Vision Pro and the future of VR movies

[iZac]

There is an expectation that the iPhone Pro models (either this year, or the following year at the latest) will add one more lense on the iPhone... of course for better results the second lense should be on the other side of the top of the camera... but in either case the expectation (of some professionals) is that Apple will have the ability to record in 3D from your iPhone as well... worst case scenario - it just provides more information that can be incorporated into the photo regardless of whether it is used for a 3D image or 2D. I would be more interested in the ability to merge two different imaging streams into something that can be used to record a slow-mo (slower motion - more frames per second) ability. (not like the specialized camera but more of anything is always better). I don't expect someone to grab the Vision Pro and put it on - just to take pictures at home. 3D Video on your iPhone would likely get the attention of vloggers and travel video stuff on YouTube 3D. StreetView 3D would be nice.

Yeah I really think 3D cameras and LIDAR being added to a load of products will help build an ecosystem to support the AppleVision line of products. The Black Mirror part of the AppleVision introduction looks an awful less dystopian when you replace creepy dad recording his kids while wearing his headset with an iPhone camera in hand.

 

[Jensend]

Because the world is already in 3D. The allure of photographs and movies is that they’re abstracted from reality, not of a piece with it.

You, at the advent of color film:
Because the world is already in color.

2D photography wouldn’t be replaced, just like B&W photography hasn’t been replaced. B&W photography still has an allure. Photographs have a variety of purposes.
I also watch animated movies, which are more abstracted than filmed movies.

No, 3D photography has been around for many decades, using consumer grade cameras using 35mm film. (Film of course is much higher resolution than digital.) But people haven’t embraced it. Not even in existing VR systems.

None of the VR systems have an easy 3D capture and viewing experience on a single device.
My Nintendo 3DS has a stereoscopic camera and screen. Being able to capture and view photos on the same device made it a fun experience, even with the pitiful image quality.

The Vision Pro will go a step beyond other stereoscopic capture and display systems by showing 3D scenes at correct scale. I think that will mitigate some of the discomfort people feel from existing 3D content.

B&W perspective-correct 3D could be fun…

 

[Surf Monkey]

You, at the advent of color film:
Because the world is already in color.

In many ways black and white is much more expressive than color film because it’s even further abstracted from reality. Now, what was your non-point again?

2D photography wouldn’t be replaced, just like B&W photography hasn’t been replaced. B&W photography still has an allure. Photographs have a variety of purposes.

As I already said, 3D photography is not new and has not been embraced by the public.

I also watch animated movies, which are more abstracted than filmed movies.

Okay?

None of the VR systems have an easy 3D capture and viewing experience on a single device.
My Nintendo 3DS has a stereoscopic camera and screen. Being able to capture and view photos on the same device made it a fun experience, even with the pitiful image quality.

Again, okay? This doesn’t rebut anything.

The Vision Pro will go a step beyond other stereoscopic capture and display systems by showing 3D scenes at correct scale. I think that will mitigate some of the discomfort people feel from existing 3D content.

B&W perspective-correct 3D could be fun…

The images they’ve showed so far look down right creepy. But at least people wearing the VP look like total tools, so there’s that.

 

[Jensend]

In many ways black and white is much more expressive than color film because it’s even further abstracted from reality. Now, what was your non-point again?

You were tying popularity to abstraction. Color is much more popular than B&W, despite being less abstract.

As I already said, 3D photography is not new and has not been embraced by the public.

Sure, it’s older than color photography. But it’s less convenient to capture and view than 2D photography.
Color is just as easy to capture and view as B&W these days.
If color photography required a separate lens for each primary color, and using a special device that held three different primary color images to view the photos in color, it would probably be much less popular.

Okay?

Again, okay? This doesn’t rebut anything.

My point is that popularity is somewhat tied to convenience. So saying that something won’t be popular now because it hasn’t been popular for the last hundred years isn’t a good argument if you ignore the convenience factor.

The images they’ve showed so far look down right creepy. But at least people wearing the VP look like total tools, so there’s that.

