DOCSLIB.ORG

Three Dimensional Visual Display

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Michael McKenna Three Dimensional Visual Media Laboratory Display Massachusetts Institute of Technology SyStCttlS fOP Vlftlial EnVÍl"OniTientS Cambridge, Massachusetts 02137 David Zeltzer Media Laboratory Research of Electronics Laboratory Abstract Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 This paper surveys three-dimensional (3D) visual display technology as it relates to real- time, interactive systems—or virtual environment systems. Five major 3D display types are examined: stereoscopic, lenticular, parallax barrier, slice-stacking, and holographic displays. The major characteristics of each display type are examined, i.e. spatial resolu- tion, depth resolution, field of view, viewing zone, bandwidth, etc. In addition, the cor- responding parameters of the human visual systems are described. The different display systems, as well as the human visual system, are compared in tabular form. I Introduction Our sense of visual "depth" is often taken for granted until we encounter a situation in which various depth cues are missing—as when we view a sup- posedly "realistically" rendered, "three-dimensional" image on the face of an ordinary CRT. Yet for many tasks, we can show that the presence or absence of 3D depth cues has important effects on human performance (McWhorter, Hodges, & Rodriguez, 1990; Liu, Stark, & Hirose, 1992). A number of three- dimensional display technologies have been developed, however, and for those virtual environment or teleoperator applications in which depth perception must be supported, it is important to provide the appropriate three-dimen- sional display. This paper is a survey of three-dimensional display techniques, with a de- scription and analysis of five major types of three-dimensional imaging systems: stereoscopic displays, lenticulars, parallax barriers, slice-stacking displays, and holography. These systems are analyzed using a set of criteria to allow quantita- tive comparisons among example displays, and the analyses are geared toward display systems for virtual environments (VEs). This paper does not cover as- pects of VE technology outside of visual displays, except as they relate to the display requirements. For example, there are rendering issues, such as the fidel- ity of lighting models, which are not directly addressed. Also, the input devices necessary to interact with a VE are not discussed—with the exception of head- tracking, required for viewpoint-dependent imaging using stereoscopic dis- plays. There are also a number of other, nonvisual, output devices of use to VEs, such as force-displays and acoustic output, which must be left to other surveys. It is assumed that the reader is familiar with two-dimensional display tech- nology for computer graphic imagery, such as CRT (cathode ray tube) displays raster "frames" and Presence. Volume I. Number 4. Fall 1992 (including calligraphic and displays) and the concepts of e 1993 The Massachusetts Institute of Technology interlaced "fields." Good references on raster CRT displays are Conrac (1985) McKenna and Zeltzer 421 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/pres.1992.1.4.421 by guest on 29 September 2021 422 PRESENCE: VOLUME I, NUMBER 4 and Foley, van Dam, Feiner, and Hughes (1990), which of 3D display systems. We will first discuss general visual also includes a thorough review of rendering techniques. cues such as brightness and color, as well as the temporal It is important to analyze the task to be accomplished and spatial resolution characteristics of the human visual in order to match the technology to the problem in a system. We will conclude the section with a discussion of cost-effective manner. For example, some tasks may re- depth perception and depth cues. Some of the criteria quire high-resolution displays, or wide-angle views, but are more important for certain kinds of display systems not stereo viewing. The criteria used in this paper should than for others. These differences will be discussed as be able to guide researchers in their selection of an ap- each display system is described. propriate display system for their display requirements. In Section 4, tables are given that compare the at- In addition, it may be possible to develop a general dis- tributes of a set of examples of the different display sys- play type, useful to a wide range of VE tasks. tems and the human visual system, based on the criteria The next section presents the criteria used to examine given below. In this section many of the criteria are ac- the 3D display systems, and relates each of the criteria to companied by a short description, which develops its an aspect of the human visual system. Section 3 provides corresponding table entry. a functional description and analysis of five three-dimen- sional Section 4 a display systems. gives quantitative 2.1 Visual Cues and Display Attributes comparison of the different display systems, in a tabular form. Finally, conclusions are presented in Section 5. 