More spatial accessories & objects can be made for visionOS 27


Apple is opening up what is possible on Apple Vision Pro by implementing physical object tracking and expanded spatial accessory support. Here’s what that means for users when visionOS 27 launches.

When Apple initially launched Apple Vision Pro, it was very proud of the hand and eye tracking it had developed. Controllers weren’t even mentioned beyond PlayStation’s standard one for playing 2D iPad games.

Slowly, it seems Apple realized that having zero haptic or physical feedback in games and interactions would severely impact what was possible. visionOS 26 introduced spatial accessories, and now visionOS 27 is expanding what is possible, both with fully realized controllers and basic objects.

First, it is important to understand the difference between a spatial accessory and an interactable object. Spatial accessories, like PSVR2 controllers or the Logitech Muse pen, pair over Bluetooth and might have buttons, haptics, and other features.

Anything else being added to visionOS is an object. It can be tracked using two methods — 3D model reference and LED tracking or visual markers.

Here’s the 15-minute developer video Apple shared on the subject.

Basically, a 3D render of an object can make Apple Vision Pro aware of that object through software. Added sensors and chips can make an object into a full spatial accessory.

Spatial accessories

When you think of a VR controller, you’re probably thinking of the Meta Quest ones that wrap around your hand. The PSVR2 controllers are similarly designed and work with Apple Vision Pro.

A 3D render of a spatial accessory flashlight with LED markers

A 3D render of a spatial accessory flashlight with LED markers

However, a spatial accessory doesn’t necessarily have to be a controller. Apple defines a spatial accessory as having three properties:

  • LED constellation for tracking
  • Internal Measurement Unit (IMU) chip
  • Bluetooth

Inputs and outputs, like buttons and haptics, are possible, but not required.

The demo focuses on a flashlight accessory, for example. It has trackable LEDs, an on/off button, and a Bluetooth connection to Apple Vision Pro.

By integrating a 3D model of this flashlight into the accessory developer’s app, Apple Vision Pro can easily track it thanks to the accurate model and LED constellation. Also, spatial accessories and tracked objects added via apps are addressable system-wide, though they won’t get all the benefits of being a full-fledged game controller like PSVR2.

While this doesn’t necessarily mean we’ll see previous generations of VR controllers come to Apple Vision Pro, it does mean it’ll be easier for accessory makers to build new ones. It may also be possible to get existing accessories to work, but in an unofficial way unless done by the manufacturer itself.

Spatial accessories can be partially occluded and still be tracked with low latency. The high frequency tracking feature allows tracking up to the refresh rate of the Apple Vision Pro.

Trackable objects

visionOS 27 also enables the ability for developers to add object tracking via object recognition or attached tracking fobs. It’s a step down from a spatial accessory, as it doesn’t require any additional technology to be added to the object being tracked.

Sequence of icons: a globe, a teal ML app icon, three developer tool icons, then a tilted globe within a yellow 3D wireframe box, suggesting machine learning transforming world data.

A scan of a physical object like a globe can bring it into software via ARKit

The example here is a globe. Since object tracking is also coming to iPhone via ARKit, it shows a UI overlaid on the physical globe that spins without lag when the physical globe is spun.

This is accomplished via using an accurate 3D model in the app to track the object, though not at as high a frequency due to the lack of LED markers. More advanced tracking is possible by attaching a third-party fob though.

The video references fobs from DFRobot and MIKROE that can help anchor physical objects in spatial environments. The use case demoed here was a fob on a steering wheel.

By attaching a fob to a standard steering wheel rig, the app was able to overlay a full 3D vehicle around it. This would be an ideal use case when playing racing simulators like iRacing.

A preview of what’s to come

The Apple Vision Pro is a niche product that’s too heavy and expensive for many users to adopt. However, its existence enables Apple to further develop its visionOS platform.

Blue rectangular eyeglasses resting on a wooden surface, sharply in focus, with blurred white headphones and other objects creating a soft, muted background in a home or office setting

Apple Vision Pro exists as a preview of what will eventually be possible in AR glasses

While the technology is still in its early stages, it is clear with each update that Apple expects wider adoption eventually. The ability to track real-world objects is key when designing AR interactions.

While true AR glasses, or Apple Glass as we’ve called them, might not arrive until 2029 or later, the groundwork is being laid today.

I could easily imagine my smart water bottle from Hidratespark being turned into an object for Apple Vision Pro. Perhaps just something as simple as making it visible in fully immersed environments, or showing a water-consumed metric when looking at it would be enough.

Hidratespark wouldn’t need anything they don’t already have to make it happen either. Technically, a third-party water tracker could do this if they created 3D models of popular water bottles.

Another concept I could think of is that the developer of Plant Daddy could get 3D models of certain kinds of flower pots and turn them into objects recognized by Apple Vision Pro. The pots themselves could become physical anchors that show plant data when you look at them directly.

It’s a really interesting technology, but it will require developers to actually utilize it. As always, that’s the biggest problem with Apple Vision Pro, and one Apple didn’t directly address with visionOS 27.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


After a four-year wait, Euphoria has returned to television, but season 3 is providing a major shake-up to its formula. Not only have four years passed in the real world, but the in-universe tale has moved forward, taking the cast of the Zendaya-led teen drama out of high school and into the trials of young adulthood. As such, the series faces a new challenge of whether it can keep up its momentum with this drastic new status quo.

While it remains to be seen how Euphoria can move past its teen drama roots, it’s an excellent time to dive into the celebrated and controversial series Skins. Let’s see how it handled the test of time, how it outshines Euphoria, and how it fell into similar trappings.

What is Skins?

