Microsoft HoloLens [Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, Holograms]

[iroboto]

I didn't know the Superball was just around the corner so appreciate the marketing perspective a little more.

That said, I imagine MS just palmed the idea off on a marketing firm and they ran with it without consideration for the realities.

Definitely could be the case. I imagine it was a quick 2 paragraph from the engineers of what Hololens is capable of and they probably went several years into the future with that one.

Ps: it's Super Bowl, Superball I imagine is some sort of Lottery lol. I don't hold it against you though I don't care for the sport either! I've Certainly watched more World and Euro Cup than I have ever watched NFL.

 

[eastmen]

Cameras setup around the top of the stadium to give a 360 view of the pitch is definitely not the same as controlling a cameraman that's on the pitch. Nor is it giving any other "feature" that's shown in that Hololens video.

Interesting, yes. Benefiting Hololens any more than a standard TV? Probably not.

You can actually use the view to zoom in to ground level and then move the field in 360 view.

This is also the first time they are using this. So you know two future techs coming down the pipe combined with those who want to watch it in VR and the like and your dead wrong on what you'll be able to do with the holo lens

 

[Deleted member 86764]

You can actually use the view to zoom in to ground level and then move the field in 360 view.

This is also the first time they are using this. So you know two future techs coming down the pipe combined with those who want to watch it in VR and the like and your dead wrong on what you'll be able to do with the holo lens

May I ask if you believe the features and functionality of that video represent the capabilities of the Hololens hardware?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

You can actually use the view to zoom in to ground level and then move the field in 360 view.

So they are taking input from every user (on what system) and rendering the view in the cloud and streaming, per user?

 

[eastmen]

May I ask if you believe the features and functionality of that video represent the capabilities of the Hololens hardware?

I believe the video is a blend of technologies already avalible and those that will be in the future. I've used a hololens and I don't see anything it couldn't do in the video and this is in a prerelease state.

Have you tried Puppy Bowl VR ? They used this great go pro system

http://vrscout.com/news/gopros-360-degree-virtual-reality-system/

http://www.animalplanet.com/tv-shows/puppy-bowl/games-and-more/puppy-bowl-virtual-reality/

This tech is only going to get better

 

[eastmen]

So they are taking input from every user (on what system) and rendering the view in the cloud and streaming, per user?

You would only need a 360 degree camera and then any user will be able to view what they want at any time

 

[Deleted member 86764]

I've used a hololens and I don't see anything it couldn't do in the video and this is in a prerelease state.

Well, I see an awful lot that it definitely cannot do, since there's no available source for it. I also do not see how that source will be available for a long, long time.

By the way, those cameras setup in the stadium are used to replays and can only view the action from 36 fixed cameras. Those views can be zoomed in (at a detriment to resolution - as they're fixed) and I'm pretty sure they can't "...zoom in to ground level and then move the field in 360 view". You're welcome to prove me wrong with some actual footage once the game(s?) have been played and the video are available.

And yeah, sticking one of those Go-Pro devices on the players helmets is possible. Safety concerns might well be a problem and the broadcasters won't be able to send the signals from however many players are in an American Football game. Along with the (fixed) 36 cameras around the stadium's edge, as well as the standard TV broadcast and the proposed expanded standard TV broadcast. Or the wildly improbable movable 3D view...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

You would only need a 360 degree camera and then any user will be able to view what they want at any time

If you select a small part of that 360 degree camera, you get only a small amount of data to view. You can't zoom in on any player beyond the quality of the source material. So let's say we have a complete view of the field in 4000x2000 res. A player occupies 0.1% of that area, so if you wanted to zoom in on the quarterback so he fills the screen, you'll have a blurry, pixelated mess. If you want every player viewable up close in 1080p quality, you need a source that provides that degree of information denisty - either a 1080p camera on every player or a 20,000p camera filming everything where each section is 1080p quality.

And that's just for top down. If you also want to view the scene from the side and front and move from player ot player, you'll need a data format beyond what we can provide. Something like multiple depth cameras scanning the scene and providing 3D models.

Anyway, Superbowl was yesterday. What did the tech actually achieve? Were viewers able to get arbitary, independent viewpoints of the whole game? I can't find anything from last night but EyeVision 360 clips are avialable and they're just replay cams.

 

[eastmen]

Well, I see an awful lot that it definitely cannot do, since there's no available source for it. I also do not see how that source will be available for a long, long time.