2.1.1 Field of View. Thefield ofview (VOW) of a display measures the angle subtended by the viewing surface from a given observer location. FOV and spatial 2 Criteria for Display Systems resolution are related since a change in the FOV of a dis- play (i.e., enlarging the viewing surface) requires either a The perception of distance is a complex phenome- change in the size or number of pixels. non, involving many mechanisms of the eye as well as The human eye has a very wide visual field. The static the brain. There are many cues, or patterns of stimuli, visualfield is the FOV that is instantaneously seen when that provide us with information about the depth and the eyes are looking straight ahead—over 120° vertically shape of objects in the real world, as well as objects pre- for a single eye, and approximately 180° horizontally for sented to us in images. None of the display systems dis- both eyes, with a 120° overlap between the two eyes. cussed in this paper supports every depth cue, and the Because the FOV is limited by the occluding cheeks, various systems have different shortcomings. Certain brows, and the nose, however, it has a rather irregular cues are better suited to certain tasks or imaging require- shape. The addition of head, neck, and body movements ments, thus certain displays may be more appropriate for allows a full 360° of visual coverage; head and eye move- certain tasks. ments combined can exceed velocities of hundreds of To compare different types of display systems, a set of degrees per second (Rolfe & Staples, 1989). criteria was developed that, in general, relates an aspect of the human visual system to a corresponding aspect of Field ofview. The horizontal x vertical static visual the display system. A few of the criteria arise from tech- field for two eyes is 180° x 120°. Throughout this sur- nological limits, rather than a human visual characteris- vey we will consider a typical workstation display to tic. Using the criteria, quantitative comparisons of dif- measure 33 x 26 cm. When viewed at a "comfortable ferent displays can be made. However, it can be difficult viewing distance" of 46 cm, the display will subtend a to quantitatively compare different types of display sys- horizontal x vertical FOV of roughly 40° x 32°. tems, because display attributes can vary widely within a given display system type. 2.1.2 Spatial Resolution. One of the most com- This section reviews the major output characteristics mon measurements made of 2D displays is spatial résolu- Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/pres.1992.1.4.421 by guest on 29 September 2021 McKenna and Zeltzer 423 tion. With CRT technology, resolution is typically mea- viewing distance of 46 cm, would require a currently sured by the number of pixels that can be displayed in unattainable resolution of 4800 x 3840 pixels. the horizontal and vertical directions. However, resolu- Rates. an tion also measures the size of the pixels: the pitch of a 2.1.3 Refresh and Update To display pixel tells how "wide" or "tall" each pixel is, and the an- apparently stable image, most electronic displays need to gular resolution of a pixel gives the visual angle that the repeatedly redraw or refresh the imagery on the display rate is the pixel subtends, from a particular viewing location. surface many times per second. The refresh at a redraws The Photoreceptors in the human eye are most densely frequency which display its imagery. critical is the threshold above packed in a central area of the retina called thefovea, and fusion frequency (CFF) acuity falls off sharply outside of this region. Measures of which a refreshed image appears steady; displays that refresh below the CFF will to flicker. The CFF is visual acuity, or the spatial resolution of the eye, usually appear on a number of refer to the foveal FOV, which subtends approximately strongly dependent factors, including the of the the ambient 1-2° of the visual field (Davson, 1980). Our eyes are in brightness display, illumination, and the size and location in the visual field of the stimu- constant motion, however, giving the illusion that we lus. For most in room a re- perceive the entire visual field at this foveal resolution. applications average light, fresh rate of 60 Hz will appear flicker-free, and many There are many ways to characterize the manner in workstations refresh their at 60 Hz or which the human eye can resolve detail. Some tests mea- graphics displays To reduce the cost of the refresh while sure visual resolution in terms of response to spatial fre- higher. circuitry still appearing to display flicker free imagery, consumer quencies, such as patterns of light and dark bars or sine TV sets in the United States are interlaced.
Recommended publications
  • Stereo Capture and Display At

