Re: [-empyre-] internet 3d & desktop 3d

["Damien Everett" <damien.everett@rmit.edu.au>]

>It is not just that, I believe. You need to cater for
the widest possible audience and sometimes this means
to develop a 3D and a let's call it 2D (or more
'conventional') version of your interface. That costs
more time and money.

Although if the project is well conceptualised these other media forms can share resources, and these translation processes can be semi automated... it need not be that much x(ml)tra work ;)

I just have faith that with enough public interest, "benevolent" companies will impliment these standards (although sure I'll whip up a shockwave 3d game for someone if I had the time and there was enough incentive...8)

The reason VR has not really taken off main stream is that is marketing agents have failed miserably... it takes time *sigh*

>No matter how hard you try, you will never get in a
museum the same crowd which is attracted to a football
match. Art is NOT for everybody, I think.

I don't know, maybe you could fool them by saying VR system recreates football games by interpolating the various camera angles, then put them in headsets with a force feedback system built in but don't tell them that their view is based on the ball...
perhaps the st*rs that they will see as a result could be the actual art experience we were trying to convey? ok... sorry :)

*%s