By the way, those cameras setup in the stadium are used to replays and can only view the action from 36 fixed cameras. Those views can be zoomed in (at a detriment to resolution - as they're fixed) and I'm pretty sure they can't "...zoom in to ground level and then move the field in 360 view". You're welcome to prove me wrong with some actual footage once the game(s?) have been played and the video are available.

And yeah, sticking one of those Go-Pro devices on the players helmets is possible. Safety concerns might well be a problem and the broadcasters won't be able to send the signals from however many players are in an American Football game. Along with the (fixed) 36 cameras around the stadium's edge, as well as the standard TV broadcast and the proposed expanded standard TV broadcast. Or the wildly improbable movable 3D view...

You haven't given an example.

You don't need 36 cameras around the stadiums edge. There are cameras that offer 180 and 360 degree fields of view now

http://www.vrspies.com/2016/02/watching-live-broadcasts-by-nextvr.html

 

[eastmen]

If you select a small part of that 360 degree camera, you get only a small amount of data to view. You can't zoom in on any player beyond the quality of the source material. So let's say we have a complete view of the field in 4000x2000 res. A player occupies 0.1% of that area, so if you wanted to zoom in on the quarterback so he fills the screen, you'll have a blurry, pixelated mess. If you want every player viewable up close in 1080p quality, you need a source that provides that degree of information denisty - either a 1080p camera on every player or a 20,000p camera filming everything where each section is 1080p quality.

And that's just for top down. If you also want to view the scene from the side and front and move from player ot player, you'll need a data format beyond what we can provide. Something like multiple depth cameras scanning the scene and providing 3D models.

Anyway, Superbowl was yesterday. What did the tech actually achieve? Were viewers able to get arbitary, independent viewpoints of the whole game? I can't find anything from last night but EyeVision 360 clips are avialable and they're just replay cams.

Please these are baby steps into the technology. Try NextVR or look at the new Samsung cameras coming out .

Your example is flawed because you'd have multiple 4k or higher camera's . So that as you move your head you switch between the camera's that have the best view and then you zoom in onto the quarter back .

Each rig will have multiple camera's and there would be multiple rigs in multiple areas of the arena /stadium

 

[Deleted member 86764]

These "flawed examples" are yours you realise?

None of what you're now demonstrating has any relevance to that video. Arguably it has no relevance to AR either.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Please these are baby steps into the technology.

Right. It's years off. Like the EA Madden visualisation from 2005. Or the Milo 'demo' for Kinect.

Just reviewing your contributions to these VR/AR threads, you've been speculating Hololens is near release (waiting on software), a headset for use with XB1 going toe-to-toe with OVR and Morpheus, not too expensive ($200-300 to make), and now that the typical Marketing Bluster video is realistic. I think you're way off the mark here all round. It's a cool but limited visualisation tech that's a ways off, limited as first edition tech always is, expensive as first edition tech always is, and being overrepresented to generate interest as is typical. I don't see the reason to have faith in Hololens when sooo many other tech concepts full of promise have all been oversold.

 

[eastmen]

These "flawed examples" are yours you realise?

None of what you're now demonstrating has any relevance to that video. Arguably it has no relevance to AR either.

I'm just responding to you

"No, the most ridiculous part of this video starts around the 25 second mark where the person turning their head, also turns the camera POV as if they've full control over the cameraman filming the game."

I've posted multiple ways that a person wearing a hololens or any vr helmet would be able to turn their head and change the POV of the camera as if they had full control of filming. Contrary to your post and these are all being used at various events today.

 

[eastmen]

Right. It's years off. Like the EA Madden visualisation from 2005. Or the Milo 'demo' for Kinect.

Just reviewing your contributions to these VR/AR threads, you've been speculating Hololens is near release (waiting on software), a headset for use with XB1 going toe-to-toe with OVR and Morpheus, not too expensive ($200-300 to make), and now that the typical Marketing Bluster video is realistic. I think you're way off the mark here all round. It's a cool but limited visualisation tech that's a ways off, limited as first edition tech always is, expensive as first edition tech always is, and being overrepresented to generate interest as is typical. I don't see the reason to have faith in Hololens when sooo many other tech concepts full of promise have all been oversold.

What is years off ? The puppy bowl was broadcasted in VR with the ability to take control of the camera. Which is exactly what Pissarant was complaining was impossible.


