Leveraging Affordable Solutions for Stereo Video Capture in Virtual

Reality Applications

Leina Yoshida

, Gustavo Domingues

, Fabiana Peres

, Claudio R. Mauricio

and Jo

ao M. Teixeira

UNIOSTE, Foz do Iguac¸u, PR, Brazil

Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife, PE, Brazil

Keywords:

Stereo Video Capture, Virtual Reality, Affordable VR Solutions.

Abstract:

Stereo video is essential for creating immersive virtual reality experiences by providing depth perception and

enhancing realism. However, capturing high-quality stereo video often requires expensive professional equip-

ment, such as specialized stereo lenses and high-resolution cameras, which poses signiﬁcant ﬁnancial barriers

for independent content creators and small studios. This paper explores affordable alternatives for stereo video

capture, speciﬁcally utilizing the built-in cameras of the Meta Quest 3 MR (mixed reality) headset. We com-

pare the capabilities of the Meta Quest 3 with high-end equipment like the Canon EOS R7 and dual ﬁsheye

lenses, whose cost is signiﬁcantly higher (approximately seven times more). Our analysis includes a compar-

ison of display and camera resolutions of popular VR head-mounted displays, revealing that the current VR

headsets’ display resolutions do not fully utilize the high capture resolutions offered by professional cameras.

We provide detailed instructions for setting up the Meta Quest 3 for stereo video capture and present examples

of videos captured in both indoor and outdoor environments. The ﬁndings suggest that affordable devices like

the Meta Quest 3 are capable of producing stereo video content suitable for the present virtual reality technol-

ogy landscape. The cost savings and operational efﬁciencies make it a practical option for content creators.

We conclude that, given the display limitations of current VR HMDs, investing in high-end capture devices

may not yield signiﬁcant beneﬁts. As VR technology advances and HMD display resolutions improve, the

advantages of professional capture equipment may become more pronounced.

1 INTRODUCTION

The advent of virtual reality (VR) has revolutionized

the way users interact with digital content, offering

immersive experiences that transcend traditional me-

dia boundaries. Central to this immersion is the use

of stereo video, which provides depth perception and

a more lifelike representation of the virtual environ-

ment. Stereo video simulates human binocular vision

by presenting two slightly offset images to each eye,

creating the illusion of three-dimensionality (Fuchs,

2017).

In recent years, there has been a surge in VR

content creation and consumption. High-quality VR

experiences are no longer conﬁned to large studios

with signiﬁcant resources; independent creators and

small studios are increasingly contributing to the VR

ecosystem (Slater and Sanchez-Vives, 2016). How-

ever, the tools required to produce high-quality stereo

video content often come with prohibitive costs. Pro-

fessional equipment like the Canon RF 5.2mm f/2.8

L Dual Fisheye Lens, priced at approximately $

1.700, and the Canon RF-S 7.8mm f/4 STM Dual

Lens at around $ 500, represent signiﬁcant invest-

ments (Canon, 2023b; Canon, 2023c). Addition-

ally, the Canon EOS R7 Mirrorless Camera body

alone costs about $ 1.300 without any lenses (Canon,

2023a). Such expenses create barriers for content cre-

ators who wish to produce professional-grade VR ex-

periences but lack substantial ﬁnancial resources. The

aforementioned high end equipement is illustrated in

Figure 1.

As an alternative, affordable solutions have

emerged that leverage existing hardware to capture

stereo video content effectively. Meta Quest 3

, a

standalone VR headset priced at around $ 500, not

only provides a platform for VR consumption but also

possesses built-in cameras capable of capturing stereo

https://www.meta.com/fr/en/quest/quest-3

Yoshida, L., Domingues, G., Peres, F., Mauricio, C. R. and Teixeira, J. M.

Leveraging Affordable Solutions for Stereo Video Capture in Virtual Reality Applications.

DOI: 10.5220/0013350500003912

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Applications (VISIGRAPP 2025) - Volume 2: VISAPP, pages

965-971

ISBN: 978-989-758-728-3; ISSN: 2184-4321

965

Figure 1: High end equipment for stereo video capture.

video. By utilizing the headset’s own hardware, cre-

ators can bypass the need for expensive cameras and

lenses, reducing the overall cost of production.

