[imacken]

It may seem like a weird question, but when we have headsets like the Reverb and even the Index having resolutions higher than most people's monitors, why do we still talk about the 'low resolution' of VR headsets?
I'm sure the answer is obvious, but...

[Emmy]

Can VR give me 2560x in each eye on an average computer?

[imacken]

Originally Posted by Emmy

Can VR give me 2560x in each eye on an average computer?

Sorry, I don't understand how that relates to my question.

[- Voight -]

@Imacken
simple answer is, that the displays in VR are right in front of the eye, what causes to detect the pixelmatrix of the LCD/OLED.

I´ve read once of micro displays especially designed for the purpose of use in VR headsets, but next thing then will be to invent a better lens technology to enlarge the microdisplay´s image - but that´s more in research than development.

Anyway, back in the 80s no one complaint about having a 15" CRT monitor for flight sims with 800 x 600 resolution, but the image quality of VR today has to stand a comparison with 4k UltraHD LCDs monitors, what in my opinion, is not quite the same thing.

[Goblin]

Yeah, it’s not the resolution, as such.
It’s the fact that your eyes are so close to the displays. When using a traditional 2D monitor, even if it’s a 36” inch screen, the view is much smaller than in real life. In VR it’s full scale. Imagine having a 50” 4K display, and then moving so close to it that the view fills a 100° of your field of view, and the virtual cockpit becomes as large as in real life... You’d want more than 4K res too

[imacken]

Originally Posted by - Voight -

@Imacken
simple answer is, that the displays in VR are right in front of the eye, what causes to detect the pixelmatrix of the LCD/OLED.

I´ve read once of micro displays especially designed for the purpose of use in VR headsets, but next thing then will be to invent a better lens technology to enlarge the microdisplay´s image - but that´s more in research than development.

Anyway, back in the 80s no one complaint about having a 15" CRT monitor for flight sims with 800 x 600 resolution, but the image quality of VR today has to stand a comparison with 4k UltraHD LCDs monitors, what in my opinion, is not quite the same thing.

Thanks for that. Not sure I see the answer though. I use a 4K monitor in DCS as well VR headsets. Currently I use the Index supersampled to 2880x3200 per eye, and don't really have any issues with the res.
I've always felt, from my perspective, that the issue with VR headsets has been SDE not resolution. For example, my current Index has the same 'resolution' as my Vive Pro, but the difference in image quality - and perceived resolution - is huge, partly due to massive reduction in SDE, and use of sub pixels with the RGB display.
I'm not convinced by the 'close to the eye' point either. I mean, sure back with CV1s etc., maybe, but now? I can't see individual pixels easily on my Index, and I couldn't see them when I had a Reverb either.

[Baldrick33]

I certainly think it is distance as others have said. Going back to back between VR and a 4k monitor and the difference is still huge, we need much bigger resolutions at the distance we are from the display.

[- Voight -]

You´re right, me too don´t see the SDE with P5k+. It also makes a difference between OLED, like the Vive Pro and LCDs. The distance between the pixels in LCDs is less observable than with OLED.
SDE and display resolution are in direct relation, but there are additional technologies, like kind of SDE filter Samsung´s Odyssey+ has; the Index also got kind of such filter between the display and the lenses.

But the distance from the eye to an LCD/OLED projected image is critical to see/not see pixelation. The higher the resolution, the closer you could get to the display without seeing the pixels. With TVs, Monitors or mobile phones, it is not so much of an issue, but with LCD beamer and now with VR headsets it is.

Luckily the SDE is not so much of an issue today compared to the first VR headsets Rift and HTC Vive, but the presentation of details in the depth of the image still is depending of how much pixel/subpixel are available to properly render the geometrical shape and texture in detail. Today´s VR games avoid these details in distance or at all to not have this problem, but with DCS we are on the opposite end of line.
Beside pure resolution of the hardware, there are also AntiAliasing, and what not, to counteract the impression of pixelated images, but on the bottom line freely cited John Carmack, there would be needed a resolution of 16k in VR headsets to get rid of any pixelation.

[imacken]

All good comments, and yes, of course, we would all want more resolution.
My question was really why is the current resolution often called - and commonly believed to be - low when it's not.
I'm not saying that we are at 4K monitor parity in quality and clarity of image, but whatever the perceived limitations of VR are, it is not low resolution in terms of pixels compared to many monitors.

[Lensman]

Originally Posted by Goblin

Yeah, it’s not the resolution, as such.
It’s the fact that your eyes are so close to the displays. When using a traditional 2D monitor, even if it’s a 36” inch screen, the view is much smaller than in real life. In VR it’s full scale. Imagine having a 50” 4K display, and then moving so close to it that the view fills a 100° of your field of view, and the virtual cockpit becomes as large as in real life... You’d want more than 4K res too

Exactly..it's the scale. Simples