Board index Non-Gaming Applications for the Oculus Rift Non-Gaming Applications Oculus Rift for movies

Oculus Rift for movies


Post Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:14 pm

Posts: 55
I am not certain I would want to watch movies on the OR. Maybe movies that were already supposed to be viewed in 3D. Of course, if I was going to watch a movie by myself also. I do not this the OR is equipped to handle any multiplayer games like Xbox live just yet.

Post Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:17 pm

Posts: 41
Oh wow, I think this would be really cool.
Especially watching with a bunch of friends.
Then we don't have to waste gas and what not to go to a movie.

Post Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:14 pm

Posts: 62
cloroxbb wrote:
@tomorrowman

Must you claim that you got screwed out of the Oculus deal every post? I dont think anyone here cares. You just sound bitter. Bitching to us isnt going to change a damn thing. I think you should just continue to contribute to this forum in a constructive manner, instead of crying about Palmer Luckey every chance you get...


You make a good point about Palmer, I am very happy for his success, but I am very sad he took an open source project and now it is closed source (he could have kept the kickstarter OPEN SOURCE) and since I was there from the very beginning, I feel it is my responsibility to talk about it, and even Notch from Minecraft has to do silly stupid stuff to make corporate masters happy http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/5067/notchtweet.jpg Isn't life too short for all this silly drama? Going closed source didn't screw me, but perhaps many of you here, I always try to think of the larger community. I constantly re-iterate things because I am more worried about his soul, than profits or deals.

My big issue is that I think mankind needs to move forward from all this dark opaque world of secrets and such that surrounds us all, Palmer benefitted because myself and other people freely shared with him, now all the rest of you perhaps will benefit from those stones cast into the ripples of time. How much more could the world benefit if things had remained open source? It is possible that things could be worse off today I suppose if the Open Source HMD project had stayed that way - OPEN.

It is not just Palmer though, it is from my experience with various companies, governments, etc etc At IBM when I was there, they had to license thier own technology that they helped to develop and fund from foreign competitors, here is a good read if you are intersted in some of the history and want to educate yourself:

http://www7.gsb.columbia.edu/apec/sites ... gAlmWu.pdf

I am sure there are many here who have thier own disaster stories of evil in this world.

I saw a lot of shelved technologies that could have helped mankind, but corporate masters were evil from my perspective. I just can't see the point of not making all the information available to people who want to do something with it that is good for all of us. I guess I have evolved into a bleeding heart liberal who has drank too much cliff stoll koolaid.

In the specific case with Palmer though, I will give my feelings, of what I think is wrong with this world and how it has possibly affected you getting a good VR device a year or 2 later than otherwise, and since we aren't immortals, maybe this matters to you. The first meeting I had with Neil, he was ridiculing one of his best members, a kid named Yuri, to me, a total stranger. To her credit, his wife Pam said that is in very poor taste of you Neil, you shouldn't be mean like that. That was the real core person of someone who I thought earlier was a really swell guy and did everything I could to help him out. He took pleasure in degrading and ridiculing his own memberbase.

Later on, Neil began to spend inordinate amounts of his time and mine wanting advice on how he could keep various people from taking over his company and booting him out of the CEO position, and all the while I kept thinking to myself, what does it matter who controls the company, if you can do good in this world, and have to RELEASE control, maybe that is the better outcome. What do you think Clorox? Would you be willing to lose control of your baby if it meant greater good for the rest of mankind? A lot of ceo's and shareholders would not agree with that meme. Perhaps Neil thought he could do the best good by keeping control himself though, and keeping some other large company from taking him over. Maybe the larger issue is that so many humans must focus on losing or retaining control in an organization to do good or evil, perhaps we need to change how the game is played?

I am no saint Clorox, and I have lots of my own demons too and great sins I have committed in the past, but I just see a world that is no longer being served by the entities and organizations we have today. They take nice kids like Palmer who were all about open source, and send them down the path of a sithlord where the open source turns to closed source. Do you really think that is a good trend? Is that really the world and future you want to exist in? Where nice open source people are corrupted into closed? I want to go in the opposite direction, where closed source types say ENOUGH, we need to shine a light on this stuff.

