Category Archives: Interface Devices

The HTC Vive in a smaller space

Granted, there are plenty of videos showing how the Vive works in large, open environments but few of them deal with the real-world scenarios faced by many when it comes to introducing virtual reality to their living rooms. Much like how the Nintendo Wii needed a similar amount of space in order to allow the user to swing their arms around as they participated in sword fights, golf and bowling, the Vive needs even more to do it justice.

Having said that, it seems to work incredibly well, even in something of a cramped space. I don’t doubt that, as the prevalence of VR continues to grow, we may undergo a radical culture shift involving how we set up our home environments. With that in mind, please enjoy the quick 60 second video I’ve put together below.

As seen in the video, you can still have an incredibly immersive experience even while remaining in the same spot, just be sure to move your tea mugs out of arms reach as it’s not a question of ‘if’ but ‘when’ you knock them over.

The demos shown are just a few of those available through the Steam store on the PC. They’re a hint at what’s to come in the future and the promise offered by applications like ‘Big Screen‘ are likely to impact everything from individual to collaborative working environments. Although I only show it from a single user perspective, you can have multi-user sessions over the internet and have people join remotely to share a virtual space, all whilst sharing their individual screens (security risks need to be considered in that respect).

I’m hoping to create a few more videos in the future as they’re able to convey things far more eloquently than with words alone.

HTC Vive Commercial Release – First Impressions

Shortly after receiving our HTC Vive, I rushed to set everything up in a bid to sample the delights of the virtual reality applications available through Steam. For those of you unfamiliar with Steam, it’s an online content distribution service, initially set up for gaming but has since diversified its offerings in a bid to reach out to wider audiences. We’re hoping to improve the student experience by creating engaging visual content for use in our concept classrooms and the promise of virtual reality in this area is quite something.

Unboxing the headset and its accompanying assortment of wires made me wonder how portable a solution the Vive could be. Much of what we do involves showing others what can be done in the classroom and it’s clear that, at the moment, working with a head-mounted display is something which is best kept to dedicated spaces. That is unless you have a dedicated team of technical support staff on hand. As a University with a “Learning and Teaching Innovation Centre“, we’re quite fortunate in that regard.

Initially, the headset wouldn’t connect to my laptop, which only had VGA and display port inputs. The HTC Vive comes just with an HDMI cable (despite also having a mini display port) and so I had to purchase a “mini display to display port” wire separately. Upon arrival, everything worked beautifully and I invited everyone in to have a go with some of the “the lab” demos on Steam along with “theBlu“, a marine life experience wherein the user is surrounded by schools of fish and underwater flora, all of which are interactive and react to being touched by the controllers.

People were ducking down in order to crawl through some of the underwater arches and flinching as a whale got a little bit too close for comfort, before which its giant, reflective eye gave a knowing wink. All of this took place both on the headset and on the laptop display, allowing others to see what the user was experiencing. The emotional bandwidth of these experiences is nothing short of amazing and I say that after having used the Oculus Rift Devkit 2 extensively. The affordance of the Vive is that, as described, it allows you to physically walk around and interact with an environment using your body whereas with the Oculus you are required to use a joypad at the moment. This will no doubt change in the future but, as of writing this, the HTC Vive is where we are likely to be focusing our virtual reality development.

It’s worth mentioning that the laptop we used ran the 3D experiences poorly – around 25 frames per second – (despite being an i7-4290MQ with 32GB ram) due to an under performing graphics chip (Quadro FX). It just goes to show that you can have a machine which is incredibly fast for video and high resolution image editing yet, without a proper game-based GPU, it will not perform well. There are a number of 3D benchmarks you can consult to see if your hardware is up to scratch and I opted to use a laptop if only because it provided for a much simpler setup. I will be bringing out the big guns for future demonstrations.

I’ll be posting more as we continue to experiment with things. At the moment, we’re brainstorming some usage scenarios involving role-play exercises.

Mixed Reality with the Oculus DK2

The irony of virtual reality is that, despite being a visual medium, it remains incredibly difficult to convey in a faithful manner. It’s not just about the visual impact of an experience but also the immersion factor.

I made a post a few months ago in which I filmed myself using the Oculus Rift at a desk. In that video, I cross-faded the perspectives of a bystander and user in an attempt to communicate how people can interact with a 3D environment using a headset.

Virtual Reality represents something of a growth industry right now but it will take time to convince people of its promise as a means for channelling emotional bandwidth. In the right hands, it could become a powerful educational tool. As always, the issues around how to establish best practice will take time to address and, because of this, it’s a great time for both experimentation and innovation.

In the video below, I’m using a green screen to chroma key the output of Oculus, thereby creating the effect of allowing people to see as I do during the session. This is far less complicated (and looks very 1980s) than the method used by Valve, which you can see here.

It does mean having to restrict movement in some ways, no facing the camera, not looking straight down etc… These tend to create confusing visual effects.

I’ll be posting more in the future as I continue to experiment with things. We’re at the beginning of something which promises to revolutionise the human computer interface and contribute to the human condition in ways we’ve yet to envisage.

Oculus Rift – Development Kit 2

I’ve recently been loaned an Oculus Rift with a view to creating a few technical demonstrations of what the head mounted display is capable of. This will go some way to allowing me to obtain closure on my workflow as I’ve been at odds for some time with regards to which devices I ought to spend my time developing for. The primary annoyance is that though my authoring environment of choice, Unity, exports to multiple platforms, compatibility problems still exist. The libraries I use for windows executables might not work as well on Android and with the death of the unity browser-based plugin, I am now limited to HTML5/WebGL in that particular medium.


