U r some weird ppl, I gave yo the link but you kept on chatting off topic about OpenXR here instead of there.
Let me try to get the turn back on topic…
What is weird for me is the small resolution that was mentioned. Now during the OpenXR Demo one of the Khronos reps said it was even possible to run same code for both headsets, even though the StarVR has a Quad Display to render.video at 4:44:40
Could it be the specs are written wrong accidentally and are rather 4x 1830x1464?
Btw I second the position of @aesopfabled half way, this thread belongs not here, rather in General discussion where already other talks about StarVR took place…
It’s not a gadget, it’s a HMD alternative…
Quad view port. But really StarVR needs to fix their specs if its wrong as Ben from RoadToVR has stated “Claimef ppd” doesn’t add up.
Headsets are VR Gadgets. Yes its an alternative, but instead of asking Xunshu to creste s special topic category it fits better here than in General where it would get buried over time. Aesopfabled issue is he believes this should have stayed in the 8k category(which is really a mess & should be summarized & pretty much reset at product release.
Now OpenXR is a part of the StarVR discussion but as you said more or less its a tightrope act. As most don’t understand it. OpenXR is more for developing for headset for ease of creating content. In a way it’s recreating a wheel that while was there hasn’t got traction: OSVR. But that’s another topic on it’s own.
The VR accessories & gadgets so far is staying on topic category… With the exception of this recent discussion veering off to OpenVR vs OpenXR.
Not sure if you guys have seen this or that it was already posted, but starvr posted the full specs on their website:
I feel it’s quite sad that StarVR is trying to hide the real resolution of their HMD. They only post: “16 million sub pixels”. If we take the number that was posted on RoadToVR then that adds up: 2 * 1,830 × 1,464 * 3 subpixels = 16 million. So that confirms that the resolution is correct. I think they must feel ashamed of their resolution otherwise they had posted it. I wonder though how that 3rd subpixel makes up for it. But realistically this thing is not going to be much sharper than first gen Oculus/Vive I guess. Which is quite a bummer.
Also didn’t know this was fresnel, another bummer. AND, biggest bummer I just see: only soft IPD control!! Although it’s not really clear, now I’m re-reading it … They might mean that they do both the hardware movements + adjustments in software that are needed … Test will need to prove how it works. But if it’s really only SW, then I’m not getting my hopes up at all … In fact the more I learn about this HMD the less interesting I find it. Pimax for the win.
I pointed out in another thread that StarVR needs another source of income, because IMAX theaters are shutting down. They dont provide much future for IMAX. StarVR just hypes the consumermarket and hope people are annoyed by Pimax 8K (lack of) progress, so they make a jump for it. Personally I think the real Pimax competitor will be from Oculus. The half dome. Or something close to that. They are not open about it, same goes for OculusGo. Just out of the blue. So If Pimax M2 tour will win the hearts and minds again of the backers, I think Pimax is OK for a while.
„While the Rift and Vive fall into the ~100 degree field of view class, XTAL is targeting 170 degrees, Pimax 180 degrees, and StarVR 210 degrees. Pushing the field of view this far brings new optical, rendering, and form-factor challenges, all of which StarVR One seems to have sorted out while its contemporaries are still in varied stages of solving.“
Clearly they seem to have solved the optical challenges better to date than Pimax, but then there is and remains the relatively unimpressive resolution. But if they priced it not far above the Vive Pro, it could be an alternative to those considering the Vive Pro. If it works seamlessly with SteamVR and Knuckles…
Well Pimax 8k resolution isn’t that impressive neither, lenses use 50% of the panel so effectively you have 8.2M pixels, of course still well above the 5.3M that the StarVR offers, but StarVR does come with that extra subpixel. Also I wonder if Pimax is smart enough to render ONLY the visible part of the display. Because if not, then you’re watching 50% of 2x1440p resolution, which would suck hard, because it would effectively decrease resolution to 1440p, so 3.7M, well BELOW the starVR resolution (before sampling up of course). I wonder if that’s the reason Pimax states that high super sampling is needed … But of course this last part is speculation, maybe they DID find a way to render only the lens visible part. Then again, it would explain why high SS is needed on the Pimax 8k, where it is not needed on the Pimax 4k.
