i looked down at his thumb the whole time....

I think you're right. I'm giving immersive video a go with The Sound Traveler because I want to control the viewer's view. I'm also open to being wrong and think that shooting this video in 360 was super clever.

I've gotta say: this is the most entertaining 360 degree video I've seen so far. I tend to agree with you, but this video has changed my mind more than I expected.

I really enjoyed looking around at the scenery while I listen to you talk. Can you make more videos like this?

I agree with you. being able to look around is cool at first, but HAVING to look around all the time is annoying.

Over 6 minutes in before I realized I could rotate the screen by swiping...

Your walk around the street actually shows what 360 degree videos are great for. VIRTUAL TOURS! if you think about how tour groups go around in a street, even though the whole group is moving in the same direction, every individual person in the group is looking in a different direction. to bring that experience to a video format, you need a 360 video. it allows you as a virtual tourist to look at whatever you find interesting while simultaneously following the virtual tour guide or the virtual tour group wherever they are going.

I actually like this format for your vlogs. I feel like we're walking together while I listen to you, and I get to look around. It may not revolutionize anything, but it will have its niche.

How the hell do you hold that thing out, navigate your way through all that mess, people yelling, birds squawking, etc... and somehow narrate everything so elegantly without your brain stopping at all or losing train of thought?

I would love to see a 360 video of you, Michael from Vsauce, Jake Roper, Hank Green, or any other science-related KZfaqr all sitting at a table, having a conversation, with a 360 camera on a table exactly in the center. I honestly don't care if the video is an hour long or so.

I was trying to pay attention to your words and look at the market at the same time. I did miss a lot of what you said.

If you think of 360 video as just normal video, but with more range, then yes, it's a terrible idea. But, it's a NEW medium. It'll take new thinking on how to best use it, or what content is best for it. For the types of video on Veritasium, I wouldn't think it would always be the best choice, but take this video or your other walk and talks you do on 2veritasium, it seems like it might actually be an enhancement. I've personally watched it twice, once through looking primarily at you, but then a second time, as I scanned around and looked at what was going on around you. Double the views! Like VR (and player controlled camera games before that), understanding how to use the medium when you don't control the users view takes time, but isn't necessarily universally better or worse, but usually better at some things and worse at others. What types of videos would you make where HD and singular viewer focus isn't the priority? Seems like a place to begin to solve a problem.

honestly, i really enjoyed watching this in spherical. being able to look at your environment as you walked around was way more interesting a viewing experience than if you were just going to vlog this direct to camera. not that your on camera presence isn't great, but i spent a lot of time listening to your words as i looked forward, where you were walking, what you were seeing. spherical might not work for the incredibly fact based, single-learning objective videos -- but it is a useful medium for experiences. even with crappy resolution, you took me to a place i'd never been in a way that would require a lot more production equipment/experience to feel similar in a regular ol' 2d video.

Cool experiment! You know my thoughts on this, Derek. Nobody really thinks 360 video is going to surpass or replace traditional video in any way, and if they say so then they are trying to sell you something, so I think you're maybe setting up a reality that doesn't exist. But 360 video is going to make a YUUUUUGE difference in delivering experiences… no stories, just self-guided immersion in a given environment. Perfect case in point: Google Expeditions (which is incredible… I welcome someone trying to explain to me how it's not an enhancement over traditional video) But yeah… 360 stories? Meh. 360 camera tech circa 2016? Double meh.

Honestly, I don't care how useful this is. The engineer inside me is absolutely in love with this tech.

i’ve never disagree with you until now, i watched this video with you talking in the background while scanning the view around you and it was like i was walking with you in the street and talk to you, i was able to look at all those markets i wanted to look at unlike these videos when the cameraman just rotates it and you feel like oh man but i wanted to see that!! i have never been able to travel abroad but this experience felt like i’m visiting a new place! it was awesome! and of course even in real life the option of looking out at every single place around you can make you feel dizzy but the beauty is that *you* choose where to look at as in real life and in this virtual reality this is physically way more easy to look around you on everything with only your finger instead of your whole head. i didn’t think of that topic before but after this video i wish that you are wrong because if 360 cameras will be our future everything can step ahead in this media world, there are so much things to do with this technology! and the technology will get better only if people actually give it a try and start using it, then it will naturally evolve over time.

I think 360 video will stick around, because you can use it to make cool looking nature documentaries, but it will never be mainstream. Fly a drone that can take 360 video and fly it through the glacier as an iceberg cleaves off. That would be amazing footage. Or do the same why flying through a swarm of locusts, school of fish, etc.

