Total Immersion - WHOA

[Pluvious]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

http://gprime.net/video.php/totalimmersion

WOW.



Pluvious

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Pluvious" <Pluvious@knowhere.com> wrote in message
news:9nq621tmc4bpv1sbnm9lkvtlm9tut9s9tm@4ax.com...
>
> http://gprime.net/video.php/totalimmersion
>
> WOW.
>
>
>
> Pluvious
>
>

Cool. I wonder which billionaire is going to have the first holodeck in his
mansion.

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 11:04:07 -0800, Pluvious <Pluvious@knowhere.com>
wrote:

>http://gprime.net/video.php/totalimmersion
>
>WOW.

/me scratches head

That is either the coolest thing since the Fonz or a nice optical
illusion. My head is hurting trying to work out what is happening
there!
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis) wrote in message news:<4223e767.1121828@news.verizon.net>...
> The people that do computer effects for movies might not think so.

Well, most find it very cool to see real-time effects but indeed some
others just ask for nothing less than the "final quality" - the one
done
with many hours of offline work !

> Run the download again and watch the demonstrator's <left> hand
> as he presents the light-sabre sequence. Seems as if there is no sense
> of true 3D-space; just images of a 3D-object painted on 2-D video.

Don't forget this video is more than one year old now. More recent
stuff on : http://perso.wanadoo.fr/emmanuel.marin/

 

[nostromo]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thus spake Pluvious <Pluvious@knowhere.com>, Mon, 28 Feb 2005 11:04:07
-0800, Anno Domini:

>
>http://gprime.net/video.php/totalimmersion
>
>WOW.
>
>
>
>Pluvious

Interesting...

--
Replace 'spamfree' with the other word for 'maze' to reply via email.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> The people that do computer effects for movies might not think so.
> Run the download again and watch the demonstrator's <left> hand
> as he presents the light-sabre sequence. Seems as if there is no sense
> of true 3D-space; just images of a 3D-object painted on 2-D video.
>

Is there a difference between the demonstrators <left> hand and his left
hand ?
If that video was genuine then the people who do CG effects in movies ought
to pay attention.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:22:46 GMT, "TheLoanArranger"
<somewhere@wallawallawalla.com> wrote:

>> The people that do computer effects for movies might not think so.
>> Run the download again and watch the demonstrator's <left> hand
>> as he presents the light-sabre sequence. Seems as if there is no sense
>> of true 3D-space; just images of a 3D-object painted on 2-D video.
>>
>
>Is there a difference between the demonstrators <left> hand and his left
>hand ?
>If that video was genuine then the people who do CG effects in movies ought
>to pay attention.
>
It's a very cool technology and may find some use in TV production,
but it's not going to replace high end 3D anytime soon.

All it's really doing is using realtime 3D like you'd find in any
modern game, adding it to live video and motion matching it to the
video.
I'm pretty sure they still needed to model the table and everything on
it along with the lights in the presentation hall. Since only the
vehicles are visible it looks like they're interacting with the table
rather than with their 3D world.
It looks nice for presentations, but the output from a high end gaming
card just isn't good enough for a feature film.
Compare the characters from Half Life 2, and Shrek or Gollum from
LOTR. The difference between realtime and pre-rendered is still huge.



Remove nospam_ to reply by email

Jeff H........


Lies, All lies. Don't believe a word Difool/sayNO says.
He fears the truth!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Jeff Holinski <Holinski@shaw.ca> once tried to test me with:

> On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:22:46 GMT, "TheLoanArranger"
><somewhere@wallawallawalla.com> wrote:
>
>>> The people that do computer effects for movies might not think so.
>>> Run the download again and watch the demonstrator's <left> hand
>>> as he presents the light-sabre sequence. Seems as if there is no
>>> sense of true 3D-space; just images of a 3D-object painted on 2-D
>>> video.
>>>
>>
>>Is there a difference between the demonstrators <left> hand and his
>>left hand ?
>>If that video was genuine then the people who do CG effects in movies
>>ought to pay attention.
>>
> It's a very cool technology and may find some use in TV production,
> but it's not going to replace high end 3D anytime soon.
>
> All it's really doing is using realtime 3D like you'd find in any
> modern game, adding it to live video and motion matching it to the
> video.
> I'm pretty sure they still needed to model the table and everything on
> it along with the lights in the presentation hall. Since only the
> vehicles are visible it looks like they're interacting with the table
> rather than with their 3D world.
> It looks nice for presentations, but the output from a high end gaming
> card just isn't good enough for a feature film.
> Compare the characters from Half Life 2, and Shrek or Gollum from
> LOTR. The difference between realtime and pre-rendered is still huge.

Who care's about feature films?

Imagine using this technology in a big "arena" style room, and give every
player a virtual blaster rifle and a virtual light saber. Now all of a
sudden you got Jedi-Wars in a holo-deck style game! It would PWNZ!!!

--

Knight37

The gene pool could use a little chlorine.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 2 Mar 2005 02:41:19 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:


>Who care's about feature films?
>
>Imagine using this technology in a big "arena" style room, and give every
>player a virtual blaster rifle and a virtual light saber. Now all of a
>sudden you got Jedi-Wars in a holo-deck style game! It would PWNZ!!!

