12Strangers

GeorgeBMac said:

There is a physical advantage to it:   When projected in front of the eye, the lens & eye would have to adjust to focus on it and thus take focus away from the main area of attention (say a driver approaching an intersection).   Aside from being distracting, that could be draining for a driver.

By putting the image directly on the retina, it avoids that (re)focusing.

But then, it seems, it would introduce a new wrinkle:   how does the beam get through the lens without being bent -- which is the purpose of the lens (which bends light by variable amounts to suit the obect of attention).

This seems more practical in a person with post cataract surgery since most of those lenses are static and don't adjust for focus.

Having owned a few cars with a HUD since 2004, most of them have some have a bit of adjustment for the perceived distance of the display. The 2 that were fixed distance were at the perceived to be at the front of the car, the adjustable ones have allowed for moving the perceived distance up to about 20’ from the front windshield. This allows you to see the information without refocusing from the traffic or whatever else is in front of you. F1 drivers have had these since roughly 1995 and, of course, combat pilots have had HUD for much longer. 

Apple’s ProRes 422 and 444 are great for offline editing but they are not used for final color grading by any studio picture post facility in LA.

However, it would be great if it was 422 on the iPhone to save some space but still give you a better file format to import into an NLE for use on documentaries, weddings, home movies and such.

It seems epic and Nvidia should be investigated for antitrust violations and consumer fraud issues re: the secret side deal. This is, apparently, epic’s SOP try getting a little side deal and if the other company doesn’t give in, then go public with a smear campaign.  Sony would you care to comment?