I feel like I am a little person being carried...I don't like it

One positive I found from this format in your video is that I was able to look at other things, which actually helped me to focus on the subject of the video. Sort of like how you don't simply stare at someone constantly when they are talking to you, because it feels natural to avert your gaze and makes listening a bit more relaxed.

This 360 video reminded me of times in scouting where I would enjoy the journey of a hike while listening to the guide talk about the location.

My game was to watch for the people who stared at the camera and then pretend I was staring right back at them...

I'm just too lazy to move around a 360 video. Just show me what I need to see and let's get it over with...

Derek, you are looking at it from a content creator's point of view. As a traveller, a 360 camera is a godsend to me. I enjoy going on long walks in foreign cities, just soaking up the atmosphere, admiring the landmarks, and having a 360 camera on a stick, sticking out of my pocket or backpack above me, I have a 3rd person view of my walk, essentially as if I had a personal drone I don't need care about and which follows me and documents the whole trip. I don't need to take photos all the time, I don't need to focus on selecting what might be interesting to watch later. Of course I still can, I still have a camera, but I don't feel the pressure of documenting those memories - the 360 camera does that for me and it is much better at documenting everything around me than me myself with any other camera ever would. So, to me, a 360 camera is a great device if you ever feel like you'd like to have a drone following you everywhere and capturing footage of everything that's around you. Another point of view - you can reframe the video any way you wish during editing and export in a classic format.

I like that EVERYONE is turning around and looking at you xD.

Your first point (resolution and bandwidth) is pretty silly. Ten years ago, you could have made exactly the same argument and concluded that KZfaq will never work. Point four (the film maker wanting to direct our interest) is a much better point, for most situations. The Alaskan cruise seems like exactly the sort of case where 360 is a huge win: the whole landscape is the subject, if you will, and allowing people to explore that from their own viewpoint sounds like a big win. On the other hand, you doing a piece to camera while walking through a market is obviously a terrible choice for 360. The market is an irrelevant distraction to what you're saying, and people want to watch you, rather than it. In this case, the immersive experience is imagining that you're talking directly and personally to me, not imagining that I'm walking through a marketplace. Point six _is_ the point: 360 does look pretty good for atmospheric shots. That's it's niche. Ultimately, it seems that you're arguing against the strawman that every video will be shot in full 360,. Any worthwhile piece of video is shot using a number of different techniques. Sometimes, 360 will be an appropriate technique for some parts of a video; most of the time, it won't be an appropriate technique for most parts of a video. You know, just like slow motion or timelapse. But you don't bother making a video pointing out that we shouldn't shoot 100% of our footage in timelapse.

I only like 360 when the videos purpose is to immerse yourself in an area or something else that would benefit from having it in a 360 form

I watched this video at least 2 times. First time as regular. And second was interesting looking around. Pls do more of this.

I see 360 as one tool, and it can be used well or badly. I think the best uses (at the moment) are when tracking, panning, tilting zooming decisions are made in post, then exported in standard formats. You shoot 360° but direct the viewers' attention where you want it. You can cover a scene in one take, one camera, one setup, then use various parts of it in various ways.

I looked around a little bit in the beginning of the video, but then I thought to myself that was completely pointless, and watched the whole thing without looking around at all.

I just stayed on the normal view, where you can see him talking

I might have been staring at your chest all the time wondering why on earth you'd choose that angle. Guess the jokes on me

I think that the real issue is one of correct application of the media type. If I want a "fully immersive" experience, or an environment that I can explore, then 360* is very useful. Like a historical reenactment, walking through the pyramids, floating in space above the Earth, or exploring an Escape Room. But....I think that we need an Adaptive Resolution that focuses on a specific viewing perspective (like 60* eyes front) but offers low-res 360*. This would focus the viewer's attention where the point of interest is, render better detail for a narrow angle, and still offer alternate perspectives. I LOVE doing VR "vacations" where I can explore locations that I will probably never travel to. Giza, Italy, New Zealand, etc. Visiting museums this way is also highly educational on a budget. :)

360 video actually works well in this case since you aren't trying to show us something. All you are doing is talking so it isn't necessary for us to even watch the video. I could have technically opened another tab and just listened to you. It didn't work well when you wanted us to look at that tennis ball video since you have to get viewers to turn around and focus on something. I decided to stay and look around at things because it isn't something i normally get to see. I can also choose to look at you or i can see other things. That's one thing I don't like about your other videos compared to this one, you are walking around in fascinating places but you only show us your face but i want to see what you are seeing.

