Practical augmented reality

This is a great example of a practical application of augmented reality (and it\’s not Pokemon Go, although that\’s getting people into shape!): a sign translator, instantly converting signs into a language you can read. These sorts of applications will eventually be built into your car windshield, and overlay automatically while driving.

 

Creating an alternate life

As an old ex-Second Lifer, and a huge fan of the commercial applications for both Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality; would love it if Second Life had, well, a second life.

For those who aren\’t familiar with it, Second Life was (is, still) a 3D virtual world launched in 2003, where you could buy an \”island\” and create/interact with your own virtual world (or other people\’s). It got a lot of flack for being uber-geek at the time (although a lot of real money was made there by buying and selling both virtual real estate and goods).

It did always feel somehow wrong, though, that you interacted with a virtual 3d world through a flat screen – and clunky keyboard commands.

So the recent announcement that it is planning on becoming fully immersive with virtual reality goggles (with the Oculus Rift. although there are others), to have a working version available by the early next year and a commercial release before the end of 2016 was exciting news.

I always thought the concept of losing yourself in a virtual world of your own creation a very powerful idea. Different than a game because there isn\’t a goal, different than an immersive movie because you drive the story. Truly, a Second Life. The appeal is of course enormous. People will get lost in it as the \”real\” world seems gray and boring in comparison.

\"Second{I also always thought it interesting that instead of creating wildly different \”realities\” though, people often created houses with fireplaces, sofas, and oil paintings on the wall. Given that the normal constraints of physics don\’t apply, why didn\’t the majority of people create wildly fantastical alternative realities?}.

Time will tell if Second Life has another chance. There are a lot more competitors out there now, and the incredibly high quality of the game graphics – with VR headsets – is going to give it a run for its money. But I think there will be a niche for people who don\’t want to engage in a pre-scripted manner, to create the reality *they* want. Even it it\’s as mundane as a living room, couch, and fireplace.

 

Ho hum: Where\’s the innovation?

Article out today on Fast Company, titled \”The Smartphone Revolution is Over.\” And I agree. In terms of form they\’ve pretty much reached the limit of the current form factor. They got small, now they\’re getting bigger, flatter, bigger screens, etc. Sure they might develop a model with a folding screen (to make it bigger again), or smaller (to fit on a wristwatch – oh joy!), or curvier, or in purple.

But personally, I think if products lead with \”now available in a color\” in their advertising (as Motorola\’s Razr is doing) the category has jumped the shark a bit, so to speak.

\"\"

The question is, what happens next? Since being able to communicate in any way you want, wherever and whenever you want – well, that\’s not going away.

Coincidentally Google announced today that they will sell \”Heads-Up Display Glasses\” by the end of 2012, a pair of glasses that will be able to \”stream information to the wearer’s eyeballs in real time.\” Given advancements in voice interaction and jawbone-type microphones, why wouldn\’t this be a form for a future \”phone\”? I\’m actually of the opinion that the form factors are going to fragment, and potentially become modular a la Transformers…add or subtract whichever module you want or need.

And I\’ve already talked about how there should/will be devices that are the \”node points\” for all communication and content, then send the right content to the right place – and how that will disintermediate the entertainment industry.

But so far, everyone\’s still playing it boringly safe. I\’m looking forward to seeing the impact Google\’s glasses will have. Until then, it\’s all been a little ho-hum.

Ho hum: Where\’s the innovation?

Article out today on Fast Company, titled \”The Smartphone Revolution is Over.\” And I agree. In terms of form they\’ve pretty much reached the limit of the current form factor. They got small, now they\’re getting bigger, flatter, bigger screens, etc. Sure they might develop a model with a folding screen (to make it bigger again), or smaller (to fit on a wristwatch – oh joy!), or curvier, or in purple.

But personally, I think if products lead with \”now available in a color\” in their advertising (as Motorola\’s Razr is doing) the category has jumped the shark a bit, so to speak.

\"\"

The question is, what happens next? Since being able to communicate in any way you want, wherever and whenever you want – well, that\’s not going away.

Coincidentally Google announced today that they will sell \”Heads-Up Display Glasses\” by the end of 2012, a pair of glasses that will be able to \”stream information to the wearer’s eyeballs in real time.\” Given advancements in voice interaction and jawbone-type microphones, why wouldn\’t this be a form for a future \”phone\”? I\’m actually of the opinion that the form factors are going to fragment, and potentially become modular a la Transformers…add or subtract whichever module you want or need.

And I\’ve already talked about how there should/will be devices that are the \”node points\” for all communication and content, then send the right content to the right place – and how that will disintermediate the entertainment industry.

But so far, everyone\’s still playing it boringly safe. I\’m looking forward to seeing the impact Google\’s glasses will have. Until then, it\’s all been a little ho-hum.

Asgard awaits: Analyzing the entertainment model

\"\"

So. Movies. Specifically, action ones (but any, really). I just indulged in 3D Imax Thor, good enough entertainment – shot a little too much with \”angles\” for gratuitous 3D impact, but overall beautiful and surprisingly sweet.