Windows 10 offers some hope in that it is attempting to converge devices ranging from mobile to desktop, something which initially made me paranoid due to the stability of having something of a standard in place (iOS and Android for mobile). I didn’t see a compelling reason to have that ecosystem disturbed until the devices started getting more powerful and, rather than being used as portable devices, they started to branch into desktop usage scenarios.

That suits me fine, it is always easier to stick to one platform provided that it remains flexible, and that’s something Windows 10 promises. The university is investing in technology and, with it, some Surface Pro tablets. The affordance this provides is a standardised set of hardware to develop ‘normal windows compatible software’ for in a mobile/tablet-based form factor. That is quite powerful and frees us up to innovate new ideas for classroom-based learning at higher education.

Inclusivity and engagement remain key factors, it remains to be seen how this pans out but I’ll be posting my experiments with the Oculus Rift in due course.

A better interface for “Google Cardboard”

In my ongoing search for a suitable alternative to the standard “Google cardboard” headset I’ve procured yet another phone housing. I prefer the phone-based approach to virtual reality as it’s far more accessible to people than head-mounted displays are at this moment in time. In addition to that, the camera throughput allows for interesting uses of augmented reality. I’ll be writing more on that in the future. This entry is a small hands-on review of the Durovis Dive 5 headset.

My first experiment with alternative approaches to cardboard began with the colorcross headset. While the approach provided for a more robust alternative to an ever-deteriorating cardboard product, it was still lacking. The phone housing wasn’t very comfortable around the eyes and it would leave tell-tale marks outlining where it had been digging into the users face. This rendered it somewhat unsuitable for my purposes as my interest is in rolling this out to students at some point and comfort is of paramount importance. In addition to that, with the colorcross approach, the phone wasn’t entirely secure. The Duros Dive 5, however, seems to fix these issues.

A better build quality than most housing alternatives

The Duros headset feels a lot sturdier than the cheaper colorcross, which is what you’d expect given it’s price tag of €59.98, making it three to four times more expensive. What this affords you, however, is a very comfortable experience. The foam padding around the eyes eliminates the indentation marks inflicted by the housing and ensures that it remains in place without biting into your head.

Both lens can be adjusted independently

Each lens can be adjusted separately and they don’t feel loose. This feature makes it great for accessibility in my books. They can be moved in two directions, closer to the screen and out to each side. In terms of the size of the phone it can house, this model isn’t meant for large phones. My Galaxy S3 fits inside nicely but if you have it augmented with an extended battery (resulting in a thicker phone, it won’t fit). The full compatibility list is on the manufacturers website.

The field of vision is relatively good, moving the lens closer tends to improve things but, due to the size of the phones the Dive 5 is capable of housing, it’s not a completely immersive experience. It’s worth mentioning that the Dive 7 model is designed to house 7 inch tablets which is something I’m keen to try next. I’d expect that the field of vision in something of that size would make for a very interesting experience. The housing alone for the Dive 7 costs €119, which still provides for a more scalable and cost effective solution than a separate head-mounted display device.

The foam padding isn’t just for your eyes, it’s also used to keep your phone in place

You can purchase a magnetic upgrade kit for the Dive 5 separately from the website, if you ordered before the 9th of March 2015 as it’s stated that anything ordered after the date comes with one (though mine did not)!

I’ll be using my colorcross for the moment as my S3 uses a giant battery, bringing its size slightly outside of the comfort zone of the Dive 5. The product is solid however and if you’re looking for an alternative to the cardboard housing, this is a great step to take and makes a world of difference. It’s an order of magnitude more comfortable.

Low cost virtual reality

One of my current projects involves coming up with a way to implement a low cost virtual reality training simulation. Traditionally, most immersive environments used for such a purpose tend to cost a lot of money. Some of you will be familiar with the Igloo method, something which takes up a lot of space and isn’t really practical due to its logistical constraints.

With all the buzz around VR headsets, it has become painfully apparent (with all the competition from various manufacturers attempting to get their head-mounted displays out first) that there is no standard. Nobody knows what protocol is going to become the most widely adopted in the coming years and nobody knows what the reception is going to be like. Interest is at an all-time high however and it would be negligent not to explore the possibilities for education. To that end, I’ll divulge a little of what I’m attempting to do by way of interface devices, just as a means of exploring interactivity in a practical sense.

I’m using a zeemote, cheap, responsive and wireless

As our interface device for navigation, I’m exploring the use of a bluetooth analog stick with three buttons. The stick allows you to move backwards and forwards in addition to strafing to the left and right. The headset, which is a phone using the Google cardboard SDK, is responsible for directional input and displaying the scene, rendered from different perspectives, one for each eye. Rather than use a tacky cardboard housing, which is what the idea originally stemmed from, I’ve found a manufacturer who produces a more robust housing made from plastic, it’s a lot more professional. VR is always a hard sell if only because it looks so awkward to the onlooker, having a cardboard box strapped to someone’s head is certainly not going to help a pitch aimed at cutting edge technology.

The housing is a colorcross phone mount, it comes with an adjustable lens

In all, the equipment costs under £20 versus the hundreds you’d be paying for a soon to be redundant first generation headset. It’s also highly functional. The training environment I’m developing in Unity3D has been based around an existing multi-user environment I developed previously and allows the host to manipulate the scene in real-time. Analytics are also important and so I’m working on a bespoke solution to make sense of all the data being gathered as each user engages with the various 3D scenes.

I’ll be posting more information in the coming days.