Actually, this might be hard, since Pimax would need to tweak/bypass the scaler to achieve this. If they can’t do this, then they’re f*cked and resolution will quite bad (50% of 2x1440p), explaining the need for high SS.
Since we haven’t had a panel utilization update since 80%. If the lenses core view area is 50% of the panel that would suggest 20% to 30% is in the peripheral area of the lens.
We don’t know how much of StarVR’s primary view area is utilized by the lens. Now with them decreasing the physical size of the panels brings the question of how much of their panels are reserved for Soft ipd adjustment?
I still would like to see StarVR One using ROV’s FoV tool.
If pimax is smart they should include eye tracking modul as standard. Interestingly though pimax in last update mentioned using Eye tracking for Dynamic distortion correction prior to StarVR One reveal; demonstrating they are in alignment with what StarVR is also using eye tracking for.
Agreed, that surely will shed some more light on the situation. But mostly I’d love to see more comparison between the Pimax 8k and the StarVR in terms of SDE and resolution. I have this feeling there’s actually not going to be that much difference here.
They claim it’s 100%. They claim to have achieved this by developing both the lens AND the panel.
Are you sure they are using soft IPD? Their website isn’t very clear here.
I read earlier that you suspect this is the case - I did not see that confirmed in any way yet, so sorry, I will wait before I afford much value to such number.
[quote=“sjefdeklerk, post:109, topic:7554”]
of course still well above the 5.3M that the StarVR offers, but StarVR does come with that extra subpixel. [/quote]
Is the sub-pixel arrangement of the Pimax confirmed yet ? I may have missed that. Is it pentile like e.g. the Rift ?
[quote=“sjefdeklerk, post:109, topic:7554”]
Also I wonder if Pimax is smart enough to render ONLY the visible part of the display. Because if not, then you’re watching 50% of 2x1440p resolution, which would suck hard, because it would effectively decrease resolution to 1440p, so 3.7M, well BELOW the starVR resolution (before sampling up of course).[/quote]
Well, you will likely have a rectangular picture being rendered, then its put through the distortion mixer resulting in another (rectangular piece of) the picture being created and sent to the 8K. So yes, I would not expect the software to be smart enough because I fear all the games assume rectangular output. Only making the rectangle smaller will be used when they employ the 170° option.
I would assume the mere fact that they have more physical pixels on the 8K screen and it is not matched 1:1 by the incoming picture data, this can result in unfortunate upscaling results while on the 5K screen it will just be shown as it was received. Smetime I guess you could choose between one of two colours for a pixel to be upscaled, and only if you downscaled from the large enough sample size will you make the “right” decision when down-scaling to get a good result when upscaling again to such physical pixel output on the 8K. But I admit I am still struggling a bit to appreciate why the SS beyond say 1.5 or 2 still shows effect. Possibly due to the enourmous distortions of a wide FoV lens.
And when we compare the 8K to the StarVR, we of course have to be fair if the latter is priced at 2x or even worse the price point of the 8K - but this again is completely in the dark at this stage (as well as the ultimate retail price of the 8K)
I understand. I’m sure though that the Berlin tests next week will prove that the Pimax 8k resolution is notably worse than the Pimax 4k resolution. I’m not sure if the Pimax employees on site will want to confirm the 50% though. So we might have to wait till Pimax ships out their 8k and people can do tests to confirm it.
No, the 4k is also hardware upsampling 1440p to 4k for the whole panel, exactly the same as the 8k. Pimax 4k has about 100 degrees Fov I think, the 8k about 170, so if panel utilization would be the same, then the 8k would have BETTER PPD than the 4k. But you’ll see, next week in Berlin people will tell you the contrary: that the perceived SDE/resolution was worse than the Pimax 4k.
As long as it is a better package overall I will be glad with it. I never had the 4K, but have the Rift & Vive, and from the V2 I know what to expect. So it very much depends on the level of expectation, I don’t think that the majority of backers are 4K owners… the actual issue in comparison with the V2 seem to be the lenses.
My last public view of Pimax was V5, but the StarVR article is contrasting against a more recent version (sorry I can’t go into more detail). I omitted HeroVR because XTAL is their next evolution and effectively replacing HeroVR entirely.