Skins broke the teen drama mold

Created by Bryan Elsley and Jamie Brittain, Skins is Channel 4’s British drama series that premiered in 2007. Initially, the series first honed in on a group of teens enjoying their youth in the city of Bristol, caught between youthful revolt, partying, and the pressures of adulthood. The show walked a fine line between relatable comedy and serious drama. This combination of genres attracted a following.

Skins aired for seven seasons between 2007 and 2013, running for a final total of 61 episodes. The series was praised by critics and prominent industry voices—including Doctor Who’s Russell T. Davies and Black Mirror’s Charlie Brooker—for breaking the mold of what a teen drama could be. Even over a decade after its final episodes aired, its characters are still fondly remembered, finding new life through a thriving online fandom.


skins


Release Date

2007 – 2013-00-00

Network

E4

Showrunner

Jamie Brittain, Bryan Elsley

Writers

Jamie Brittain, Bryan Elsley



Skins was celebrated as a realistic depiction of teen life

The series was willing to show the highs and lows

Skins is part of a unique generation of teen-focused media released in the mid-2000s and 2010s. The series wasn’t a glossy depiction of youth culture; its cast comprised young people stumbling through life, making mistakes, or intentionally causing trouble. They were allowed to be flawed and even unlikable, which would resonate with the young target demographic at the time, who would find their struggles relatable.

With this clear recognition of what its audience was looking for, Skins became acclaimed for its willingness to dive into taboo and controversial subjects at the time. Alongside several storylines tackling queer themes, the series dared to depict a generation in conflict with those who came before, with the show’s adults either being unintentionally neglectful or outright malicious towards the young cast. As Skins was exploring teens transitioning between youth and adulthood, the show is a coming-of-age story that is willing to show every aspect these changes bring, for better or worse.

Skins spawned several stars

Several actors are now household names

The cast of Skins in a photo. Credit: Warner Home Video

While Euphoria can be credited with being the breakout show for several actors, Skins had no shortage of faces who would dominate both the big screen and television. Seasons 1 and 2’s cast not only featured Nicholas Hoult, Dev Patel, Joe Dempsie, and Hannah Murray long before they would star in highly celebrated projects such as Superman, The Green Knight, and Game of Thrones.

The show also featured small appearances by Get Out’s Daniel Kaluuya, who would pen several episodes for the series. Season 2 would continue to feature future stars in their breakout roles, such as 28 Years Later’s Jack O’Connell as the brash and loud hooligan Cook and The Gentlemen’s Kaya Scodelario, who transformed her season 1 character Effy Stonem into a compelling lead.

When paired with a supporting cast of several talented, established mainstays on British television, it is understandable why Skins provided a perfect chance to give these future stars the perfect breakout roles. Not only were the characters able to tap into the youthful rebelliousness and culture of the time in a way that made it highly relatable to audiences, but the stars behind these characters were able to show their skills against their older costars and prove themselves. As such, it is unsurprising that Skins‘ young leads would go on to bigger projects that would be recognized around the globe.

Skins avoided Euphoria’s production issue

Skins’s major cast shake-ups helped the series continue

The skins show 3. Credit: Warner Home Video

However, with a young cast who would gradually grow out of their roles, Skins was limited in the stories that it could tell while the audiences could still plausibly believe that the actors were the same age as their characters. While finding a cast who could believably play younger characters is hardly a new predicament, it is something that has become more scrutinized as time goes on. Even Euphoria has had to grapple with this issue, with season 3 featuring a time jump of several years to account for its cast outgrowing their high school roles in the gap between each season’s production.

Arguably, out of most teen dramas, Skins found the ideal way to handle this issue. Rather than following a single group of teens across seven seasons, the first six seasons can be divided into three distinct eras with their own unique casts. The final season explored what happened to several fan-favorite characters following their education. Not only did this compromise avoid any potential issues due to the cast’s ages, but it also broadened the scope of the kinds of stories that could be told due to its revolving cast.

Skins wasn’t without its own controversies

A young cast brought several difficulties

That’s not to say that Skins didn’t attract criticism. Due to the young ages of the cast at the time of filming and the situations they were placed in, the series understandably and rightfully received heavy scrutiny of how they were treated, alongside discussions of whether the series was guilty of glorifying unhealthy habits. These critiques weren’t limited to viewers and professional critics either, as several lead actors such as Scodalerio, April Pearson, and Dakota Blue Richards have spoken about their time on set through social media.

While Skins can be celebrated for its willingness to depict a gritty and relatable portrayal of growing up in the early 2000’s, it is important to acknowledge where things could have been handled better, especially as more of its stars open up about their time making the show. It is also important to acknowledge how these revelations can affect the show’s perception, either by those who grew up with the show or newcomers looking in. If you feel uncomfortable by the events depicted onscreen or feel sour towards the show due to the cast’s treatment, it may be best to avoid it.​​​​​​​

Where to stream Skins

The series has a lasting legacy

Effy in Skins. Credit: Channel 4

For better and worse, Skins represents a major moment in British television history. Between casting future stars in their breakout roles and giving audiences an unflinching depiction of teen life, the series is worth revisiting for these aspects. Furthermore, if you are familiar with Euphoria, it is also interesting to go into the series and compare how each show tackles similar themes, not only due to how times have changed between series but also through how a British cultural lens vs. a US lens works.


Furthermore, for US viewers, Skins is currently readily available to stream. The full series is available to Hulu subscribers, as well as those who pay for the Disney+ bundles that feature the service. If your excitement for Euphoria has been dimmed by the lengthy wait between seasons or you are just looking for an interesting show to compare it to, Skins still stands as the best option available.

hulu-poster.jpg

Subscription with ads

Yes, $10/month

Live TV

Yes, various plans available




Source link