This paper explores the viability of using the Meta

Quest 3 as a low-cost solution for stereo video capture

in VR applications. We compare the costs and tech-

nical capabilities of high-end equipment with more

affordable alternatives, examining whether the supe-

rior speciﬁcations of professional devices are fully

utilized given the current display resolutions of pop-

ular VR headsets. Our analysis includes a compari-

son of display and camera resolutions among the most

widely used VR headsets to assess if the higher reso-

lution offered by professional cameras translates into

perceptible improvements in user experience.

The objectives of this study are twofold:

1. To demonstrate that affordable methods, such as

using the Meta Quest 3, are capable of captur-

ing stereo video suitable for immersive VR expe-

riences.

2. To evaluate whether the investment in high-end

capture devices is justiﬁed, considering the dis-

play resolution limitations of current VR head-

mounted displays (HMDs).

By addressing these objectives, we aim to provide

insights that can inform content creators about cost-

effective strategies for VR production and stimulate

discussions on the necessity of expensive equipment

in the context of current VR technology limitations.

2 STEREO CAPTURE

APPROACHES

Stereo content capture for VR applications has been a

signiﬁcant area of research and development, leading

to various methods and devices ranging from profes-

sional high-end equipment to low-cost custom solu-

tions.

Peleg and Ben-Ezra (Peleg and Ben-Ezra, 1999)

pioneered the creation of stereo panoramas using a

single rotating camera. Their method captures im-

ages at incremental angles and stitches them to form

panoramic stereo pairs. This approach demonstrated

that stereo content could be generated without spe-

cialized stereo cameras, providing a cost-effective so-

lution for immersive content creation.

Anderson et al. (Anderson et al., 2016) introduced

Google’s Jump system, a professional-grade stereo-

scopic camera rig composed of 16 synchronized cam-

eras arranged in a circular array. The system enables

high-resolution, 360-degree stereo video capture and

employs advanced computational photography algo-

rithms to seamlessly stitch the footage. This work

signiﬁcantly contributed to professional VR content

production by providing high-quality immersive ex-

periences.

Facebook Engineering (Facebook Engineering,

2016) unveiled the Surround 360 system, an open-

source, high-quality 3D-360 video capture solution.

Consisting of a 17-camera setup, the system is

designed to efﬁciently capture and render 3D-360

videos. By releasing the hardware designs and stitch-

ing code to the public, Facebook encouraged innova-

tion and accessibility in the VR content creation com-

munity.

Tremblay et al. (Tremblay et al., 2019) proposed

a low-cost 360 stereo photography and video capture

system that leverages consumer-grade cameras and

3D-printed mounts. Their approach aims to make im-

mersive VR content creation more accessible by re-

ducing hardware costs while maintaining reasonable

quality. The system demonstrates that effective stereo

content can be produced with minimal investment,

promoting wider adoption of VR technologies.

In addition to these research initiatives, commer-

cial devices have emerged to meet the growing de-

mand for VR content. The Insta360 Pro 2

is a

professional 360-degree camera capable of capturing

high-resolution (up to 8K) stereoscopic video. It fea-

tures advanced functionalities such as real-time image

stabilization, HDR support, and long-range wireless

control, making it suitable for professional ﬁlmmak-

ers and VR content creators. Priced at approximately

$4,500 USD, it offers high-end performance for com-

mercial applications.

Conversely, the Stereolabs ZED 2

is a more af-

fordable stereo camera priced around $530 USD.

While it does not capture 360-degree content, it pro-

vides real-time depth sensing and spatial mapping,

which are essential for VR and augmented reality

(AR) applications that require environmental under-

standing. Its lower cost and ease of integration make

it accessible to developers and researchers focusing

on depth-based VR experiences. Table 1 summarizes

https://www.insta360.com/product/insta360-pro2

https://www.stereolabs.com/en-br/products/zed-2

VISAPP 2025 - 20th International Conference on Computer Vision Theory and Applications

966

all the approaches mentioned in this section.

