From: Jason Joslyn Subject: Re: REV-PROD: Eyegen 4 vs. Low cost hmd's Date: 18 Apr 1995 01:59:59 GMT Organization: Jax Gateway to the World As far as a *subjective* opinion goes, here's mine: I tried several HMD's at SIGGRAPH 94 including the Eyegen, the Forte VFX1 and the Virtual I/O. I was underwhelmed with the Eyegen, due to it's narrow FOV and the way it fit on my head, which let a lot of light in through my peripherial vision- thus reducing the immersion effect. It had a very crisp image- due to the CRT & colorwheel system. So crisp that it could be used in applications where one wants to read small text in the virtual world. I guess that this is it's biggest attraction, because it also had a noticeable RGB "ghosting" effect when I moved my head quickly, due to the colorwheel system. The other new HMD from Virtual Research, the VR4, which costs the same as the Eyegen, was probably the *best* headmount I tried. It had very bright,and high-contrast LCD display that had a much broader FOV than the Eyegen. It was also comfortable and very adjustable. It and the DHMD01 from Division impressed me the most, but the DHM01 (about $5000) seemed to be more a part of the Division Bundled systems than a stand-alone HMD. It requires a seperate "Integrated Peripherial Unit" from Division that seems to only have Workstation-type connections. If I had 6 or 7 thousand dollars, I would probably find a way to make the DHMD01 plug into my PC, just because of the wide field of view and great sense of immersion I got from the DHMD01. But since I don't have these resources, I looked at the less pricey ones from Forte and Virtual I/O. These two seem to fill two different roles- the Forte goes for immersion by surrounding your head in a comfortable and dark shell with big headphones and very little light getting in to your eyes. The design is great, but not very adjustable for different size heads. Luckily it seemed to work for most of the people I saw try it on. The LCD's I saw in it were kind of low-res, but the folks at Forte say that they have already increased that in the model that is going to be shipping soon. The FOV was much less than that of the DHMD01 or the VR4, but comparable to the Eyegen, without the crispness. It definitely has the effect of looking through a square hole. One can always see the edgess of the screen, and this does reduce the sense of immersion a bit, until you get involved in the scene and forget about it, like at a movie theatre. The built-in 3DOF tracking in the Forte seemed prety fast, but it did require that the user "reset" it to it's 0,0,0 orientation before restarting the simulation, etc. The Virtual I/O on the other hand doesn't seem to be going for the same "immersion" effect as much. It's display looks like a big square, medium-res screen hanging in front of you, with the world all around the screen being totally visible. They say that this will allow it to be used for "augmented VR" and overlay-displays, but they didn't have any examples of transparency combined with full opacity in the same image. They also have a darkening "clip" that fits around the eyes to shut out some light, which helped, but didn't make it very much more immersive. I think that I would probably use Virtual I/O i-glasses! in the dark if I wanted to really get into a world. Otherwise, the image was good and the stereoscopy (like the Forte's) was flickerless and convincing. The Virtual I/O i-glasses! I tried were hooked into a 3D video tape that was very stunning, and I can see that the proposed 3D cable programming for the i-glasses! would work very well. The other HMD I tried was the General Reality Cyber-eye. I gather that some people love this lightweight visor, and others don't. (I prefaced this message by saying that it was my subjective opinion) I was not very impressed. It was indeed lightweight and comfortable, but the image seemed like a postage-stamp sized window about 10 feet away. I don't really like the narrow FOV effect, but I found it acceptable in the Virtual I/O and Forte, but the Cyber-eye I tried seemed way too "tunnel-visioned" for me. I can say that it had a very crisp display once I got over the FOV and lack of immersion (the visor lets much light in around the sides). I can see people using the Cyber-Eye for the same sort of apps that the Eyegen is used for, where immersion is not a priority and detail is. Also, because of it's sleek design, I can see business men/suit-types feeling at ease wearing the Cyber-eye to view VR stock-market visualizations while at their desks, whereas the Eyegen makes one look like one's head is being eaten by some of black sinewy creature. (Amazing the things that come out when a "subjective account" is asked for!) In summary, I am now trying to decide between the Virtual I/O i-glasses! and the Forte VFX1 for my first HMD investment. I have not tried the Cybermaxx, but have talked to people who have given totally different accounts of it. I see it as a competitor with Forte, since it is after the immersion effect, and I was very impressed with the balanced, comfortable way that the VFX1 fit on my head. The Cybermaxx just doesn't look so luxuriously comfortable, but then it is cheaper, I think. ($700 vs.$1000 Forte). I hope you really wanted this much information and opinion, -Jason ---------------------------- Jason Joslyn jjoslyn@jax.gttw.com MAYA Productions http://ww1.gttw.com/maya/maya.html (Chris Chuter) says: > >Has anyone had the opportunity to compare the Virtual Research eyegen4 >with some of the lower cost HMD's just coming out (particularly the >virtual I/O). I know these will differ greatly in FOV and amount of >pixels, but i'm looking for more of a subjective opinion concerning >the look and feel. I know the eyegen will give a much better immersive >feel, but does it merit the extra cost (eyegen4 - $7900, virtual I/O - >$599).