    Stereo Capture and Display At

    Creation of a Complete Stereoscopic 3D Workflow for SoFA Allison Hettinger and Ian Krassner 1. Introduction 1.1 3D Trend Stereoscopic 3D motion pictures have recently risen to popularity once again following the success of films such as James Cameron’s Avatar. More and more films are being converted to 3D but few films are being shot in 3D. Current available technology and knowledge of that technology (along with cost) is preventing most films from being shot in 3D. Shooting in 3D is an advantage because two slightly different images are produced that mimic the two images the eyes see in normal vision. Many take the cheaper route of shooting in 2D and converting to 3D. This results in a 3D image, but usually nowhere near the quality as if the film was originally shot in 3D. This is because a computer has to create the second image, which can result in errors. It is also important to note that a 3D image does not necessarily mean a stereo image. 3D can be used to describe images that have an appearance of depth, such as 3D animations. Stereo images refer to images that make use of retinal disparity to create the illusion of objects going out of and into the screen plane. Stereo images are optical illusions that make use of several cues that the brain uses to perceive a scene. Examples of monocular cues are relative size and position, texture gradient, perspective and occlusion. These cues help us determine the relative depth positions of objects in an image. Binocular cues such as retinal disparity and convergence are what give the illusion of depth.
  • Virtual Reality and Visual Perception by Jared Bendis

    Virtual Reality and Visual Perception by Jared Bendis

    Virtual Reality and Visual Perception by Jared Bendis Introduction Goldstein (2002) defines perception as a “conscious sensory experience” (p. 6) and as scientists investigate how the human perceptual system works they also find themselves investigating how the human perceptual system doesn’t work and how that system can be fooled, exploited, and even circumvented. The pioneers in the ability to control the human perceptual system have been in the field of Virtual Realty. In Simulated and Virtual Realities – Elements of Perception, Carr (1995) defines Virtual Reality as “…the stimulation of human perceptual experience to create an impression of something which is not really there” (p. 5). Heilig (2001) refers to this form of “realism” as “experience” and in his 1955 article about “The Cinema of the Future” where he addresses the need to look carefully at perception and breaks down the precedence of perceptual attention as: Sight 70% Hearing 20% Smell 5% Touch 4% Taste 1% (p. 247) Not surprisingly sight is considered the most important of the senses as Leonardo da Vinci observed: “They eye deludes itself less than any of the other senses, because it sees by none other than the straight lines which compose a pyramid, the base of which is the object, and the lines conduct the object to the eye… But the ear is strongly subject to delusions about the location and distance of its objects because the images [of sound] do not reach it in straight lines, like those of the eye, but by tortuous and reflexive lines. … The sense of smells is even less able to locate the source of an odour.
  • Intraocular Lenses and Spectacle Correction

    Intraocular Lenses and Spectacle Correction

    MEDICAL POLICY POLICY TITLE INTRAOCULAR LENSES, SPECTACLE CORRECTION AND IRIS PROSTHESIS POLICY NUMBER MP-6.058 Original Issue Date (Created): 6/2/2020 Most Recent Review Date (Revised): 6/9/2020 Effective Date: 2/1/2021 POLICY PRODUCT VARIATIONS DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND RATIONALE DEFINITIONS BENEFIT VARIATIONS DISCLAIMER CODING INFORMATION REFERENCES POLICY HISTORY I. POLICY Intraocular Lens Implant (IOL) Initial IOL Implant A standard monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) implant is medically necessary when the eye’s natural lens is absent including the following: Following cataract extraction Trauma to the eye which has damaged the lens Congenital cataract Congenital aphakia Lens subluxation/displacement A standard monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) implant is medically necessary for anisometropia of 3 diopters or greater, and uncorrectable vision with the use of glasses or contact lenses. Premium intraocular lens implants including but not limited to the following are not medically necessary for any indication, including aphakia, because each is intended to reduce the need for reading glasses. Presbyopia correcting IOL (e.g., Array® Model SA40, ReZoom™, AcrySof® ReStor®, TECNIS® Multifocal IOL, Tecnis Symfony and Tecnis SymfonyToric, TRULIGN, Toric IO, Crystalens Aspheric Optic™) Astigmatism correcting IOL (e.g., AcrySof IQ Toric IOL (Alcon) and Tecnis Toric Aspheric IOL) Phakic IOL (e.g., ARTISAN®, STAAR Visian ICL™) Replacement IOLs MEDICAL POLICY POLICY TITLE INTRAOCULAR LENSES, SPECTACLE CORRECTION AND IRIS PROSTHESIS POLICY NUMBER
  • Dualcad : Intégrer La Réalité Augmentée Et Les Interfaces D'ordinateurs De Bureau Dans Un Contexte De Conception Assistée Par Ordinateur

