Computational Focus-Tunable Near-eye Displays Nitish Padmanaban - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
computational focus tunable near eye displays
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Computational Focus-Tunable Near-eye Displays Nitish Padmanaban - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dec 01, 2022 419 likes •1.04k views

Computational Focus-Tunable Near-eye Displays Nitish Padmanaban Stanford University NVIDIA GPU Technology Conference 2017 www.computationalimaging.org Magnified Display d d f 1 d + 1 d ' = 1 f Real World:

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Computational Focus-Tunable Near-eye Displays

Nitish Padmanaban Stanford University NVIDIA GPU Technology Conference 2017 www.computationalimaging.org

slide-2
SLIDE 2
slide-3
SLIDE 3
slide-4
SLIDE 4

Magnified Display

1 d + 1 d' = 1 f

d d’ f

slide-5
SLIDE 5
slide-6
SLIDE 6
slide-7
SLIDE 7
slide-8
SLIDE 8
slide-9
SLIDE 9
slide-10
SLIDE 10
slide-11
SLIDE 11

Real World: Vergence & Accommodation Match! Match!

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Current VR Displays: Vergence & Accommodation Mismatch Mismatch

  • for people

with normal vision

slide-13
SLIDE 13

4D / 25cm Optical Infinity

Normal vision Nearsighted/myopic Farsighted/Hyperopic Presbyopic

Focal range (range of clear vision)

Modified from Pamplona et al, Proc. of SIGGRAPH 2010

Nearsightedness & Farsightedness

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Presbyopia

Nearest focus distance (D) Age (years)

8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 0/∞ 4/25cm 8/12.5cm 12D/8cm 16D/6cm

Duane, 1912

slide-15
SLIDE 15
  • Q1: Can computational displays effectively replace

glasses in VR/AR?

  • Q2: How to address the vergence–accommodation

conflict for users of different ages?

  • Q3: What are some near-eye display technologies that

address this?

slide-16
SLIDE 16
  • Q1: Can computational displays effectively replace

glasses in VR/AR?

  • Q2: How to address the vergence–accommodation

conflict for users of different ages?

  • Q3: What are some near-eye display technologies that

address this?

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Magnified Display Display Lens

Fixed Focus

1 d + 1 d' = 1 f

d d’ f

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Adaptive Focus

Magnified Display Display Lens

1 d + 1 d' = 1 f

actuator à vary d’

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Adaptive Focus

Magnified Display Display Lens

focus-tunable lens à vary f

1 d + 1 d' = 1 f

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

slide-22
SLIDE 22

How sharp is the target? (blurry, medium, sharp) Is the target fused? (yes, no)

4D (0.25m) 3D (0.33m) 2D (0.50m) 1D (1m) Four simulated distances Four simulated distances

Task

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Results: Sharpness and Fusibility

far near

1D 1m 2D 0.5m 3D 0.3m 4D 0.25m

Distance far far near

1D 1m 2D 0.5m 3D 0.3m 4D 0.25m

Distance

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Results: Sharpness and Fusibility

far near

1D 1m 2D 0.5m 3D 0.3m 4D 0.25m

Distance far far near

1D 1m 2D 0.5m 3D 0.3m 4D 0.25m

Distance

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Results: Sharpness and Fusibility

far near

1D 1m 2D 0.5m 3D 0.3m 4D 0.25m

Distance far far near

1D 1m 2D 0.5m 3D 0.3m 4D 0.25m

Distance

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Results: Sharpness and Fusibility

(n = 64)

far far near

1D 1m 2D 0.5m 3D 0.3m 4D 0.25m

Distance far far near

1D 1m 2D 0.5m 3D 0.3m 4D 0.25m

Distance

slide-27
SLIDE 27
  • Fast, user-driven refractive estimates can be used to correct

for near and far sightedness in an AR/VR system so that the user does not need to wear their typical correction

Summary

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Computational Near-eye Displays

  • Q1: Can computational displays effectively replace

glasses in VR/AR?

  • Q2: How to address the vergence–accommodation

conflict for users of different ages?

  • Q3: What are some near-eye display technologies that

address this?

