I'm wondering what the advantage is of using a 3D OpenGL capture vs a VR image capture, especially of you're not actually walking around the subject (or even then)? That said, the final result of the splatting is indeed interesting, almost like an old cardboard kaleidoscope, or maybe a pin-hole camera. Less accurate, but definitely dreamy.
(Note to everyone: Doug is a domain expert on this topic.)
The capture, if I understand it correctly, is a form of polycloud. OpenGL is just the in-browser renderer. I am actually walking around the subject. The effect really is cool.
I especially liked the stray bits that trailed off and the generally hazy outer edges. I visited their website and it looks like they are kind of building this travelog share map, which is kinda cool. But my thoughts go more towards the "how much can this be pushed into something not originally intended?" Like, what if you just start walking with it on and you stretched out the capture and deliberately left a lot of "holes"?
I'm wondering what the advantage is of using a 3D OpenGL capture vs a VR image capture, especially of you're not actually walking around the subject (or even then)? That said, the final result of the splatting is indeed interesting, almost like an old cardboard kaleidoscope, or maybe a pin-hole camera. Less accurate, but definitely dreamy.
(Note to everyone: Doug is a domain expert on this topic.)
The capture, if I understand it correctly, is a form of polycloud. OpenGL is just the in-browser renderer. I am actually walking around the subject. The effect really is cool.
I especially liked the stray bits that trailed off and the generally hazy outer edges. I visited their website and it looks like they are kind of building this travelog share map, which is kinda cool. But my thoughts go more towards the "how much can this be pushed into something not originally intended?" Like, what if you just start walking with it on and you stretched out the capture and deliberately left a lot of "holes"?