[sci.virtual-worlds] VR on Small Machines?

hlab@milton.u.washington.edu (Human Int. Technology Lab) (01/06/91)

 Is it feasible to run a small VR setup off of a computer such as the 
Amiga? I wouldn't see why not, but maybe I'm not well informed on the 
subject. I always hear about it being done on huge supercomputers.
--- QuickBBS 2.66 (Reg)
 * Origin: I.J.C.R. BBS & B'nai No'ach [Ft.Worth, Texas] (1:130/49)

--  
Darin Arrick - via Fidonet node 1:130/49
UUCP: ...!merch!ijcr!Darin.Arrick
INTERNET: Darin.Arrick@ijcr.fidonet.org

madsax@milton.u.washington.edu (Mark A. DeLoura) (01/07/91)

>
> Is it feasible to run a small VR setup off of a computer such as the 
>Amiga? I wouldn't see why not, but maybe I'm not well informed on the 
>subject. I always hear about it being done on huge supercomputers.
>--- QuickBBS 2.66 (Reg)
> * Origin: I.J.C.R. BBS & B'nai No'ach [Ft.Worth, Texas] (1:130/49)
>
>--  
>Darin Arrick - via Fidonet node 1:130/49
>UUCP: ...!merch!ijcr!Darin.Arrick
>INTERNET: Darin.Arrick@ijcr.fidonet.org
>

I guess that would depend on your definition of VR.  Certainly it is
feasible to get a pair of Haitex X-SPECS, and attempt to create a
pseudo-VR which has only the stereoscopic view; and it might even be
possible, with the left-over cycles, to get some sort of stereo sound
going, but the refresh rate is going to be something awful.  And you
won't have the best part, which is the human-computer interaction of
being able to physically move around, and the computer updating your views
based on the new position/orientation information obtained from the
gloves and/or suit.  It just takes too much processing power to do the
rendering of the images you will see. 

I suppose, given a fully blown out Amiga system, you might be able to
get something to work, with refresh rates of ~10fps and limited
polygons.  But writing the software to interact with will be an
incredible pain. Especially considering the Amiga's programming
environment. (IMHO.)  

Granted, it does seem as if the only way to eventually set-up a VR
network would be to have the information travelling to each user be
general enough so that each "node" can determine the level of
explicitness which the user sees.  That is, person A has a slow system
and can only see blobs at a decent refresh rate, while person Z has
Super-Zippy XBM Model 4000, which can render 500K polygons at 60Hz
with 16-channel stereo sound.  Someone is going to have to come up
with standards for the data travelling over that network.  I sure hope
it isn't *BM. :P

===============================================================================
Mark A. DeLoura    madsax@milton.u.washington.edu      University of Washington
    "It's better to play one note and mean it,
           than play zillions of scales and not mean it."  -Mike Oldfield

jcs@crash.cts.com (John Schultz) (01/09/91)

In <13838@milton.u.washington.edu> hlab@milton.u.washington.edu (Human Int. Tech
nology Lab) writes:





> Is it feasible to run a small VR setup off of a computer such as the 
>Amiga? I wouldn't see why not, but maybe I'm not well informed on the 
>subject. I always hear about it being done on huge supercomputers.

  Absolutely. You'll need at least a 25Mhz 68030, with 32 bit memory.
I've developed a system that will be available RSN. The display is
320x200x4 LC-Stereo Shutter, sound is four channel D/A (two stereo
pairs). The system has been successfully linked to Fake Space Labs
stereo BOOM viewer (head tracking, black and white crts). It even
does anaglyph stereo (very inexpensive!). Worlds must be relatively simple
in order to keep the frame rate between 15-30 frames/sec, as rendering
is done with the 68030 (faster than the blitter). When the 34020 or
i860 boards become available, much more detailed worlds will be possible
with 30 frames/sec constant.
  Any other questions, feel free to ask.



  John

jcs@crash.cts.com (John Schultz) (01/09/91)

In <13862@milton.u.washington.edu> madsax@milton.u.washington.edu (Mark A. DeLou
ra) writes:

>> Is it feasible to run a small VR setup off of a computer such as the 
>>Amiga? I wouldn't see why not, but maybe I'm not well informed on the 

>I guess that would depend on your definition of VR.  Certainly it is
>feasible to get a pair of Haitex X-SPECS, and attempt to create a
>pseudo-VR which has only the stereoscopic view; and it might even be
>possible, with the left-over cycles, to get some sort of stereo sound
>going, but the refresh rate is going to be something awful.  And you
>won't have the best part, which is the human-computer interaction of
>being able to physically move around, and the computer updating your views
>based on the new position/orientation information obtained from the
>gloves and/or suit.  It just takes too much processing power to do the
>rendering of the images you will see. 

>I suppose, given a fully blown out Amiga system, you might be able to
>get something to work, with refresh rates of ~10fps and limited

  15-30 frames/sec is possible.