I believe that 360 will fill an interesting niche, but otherwise that you are correct.

It was 15 seconds before I noticed, "Hey, why's my cursor a white glove? I don't use a Mac?!" Then I understood you were talking about spherical video and so I tried dragging the image around - and it worked! Then I tried using the control arrows in the upper left corner. Hey, that worked too. This is cool! That was generally my thought process. So everything you said between the 15 and 45 second marks.... I have no idea what you said.

I would still love to see more videos like this. Particularly when you do experiments, maybe as additional footage videos. I would love the feeling of being able to feel more immersed in the environment. This video in particular. My wife being a quasi military brat grew up in Korea. Though the area has changed drastically since, I was able to get my first closer to real look at what the streets she described are like. She says, despite the progression of time and tech, the culture has retained much of what she knew.. Thanks Derek for this video.

Spent the entire time looking at his hands at the bottom.

You know what was far more interesting than looking all around during the video? Hovering over the time bar and seeing the whole picture in a box.

I didn't even realise this was a 360 video till the tennis ball part where you pointed me the other way. Then I thought it was kinda cool and rewatched the video while looking forward instead of backwards. I think I'll have to reserve judgement till the resolution and bandwith part of the equation improves to a point where I won't notice it as a limitation. But thanks for trying it out for us!

Depending on the content that you’re creating, it could be the best tool. We all need to choose the right tools for the job. Sometimes spherical video might be the best. Why not?

The moment I realized I could move the video around (it was a few seconds in) I was amazed. I immediately spiraled around and marveled at Seoul, the people, and the technology. And then ten seconds later, I stopped playing with it and went back to my Sudoku.

Anyone else not know it was 360 video for a few minutes? lol

I think 360 video is always going to have it's place. Whether it's appropriate to use or not is going to be decided on a case by case basis and depend greatly on the subject matter. I don't know if this is a thing yet, but I think also limiting the very to less than 360 is going to important too. For example: During a lecture the camera can be placed close up to the person giving the lecture. Being close up to the speaker is generally more interesting than having the camera way in the back. Giving the person watching the ability to rotate the video a few degrees left and right (and maybe up and down) will allow them to do things like move the camera to look at some notes the person wrote on a white board earlier that they might have missed or need to review. Sure they cold just rewind the video, but that breaks the momentum of the speech and means they have to look scrub through the video to find were the notes were written or talked about and then try to find the moment they left off from when they go back. Doing something like this might even be entirely impossible during a live stream presentation.

360 videos are awesome , whoever made this ..Thank you ! This will be great if applied for educational purposes, it may needs some tweaks but it's nearly perfect *_*

I think 360 is a useful tool, but not good for entertainment. For instance, in CCTV security footage it would be useful.

I spent the entire video looking at the shops around him... Never knew every 5th shop in Korea was for optical glasses.

I believe it depends on the information being displayed. Having the ability to gather more detail and information from any video is very useful depending on how it is displayed

I enjoyed this trip very much, I think it was amazing but only for certain types of interactions. The whole time you were talking, I didn't feel like I had to focus only on your being, I could look around, and that in turn made me feel like we were taking a stroll and discussing ideas, which sharpened my focus on your voice and what you were presenting. Then again, I got distracted a few times because I've always wanted to visit Seoul and being a responsible father with less money in the bank than I care to admit, I watched the video a few times to soak it all in ;-)

Spherical video opens up the potential to visit places that one usually can't. To look around at architecture or great wonders of nature that are dangerous or hard to reach. For sight seeing they hold real potential. However, for most forms of video it is the framing and editing that imparts the feel and tension, brings drama and makes points. That is how we tell stories and educate. There is little then that 360 can bring to those types of video.

I dont like 360 because I can't look at everything at once and I'm afraid I'm going to miss something

I enjoyed this. Do more walks around places. I liked the way the angle made me have to recalculate what I was really seeing. There could be some really unique story telling with this tech, but I see where you're coming from.

