I might mention that article is pointing out the same point I have been making with 3D and Cams for a couple of years now. And is why I see the 3D keyword specifically in play there.
And I have been all over that fact since before it actually started. Plenty of cam/360 3D names.
Until most all of it is 3D, it is in play. But for as long as streaming a 2k x 2k 360 image is a bandwidth issue, it is very much in play. As far as the quality and immersion, there is a very noticeable difference in them.
Most home footage will probably be 1.5k x 1.5k for streaming and not 3D. That is about 70% less bandwidth.
Since you are only streaming a single 1.5k image and the headset makes same that image on both sides.
This is what prompted Google to push a 180 format.
1k x 1k x 180 is possible and will be viewed the same res as a 2k x 2k 360
And puts the 180 keyword in play somehow.
So for those that do not understand that difference, just think about how many pixels and where there are.
Your HMD is only looking at a 100 degree span so a 2k 360 image only gets 1/2k (.5k) to view at a time.
2k x 180 is twice that or 1k viewing. The further you space those pixels, the more space in between them.
It sounds hi-res, but not if you look at the real methods.
Bandwidth will not get solved for at least 3-5 years.
But anyway, I hope everyone understands my point about 180 and 3D now.
I just can't figure out how many might need/want 180 as a keyword.
It's not like retail will need 180 as 3D might be needed. But I'm sure there will be 180 3D CAMS.
VR180Cams (think I bought that right after Googles announcement)
180Producer - you can still use a 360 cam and edit the output for 180, saving bandwidth.