Archive for June, 2007

Metaverse Roadmap

June 26, 2007

Wondering where all this new ubiquitous computing and 3D virtual worlds technology is leading us? Me, too. There is some interesting brainstorming and predictive work coming out of the Metaverse Roadmap project, which has just published the Metaverse Roadmap Overview (3.x MB).

Update, July 3: Mmmm movies! I just found some rad video interviews of the three main authors of the MetaVerse Roadmap Overview document, recorded by Elon University/Pew Internet’s Imagining the Internet Project in May 2006 at the Metaverse Roadmap Summit at Stanford Research Institute. These links open new windows for Jerry Paffendorf, Jamais Cascio, and John Smart.

About one of them, I know Jerry from Brooklyn, and he told me about a hundred awesome things, but I never heard him mention the 3D scanner cameras before. So brilliantly obvious, why didn’t I think of them the other day for AVSynth? Screw rendering 3D from disparate photos, we’ll just poke a second eye in the iPhones for stereoscopic imaging. Here’s news and a video from last August about a 3D live motion video camera that uses lasers. Hello mirror world.

AVSynth: Browsing lifestreams in 3D

June 26, 2007

So a few weeks ago I posted a link to the Photosynth demo. I’ve watched it so many times since then — maybe I’m a little obsessed — and I can’t stop thinking about what the 2017 version of this software is going to be like. If ten years from now all the kids are still going out with their audio/video recording cellphones turned on, we’re going to have a lot of data on our hands. Something like Photosynth — call it “AVSynth” — should be able to stitch all the live audio and video feeds altogether and produce an active mirror of the real world. An AVSynth browser will make you a virtual tourist, a voyeuristic ghost, jumping from camera to camera in what appears to be 3D space, listening to live sound, also arranged in 3D. Maybe to keep the A/V feeds going, an AVSynth browser sends micropayments to individual recorders, making a market demand for interesting scenes. Even if the kids finally just end up recording themselves watching AVSynth and it all degenerates into fractal video feedback, we’ll be able to pull our AVSynth browser’s time slider back to the beginning of time and watch the world all over again, starting with the good old days when we took still photos of Notre Dame… “and we liked it!”

My friend Brian Hawthorne just passed me a pointer to, which can turn some of today’s common camera phones into automatic flickr-based life-logging tools.

The Photosynth demo prompted another friend to show me this home page for a classic 1997(!) computer animation of the UC Berkeley Campanile by Paul Debevec demonstrating that 3D models can be derived from a just a few photographs. The video itself is probably most easily viewed on YouTube: The Campanile Movie. Apparently this graphics research inspired the “bullet time” effects in The Matrix movie.

Quest for the Avatar

June 15, 2007

Mark Wallace, blogging over at (highly recommended), yesterday had some interesting news and ideas about developing Virtual Worlds (VW) standards. Perhaps through standards an avatar could be portable across worlds, he wonders.

It seems to me that this question arises mostly for the certain class of virtual worlds where users play just one contiguous 3D avatar at a time and use (or pretend to use?) that avatar to interact with and view the virtual world (think Second Life and World of Warcraft *). In these types of worlds, the avatar is not just the 3D representation of a user, but typically it also represents, at least ostensibly, that user’s view point in the world and his or her actionable area. When we see this type of avatar moving about, we expect that we are aware of some significant portion of its operator’s attention and action, their presence, and thusly we expect we are sharing experiences and can have highly focused human-type interactions with other users in a VW.

While there’s utility and Quest of the Avatarvirtue (!) to representing presence in virtual worlds with a 3D character, presence just isn’t the same as 3D bodies. In real life (at least until augmented reality takes over) if you’re there in front of me, I can pretty easily gauge your attention. I innately understand the biology going on there. But with the avatar– while it attempts to represent the same thing — it can be completely disconnected from and deceptive of any presence.

Consider Second Life, where the “avatar presence” convention is already being stretched significantly: the user’s camera view (and ears!) can fly around pretty much independently of the avatar. Furthermore, Second Life‘s open client architecture is going to enable the development ever more omniscient views for the user. For example, right now I have five tabs open in my web browser. Why not five simultaneous view ports into one or more virtual worlds?

So, what I keep wondering: Is the avatar concept still useful when we are more frequently using computer scripts and advanced controls to affect changes and talk to people in the virtual worlds in multiple “distant” places at once, on a completely inhuman scale? Or do we need something more like … ghosts? If we attempted to standardize the avatars today, would they just be like any user-controlled 3D object inserted into (or borrowed from) a target VW, or mustn’t we agree on some standardized protocols for indicating action and presence before we really get the heart of what an avatar is? Would the avatar’s presence, if we could represent it, somehow relate to its user’s open viewports, or is this, too, an oversimplification of presence?

As users become more adept at manipulating and reading 3D environments, encouraged and enabled by more advanced controllers and 3D browsers, will we find that today’s typical single-location 3D avatar is not, after all, the most useful construct for representing our attention and actions to others in virtual worlds?

My vote would be that we hold off on trying to standardize the avatar and let innovation take its course for a while.

* BTW, even though I mentioned it, I’ve still never played World of Warcraft — because I hear it can kill you.

Updated June 18: Another rewrite for clarity. One day I’ll get a blog post right the first time. Or not..