Issue link: http://digital.copcomm.com/i/663385
36 cgw m a r c h . a p r i l 2 0 1 6 trends with any new tech, and VR won't be any different. The key will be to not overpromise what it can deliver, and focus on what we can do with it today. That way, there are no unrealistic expectations about it being the technology that changes the world overnight. Stereo 3D was in a bubble largely dominated by television manu- facturers and theater owners. That surcharge on 3D movies really impacted the public's enjoyment of stereoscopic content, and the decision by studios to convert a 2D film to 3D as a financial decision (opposed to creative) really didn't help. It is no secret that these things happened; other issues existed, like excessive strobing and flicker caused by the low 24 fps standard frame rate and reductions in brightness from polarized equipment and glasses. While these issues were acknowledged, they weren't made a priority for repairing on an industry-wide level. On one hand, VR has its own set of issues, like VR sickness, vergence-accom- modation (vision) conflicts, and field-of-view limitations. Yet as a whole, the community is extremely dedicated to solving these issues and taking them very seriously. What else can we do? It helps for any new technology to have as easy a learning curve and as few barriers as possible. That sounds like common sense, but it is surprising how many devices, operating systems, and products have issues with incompatibility and setup. If it is too difficult to use, or if someone finds out their brand-new purchase cannot display the content they wanted to see, they are going to become disenchanted pretty quickly. This is one of the reasons there is a lot of support by developers and creators of VR around open-source soware and hardware. Is VR a stepping-stone for AR, or will both coexist? Right now, VR and AR coexist and sometimes even together in mixed reality (MR). The first usage of this term and explanation that I know of comes from a paper authored by Paul Milgram, Haruo Takemura, et al, titled 'Augmented Reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum.' At SIGGRAPH's 2015 VR Village, we had a couple of strong projects demonstrating this: uSens' 'Super Reali- ty' Impression Pi blend of VR and AR, and Dassault Systèmes' 'Never Blind in VR.' It should be noted that a lot of people, including myself, do use VR as a catchall for VR, AR, and MR. Are there industries where AR is better suited than VR? I don't think AR or VR is industry-specific, but rather applica- tion-specific. Say the goal is to create immersion in a virtual envi- ronment, even a photorealistic one – the choice will be to go VR. If the real world simply needs augmenting, then AR will be the default choice. There may be certain situations where VR is impossible. For example, I wouldn't want someone to be performing surgery on me while wearing a head-mounted display! But I can absolutely see a doctor wearing an AR device as a means to perform procedures. What are some of the more exciting developments of late? At VR Village, we demonstrated physical, embodied VR in really large spaces. In one case, 'C.a.p.e,' by CREW_EricJoris, actually had attendees walking around the entire hall while inside an immersion (an experience that involves wearing an HMD and being guided by someone through an environment). The reaction of other attendees was brilliant – they'd turn around aer looking at an exhibit and see someone just meandering on by, inside a head-mounted display with headphones. The ability to be so mobile in VR is really new. People are going to be able to turn their rooms into a VR environ- ment without moving furniture away, and with minimal preamble. Right now, most people can only experience VR in conferences, meetups, and academic institutions, so it is hard to imagine what our future will look like one year from now. I do think it is going to be a very mobile future, where sitting in chairs gets banished from most VR experiences. How will that impact the course of VR and AR? Problems with VR motion sickness are well known and something we need to reduce. We know that motion sickness is caused to a large degree when vestibular stimuli do not match stimuli from our other senses. The vestibular system acts as motion detectors, and introducing physical movement (or even the sensation of movement) that matches the visual cues in a virtual environment greatly reduces VR sickness. Physical movement that works well with visual cues also contributes to a great sense of 'presence,' the proverbial holy grail of VR. So movement and the ability to be mobile doesn't just make the experience more interesting, it also helps achieve the highly sought-aer presence and part of the fix for motion sickness in VR. Is there a certain application outside of the 2015 VR Village that especially interests you? I am rather curious about the use of AR and VR in education, both as a learning tool and as a new language. In a conversation with Dr. Ken Perlin of NYU, he demonstrated to me how we may be able to animate, or 'physically describe,' an idea or concept that would have otherwise been difficult to explain with words or diagrams. It be- comes as simple as using traditional symbols in a new virtual space, which works toward creating a language that hadn't existed. I find this potential to be fascinating, along with the knowledge that we are now creating virtual wayfinding aids so we don't get lost in our virtual environment, and that we are also creating 'redirected walk- ing' when the virtual environment exceeds the real-world space we are in. These are all unique to VR, and the potential is incredible. ■ IMAGES IN THIS Q&A ARE FROM PROJECTS IN THE 2015 VR VILLAGE. Karen Moltenbrey is the chief editor of Computer Graphics World. C M Y CM MY CY CMY K