Re: [photo-3d] House of Wax / why 3d

["John A. Rupkalvis" <stereoscope@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "William Gartin" <william_gartin@xxxxxxx>
To: <photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 11:46 AM
Subject: Re: [photo-3d] House of Wax / why 3d


> ...Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems
> that no other form of enhancement requires the user to wear any kind of
> extra equipment...

For the most part, you are correct.  Binaural sound requires headphones, but
this remains a much smaller niche than even stereoscopic imaging.  Even Imax
has removed the headphones from the most recent version of their headgear.

Some Virtual Reality systems have required that headgear be worn (HMD's),
and tactile feedback gloves are slowly gaining popularity, mainly among the
video game set.  Even whole body suits for VR experiences have been built.
But, for the most part these have not been widely marketed.

Of course in other areas, headgear and glasses are widely used.  Safety
helmets, originally limited mainly to motorcyclists and jet pilots, are now
worn in many outdoor sports, from bicycling to skating to football and
baseball and many others.

Glasses should not be that much of a problem.  Many people wear eyeglasses
nearly all of the time.  Most people associate sunglasses with pleasant
activities in sports and recreation.  On a sunny day, count how many drivers
on the freeway are NOT wearing sunglasses.  Some people even wear sunglasses
indoors as a fashion statement.

The wearing of glasses of one type or another is a common experience.  Is
there really that much difference between putting on 3-D glasses to watch a
movie and putting on sunglasses to relax at the beach?

JR



 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/