I think there’s a huge potential for 360 video if someone can figure out how to do it right. The lack of linear focus actually could help rewatchability because every persons experience is different. Open World video games are designed to not have a linear structure, but many still take it as an art medium because of what you can fit into a video game. You could even use the same focus strategies paintings use to give more of a central focus. The bandwidth problem could be solved by having movie theaters start using 360 video. Movie theaters are slowly but surely losing money due to streaming, but giving a new focus, and using existing technology that brings something new and exciting to the table, might save movie theaters worldwide. Their only problem is lack of movies. I’ve only seen one feature length film on KZfaq, and even that film looked like it was on a serious budget. The problem seems to be that technology is moving faster than creators right now. It’s the same problem vr is facing at the moment. If we give creative people the time to put in a serious amount of effort we may very well have a new art medium. Do I think it will take over movies or make movies obsolete? Probably not. But will it be a tool many artistic people can use to their advantage in the future, I don’t really see why not.

i think 360 videos are great for 'walkumentaries' , where a person walks through a place and tells a story about it

You are both right and wrong. Watching a film (and other examples you mentioned) is much better to be presented in the current form, everything you say about that is correct. However, your own video disproves your statement. No one wants to watch your face for 6 minutes as you talk, but I had fun watching the streets and shops of a far away country while listening to you. Similar to how I listen to a podcast while doing other things. If it's not a guided experience but a world to explore, 360 can offer much more information and the ability to rewatch the same video to learn even more.

I think it's only useful for visiting places, because that when you turn to look everywhere.

For doing a remote walkthrough of a house, I like having a chained series of high resolution, 3D points that you can jump to. It might be cool for many kinds of self directed learning. But I do tune in to your channel because you are excellent at moving understanding along. You know how to frame a scene. You know how to frame a topic. So for anything like guided learning, I agree, it's a missapplication of the technology that dissapates the benifit of the guide.

I think both 360deg and standard video both have their place. This video would have been much more focused on the topic at hand in standard video. However I would have not gotten the ability to see the setting, it was really interesting to look around the environment you were in with 360 deg vision. See all of the tiny shops crammed with goods, see the local culture. Structured narrative content should be fixed viewing (2d or 3d). But I 100% believe there is a place for 360deg video. Especially for capturing a place at a given moment in time. I think what I said will be the general way that things are, but there will be some exceptional exceptions to it.

I think you are right that the 360 view is distracting to the conversation, but I can also say that you are narrowly looking at this from your point of view as a teacher of stuff. Movies will not be shot to any real effect in 360 because movies are the art of crafting the narrative, in the same vein as teaching is the art of conveying information. Where this will really shine is in imparting an experience. Personally i was able to follow along with your talk, but i also got a knowledge of the street. Its not useful and will be forgotten shortly, but it was someplace new. Its kinda like virtual reality, most games are not going to work well with it, but in games that focus on the experience, it can be a powerful tool. Its all about using the tools available and correctly to get the greatest impact out of your goal.

I love this video and I hope you make more. video capturing the world around you is tool orientated. You use the kind of camera that can best illustrate what you want to convey to your audience. Walking through a city in 360 is amazing. You can point things out as if we were there with you. You just have to give, us the viewer, time to scroll around to see what you are pointing at.

Tbh, even besides the fact that I get to look down the little alleys while stile listening to you, it's just kind of cool attempting to process it all at once. It didn't show the extra clip real well in my opinion, so 360 video probably won't be good for demonstration purposes, but it would still be really cool for vlogs. Keep on making your awesome videos, man!

Look straight down and see his hand holding nothing

I love looking at all the people going past

Moving around to see everything is so much effort

“When you think something is true, you should try as hard as you can to disprove yourself”. Good grief, that’s the quote of the century. If more people followed that wisdom…… Where was I….oh, 360. You are spot on. Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. In my landscape and wildlife photography, I discovered that my images got much better when I added paying close attention to the things in the viewfinder that I DIDN’T want in the picture.

I think you're wrong. But not because your points are wrong, but rather the concept you're starting with is wrong. 360 video isn't "the" future, rather it's "a" future. Your video is actually an excellent example of a successful way to use 360 video. It was really fun to be able to look around the same way I would have been if I was there in person. Taking in the surroundings and being oo'd and ah'd by things. It didn't distract me at all from the conversation you were having with the viewer either. Will 360 replace normal video? Absolutely not. But I do think it will grow and find a comfortable niche.

omg... so many things to buy... nobody show this place to my mother.

I really liked this video, and the 360 aspect is probably my favorite part. I don't think you could have provided a better place to shoot a 360 video, as their is something constantly going on around you, in all directions. One of my favorite things was tracking people who pass you, going back and seeing where they came from, and really watching the entire development. One thing I noticed is that people who are coming at you will look forward, and once you pass them they turn around and look at whatever crazy camera contraption you were holding.