You DO realize that the 3D graphics are only visible on a monitor,
right? To the live audience there's nothing there.
The only way you'd be able to see what you're holding would be to wear
a VR headset with a camera mounted on it. Even then you'd need to be
wired into the computer that does the video overlays.

We're still a ways from projected 3D or holodecks.


Remove nospam_ to reply by email

Jeff H........


Lies, All lies. Don't believe a word Difool/sayNO says.
He fears the truth!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Jeff Holinski <Holinski@shaw.ca> wrote:

>You DO realize that the 3D graphics are only visible on a monitor,
>right? To the live audience there's nothing there.

The "monitor" can be a 3D display too... Two cameras for the
video, 3D stereo CG for the virtual stuff. The final result work
great, alas I can't show videos of this on the Internet yet for
obvious technical reasons.

>The only way you'd be able to see what you're holding would be to wear
>a VR headset with a camera mounted on it.

A pair of camera, rather. If you do only 2D overlay, one camera
may be enough, but when you've got virtual object occluded by
real objects, the sense of seeing the CG "behind/before" reality
begs for seeing stereo depth in reality either. Otherwise it is
rather tame, and it's just looking at a TV in front of you..

But anyway I prefer myself any large stereo display (CAVE, etc)
to VR headsets. Same considerations as above apply for the
need for a pair of camera instead of only one, though.

> Even then you'd need to be
>wired into the computer that does the video overlays.

If you're in a CAVE, surrounded by screens, and with a pair
of stereo glasses, you can see a 3D virtual object "in your hand".
But only you, since then here's only one correct point of view
for the stereo CG in the cave. It works rather nice...

>We're still a ways from projected 3D or holodecks.

There are some low-def 3D "holodecks" that start to work,
they see augmented reality as a nice proof of concept, so
stay tune for some results in this soon.

Emmanuel Marin, Paris.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"TheLoanArranger" <somewhere@wallawallawalla.com> wrote:

>> The people that do computer effects for movies might not think so.
>> Run the download again and watch the demonstrator's <left> hand
>> as he presents the light-sabre sequence. Seems as if there is no sense
>> of true 3D-space; just images of a 3D-object painted on 2-D video.
>>
>
>Is there a difference between the demonstrators <left> hand and his left
>hand ?
>If that video was genuine then the people who do CG effects in movies ought
>to pay attention.

The demonstrator is holding a wired device of some sort in his right hand,
the one in which CG objects appear. He holds no such device in his left
hand. (Some of the videos show this more clearly than others -- the wire
hangs loose rather than being snaked down his sleeve). I am guessing that
staionary objects can be detected and computed by cameras in the room
linked to the computer but (rapidly?) moving obejects, like hands, are not.
The wired device is a way of telling the computer the location and
orientation of the demonstrator's right hand. If he held another in his
left hand the computer could track that hand, too.

--

I feel more like I do now than I did when I came in.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:
>Jeff Holinski <Holinski@shaw.ca> once tried to test me with:
>
>> On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:22:46 GMT, "TheLoanArranger"
>><somewhere@wallawallawalla.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> The people that do computer effects for movies might not think so.
>>>> Run the download again and watch the demonstrator's <left> hand
>>>> as he presents the light-sabre sequence. Seems as if there is no
>>>> sense of true 3D-space; just images of a 3D-object painted on 2-D
>>>> video.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Is there a difference between the demonstrators <left> hand and his
>>>left hand ?
>>>If that video was genuine then the people who do CG effects in movies
>>>ought to pay attention.
>>>
>> It's a very cool technology and may find some use in TV production,
>> but it's not going to replace high end 3D anytime soon.
>>
>> All it's really doing is using realtime 3D like you'd find in any
>> modern game, adding it to live video and motion matching it to the
>> video.
>> I'm pretty sure they still needed to model the table and everything on
>> it along with the lights in the presentation hall. Since only the
>> vehicles are visible it looks like they're interacting with the table
>> rather than with their 3D world.
>> It looks nice for presentations, but the output from a high end gaming
>> card just isn't good enough for a feature film.
>> Compare the characters from Half Life 2, and Shrek or Gollum from
>> LOTR. The difference between realtime and pre-rendered is still huge.
>
>Who care's about feature films?
>
>Imagine using this technology in a big "arena" style room, and give every
>player a virtual blaster rifle and a virtual light saber. Now all of a
>sudden you got Jedi-Wars in a holo-deck style game! It would PWNZ!!!

You know that you wouldn't be able to see your light saber or anyone
else's right? You would have to have to be wearing something like a VR
helmet with a camera in it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Bateau <Gamera@work.stomping.aza> once tried to test me with:

>>Imagine using this technology in a big "arena" style room, and give
>>every player a virtual blaster rifle and a virtual light saber. Now
>>all of a sudden you got Jedi-Wars in a holo-deck style game! It would
>>PWNZ!!!
>
> You know that you wouldn't be able to see your light saber or anyone
> else's right? You would have to have to be wearing something like a VR
> helmet with a camera in it.
>

Looking at the video I thought they were demoing this in front of a live
audience... guess not.