Or do you want me to believe it is better for everyone if perhaps Iribe sells Oculus to Sony (like he already did one company) and all kinds of wonderful open source HMD goodness goes into a sony corporate blackhole and stuff sits on a shelf like I saw at IBM? Don't want to cannibalize current revenue streams after all do we? Perhaps it would be cheaper for Sony to buy and shelve Oculus and push out thier HMZ product line for a few years, would that make you happy?

Its not really about me, or palmer, or neil, or even you or VR, it is about what kind of world do you want to live in, the closed source one, or a different one? A red pill world or a blue pill one?

Perhaps I should have not told Palmer anything, and remained with tight lips, would it have made a difference? I don't know Clorox, I just see 8 billion humans and growing, and our current anarcho-capitalist structure worldwide is not serving them, and I hope more humans want that to change.

I don't think the ends justifies the means, and I think the darkness Neil has done is hurting more people and he could be a greater force for good, and I certainly think Palmer going into the closed source world is a very very bad trend. We didn't get to where we are today, because people were closed source and not sharing ideas and information back and forth and really trying to help each other make this planet a better place.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/17/world ... d=all&_r=0

Clorox, since the PDF above was about technology transfer to Korea, here is a recent article talking about how hyper-capitalism and the fundamental dynamics of korean society have changed for the worst over the past few hundred centuries, you will be old one day, I hope you aren't left to die like this. I see that coming to the USA, when we take palmer luckeys and good will and intention and open source, and send them down dark paths of closed source and profits.

I see over on Reddit, there is now a thread where people are concerned that no negative news is being considered about the Rift, and they are thankful that someone from indiecast did something to measure expectations. A thread like that should have already been on MTBS3D where it all started, eh? If things were really open and to be freely criticized, but neil and palmer moderate over there, and I have been booted ;)

I have already went far far beyond the boundaries of what is accepted here, but I would only ask all of you, to think, was the world best served by taking the ORIGINAL open source HMD palmer was working on, and making it closed source? I could be wrong, why does no one else even talk about it though?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHEitsYJnmw The rent is too damn high!

Post Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:57 pm

Posts: 5
The OR, like most applications it's applied to, would change the movie landscape and therefore change the nature of the movie itself. It would be easy enough to take panoramic shots of the set and composite a filmed scene into a VR set. Easy enough to replace studio lights with sky and wires/ floor markers with ground replacement.
The trick is what to do with the finished scene?
Pans, wipes, cuts, and all those dozens of century-old storytelling techniques that normally drive a story or character on celluloid would fall by the wayside if the viewer can 'move' around a scene as it then becomes interactive entertainment more or less. That would open up to some fun things but there would be a loss of character and directors vision. I would imagine most shots would need to be 'full shots' of actors (head to toe) in order for someone to be in the same room as them for a virtual experience.

If one remains stationary and sitting at a fixed point then movies would be like watching on a massive IMAX screen. Certain shots of a film could be set up for an immersive experience, much like how some IMAX movies really expand a particular sequence for their screens.
Take 'Aliens' for example. Some shots could be made to completely envelop the viewer such as when the Sulaco does a fly-by as it nears LV-426. You would be floating in space watching a massive ship slowly rumble by in front of you and when you look around, all you see is a deep expanse of stars. Would be stunning no doubt but I have to wonder how jarring a moment like that might be?

Taking that a step further, the OR in conjunction with D-BOX would be exactly what we are all hoping for. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlAyqo3B0OA

Post Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:19 am

Posts: 34
Virtual movie theaters are a done deal. They are crazy easy to make. What we need are movies we can walk around in. It would be great if we could get an updated for Rift re-release of all the pixar and pixar like movies.

The scene starts and we are dropped in at a location set by the director. We have freedom to explore the space, watch the action from all around, while the scene plays out.

I can imagine watching Toy Story; siting on the edge of Andys bed (was the kids name Andy?) Or, having a curbside view of a fight scene from the Incredibles.

