From: John Wann Subject: Re: SCI: Independent on Sunday report on VR Keywords: Sega, Eye damage, UK > The researchers and reporters have to do a better job >discriminating between the effects of virtual environments >generally and the specific consequences associated with >particular pieces of gear. Bob, Don't you think the real problem is the number of VR "experts" who play around at developments, make comments and fiercely protect the VR industry, but don't seem to get in there to collect and publish hard empirical data on how the human perceptual motor system responds to VR systems ? We research, publish and disseminate in that order. Our original research was on the VPL LX with fresnel lens system, with no individual tuning of IOD, - a very crude system. We then introduced calibration procedures that are very sensitive to individual visual states. Then cross checked our findings on an HMD with LEEP optics and finally with desktop stereo-displays. Across all these experimental situations we found related problems that are cannot be account for by fresnel lenses or tracker lags any other model specific feature. We do have a general hypothesis pertaining to these problems, but we go through the critical academic peer review process first and this isn't ready for release yet. Some indication of our proposals and suggestions for HMD modifications are forthcoming in CyberEdge Journal. But lets be candid, most of those involved in VR research know there's a number of problems with current HMD's (see Bob Stone's report to the UK Industry Conference in Coventry 1992; or Robinett & Rollands "Presence" comments about "decoupling accommodation and convergence"). We have been banging on a number of HMD manufacturers doors, trying to alert them about what they need to consider (e.g as outlined in CyberEdge Journal) for the last 18 months without any success. So who's going to stand up and be counted when there's the imminent release of a home-HMD, with the potential for unrestricted use ? Is there a single reader of this bulletin board who seriously believes it would be wise for an 8yr old to sit at home playing a video game for an hour or so with something typical of our current developments in HMDs ? And if so what possible grounds or data do they have for making this assumption ? My particular specialism is perceptual development and our research team also contains specialists in child optometry and we don't know of any evidence that would get you close to this conclusion. I'm sure that if reports started coming in from optometrists about "VR-overuse-syndrome" there would be plenty of "experts" to say "hmmm, yes there are some device specific problems", but is that a responsible way for VR to progress ? So when are all the people sitting reading bulletin boards, and taking odd pot shots, going to get off the fence and either support our findings or vigorously attack them with hard empirical data of their own. I don't mind either way, but if the current UK media fluster shakes the VR community out of their complacency about health and safety guidelines, which are woefully lacking, then I have no regrets. John Wann (at the eye of the storm) Edinburgh VR project