On Tue, 28 Apr 1998, Tony Havelka wrote:
> > Mounted HUD would be a better idea. Keep in mind that the trade-off for
> > augmented reality is that you lose depth perception by covering one eye
> > with the display. Also, you lose all of your peripheral vision on that
> > side. Essentially you'd have one heck of a blind spot on one whole side
> > of the car. Bad idea.
>
> Mark,
>
> You do not have to completely cover one eye in order to use an HMD.
> Checkout http://www.liquidimage.ca/vr/images/m1c.jpg . It shows a head on
> picture of the M1. It takes up only 20 degrees of the overall field of
> view leaving all of the peripheral field open. Also, you can place the
> device anywhere in your field of view - directly in front, up to the right,
> down to the right, etc... so that you don't lose your depth perception.
>
Ok, while I haven't yet seen the M1, my comments were basically made with
the P4 Private EYe and the PD-5 in mind, since those seem to be the
favorites around here. As far as the whole HMD debate goes, I'd be very
happy with just a P4. It ironic that the company stopped making them for
"lack of interest" just as this group seems to be building interest.
____________ _________ ________ __ __
/ _______ / / ___ / / ___ / / / / /
_/ / __ / / _/ / /_ / / / /_ /_ / /__/ /_
/ / /_/ / / / /____/ / / /____/ / / ____ /
/ / / / / _____ / / _____ / / / / /
/__/ /_/ /__/ /_/ /_/ /__/ /_/ /__/
http://www-personal.umd.umich.edu/~mlenigan/
"End the discrimination! Support dyslexic vending machines...after all,
they don't care which way you insert your dollar."
From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty
Archive created with babymail