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Conventional

stereoscopic distance virtual image distance stereoscopic distance

vergence accommodation

Conventional Stereo / VR Display

slide-30
SLIDE 30

With Focus Cues

virtual image distance stereoscopic distance stereoscopic distance

vergence accommodation

Removing VAC with Adaptive Focus

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Follow the target with your eyes

4D (0.25m) 0.5D (2m)

Task

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Accommodative response in conventional display

Conventional

stereoscopic distance virtual image distance stereoscopic distance

Stimulus

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Conventional

stereoscopic distance virtual image distance stereoscopic distance

Stimulus Accommodation

n = 59, mean gain = 0.29

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

Accommodative response in conventional display

slide-34
SLIDE 34

With Focus Cues

virtual image distance stereoscopic distance stereoscopic distance

Stimulus

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

Accommodative response in focus tunable display

slide-35
SLIDE 35

With Focus Cues

virtual image distance stereoscopic distance stereoscopic distance

Stimulus Accommodation

n = 24, mean gain = 0.77

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

Accommodative response in focus tunable display

slide-36
SLIDE 36

4D / 25cm Optical Infinity

Normal vision Nearsighted/myopic Farsighted/Hyperopic Presbyopic

Focal range (range of clear vision)

Modified from Pamplona et al, Proc. of SIGGRAPH 2010

Presbyopia

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Do Presbyopes benefit from dynamic focus?

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

Do Presbyopes benefit from dynamic focus?

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

Do Presbyopes benefit from dynamic focus?

slide-40
SLIDE 40

far near far near

Image quality in VR

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

slide-41
SLIDE 41

far near far near

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

Image quality in VR

slide-42
SLIDE 42

far near far near

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

Image quality in VR

slide-43
SLIDE 43

far near far near

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

Image quality in VR

slide-44
SLIDE 44

far near far near

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

Image quality in VR

slide-45
SLIDE 45

far near far near

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

Image quality in VR

slide-46
SLIDE 46

Summary

  • The best approach for mitigating the vergence–

accommodation conflict may differ depending on the age of the user

  • For users over the age of 45, a “conventional” stereo display

may actually provide better image quality, particularly for nearby virtual objects.

  • However, somewhat paradoxically, the dynamic display did

improve fusion for all ages

slide-47
SLIDE 47
  • Q1: Can computational displays effectively replace

glasses in VR/AR?

  • Q2: How to address the vergence–accommodation

conflict for users of different ages?

  • Q3: What are some near-eye display technologies that

address this?

slide-48
SLIDE 48
  • Q1: Can computational displays effectively replace

glasses in VR/AR?

  • Q2: How to address the vergence–accommodation

conflict for users of different ages?

  • Q3: What are some near-eye display technologies that

address this? • Gaze-contingent focus

  • Monovision
  • Light field displays
  • etc
slide-49
SLIDE 49

Gaze-contingent Focus

  • non-presbyopes: adaptive focus is like real world, but needs eye tracking!

HMD lens micro display virtual image eye tracking

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

slide-50
SLIDE 50

Gaze-contingent Focus

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

slide-51
SLIDE 51

Gaze-contingent Focus

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

slide-52
SLIDE 52

Gaze-contingent Focus

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

slide-53
SLIDE 53

Gaze-contingent Focus – User Preference

Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

slide-54
SLIDE 54

Monovision VR

Konrad et al., SIGCHI 2016; Johnson et al., Optics Express 2016; Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

slide-55
SLIDE 55

Monovision VR

Konrad et al., SIGCHI 2016; Johnson et al., Optics Express 2016; Padmanaban et al., PNAS 2017

  • monovision did not drive accommodation

more than conventional

  • visually comfortable for most; particularly

uncomfortable for some users

slide-56
SLIDE 56

Backlight Thin Spacer & 2nd panel (6mm) Magnifying Lenses LCD Panel

Light Field Stereoscope

Huang et al., SIGGRAPH 2015

slide-57
SLIDE 57

Light Field Cameras Light Field Stereoscope

Huang et al., SIGGRAPH 2015

slide-58
SLIDE 58

Summary

  • focus cues in VR/AR are challenging
  • adaptive focus can correct for refractive errors (myopia, hyperopia)
  • gaze-contingent focus gives natural focus cues for non-presbyopes, but

require eyes tracking

  • presbyopes require fixed focal plane with correction
  • monovision has not demonstrated significant improvements
  • light field displays may be the “ultimate” display, but need special

considerations for presbyopes

slide-59
SLIDE 59

Making Virtual Reality Better Than Reality?

  • focus cues in VR/AR are challenging
  • adaptive focus can correct for refractive errors (myopia, hyperopia)
  • gaze-contingent focus gives natural focus cues for non-presbyopes, but

require eyes tracking

  • presbyopes require fixed focal plane with correction, better than reality!
  • monovision has not demonstrated significant improvements
  • light field displays may be the “ultimate” display, but need special

considerations for presbyopes

slide-60
SLIDE 60

Acknowledgements

  • Gordon Wetzstein (Stanford)
  • Robert Konrad (Stanford)
  • Fu-Chung Huang (NVIDIA)
  • Emily Cooper (Dartmouth College)
  • Tal Stramer (Stanford)