I\’m just sorry the actual screen resolution is still so low….and that the 3D is a bit wonky. Don\’t get me wrong, I think it\’s an improvement in the \”embedding\” yourself aspect of being entertained, but why am I still faking 3D with cheap plastic glasses, and too low resolution on 2D screens?

\"\"

Why am I not being surrounded with at the very least, a curved screen, and optimally – sitting in the middle of the action with a visor that put me into the movie? Whatever happened to the promise of virtual reality? The gaming industry is going there. I understand that it would require a tech revolution in filming technique (360° vision required), but as so much of the environment on screen is currently created with Cad-like programs anyway, it shouldn\’t be too much of a stretch.

I realize those owners of huge real estate housing large screens have a good reason to *not* go there, but entice viewers to shell out $15 (!) for the \”big screen\” experience, but to be honest the small visor / virtual reality version would look better.

And the established film creation industry has similar interests in keeping the status quo.

So while I understand the legacy industry players have a vested interest in keeping the seats filled, I wonder if there isn\’t any room for other players to innovate the space? Particularly since other players in the entertainment industry are starting to create original content.

Instead of the current model (entertainment companies make a movie, which is turned into a game), how hard would it be for the game companies to create their own original movies / entertainment with a game-like interface? Or other players who don\’t have a vested interest in the existing interface?

I\’m not underestimating the amount of effort it would take to launch a completely new entertainment model, but I don\’t think there\’s a lot the established industry could do if a well financed, concerted effort was made – in partnership with the visor / hardware companies. It sure would be a really interesting space to innovate.

I\’ve consciously kept this post reasonably attainable, because where I think really interesting development is, is in true interactive virtual reality so you\’re not just watching from the vantage point of the producer but are free to interact with your surroundings in any way you want.

This would open a whole new world of commercial applications – from eliminating the need to travel (you can do that trip of a lifetime, without the food poisoning or uncomfortable beds) to simulations for any activity the requires any physical training (fire, police, pilot, race car driver, etc). You could actually walk through Asgard, sit on the throne, walk through the halls.

Reminds me of a \”living theater\” experience in Manhattan recently told me about: the entire building is made up of rooms, each of which has a part of a story line being acted out. You choose to sit, engage, walk from room to room, create the experience you want while being transported to a crime scene a la Agatha Christie.

It makes sense that people who are – by the time the technology arrives – spoiled for personalized experiences they dictate themselves, instead of ones foisted upon them – would prefer this type of entertainment. So: a merging of the gaming industry and movie / entertainment is inevitable.

Throw in augmented reality so that interactions in your daily life can be enhanced with game-like features, and the convergence is 360°. I have to admit, the idea of actually interacting the Chris Hemsworth – albeit, virtually – an enticing one! 

\"\"

Reality, what is it really? Exploring Augmented Reality

\"\"I love the concept of augmented reality. I mean, isn’t watching Avatar in 3D Imax so much better than the gray reality when you come home to look at your walls?

Don’t you love the colors! – and can’t you feel your muscles twitching as you mentally jump from psychedelically colored palm frond to palm frond along with the Navi?  When I got home after the movie, all I could do is stare at my (boring) walls and wonder “where are my white floating squids?” Uch. Reality is tough, gray, cold – well, “real”.

But seriously, I think augmented reality has the potential to be the next mass (and I mean, MASS) addiction after social networking.

Currently every discussion around it seems to focus on the information it will bring…as interesting as it would be to have directions overlaid onto my wanderings (directly into my retina, or indeed – the optic nerve at some point) I think another obvious application is more akin to gaming in nature.

\"\"
Your neighbors, the Smiths.

Imagine you’re just in one of those moods, and instead of having to look at all the “regular” faces you pass on the street (gray, dour) you could instead decide that today is “sea monkey day”. Seriously, you’re in the mood for sea monkeys. So you program your “sea monkey setting” into your yet-to-be-determined data input module and voila! Everyone has a sea monkey head.

It’s the ultimate version of beer goggles.

The program could generate facial differences by interpolating from real faces, or by pulling data from various public profiles (the sentiment analysis of your current Facebook status interpolates: “bad mood”) and an unhappy (but potentially, comical) Sea Monkey face is projected. Etc. etc. You get the picture.

An additional idea would be being able to set your own markers so that AR programs interpret your data in a certain way that day. In a flirty mood / want to chat? Advertise with a certain color (how about, green face = available). We could color code the world and communicate without any words at all. After all, if our information from a wide variety of sources is going to be broadcast anyway (ref: http://lindaricci.com/01/04/not-just-a-pretty-face), why not control what we put out there in this way?

This could be seriously addictive. And seriously lucrative from an entertainment merchandising standpoint. Think about it: Now I don\’t have to just leave the Navi behind when I get home, I can superimpose licensed Navi images on my whole day. All I need is some giant pond fronds (why not my office chair??)

It makes sense as part of the “personalization” trend: everyone wants (information) how they want it, in the way they want it. How difficult is it to imagine that this will also include superimposing our own desires for what “reality” will look like that day?

Once it happens would you ever go back to just seeing things the way they “are”?  I don’t think so.

Scroll to Top