They could even extend the experience so you take over a character and act out their part like in 'Ready Player One'

Post Wed Feb 20, 2013 7:28 pm

Posts: 51
tomorrowman wrote:
cloroxbb wrote:
@tomorrowman

Must you claim that you got screwed out of the Oculus deal every post? I dont think anyone here cares. You just sound bitter. Bitching to us isnt going to change a damn thing. I think you should just continue to contribute to this forum in a constructive manner, instead of crying about Palmer Luckey every chance you get...


You make a good point about Palmer, I am very happy for his success, but I am very sad he took an open source project and now it is closed source (he could have kept the kickstarter OPEN SOURCE) and since I was there from the very beginning, I feel it is my responsibility to talk about it, and even Notch from Minecraft has to do silly stupid stuff to make corporate masters happy http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/5067/notchtweet.jpg Isn't life too short for all this silly drama? Going closed source didn't screw me, but perhaps many of you here, I always try to think of the larger community. I constantly re-iterate things because I am more worried about his soul, than profits or deals.

My big issue is that I think mankind needs to move forward from all this dark opaque world of secrets and such that surrounds us all, Palmer benefitted because myself and other people freely shared with him, now all the rest of you perhaps will benefit from those stones cast into the ripples of time. How much more could the world benefit if things had remained open source? It is possible that things could be worse off today I suppose if the Open Source HMD project had stayed that way - OPEN.

It is not just Palmer though, it is from my experience with various companies, governments, etc etc At IBM when I was there, they had to license thier own technology that they helped to develop and fund from foreign competitors, here is a good read if you are intersted in some of the history and want to educate yourself:

http://www7.gsb.columbia.edu/apec/sites ... gAlmWu.pdf

I am sure there are many here who have thier own disaster stories of evil in this world.

I saw a lot of shelved technologies that could have helped mankind, but corporate masters were evil from my perspective. I just can't see the point of not making all the information available to people who want to do something with it that is good for all of us. I guess I have evolved into a bleeding heart liberal who has drank too much cliff stoll koolaid.

In the specific case with Palmer though, I will give my feelings, of what I think is wrong with this world and how it has possibly affected you getting a good VR device a year or 2 later than otherwise, and since we aren't immortals, maybe this matters to you. The first meeting I had with Neil, he was ridiculing one of his best members, a kid named Yuri, to me, a total stranger. To her credit, his wife Pam said that is in very poor taste of you Neil, you shouldn't be mean like that. That was the real core person of someone who I thought earlier was a really swell guy and did everything I could to help him out. He took pleasure in degrading and ridiculing his own memberbase.

Later on, Neil began to spend inordinate amounts of his time and mine wanting advice on how he could keep various people from taking over his company and booting him out of the CEO position, and all the while I kept thinking to myself, what does it matter who controls the company, if you can do good in this world, and have to RELEASE control, maybe that is the better outcome. What do you think Clorox? Would you be willing to lose control of your baby if it meant greater good for the rest of mankind? A lot of ceo's and shareholders would not agree with that meme. Perhaps Neil thought he could do the best good by keeping control himself though, and keeping some other large company from taking him over. Maybe the larger issue is that so many humans must focus on losing or retaining control in an organization to do good or evil, perhaps we need to change how the game is played?

I am no saint Clorox, and I have lots of my own demons too and great sins I have committed in the past, but I just see a world that is no longer being served by the entities and organizations we have today. They take nice kids like Palmer who were all about open source, and send them down the path of a sithlord where the open source turns to closed source. Do you really think that is a good trend? Is that really the world and future you want to exist in? Where nice open source people are corrupted into closed? I want to go in the opposite direction, where closed source types say ENOUGH, we need to shine a light on this stuff.

Or do you want me to believe it is better for everyone if perhaps Iribe sells Oculus to Sony (like he already did one company) and all kinds of wonderful open source HMD goodness goes into a sony corporate blackhole and stuff sits on a shelf like I saw at IBM? Don't want to cannibalize current revenue streams after all do we? Perhaps it would be cheaper for Sony to buy and shelve Oculus and push out thier HMZ product line for a few years, would that make you happy?