Found this almost 5 years later. The first half about resolution seems pointless now. The second part where you would be distracted from the presentation is 100% true and I agree with that WHEN you're supposed to focus. I mean, when I watch a movie I don't want it to be a 360 presentation so I can see people sitting in the theater :D HOWEVER I think 360, virtual reality crazes have vanished a bit but I think they are useful when you want to actually explore a place without particularly focusing on someone talking or presenting something. It's like virtual travelling. That's when I think it makes senseto use this.

This video is not drunk friendly. I shall visit later time.

Oh yes, 360 144s 15FPS and Shit internet go well together.

This is an awesome way to see new places or podcasts when you want to rewind and see a rooms reaction. Movies would be hard and a headset is nearly a must.

Thanks to AI L's comment I realized I could move the screen around. If you look down, his hand is really weird holding... nothing. I agree with your points but I still loved the 360 on this visit through the market. AND I think it is fabulous that you are willing to put yourself out there and have people challenge you on being wrong. There not many people who are willing to do that. Everyone is guarding their ego so it won't get hurt. Thank you!

well its not revolutionary but its not useless either

You are completely missing the point. You souldn't expect 360 video format to become the only video format available in the future, it's just another tool that video editors and directors can now use to tell their stories. It's good for some tasks like showing an immersive beautiful landscapes and bad for other tasks like showing a video where the viewer is supposed to look at something specific like that tennis ball example. People are so quick to come to conclusions. Oooh we invented the internet - lets burn all the paper books, oooh we invented a CGI - lets make all movies in cgi now, oooh we created a phone - lets not talk to people in person now..

It seems like a stepping stone into getting us used to both Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality. AR makes for a different sort of 360, regenerating a virtual world on top of an actual direction of viewing, and that real camera is following your head motion, so resolution can be highest there, even if lower resolution might exist in other directions in lower resolution playback.

I agree with you almost entirely, however it was entertaining to look around during one of your monologue pieces that you do while walking around and listen while I look around and see the sights.

I find that using 360 video when talking about something while walking gives the viewer more to look at and interact with instead of encouraging the viewer to let it run in the background while s/he does something else.

1. Resolutions will obviously improve. Bad argument. Bandwidth will improve too. 2. Zooming on 360 will also not be a problem. Extremely weak argument. 3. Are you forgetting that VR makes 360 perfect. It makes the video viewing experience MORE like how real humans see the world not less. On top of that even in the 2D player we are still looking at and focusing on the exact same real-esate on the screen. The same amount. Only it's interactive and we get to choose where we look. Where else do we see this? Video games. I guess those aren't successful for this reason as well? (Oh wait, they are wildly sucessful.) Not only is this a bad argument... examination of the argument leads to pros of 360 video, not cons. 4. Sounds like a selfish and personal reason... not really anything against 360. End of the day the consumers drive the technology and not the content creators. 5. I'm not going to debate with you on learning (even though I don't fully agree) but this fifth point is literally nothing to do with 360 video. And is even only tangental to "teaching" 360 videos. 6? control is out of the hands of the creator? No. Does a stage performer somehow lose something by allowing the audience member's heads to move? No. Think about how magicians can control where people look and what they focus on without actually physically controlling their head or eyes. Is it more challenging? Yeah. Is that a bad thing? Not at all. 7. All of your examples were really bad and didn't help your case. Motion pictures didn't replace books... but motion pictures are insanely popular. (Way more than books.) So you are saying that 360 won't replace 2D video... but will just be wildly more successful than 2D video? You are looking at 360 video with a very very narrow lens. Only in education. Try to be more open minded and examine everything objectively before jumping to a conclusion. (You know, like scientists do.)

When he pointed to the video on the screen I literally just stared at him the entire time and only noticed the video was playing behind where the camera was facing, I now know I am dumber than rocks

4 years later, I haven't come across a single spherical video in about 4 years. I had completely forgotten that they had been a thing at one point. I reckon you were absolutely right, lol.

I angled the camera down towards his hand and couldn't stop laughing

you're not wrong,... 360 is pointless

With a 360 camera, it's cool that when you do these vlogs we can listen to you and look around as you're walking about these interesting places you record. It's chill.

Hey Derek, this kind of video is just fine in 360. I can listen to what you're saying and look around without missing anything. Explaining complex concepts, however, would require me to look exactly where you want me to be looking, I think. So it should be okay, as long as you use it for videos in which all you do is talk and you're not showing anything specific. Still, great content, keep it up! :)

I'll tell you what though, the immersion with a 360 video is amazing. Looking around the market, it really felt like I was actually there with you, looking around. I agree with the fact that 360 isn't going to replace cinematics any time soon, and neither should it They are two very fundamentally different things. But for videos like these? Maybe some documentaries like mentioned at the start? I would love that (Barring the shitty quality and that jarring line in the middle where the sphere meets itself).

