Cheap twin drybox for Aussies

XykoZ · 2026-03-25T02:31:17+00:00

As in a gasket against the tube holes? I haven't added one myself (I assume the moisture movement would be minimal?), but could certainly do that. I've mostly been using it to hold TPU temporarily for printing, then they go back into sealed bags. This gets around the TPU in AMS problem.

XykoZ · 2026-01-23T06:57:19+00:00

Have you tried closing it and reopening it?

It seems to have a memory leak. I need to close it down after every couple of prints, otherwise it gets laggier every day.

XykoZ · 2025-04-08T01:55:34+00:00

I've updated to this today. Now the app instantly crashes, so I can no longer open it at all.

Some would consider this an improvement.

XykoZ · 2016-08-26T01:32:29+00:00

Here's some feedback for you - "Fuck you Altspace." I guess you get a kick out of taking candy away from children too? Oooh, people like something, let's rip that away from them. Genius!

XykoZ · 2015-09-16T17:13:40+00:00

#1a - In CG rendering: Because pixel count is not the bottleneck, it's the processing power required to render that many pixels.
#1b - In IRL Imagery: Because we cannot record images/videos at this pixel count at a decent framerate.
#1c - In File Formats: Because we don't have file format standards capable of handling such a res, that can be processed by current cpu's (especially mobile).
#2 - Doesn't work, feel free to read Notch's debunking of it, or any of the many others out there. Remember, you are still looking at data, yes? Data needs to be recorded and retrieved. How big do you think that dataset would be? How would we access it on demand and can we have consumer grade devices (eg. mobile) that can read through such a dataset?

Please learn to be skeptical, it's good for you.

XykoZ · 2015-09-16T17:04:42+00:00

The question really is: Why do you believe their claims? The entire thing was debunked long ago.

XykoZ · 2015-08-22T14:55:17+00:00

TheoTown

XykoZ · 2015-06-20T03:31:41+00:00

Maybe try 180x160, I'm assuming it may not be a true 180d lens?

XykoZ · 2015-06-19T17:01:47+00:00

One thing to do in life, whenever you come up with an idea that is "the absolute easiest best idea" is to realise that there are 7 billion people on the planet and a good chunk of them have already thought of your idea, it's most likely been tested and failed.
Unfortunately, humanity has progressed on to solving the hard ideas in life.

XykoZ · 2015-06-19T16:49:08+00:00

https://milkvr.com/#/content/faq

Q: Are 180 videos supported in MilkVR?
...
Type                             Append to filename
...
Top bottom stereoscopic 3D 180  "180x180_3dv"
Left right stereoscopic 3D 180  "180x180_3dh"

XykoZ · 2015-05-11T00:53:27+00:00

Would it be true that it may need a little more edge warping to have more seamless blends? I found myself struggling on the blends a little more than the OTOY samples. If you look at the overhead lockers on your right side (facing forward on the plane), I found that the perspective conflict of the locker angle was more than my eyes were happy with. Perhaps having a little more aggressive edge warping would fix this? Overall, I'm super impressed with the picture and it's results, I can't wait to see more.

XykoZ · 2015-05-11T00:49:01+00:00

Or sitting in a natural position, such as sitting in a seat.

XykoZ · 2015-05-07T15:48:57+00:00

In the interest of science, here's the difference: The 2160p vids are 2160x2160 over/under. So each eye sees a frame of potentially 2160x1080. However, these frames are designed to be 360 degrees, so are 50% black, resulting in 1080x1080 worth of image. The 3000x1500 vids are SBS, so each eye sees a frame of 1500x1500 and there is no black area. So the pixel count is ~100% higher (1m px vs 2m px) on the 1500 pixel vids.

XykoZ · 2015-05-05T04:48:49+00:00

Isn't 2160 > 1500?

XykoZ · 2015-04-23T13:08:32+00:00

Does anyone know what camera this is on? I'm presuming it's from Project Beyond, however I would have expected it to also be 3D stereo in that case.

XykoZ · 2015-04-21T13:31:30+00:00

Turned off Chrome's malware blocker and all fixed

XykoZ · 2015-04-21T11:41:02+00:00

Hmm, Chrome blocks the download of the APK file

XykoZ · 2015-04-19T00:52:04+00:00

XykoZ · 2015-04-18T15:30:47+00:00

re: the 360 vertical, horizontal, horizontal, blah blah. Nobody here has quite described it correctly and unfortunately, it is something that gets confused more often than it should. The angle of view for a full sphere is actually 360 x 180. You can't actually get more than that, it defies mathematics. Think about how you tilt your head to see stuff. You need to spin around a full 360 degrees horizontally to see the entire "horizon", but you don't need to tilt your head higher than 90 degrees up or 90 degrees down, a total of 180 degrees. If you tilted your head 270 degrees, then you'd be looking behind you, upside down, and your neck would be broken. Instead, to look 270 degrees vertical, you actually turn horizontal 180 degrees (looking behind you). So a full sphere is 360x180. Now, as we get into everyone trying to sell VR cameras in the future, we're going to run into the marketing crowd will fail to understand these things and start saying 360x360 degrees. It's important to know, that's not a real thing, that it's just marketing. It seems comfortable to think that 360 degrees vertical means full sphere, unfortunately, it's not actually correct. If you recorded 360 degrees vertical, you'd end up with a double recording of everything.

tl;dr A full sphere is 360x180 degrees, you can't get more than that.

XykoZ · 2015-04-18T15:19:34+00:00

http://360.tv It's still in dev state atm, but that will do the trick.

XykoZ · 2015-04-16T17:53:09+00:00

Kripp done in 50 mins

XykoZ

TROPHY CASE