    Dualcad : Intégrer La Réalité Augmentée Et Les Interfaces D'ordinateurs De Bureau Dans Un Contexte De Conception Assistée Par Ordinateur

    ÉCOLE DE TECHNOLOGIE SUPÉRIEURE UNIVERSITÉ DU QUÉBEC MÉMOIRE PRÉSENTÉ À L’ÉCOLE DE TECHNOLOGIE SUPÉRIEURE COMME EXIGENCE PARTIELLE À L’OBTENTION DE LA MAÎTRISE AVEC MÉMOIRE EN GÉNIE LOGICIEL M. Sc. A. PAR Alexandre MILLETTE DUALCAD : INTÉGRER LA RÉALITÉ AUGMENTÉE ET LES INTERFACES D'ORDINATEURS DE BUREAU DANS UN CONTEXTE DE CONCEPTION ASSISTÉE PAR ORDINATEUR MONTRÉAL, LE 27 AVRIL 2016 Alexandre Millette, 2016 Cette licence Creative Commons signifie qu’il est permis de diffuser, d’imprimer ou de sauvegarder sur un autre support une partie ou la totalité de cette œuvre à condition de mentionner l’auteur, que ces utilisations soient faites à des fins non commerciales et que le contenu de l’œuvre n’ait pas été modifié. PRÉSENTATION DU JURY CE MÉMOIRE A ÉTÉ ÉVALUÉ PAR UN JURY COMPOSÉ DE : M. Michael J. McGuffin, directeur de mémoire Département de génie logiciel et des TI à l’École de technologie supérieure M. Luc Duong, président du jury Département de génie logiciel et des TI à l’École de technologie supérieure M. David Labbé, membre du jury Département de génie logiciel et des TI à l’École de technologie supérieure IL A FAIT L’OBJET D’UNE SOUTENANCE DEVANT JURY ET PUBLIC LE 6 AVRIL 2016 À L’ÉCOLE DE TECHNOLOGIE SUPÉRIEURE AVANT-PROPOS Lorsqu’il m’est venu le temps de choisir si je désirais faire une maîtrise avec ou sans mémoire, les technologies à Réalité Augmentée (RA) étaient encore des embryons de projets, entrepris par des compagnies connues pour leurs innovations, telles que Google avec leur Google Glasses, ou par des compagnies émergentes, telles que META et leur Spaceglasses.
  • Stereo 3D (Depth) from 2D

    Stereo 3D (Depth) from 2D

    Stereo 3D (Depth) from 2D • 3D information is lost by Viewing Stereo projection. Stereograms • How do we recover 3D Autostereograms information? Depth from Stereo Image 3D Model Depth Cues Shadows: Occlusions: Shading: Size Constancy Perspective Illusions (perspective): Height in Plane: Texture Gradient: 3D from 2D + Accommodation • Accommodation (Focus) • Change in lens curvature • Eye Vengeance according to object depth. • Effective depth: 20-300 cm. • Motion. • Stereo Accommodation Eye Vergence • Change in lens curvature • Change in lens curvature according to object depth. according to object depth. • Effective depth: 20-300 cm. • Effective depth: up to 6 m. Motion: Motion: Stereo Vision • In a system with 2 cameras (eyes), 2 different images are captured. • The "disparity" between the images is larger for closer objects: 1 disp ∝ depth • "Fusion" of these 2 images gives disparities depth information. Left Right Right Eye Left Eye Right Eye Left Eye Image Separation for Stereo • Special Glasses • Red/green images with red/green glasses. • Orthogonal Polarization • Alternating Shuttering Optic System Optic System Parlor Stereo Viewer 1850 Viewmaster 1939 ViduTech 2011 Active Shutter System Red/Green Filters Anaglyphs Anaglyphs How they Work Orthogonal Polarization Orthogonal Polarization Linear Polarizers: 2 polarized projectors are used (or alternating polarization) Orthogonal Polarization Orthogonal Polarization Circular Polarizers: Circular Polarizers: Left handed Right handed Orthogonal Polarization TV and Computer Screens Polarized Glasses Circular Polarizer Glasses: Same as polarizers – but reverse light direction Left handed Right handed Glasses Free TV and Glasses Free TV and Computer Screens Computer Screens Parallax Stereogram Parallax Stereogram Parallax Barrier display Uses Vertical Slits Blocks part of screen from each eye Glasses Free TV and Glasses Free TV and Computer Screens Computer Screens Lenticular lens method Lenticular lens method Uses lens arrays to send different Image to each eye.
  • A Review and Selective Analysis of 3D Display Technologies for Anatomical Education