Its not really about me, or palmer, or neil, or even you or VR, it is about what kind of world do you want to live in, the closed source one, or a different one? A red pill world or a blue pill one?

Perhaps I should have not told Palmer anything, and remained with tight lips, would it have made a difference? I don't know Clorox, I just see 8 billion humans and growing, and our current anarcho-capitalist structure worldwide is not serving them, and I hope more humans want that to change.

I don't think the ends justifies the means, and I think the darkness Neil has done is hurting more people and he could be a greater force for good, and I certainly think Palmer going into the closed source world is a very very bad trend. We didn't get to where we are today, because people were closed source and not sharing ideas and information back and forth and really trying to help each other make this planet a better place.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/17/world ... d=all&_r=0

Clorox, since the PDF above was about technology transfer to Korea, here is a recent article talking about how hyper-capitalism and the fundamental dynamics of korean society have changed for the worst over the past few hundred centuries, you will be old one day, I hope you aren't left to die like this. I see that coming to the USA, when we take palmer luckeys and good will and intention and open source, and send them down dark paths of closed source and profits.

I see over on Reddit, there is now a thread where people are concerned that no negative news is being considered about the Rift, and they are thankful that someone from indiecast did something to measure expectations. A thread like that should have already been on MTBS3D where it all started, eh? If things were really open and to be freely criticized, but neil and palmer moderate over there, and I have been booted ;)

I have already went far far beyond the boundaries of what is accepted here, but I would only ask all of you, to think, was the world best served by taking the ORIGINAL open source HMD palmer was working on, and making it closed source? I could be wrong, why does no one else even talk about it though?



Im definitely going to check out everything that you posted here, I just gotta wait until I have more time (the weekend). Wall O text is intimidating :)

Post Wed Feb 20, 2013 7:30 pm

Posts: 51
joeyLapetina wrote:
Virtual movie theaters are a done deal. They are crazy easy to make. What we need are movies we can walk around in. It would be great if we could get an updated for Rift re-release of all the pixar and pixar like movies.

The scene starts and we are dropped in at a location set by the director. We have freedom to explore the space, watch the action from all around, while the scene plays out.

I can imagine watching Toy Story; siting on the edge of Andys bed (was the kids name Andy?) Or, having a curbside view of a fight scene from the Incredibles.

They could even extend the experience so you take over a character and act out their part like in 'Ready Player One'


Dude, that is an awesome concept! That would be amazing.

Post Sat Feb 23, 2013 2:36 pm

Posts: 15
Wow! I would love to watch movies like this. Watching movies on the OR is similar to the IMAX but more personalized and it could be done through the comforts of your home. That virtual cinema picture looked awesome, but the movie itself on the OR display would be even cooler. Watching movies on the OR would be innovative and would bring a whole new aspect to the film industry.

Post Mon Feb 25, 2013 9:32 am

Posts: 700
Location: Miami, FL
joeyLapetina wrote:
Virtual movie theaters are a done deal. They are crazy easy to make. What we need are movies we can walk around in. It would be great if we could get an updated for Rift re-release of all the pixar and pixar like movies.

The scene starts and we are dropped in at a location set by the director. We have freedom to explore the space, watch the action from all around, while the scene plays out.

I can imagine watching Toy Story; siting on the edge of Andys bed (was the kids name Andy?) Or, having a curbside view of a fight scene from the Incredibles.

They could even extend the experience so you take over a character and act out their part like in 'Ready Player One'


This idea is just as cool as your treadmill idea. You're on a roll. It would be an amazing experience to feel like you're just an extra in a Pixar movie, seeing the action play out. VR has a lot of potential uses and I enjoy reading all the ways that everyone has come up with for using the Oculus Rift, from entertainment to fitness and therapeutic uses.

Post Wed Mar 06, 2013 4:42 pm

Posts: 43
Imagine a few laps of the isle of mann TT on board viewed with the rift...."drools" :mrgreen:

PreviousNext

Return to Non-Gaming Applications

Spinnakr Active Analytics