Mailinglist Archives:
Infrared
Panorama
Photo-3D
Tech-3D
Sell-3D
MF3D

Notice
This mailinglist archive is frozen since May 2001, i.e. it will stay online but will not be updated.
<-- Date Index --> <-- Thread Index --> [Author Index]

VRSurfer Wireless LC Shutter Glasses


  • From: P3D Oliver Dean <3d-image@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: VRSurfer Wireless LC Shutter Glasses
  • Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 19:15:32 -0800

In spite of the excellent wireless technology of the VRSurfer glasses
and the promise that it represents, I regretfully had to make the
following comments in a recent e-mail I sent to the manufacturer after
having used the glasses for a while:

> 1.  There is a very serious design defect that I think VRex had better
> face up to and change as soon as possible, regardless of cost.  It
> should have been caught in testing before the tooling was OK'd -- I
> don't understand how those responsible could have missed it:  THE INSIDE
> DIMENSIONS OF THE VRSURFER ARE TOO NARROW FOR USE OVER STANDARD
> EYEGLASSES!  I've been struggling for days trying to find a comfortable
> way of wearing the VRSurfer glasses over ANY of my eyeglasses, and it is
> simply impossible without modifying the interior plastic cover. This is
> especially frustrating, because the technology and cost of the glasses
> is a real breakthrough, and this defect could have been so easily
> avoided.  
> 
> Accordingly, I must regretfully inform you that, until this defect is
> corrected, I will warn prospective buyers who need to wear wear glasses
> for viewing computer monitors and video, that, in my opinion, VRSurfer
> is UNACCEPTABLE for their use!
> 
> If this defect should be corrected any time soon, I would appreciate it
> if you would arrange a trade-up of my 2 pair of glasses for the
> corrected design. 
> 
> 2.  The gray plastic cover over the outside of the glasses is not
> optically flat enough.  Slight ripples in the flatness of the plastic
> are clearly evident when the glasses are moved while you are looking
> through them.  The result is a slight but distinct reduction in
> sharpness when viewing images on a computer monitor.  The loss is not so
> apparent when viewing the lower resolution images of a TV, but it is
> annoying with the computer, especially at 1024 x 768 resolution.
> 
> 3.  The flat area on the gray plastic cover is not large enough.  The
> edges of it, which severely distort the view, are clearly visible
> through the LC openings.
> 
> 4.  Storage of the glasses is unnecessarily difficult.  To save money in
> the tooling, I imagine, somebody made the decision to mold the earpieces
> as one part of the body of the glasses, rather than making them hinged.
> This was an unfortunate decision.  StereoGraphics SimulEyes glasses can
> be folded and stored in a baggie -- VRSurfer glasses need to be stored
> in a large box!  I haven't seen as clumsy a design as this since the
> Toshiba LC glasses.  Addition of the sensor, circuit, and battery to LC
> glasses need not add so much to the bulk that the earpieces can't be
> folded. I'm having problems trying to store just two of these elephants. 
> This may not seem like much of a problem to you, but if somebody needs
> to transport a substantial number of glasses to a show in his car, the
> VRSurfer glasses will be too bulky, and the person giving the show may
> have to opt for a more compact brand, even though they are wired.  The
> VR projectors are not yet low enough in cost, by at least an order of
> magnitude, to be a practical alternative for low budgets. 
> 
> 5.  The software for use with computers seems unnecessarily complicated.
> Making it dependent on the video drivers is, I think, a mistake. 
> StereoGraphics seems to have a much better approach, which modifies the
> bottom scan lines of the resulting raster, requiring only that an
> interlaced driver must be running at the time the stereo function is
> enabled and that the Windows 95 task bar be moved to the top of the
> page.  These are small prices to pay for a very stable, trouble free,
> uncomplicated, and easy to install software approach. I realize that
> there may be patent problems, however, but it may be worth looking
> into.  
> In closing:  To VRex -- please continue to be innovative, but please pay
> a lot more attention to substantial, in-depth user testing before
> commitment to hardware tooling!

-- 
Oliver Dean -- 3d-image@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dominguez Hills (near Los Angeles), Calloushernia, USA


------------------------------