    A Review and Selective Analysis of 3D Display Technologies for Anatomical Education

    University of Central Florida STARS Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 2018 A Review and Selective Analysis of 3D Display Technologies for Anatomical Education Matthew Hackett University of Central Florida Part of the Anatomy Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Doctoral Dissertation (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STARS Citation Hackett, Matthew, "A Review and Selective Analysis of 3D Display Technologies for Anatomical Education" (2018). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 6408. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/6408 A REVIEW AND SELECTIVE ANALYSIS OF 3D DISPLAY TECHNOLOGIES FOR ANATOMICAL EDUCATION by: MATTHEW G. HACKETT BSE University of Central Florida 2007, MSE University of Florida 2009, MS University of Central Florida 2012 A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Modeling and Simulation program in the College of Engineering and Computer Science at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Summer Term 2018 Major Professor: Michael Proctor ©2018 Matthew Hackett ii ABSTRACT The study of anatomy is complex and difficult for students in both graduate and undergraduate education. Researchers have attempted to improve anatomical education with the inclusion of three-dimensional visualization, with the prevailing finding that 3D is beneficial to students. However, there is limited research on the relative efficacy of different 3D modalities, including monoscopic, stereoscopic, and autostereoscopic displays.
  • Dr. Juan Carlos Jácome Fernández

    Dr. Juan Carlos Jácome Fernández

    Title CAPTURING OF 3D CONTENT USING A SINGLE APERTURE CAMERA Name: Dr. Juan Carlos Jácome Fernández This is a digitised version of a dissertation submitted to the University of Bedfordshire. It is available to view only. This item is subject to copyright. CAPTURING OF 3D CONTENT USING A SINGLE APERTURE CAMERA By Juan Carlos Jácome Fernández A thesis submitted to the University of Bedfordshire in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy October 2017 Abstract Integral imaging has recently re-emerged as an alternative to current 3D capturing systems, providing post-production refocusing capabilities and reducing the complexity of 3D capturing systems. One of the main drawbacks of conventional plenoptic 1 integral imaging systems is the implementation of a single custom made microlens array which has a fixed focal length and a high cost/low scalability associated with. This thesis demonstrates a variable focal length microlens arrays system, which can flexibly operate within a range of various focal lengths, increase the cost-effectiveness of the integral imaging system and offers the opportunity to manipulate the main camera optical parameters without modifying the objective lens settings. To validate the proposed concept, a custom-made integral imaging camera system was designed and built (IMPERX 4K system). Based on the results obtained from two initial optical simulations, software simulation and mathematical model; the suitable microlens arrays were acquired, and several experiments were performed to establish the feasibility of a variable focal length microlens arrays system. The results obtained show the proposed system performed as expected. The variable focal length system represents an ideal method to control microlens focal length, as it offers a higher microlens count, without a dedicated electronic system, whose performance is not susceptible to temperature-pressure changes and can operate in real-time as it does not require downtimes to re-adjust.
  • Multi-User Display Systems, Compendium of the State of the Art