--

Knight37

The gene pool could use a little chlorine.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 3 Mar 2005 01:51:19 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:

>Bateau <Gamera@work.stomping.aza> once tried to test me with:
>
>>>Imagine using this technology in a big "arena" style room, and give
>>>every player a virtual blaster rifle and a virtual light saber. Now
>>>all of a sudden you got Jedi-Wars in a holo-deck style game! It would
>>>PWNZ!!!
>>
>> You know that you wouldn't be able to see your light saber or anyone
>> else's right? You would have to have to be wearing something like a VR
>> helmet with a camera in it.
>>
>
>Looking at the video I thought they were demoing this in front of a live
>audience... guess not.

There is a live audience in the room, but they're impressed with
what's on the large monitor behind the guy giving the demo.


Remove nospam_ to reply by email

Jeff H........


Lies, All lies. Don't believe a word Difool/sayNO says.
He fears the truth!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:
>Bateau <Gamera@work.stomping.aza> once tried to test me with:
>
>>>Imagine using this technology in a big "arena" style room, and give
>>>every player a virtual blaster rifle and a virtual light saber. Now
>>>all of a sudden you got Jedi-Wars in a holo-deck style game! It would
>>>PWNZ!!!
>>
>> You know that you wouldn't be able to see your light saber or anyone
>> else's right? You would have to have to be wearing something like a VR
>> helmet with a camera in it.
>>
>
>Looking at the video I thought they were demoing this in front of a live
>audience... guess not.

Every time this link comes up people act like such dumbasses. I can't
believe people think it's visible in real life hahahahahahahaha.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

>>>>>Imagine using this technology in a big "arena" style room, and give
>>>>every player a virtual blaster rifle and a virtual light saber. Now
>>>>all of a sudden you got Jedi-Wars in a holo-deck style game! It would
>>>>PWNZ!!!
>>>
>>> You know that you wouldn't be able to see your light saber or anyone
>>> else's right? You would have to have to be wearing something like a VR
>>> helmet with a camera in it.
>>>
>>
>>Looking at the video I thought they were demoing this in front of a live
>>audience... guess not.
>
> Every time this link comes up people act like such dumbasses. I can't
> believe people think it's visible in real life hahahahahahahaha.

We act like dumbass's because we haven't seen this particular movie before,
you snotty, arrogant, little wise and beautiful woman.
Shame we can't all be as perfect as you. You must be "The One", eh ?
Dickhead.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"TheLoanArranger" <somewhere@wallawallawalla.com> wrote:
>>>>>>Imagine using this technology in a big "arena" style room, and give
>>>>>every player a virtual blaster rifle and a virtual light saber. Now
>>>>>all of a sudden you got Jedi-Wars in a holo-deck style game! It would
>>>>>PWNZ!!!
>>>>
>>>> You know that you wouldn't be able to see your light saber or anyone
>>>> else's right? You would have to have to be wearing something like a VR
>>>> helmet with a camera in it.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Looking at the video I thought they were demoing this in front of a live
>>>audience... guess not.
>>
>> Every time this link comes up people act like such dumbasses. I can't
>> believe people think it's visible in real life hahahahahahahaha.
>
>We act like dumbass's because we haven't seen this particular movie before,
>you snotty, arrogant, little wise and beautiful woman.

Neither had I the first time I saw it but it was still obvious to me.
Dumb my wise and beautiful friend.

>Shame we can't all be as perfect as you. You must be "The One", eh ?
>Dickhead.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

>>> Every time this link comes up people act like such dumbasses. I can't
>>> believe people think it's visible in real life hahahahahahahaha.
>>
>>We act like dumbass's because we haven't seen this particular movie
>>before,
>>you snotty, arrogant, little wise and beautiful woman.
>
> Neither had I the first time I saw it but it was still obvious to me.
> Dumb my wise and beautiful friend.


Being so god damn clever, I wonder why you contribute so little to this
newsgroup.
Prick.


Shame we can't all be as perfect as you. You must be "The One", eh ?
Dickhead.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"TheLoanArranger" <somewhere@wallawallawalla.com> wrote:
>>>> Every time this link comes up people act like such dumbasses. I can't
>>>> believe people think it's visible in real life hahahahahahahaha.
>>>
>>>We act like dumbass's because we haven't seen this particular movie
>>>before,
>>>you snotty, arrogant, little wise and beautiful woman.
>>
>> Neither had I the first time I saw it but it was still obvious to me.
>> Dumb my wise and beautiful friend.
>
>Being so god damn clever, I wonder why you contribute so little to this
>newsgroup.
>Prick.

You mean I should argue about flame and reply to religious trolls like
the rest of you?

>Shame we can't all be as perfect as you. You must be "The One", eh ?
>Dickhead.

YOU SAID THAT SAME THING LAST TIME AND IT WAS A LAME INSULT THEN.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly "TheLoanArranger" <somewhere@wallawallawalla.com> Spake Unto
All:

>> Why don't you strip naked and paint OWNED on your ass?
>
>You like men stripped naked ?

You two - get a room!