I foresee virtual tourism emerging through this technology. Bad day at the office? Log into our Venice Gondola stream, or soak up the City of Lights with our Paris walking tour. 360 video is good for atmosphere, ambiance, not narrative.

360° video is not the future; it is a part of the future. It is another tool and will be appropriate where it is appropriate. Oddly, I really liked it in this video, but that was because your real content was in the audio track, so I was free to have fun looking around without missing anything. Anyone who has taught knows that teachers will never be replaced by technology, but teachers who know how and when to appropriately use technology will have an advantage over those who don't.

Exactly! I totally agree with you, I was incredibly distracted by your shoes it looked like you were wearing high heels 👠. When the video popped up it popped up to the left and it took me almost half way through the video to find it, so it was kinda lost on me. Keep up the good work my friend. Jeff

I was wondering why my cursor turned into a little hand. I didn't realize the video was 360 until he said 'granted you are getting a nice view' lol...

Smart people once said the same thing about telephone and radio. Sure, 360 video is stupid for things like vlogs and movies, but it definitely has a niche. Especially for things like virtual tours.

How about the role of 360 audio (binaural and ambisonic) in the technology though? Isn't it worth it developing and using that technology having that in mind as well, especially when it comes to music? What's your thought about it?

I wonder if it would be useful to be in a the middle of a round table discussion where you can choose who to look for various reasons-like a virtual meeting.

Zoom down to look at his hand and then spin it around.

I think if 360 is going to be successful, it relies on achieving widespread use of VR headsets, because without VR headsets, 360 video is exponentially more difficult to watch.

I was offered a 360 Camera as a gift from Samsung. I turned it down. I saw zero purpose to it. After watching your video, a felt better about that decision. You were able to put into words what I felt about the whole idea. Thanks for your continuing efforts to get to the core of an issue.

I liked this because I explored ure surroundings but as a result gig distracted. I love the video and was focused on it for the total duration because I kept looking around like a tourist. its fun seeing ure surroundings

I feel like for educational videos probably 360 isn't the way to go however for vlogs it would be really cool and this video of you walking down the street was really fun and I believe it has a future in videos such as this one where there is a place to discover

You may be right but this video is proof of why you should do 360. I never would've known the things i learned about the open markets in this place you visited. We see a wealth of culture here, how the local population interact and come about their goods. I would've never been able to see the one lady in the pink shirt standing in the doorway as you passed her on your right giving you an odd look, giving me the indicator that you are odd, but she stares more at the camera which makes me question the look of the device and how odd it must be to look at it rather than through it. To your point yes, you can't direct the viewer to the information you want but we don't get that luxury in life either so a social commentary while we walk through the streets being allowed to observe as we individually see fit forces is to be observant ourselves in the first place. The things I wished to learn and the things you would have liked me to learn can always be wildly different. Do I think 360 will take over? No. Should everything be filmed in 360? No. Does it have it's uses? Absolutely. To think of a film as being solely the responsibility of the creator is selfish and wrong, we as the viewer hold the other half of that responsibility. If you wish to show us a busy market place where it is impossible to track one thing without missing something else, 360 is a must. It allows the viewer the liberty of discovery. Being allowed to discover is it's own type of learning. But you know all that already, don't you?

Many, many years ago, it was either at Disneyland or at the worlds' fair that there was one exhibit that had a series of screens representing the windows of a car. You saw what you would see from the interior of the car...things on the road and along the roadside moving along toward the rear of the exhibit, and y0u could follow objects as they passed front the windshield to the side windows and finally to the rear window. It was quite impressive...a real Gee Whiz experience. I can see full surround being used for such venues where there is not a real storyline that you need to follow. It would also be great for travelogues, like taking a helicopter ride through the Grand Canyon where you would want to gaze around at the scenery. However, in a typical movie where there is a plot and a stopryline that you must follow, it would be too easy to be distracted by the surroundings instead of watching the story unfolding in front of you. So, I can see the usefulness for things like a 3-D walkthrough of a building or something scenic but not for movies.

5:40 The question that they were actually answering (perhaps without knowing it) was "is this traveling as you would EXPECT it to, or FASTER than your everyday experience has conditioned you to expect?"