    Multi-User Display Systems, Compendium of the State of the Art

    Multi-user display systems, Compendium of the State of the Art. Juan Sebastian Munoz-Arango; Research Assistant EAC - UA Little Rock; Little Rock, AR, Dirk Reiners; Research Scientist EAC - UA Little Rock; Little Rock, AR Carolina Cruz-Neira; Research Director EAC - UA Little Rock; Little Rock, AR Abstract egories: Spatial Barriers, Optical Filtering, Optical Routing and One of the main shortcomings of most Virtual Reality display sys- Time Multiplexing. tems, be it head-mounted displays or projection based systems like In addition to these categories it is worth mentioning volu- CAVEs, is that they can only provide the correct perspective to a metric displays and light field displays, which are relevant to the single user. This is a significant limitation that reduces the appli- multi user viewing topic even though they achieve multi user per- cability of Virtual Reality approaches for most kinds of group col- spective through a totally different approach. laborative work, which is becoming more and more important in many disciplines. Different approaches have been tried to present Spatial barriers multiple images to different users at the same time, like optical Spatial barriers take advantage of the display’s physical config- barriers, optical filtering, optical routing, time multiplex, volu- uration and user placement to display users’ specific views. Es- metric displays and lightfield displays among others. This paper sentially they form a mechanical barrier that lets each user see a describes, discusses and compares different approaches that have subset of the underlying displays’ pixels. been developed and develop an evaluation approach to identify The spatial barriers approach has been around for a while.
  • GRAPHICS HARDWARE WHAT’S in STORE GRAPHICS CARDS GRAPHICS CARDS DEDICATED (EXTERNAL) High Performance Power Consumption Heat Emission

    GRAPHICS HARDWARE WHAT’S in STORE GRAPHICS CARDS GRAPHICS CARDS DEDICATED (EXTERNAL) High Performance Power Consumption Heat Emission

    10 COMPUTER GRAPHICS HARDWARE WHAT’S IN STORE GRAPHICS CARDS GRAPHICS CARDS DEDICATED (EXTERNAL) High performance Power consumption Heat emission INTEGRATED (INTERNAL) Low power, low heat Mobile devices, on board Integrated with CPU ARCHITECTURE VERTEX SHADERS (TRANSFORM GEOMETRY) GEOMETRY SHADERS (CREATE NEW GEOMETRY) PIXEL SHADERS (COLORS, SHADOWS…) UNIFIED SHADERS One type of processors for all operations GTX 680 = 1536 unified shader cores CUDA, GPGPU General (not only graphics) performed on GPU Parallelism (HW video encoding, numerical computations) CONNECTORS VGA Analog DVI Digital + Analog HDMI Digital miniHDMI, microHDMI DISPLAYPORT Digital, Analog Mini DisplayPort (Apple) MANUFACTURERS NVIDIA GeForce, Quadro, Tesla AMD (FORMERLY ATI) Radeon, FirePro INTEL Integrated in Core CPUs POWERVR ARM Mali DISPLAYS CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) ANALOG TVS OLD COMPUTER MONITORS MEDIUM SIZE DISPLAYS LIGHT EMISSION Black is black FLICKER 75-100 Hz for work http://www.bthompson.net/ PLASMA (PDP, NEO-PDP) NOT SUITABLE FOR COMPUTER DISPLAYS LARGE SCREENS (30”+) LIGHT EMISSION Black is black HIGH ENERGY DEMANDS VIEW ANGLE DOESN’T MATTER IMAGE RETENTION Reduced for Neo-PDP LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAY (LCD) CRYSTALS BLOCK LIGHT FROM BACK SOURCE Black is hard to achieve DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGIES (TN, IPS, MVA, …) LOW ENERGY CONSUMPTION LARGE SCREENS VIEW ANGLES ISSUE LCD LED CONFUSION OLED (ORGANIC LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE) LIGHT EMISSION GOOD CONTRAST AND COLORS EXPENSIVE PRODUCTION Small screens so far LOW ENERGY POTENTIALLY FLEXIBLE VIEW ANGLE
  • Review of Stereoscopic 3D Glasses for Gaming

    Review of Stereoscopic 3D Glasses for Gaming

    ISSN: 2278 – 1323 International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Engineering & Technology (IJARCET) Volume 5, Issue 6, June 2016 Review of Stereoscopic 3D Glasses for Gaming Yogesh Bhimsen Joshi, Avinash Gautam Waywal sound cards and CD-ROMs had the multimedia Abstract— Only a decade ago, watching in 3-D capability. meant seeing through a pair of red and blue glasses. Early 3D games such as Alpha Waves, Starglider 2 It was really great at first sight, but 3-D technology began with flat-shaded graphics and then has been moving on. Scientists have been aware of progressed with simple forms of texture mapping how human vision works and current generation of such as in Wolfenstein 3D. computers are more powerful than ever before. In the early 1990s, the most popular method of Therefore, most of the computer users are familiar with 3-D games. Back in the '90s, most of the publishing games for smaller developers was enthusiasts were amazed by the game Castle shareware distribution, including then-fledgling Wolfenstein 3D, which took place in a maze-like companies such as Apogee which is now branded as castle, which was existed in three dimensions. 3D Realms, Epic MegaGames (now known as Epic Nowadays, gamers can enjoy even more complicated Games), and id Software. It enabled consumers the graphics with the available peripherals. This paper opportunity to try a trial portion of the game, which gives an overview of this 3-D Gaming technology and was restricted to complete first section or an episode various gaming peripherals. This paper will also of full version of the game, before purchasing it.
  • The Varriertm Autostereoscopic Virtual Reality Display