>polygons.  But writing the software to interact with will be an
>incredible pain. Especially considering the Amiga's programming
>environment. (IMHO.)  

  I've written software with an analog joystick for input, as well
as head tracking (using Fake Space Lab's BOOM viewer). A glove
is simply more data.

  I'll probably be showing my system at SPSE in San Jose, Feb 24-Mar 1,
for those interested in seeing a real, low-cost VR system.


  John

ron@vicorp.com (Ron Peterson) (01/10/91)

In article <6793@crash.cts.com> jcs@crash.cts.com (John Schultz) writes:
> It even does anaglyph stereo (very inexpensive!).
>  Any other questions, feel free to ask.
What is anaglyph stereo?  Is it different than just creating two images
using a standard perspective transformation from two slightly seperated
points of view?
ron@vicorp.com

akk@trantor.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Andy Klingler) (01/11/91)

In article <6793@crash.cts.com>, John Schultz writes:

>   Absolutely. You'll need at least a 25Mhz 68030, with 32 bit memory.
> I've developed a system that will be available RSN. The display is
> 320x200x4 LC-Stereo Shutter, sound is four channel D/A (two stereo
> pairs).

Hm. Sounds like an A3000 :-)
Can you supply some more information?
(How is the software done; what data formats; additional hardware)

[...]
> does anaglyph stereo (very inexpensive!). Worlds must be relatively simple
> in order to keep the frame rate between 15-30 frames/sec, as rendering
> is done with the 68030 (faster than the blitter). When the 34020 or

Wouldn`t it be faster to do the drawing with the blitter and the
necessary calculations with the 030 at the same time?
How many polygons can you draw?

        Andy
---
Andreas Klingler
akk@trantor.informatik.uni-erlangen.de
         If you have enough patience, everything can be simulated
                               Marvin Minsky

jcs@crash.cts.com (John Schultz) (01/11/91)

In <14101@milton.u.washington.edu> ron@vicorp.com (Ron Peterson) writes:



>In article <6793@crash.cts.com> jcs@crash.cts.com (John Schultz) writes:
>> It even does anaglyph stereo (very inexpensive!).
>>  Any other questions, feel free to ask.
>What is anaglyph stereo?  Is it different than just creating two images
>using a standard perspective transformation from two slightly seperated
>points of view?

  Anaglyph: aka Red/Green, Red/Blue (Low/high frequency light filters),
was real popular in the 50's (movies, comic books). Cardboard glasses
with plastic filters cost pennies, and generating the image on the computer
is also very easy. The end result is a "grey" scale color when seen
through the filters (really a purple or yellow/green scale). The math is
the same as other stereo techniques.


  John
 

jcs@crash.cts.com (John Schultz) (01/13/91)

In <14185@milton.u.washington.edu> akk@trantor.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Andy 
Klingler) writes:

>In article <6793@crash.cts.com>, John Schultz writes:

>>   Absolutely. You'll need at least a 25Mhz 68030, with 32 bit memory.
>> I've developed a system that will be available RSN. The display is
>> 320x200x4 LC-Stereo Shutter, sound is four channel D/A (two stereo
>> pairs).

>Hm. Sounds like an A3000 :-)

  It was developed on a 25Mhz GVP 68030. It has been run on 16Mhz 68020s,
33Mhz 68030s and the A3000. The graphics are slightly faster on the A3000
due to the 32bit chip ram, but overall the 33Mhz GVP is fastest.

>Can you supply some more information?
>(How is the software done; what data formats; additional hardware)

  The data format is custom, ASCII text. Conversion from other popular
formats to come when funding becomes available. Additional hardware:
X-Specs stereo LC glasses, CH FlightStick analog joystick, custom
gameport adaptor, stereo audio system (any). I've got the PowerGlove,
but have not hooked it up yet (don't have the serial hardware and
passcode for raw data mode (it's copyrighted). I'll wait until a legal
method becomes available for PowerGlove support).

>> does anaglyph stereo (very inexpensive!). Worlds must be relatively simple
>> in order to keep the frame rate between 15-30 frames/sec, as rendering
>> is done with the 68030 (faster than the blitter). When the 34020 or

>Wouldn`t it be faster to do the drawing with the blitter and the
>necessary calculations with the 030 at the same time?
 
  Nope. The 68030 is much faster than the blitter for filling polygons.
There is much waste in setting up the blitter to fill polygons, and the
end result looks terrible (system routines re-outline the masks, and
they are *really* slow).
  
>How many polygons can you draw?

  As many as you like. Of course, frame rate is inversely proportional
to polygon count. I can fly a simple jet with moveable rudder, stabilator,
ailerons, retracts, etc, and simple terrain at 15-30 frames/sec stereo.

  Any venture capitalists, bankers, daddy warbucks, publishers, etc,
please contact me for a demo. I'm located in sunny San Diego.


  John Schultz
  (619) 442-5880