Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs
Not if it causes judder/strobing/other artefacts.
1. There's no visible judder at the framerates we're talking about, as long as it's full framerate (e.g. 75fps@75Hz).
2. There is no other artifacts. It has far less artifacts than the best plasma and DLP displays.
No plasma-style contouring. No DLP-style temporal dithering. CRT-clarity motion.
3. Motion blur is a much, much, much, much bigger problem for VR
-- Display spans your vision. Bigger FOV = easier to see motion blur.
-- Display is really close to vision. Easier to see motion blur.
-- Head turning creates image panning. Panning is a motion blur problem on many displays.
-- Mere medium speed head turning creates fast panning going at 2000 pixels/second through 4000 pixels/second (more than one screenwidth per second). Amplified motion blur. Ouch.
-- Panning situations occur quite often. You can read this screen even when you rotate your head around. This causes artifacts on displays other than clean artifact-free low-persistence displays such as the DK2. But in real life, you can still read this physical text even when you're rotating/moving/shaking your head around, while reading this text.
-- All the above situations amplify the type of motion blurring seen at www.testufo.com/eyetracking
Yes, the main issue with DK2 is the screendoor effect of the Pentile, but there are zero motion artifacts -- it looks sharp and fast similar to a CRT with no contouring and temporal dithering artifacts or rainbowing. The disappearance of motion blur is massively far by the lesser of evil, since the alternative is massive nausea/dizziness of avoiding high-persistence. On the DK2, trying to read text on walls while shaky or moving head around, is perfectly crisp, smooth, butter, less-nauseating, less-dizzying. From what I saw, motion in the DK2 is "perfect-smooth" zero blur like a butter-smooth Super Mario Brothers panning (while Mario running) on a Nintendo on a CRT
-- there's zero motion blur, zero stutter, zero judder -- and you don't have any plasma-like artifacts or DLP-like artifacts at all! (This is assuming the game ran at 75 frames per second, the refresh rate of the low-persistence mode). There was the screendoor, but it paled in comparision to the motion blur being virtually gone (pun intended).
On the Oculus Rift, pans are CRT sharp like Nintendo Super Mario panning, or a 60fps Sega arcade CRT game, or zero-blur sports motion on a CRT -- any blur-free display motion. The Rfit DK2 handles motion better than a plasma and DLP. For motion handling it beats even the good Panasonic plasmas. It's already shown that lower persistence massively more important for the VR use case scenario.
Look at the interviews in places like Popular Mechanics
, Palmer (of Oculus) has said:
Palmer Luckey, of Oculus
"...You couldn’t have a made a low-persistence VR headset five years ago at all and certainly not well. It’s going to be mandatory for a good VR experience going into the future until we can get displays that run so fast that a single full-persistence frame is as short as our low-persistence flash. You’d need to get up to 1000 frames per second to do that. Until we have 1000 Hz displays, 1000 fps rendering, and some hypothetical, crazy video link with hundreds of more bandwidth than HDMI, we’re going to be stuck with other solutions."
To try to reduce 90% persistence via DLP (e.g. ~16.7ms down to ~1.7ms, you will be losing 90% of temporal dithering resolution, creating color artifacting issues. I do not think DLP is the ideal technology for VR, as a result. It's probably perfectly fine for slower VR, but none of the fast-motion VR stuff where you might suddenly turn your head around. One could improve this by using full persistence and temporal dithering over multiple frames with DLP -- which would still improve things. But even just targetting 2ms = 1/500sec persistence = requires 500fps@500Hz in order to avoid impulse-driving techniques. This isn't practical on today's GPUs so "purer" impulse technologies such as CRT or rolling-scan OLED (the tech closest to CRT quality) is currently required to achieve the zero-stutter, zero-blur, zero-contouring, zero-temporals experience (at this time).
Enough said. It was obviously a lot dizzying to be shaking my head around (causing the screen to go wild with panning motion) while wearing the Oculus DK2 -- and I could still read small text on signs on the virtual walls. Imagine continuing to stare at this text while nodding your head left/right fast. You can still read the screen. Now try to do it virtually (with a VR headset), read small text displayed on a wall or similar, while nodding your head left/right very fast (which creates panning back-and-forth). Try that with ANY other virtual reality headset. Ouch. But try it with Oculus Rift DK2, and viola -- it feels far more natural.
there wasn't any judder or motion blur during the framerate-equalling-refreshrate situation (75fps@75Hz). Felt far more immersive, as a result, despite the texture of the screen pixel structure. The lack of VR nausea/dizziness during fast-head-turning -- is something I've never seen before in any virtual reality headset . Something that eliminated the nauseating experience found on other older VR headsets I've tried five and ten years ago.
I have to totally agree with Palmer -- he is right that the elimination of motion blur makes VR far more immersive, because of the bullet points I listed above. Motion blur problem is massively amplified during VR situations, and many companies do not understand this as well as people like Palmer Luckey/John Carmack/Michael Abrash/Myself/Blur Busters.