All the example photos Apple uses look a bit too polished, whether 2D or 3D. You were watching the presentation in 2D, so if the examples they were showing looked more creepy to you, it came down to the presentation and examples they picked, and not anything inherent about the 3D properties of the photos and videos.

 

[Surf Monkey]

You were tying popularity to abstraction. Color is much more popular than B&W, despite being less abstract.

Sure, it’s older than color photography. But it’s less convenient to capture and view than 2D photography.
Color is just as easy to capture and view as B&W these days.
If color photography required a separate lens for each primary color, and using a special device that held three different primary color images to view the photos in color, it would probably be much less popular.

My point is that popularity is somewhat tied to convenience. So saying that something won’t be popular now because it hasn’t been popular for the last hundred years isn’t a good argument if you ignore the convenience factor.

All the example photos Apple uses look a bit too polished, whether 2D or 3D. You were watching the presentation in 2D, so if the examples they were showing looked more creepy to you, it came down to the presentation and examples they picked, and not anything inherent about the 3D properties of the photos and videos.

Well, I’m sure you find these rationalizations compelling.

 

[Jensend]

Well, I’m sure you find these rationalizations compelling.

I mostly just think your "abstraction" argument isn't compelling.
People who go to the theater to see live plays/musicals don't complain that they got a headache because the visuals are 3D.

I don't see 3D movies/TV ever becoming the dominate way people watch those mediums. Moving cameras and incorrect scale make many people uncomfortable when watching stereoscopic content.

I'm not even claiming 3D VR content of any sort will take off. I just believe there are some fundamental differences that aren't analogous to previous versions of 3D that may lead to a different outcome for the technology.

A 360 photosphere that looks fine on a 2D screen looks wrong when viewed within VR, but a full 3D rendered environment looks natural. From your experience with VR, would you agree?

 

[Surf Monkey]

I mostly just think your "abstraction" argument isn't compelling.
People who go to the theater to see live plays/musicals don't complain that they got a headache because the visuals are 3D.

I don't see 3D movies/TV ever becoming the dominate way people watch those mediums. Moving cameras and incorrect scale make many people uncomfortable when watching stereoscopic content.

I'm not even claiming 3D VR content of any sort will take off. I just believe there are some fundamental differences that aren't analogous to previous versions of 3D that may lead to a different outcome for the technology.

A 360 photosphere that looks fine on a 2D screen looks wrong when viewed within VR, but a full 3D rendered environment looks natural. From your experience with VR, would you agree?

Seems like reaching.

 

[Jensend]

Seems like reaching.

Have you tried VR at all?

 

[Surf Monkey]

Have you tried VR at all?

Yes. Are we trading fallacies now?

 

[Jensend]

Yes. Are we trading fallacies now?

Wanting to know someone’s personal experience with the product category being discussed is a fallacy? Is that completely irrelevant to your opinions about it?

 

[Surf Monkey]

Wanting to know someone’s personal experience with the product category being discussed is a fallacy? Is that completely irrelevant to your opinions about it?

Sure looks like you’re driving towards an appeal to authority fallacy.

Yes, I have experience with several VR systems.

 

[vladi]

I mostly just think your "abstraction" argument isn't compelling.
People who go to the theater to see live plays/musicals don't complain that they got a headache because the visuals are 3D.

I don't see 3D movies/TV ever becoming the dominate way people watch those mediums. Moving cameras and incorrect scale make many people uncomfortable when watching stereoscopic content.

I'm not even claiming 3D VR content of any sort will take off. I just believe there are some fundamental differences that aren't analogous to previous versions of 3D that may lead to a different outcome for the technology.

A 360 photosphere that looks fine on a 2D screen looks wrong when viewed within VR, but a full 3D rendered environment looks natural. From your experience with VR, would you agree?

HDRI or 360 photos/videos are nothing spectacular nor hard to make today. I'm pretty sure there is a lot more advanced technology today that does it whole a lot better. I myself haven't graded a single 360 movie in my life so I can't tell you much about it.

 

[jagooch]

I’d watch an interactive VR movie of 2003 Jessica Alba , as long as it included VR gloves.