Pixel-Rich VR Display Eliminates Screen Door Effect

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,004
While I have no problem tolerating the low PPI of current headset displays because VR is still in its infancy, it’s nice to know that major improvements in visual fidelity are on the horizon. Japan Display has just announced a 3-inch, 651-PPI, 1440x1700 display but also note that an 800-PPI is in the pipeline.

Smartphone displays, although often high-resolution, just don't have the refresh rate that VR demands, leading to "screen-door effect," where you can make out the lines between pixels. In a bid to reduce that pesky effect that plagues so many headsets, screen manufacturer Japan Display (JDI) has been working on cramming more pixels into every inch, resulting in its brand new VR-tailored screens. The company, which is a joint venture between Sony, Toshiba and Hitachi, is currently developing a 3.42-inch screen, 1,440 x 1,700 screen, packing in a whopping 651 pixels-per-inch.
 

Ducman69

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,445
More like the screen door effect is smaller.
That's like arguing that glass isn't perfectly see through. If you improve the clarity and keep it clean enough, its good enough even if it will never be as clear as air.

I'm absolutely a potential customer, but I couldn't bite even at these black friday deals.

Going to wait one more generation to bite, and have my Gear VR for a fix for right now.
 

rocketr2

Gawd
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
703
The screen door effect totally kills the VR experience for me. Doesnt make you feel like you're in a virtual world, makes you feel like you looking at a tiny screen with a magnifying glass, washed out and pixelated.
 

silent-circuit

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Sep 18, 2005
Messages
16,133
Ummmmm

How exactly does refresh rate relate to screen door effect?
The person writing the article has no idea what they're talking about, basically.

If refresh rate were the issue we'd be screwed, given AMOLED is so common in smartphones and it's one of the fastest display technologies readily available right now.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,461
I'm all for higher resolution, but I wonder what this will do to GPU requirements.
 

LurkerLito

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
2,161
I'll wait for the 800ppi before I would upgrade my current vive. That is a pretty good improvement but I definitely want higher than what's pictured. When I play I do notice it sometimes but it doesn't at all kill the VR experience for me. The only time it really bothers me is when I try to watch a video with the video player I bought for the Vive or when I want to look at my cloned desktop in the steamVR interface.
 

MaZa

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
2,811
Ummmmm

How exactly does refresh rate relate to screen door effect?
It was just worded poorly. What he said that screens that are available right now and have high enough PPI to cover screendoor effect do not have high enough refresh rate for the VR.
 

homernoy

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2007
Messages
439
The thing that worries me, is that Sony is involved. I guess the Vive and Oculus won't see this tech, it will go to the mediocre PSVR.
 

Ducman69

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,445
It was just worded poorly.
No, if you read it, its obvious it was just written by someone that has absolutely no clue what they are talking about. The below statement simply doesn't make any sense whatsoever, and isn't just a matter of bad wording:
Smartphone displays, although often high-resolution, just don't have the refresh rate that VR demands, leading to "screen-door effect," where you can make out the lines between pixels.

In a bid to reduce that pesky effect that plagues so many headsets, screen manufacturer Japan Display (JDI) has been working on cramming more pixels into every inch, resulting in its brand new VR-tailored screens.
He basically says low refresh rates cause "screen door effect", so higher resolution screens are coming to market to fix that. Literally makes no sense. Engadget had a bit of a cultural revolution a little while back, where they banned half the commenters, made the comments harder to see or disabled on many articles, and replaced their staff with liberal hipster buddies that think of technology as a fashion statement and simply aren't techy people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dgz
like this

Stoly

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
6,472
just don't have the refresh rate that VR demands, leading to "screen-door effect,"
what does refresh rate has to do with screen-door effect?

BTW pixel size doesn't really relate to a screen door effect but the gap between them, if you reduce the gap you diminish the screen door effect while maintaining pixel size
 

T_A

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
409
Cant wait for the next gen. VR , current gen is still too early for me , GPU requirements are too high and the reward is not good enough.
 

Samson4EiT

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
1,503
I'm all for higher resolution, but I wonder what this will do to GPU requirements.
Nothing really with where we are at already. 1440x1700= 2.448 million pixels, 4.896 mil with 2 screens in a headset. 4K screens are 8,294,400 pixels. Even with 2 of these screens at 90hz will be less demanding than 4K 60 by a decent amount. Adding %30 to try and ballpark the 1440x1700 90hz requirements would be equal to a screen of 6,364,800 pixels. About 77% demanding as a 4K 60hz screen is currently.

I'll probably wait until the 800 dpi models before making my first VR headset purchase.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,461
Nothing really with where we are at already. 1440x1700= 2.448 million pixels, 4.896 mil with 2 screens in a headset. 4K screens are 8,294,400 pixels. Even with 2 of these screens at 90hz will be less demanding than 4K 60 by a decent amount. Adding %30 to try and ballpark the 1440x1700 90hz requirements would be equal to a screen of 6,364,800 pixels. About 77% demanding as a 4K 60hz screen is currently.

I'll probably wait until the 800 dpi models before making my first VR headset purchase.

Have you had any confirmation that these 800dpi models are in the works, or is this just an assumption based on the logical progression of things?

I ahve been considering getting a Vive for the house for Xmas, but I don't want to jump in too early and regret it.
 

Samson4EiT

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
1,503
Have you had any confirmation that these 800dpi models are in the works, or is this just an assumption based on the logical progression of things?

I ahve been considering getting a Vive for the house for Xmas, but I don't want to jump in too early and regret it.
At the end of the article they confirm they are working on an 800dpi model, they didn't say screen size or resolution for it though. I imagine they are trying to keep the same screen size though. Which would be a resolution in between 1728 x 2040 (781ppi) to 1771 x 2091 (801ppi). I'll go with the latter. That would be 7.4mil pixels, adding %30 brings it up to 9.628mil. Now that would approximately 14% more demanding at 90hz than 4K 60hz. By the time those screen issues get sorted out and implemented into a headset, that seems very doable in the short term (1-3 years) GPU wise to catch up.
 

KazeoHin

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,002
I'm all for higher resolution, but I wonder what this will do to GPU requirements.
With active eye-tracking, the game engine can render out the full-detail and PPI where the player is currently looking, and render at 1/2 resolution everywhere else. This will reduce the demand significantly. Many basic eye-tracing sensors can easily trace a person's vision over 90 times a second, so it should not add any latency.
 
Top