X (UltraOptix) or the 5X you linked to in your last post ?PalmerTech wrote:Not quite.Those lenses are nice, but the field of view is quite a bit lower than the optics in the Rift. I used those UltraOptix lenses for some prototypes, but we are having custom lenses made.
Exciting!!!PalmerTech wrote:Not quite.Those lenses are nice, but the field of view is quite a bit lower than the optics in the Rift. I used those UltraOptix lenses for some prototypes, but we are having custom lenses made. Cheaper, and even more geometric distortion = high pixel density in the center!
Thanks Palmer, it is really great to be able to tap into your expertise! I can't even imagine how many hours it took to figure out all the details for the Rift. What I am learning is that reality is a harsh mistress - at least in comparison to software.PalmerTech wrote:Another thing to note: Because you are using a pure SBS signal, the center of each image is only 60.5mm apart, not the 65mm or so that is an average IPD. Because of this, you will have to move the lenses closer together than they should be to shift the image outwards, which means the exit pupil is not perfectly aligned. It works for testing, but does a lot better when you can shift the center of each image a few millimeters outward.
With some luck because building physical things is a completely different game from building software, which is what I am used tobrantlew wrote:Seems like you'll be getting your Rift 3 months ahead of time. I'm jealous
I did, but with the HMZ-T1 instead. Without proper application support the experience is interesting, but not great - at least at first. The good news is that our brains are really eager to adapt to new modes of interaction and after a while I was feeling quite immersed even though I ended up holding the Hydra on my hands. Mapping your viewport to the position of your hand, while still unnatural, still feels much more natural than using an analog stick.brantlew wrote:Have you tested your tracker yet? It comes with mouse emulation right out of the box so you should be able to get a feel for it even just holding the assembly together with your hands.
I thought the Hydra had only two controllers?rfurlan wrote:The Sixsense tracking system used by the Razer Hydra supports up to 4 independent endpoints - which is great because an integrated VR setup would need at least 3
That is correct, the Hydra has only two controllers, however the Sixsense platform can handle up to 4 if someone were to license and integrate it on their own devices.brantlew wrote:I thought the Hydra had only two controllers?rfurlan wrote:The Sixsense tracking system used by the Razer Hydra supports up to 4 independent endpoints - which is great because an integrated VR setup would need at least 3
Yes, I that is the ideaChriky wrote:Are you going to add physical blinkers so that you can't see the edge of the screen?