I was wrong with the price of the Hololens. I'm sure you've never been wrong however otherwise what is the point of this little hissy fit post you made?

Remember this is what I responded too

"No, the most ridiculous part of this video starts around the 25 second mark where the person turning their head, also turns the camera POV as if they've full control over the cameraman filming the game."

I've posted a link that has multiple live events with the ability to do just what he complained about being impossible.


In Sept of 2015 you could have watched the MTV VMAs in 360 degree VR allowing at will for you to change what you were looking at , just like in the hololens video

http://fortune.com/2015/09/01/vr-for-mtv-vmas/

The US open was only streamed in 180 degrees you still had a good view of it.


This is a feature that is rolling out because of VR , hololens just gets to take advantage of it and its not years away its happening now. Get yourself a carboard rig or gear vr and you can experience it now.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

I've posted multiple ways that a person wearing a hololens or any vr helmet would be able to turn their head and change the POV of the camera as if they had full control of filming. Contrary to your post and these are all being used at various events today.

You still haven't solved the problem of the view being 3x wider than the TV's view, so yes, that video is still improbable. Still way in the future and won't be present on Hololens 1.0 as you're hoping.

I understand your faith in Microsoft is unwavering, but I prefer to take a scientific view on these types of things. Regardless of the company.

That video is and will remain for a number of years - daft. Just like Milo and the original Killzone 2 demo / Madden are.

Spoiler

My phone wants to auto-correct "Killzone" to "jolliness", changes the context of the game completely

 

[Silent_Buddha]

If they have enough camera's around the stadium, the available view is going to be far larger than just 3x wider. It's relatively trivial now to stitch together footage from multiple camera's (even video in motion) for a seemless viewing experience.

Of all the complaints you could have about the advertisement, that's the most realistic of the things shown.

Regards,
SB

 

[Deleted member 86764]

Only those video feeds are multiple metres apart.

I feel a bit like a broken record here.

Okay, I'll just have to accept what you're saying; I can't wait to watch the next Superbowl after the Hololens is released in 3D, and have an expanded view of the field, where I can look in 360 from anywhere in the field.

 

[fehu]

Only those video feeds are multiple metres apart.

There's nothing at the moment set up so that it can be accomplished.
There's nothing in the world that can stop the microsoft and fifa/nfl/ecc's marketing departments from setting up two camera and streaming the optional video

 

[BadTB25]

All this tearing apart of Hololens is a little ridiculous. It's obviously a marketing video of the a "possible" NFL experience in the future---hell it even says so in the opening scene.

This kind of videos are nothing new---no one complained about PS9, flying cars or other commercials that are not possible now. There is no statement that says it will represent your actual experience.

It's a conceptual video of what may be possible not what currently exists and in that case, is what you see there really impossible say in 5-10 years time? And to be clear, I'm not saying it will be. That said, I wish I could get to experience the device in person.

 

[eastmen]

Well hololens is up for order today

Hololens Specs:

• fully untethered and self-contained, which means you do not need a PC or phone to use it
• custom-built Microsoft Holographic Processing Unit (HPU)
• Intel 32 bit processor
• inertial measurement unit
• ambient light sensor
• 4 environment understanding cameras (these combine with a depth sensing camera to allow HoloLens to map spaces.)
• 2-megapixel HD camera to capture videos and photos
• 4 microphones inside the headset are used to pick up voice commands from users
• 2GB of RAM
• 64GB of flash storage
• Bluetooth (for the Clicker accessory, included)
• Wi-Fi
• 579 grams
• battery will run for around 2-3 hours of active use
• fully functional when it's charged over Micro USB
• standby time of two weeks.
• comes with a carrying case, Clicker accessory, charger, and additional nose pads

As you can see above MS has added a clicker

https://www.petri.com/hololens-clicker-peripheral-will-make-it-easier-to-interact-with-holograms

Holo Studio - Build holograms using the hololens

Young Conker

Fragments - Murder Mystery (this sounds so awesome)

Spatial Mapping -
https://dev.windows.com/en-US/holographic/spatial_mapping#mesh_processing

I am very impressed with this. They just need to get the battery life up , 2-3 hours is not enough , 6 hours would be the minimum I feel . Although it can charge through micro usb , so I guess you can bring a battery pack. And of course FOV needs to go up.