    The Varriertm Autostereoscopic Virtual Reality Display

    submission id papers_0427 The VarrierTM Autostereoscopic Virtual Reality Display Daniel J. Sandin, Todd Margolis, Jinghua Ge, Javier Girado, Tom Peterka, Thomas A. DeFanti Electronic Visualization Laboratory University of Illinois at Chicago [email protected] Abstract In most other lenticular and barrier strip implementations, stereo is achieved by sorting image slices in integer (image) coordinates. Virtual reality (VR) has long been hampered by the gear Moreover, many autostereo systems compress scene depth in the z needed to make the experience possible; specifically, stereo direction to improve image quality but Varrier is orthoscopic, glasses and tracking devices. Autostereoscopic display devices are which means that all 3 dimensions are displayed in the same gaining popularity by freeing the user from stereo glasses, scale. Besides head-tracked perspective interaction, the user can however few qualify as VR displays. The Electronic Visualization further interact with VR applications through hand-held devices Laboratory (EVL) at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) such as a 3d wand, for example to control navigation through has designed and produced a large scale, high resolution head- virtual worlds. tracked barrier-strip autostereoscopic display system that There are four main contributions of this paper. New virtual produces a VR immersive experience without requiring the user to barrier algorithms are presented that enhance image quality and wear any encumbrances. The resulting system, called Varrier, is a lower color shifts by operating at sub-pixel resolution. Automated passive parallax barrier 35-panel tiled display that produces a camera-based registration of the physical and virtual barrier strip wide field of view, head-tracked VR experience.
  • Bharat Sevak Samaj

    Bharat Sevak Samaj

    1 BHARAT SEVAK SAMAJ NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, PROMOTED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL BOARD OF EXAMINATIONS BSS NATIONAL VOCATIONAL EDUCATION MISSION AHE016-BSS DIPLOMA IN OPTOMETRY TWO YEARS (FIRST YEAR) EXAMINATION APRIL-2016 AHE016-01 COMMUNICATIVE ENGLISH AND COMPUTER FUNDAMENTALS TIME: 3 Hours Marks: 100 INSTRUCTIONS * 43 questions are there in total * Write answers to each question in proportion to the mark allotted * During the first 15 minutes read the questions carefully I. FILL IN THE BLANKS - ANSWER FOR ANY 10 QUESTIONS 1 x 10 = 10 1) Vowels are ...... in number 2) ..... Lotus is lovely flowers 3) I ....... seen the Tajmahal. 4) Basic working platform of the computer is the .............. 5) Function keys are ................. 6) The letters in computer application is called ............... 7) The expanded form of MS Word is......................... 8) -----------------is example for network operating system.(windows nt) 9) Basic working platform of the computer is ......... 10) ................. key is also used to select spelling command 11) In Ms Excel individual file is known as ............ 12) She is ............... B.sc graduate 13) The letters in computer application is called ............... 14) Who is the father of computer----------------- 15) I_______ eaten food. 2 II. DEFINE THE FOLLOWING - ANSWER FOR ANY 10 QUESTIONS 2 x 10 = 20 1) Define types of sentences? 2) Define collective noun? 3) Define kinds of adjectives? 4) Font 5) What is the difference between Notepad and Wordpad 6) computer 7) Briefly explain the table menu in MS Excel 8) Explain any five options for the format 'menu' 9) Word screen 10) Subordinate clause 11) Walking areas of computer? 12) What is URL? 13) Define Control unit? 14) What are Question tags? 15) Desk top III.