3 DISPLAYS AND CAMERA

RESOLUTIONS

To evaluate the necessity of high-resolution capture

devices, we compare the display and camera resolu-

tions of the most widely used VR HMDs. The se-

lected HMDs for this comparison are: Meta Quest 3,

Valve Index, HTC Vive Pro 2, PlayStation VR2 and

Pimax Vision 8K X

These devices represent a range of consumer and

prosumer VR headsets available as of 2023 and are

illustrated in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Selected VR headsets.

Table 2 summarizes the key speciﬁcations of the

selected VR HMDs, including display resolution per

eye, refresh rate, ﬁeld of view (FOV), and any built-in

camera capabilities.

The display resolutions of current VR HMDs,

while signiﬁcantly improved over earlier generations,

still lag behind the high-resolution capabilities of pro-

fessional cameras like the Canon EOS R7, which fea-

tures a 32.5-megapixel sensor capable of capturing

images at 6960 × 4640 pixels (Canon, 2023a). In

contrast, the highest-resolution VR headset in our se-

lection, the Pimax Vision 8K X, provides a resolution

of 3840 × 2160 pixels per eye (Pimax, 2023).

Moreover, Meta Quest 3, which is both a MR

headset and our proposed low-cost stereo video cap-

ture device, offers a resolution of 2064 × 2208 pixels

per eye (Meta, 2023). While this is lower than the

resolutions offered by professional cameras, it aligns

with the display capabilities of current VR HMDs,

ensuring that the captured content matches the maxi-

mum displayable resolution.

The discrepancy between the high-resolution cap-

ture capabilities of professional cameras and the

lower display resolutions of VR HMDs raises ques-

tions about the practical beneﬁts of using such cam-

eras for VR content. Since VR headsets cannot dis-

play the full resolution provided by high-end cameras,

the additional detail captured is effectively lost during

the content consumption phase.

This mismatch suggests that investing in ex-

pensive, high-resolution capture equipment may not

yield perceptible improvements in the user experience

when viewed on current-generation VR HMDs. As a

result, more affordable capture solutions like the Meta

Quest 3’s built-in cameras may offer sufﬁcient qual-

ity for immersive VR experiences without the need

for professional-grade equipment.

Table 3 highlights the comparison between cam-

era resolutions and VR HMD display capabilities.

As shown in Table 3, the capture resolutions of

professional cameras far exceed the display capabili-

ties of current VR headsets. This reinforces the notion

that the beneﬁts of high-resolution capture devices are

not fully realized with today’s VR display technology.

Also, low resolution capture devices may beneﬁt from

artiﬁcial intelligence methods that can enhance image

quality and resolution, such as Real-ESRGAN (Wang

et al., 2021).

The analysis suggests that the current limitations

of VR HMD display resolutions do not necessitate

the use of high-end, high-resolution capture devices

for creating immersive VR content. Affordable alter-

natives, such as the Meta Quest 3, provide adequate

resolution that aligns with what users can experience

through existing VR hardware.

This ﬁnding supports the argument that more cost-

effective solutions for stereo video capture are not

only sufﬁcient but also practical for contemporary VR

applications. As VR technology evolves and display

resolutions increase, the need for higher-resolution

capture devices may become more pressing. How-

ever, at present, affordable options offer a favorable

balance between cost and performance.

4 STEREO CAPTURE WITH

META QUEST 3

In this section, we provide a guide on how to conﬁg-

ure the Meta Quest 3 for stereo video recording. We

also present examples of short videos captured in both

indoor and outdoor settings.

4.1 Setup Instructions

Meta Quest 3 is equipped with MR capabilities, in-

cluding high-resolution cameras that can be utilized

for stereo video capture. To capture stereo video us-

ing Meta Quest 3, one must follow these steps:

1. Update Firmware and Software: Ensure that

Leveraging Affordable Solutions for Stereo Video Capture in Virtual Reality Applications

967

Table 1: Comparison of Stereo Content Capture Methods and Devices.

Work/Device Hardware Type Approach Advantages Limitations

(Peleg and Ben-Ezra, 1999) Single rotating camera Stereo panorama creation Cost-effective, simple setup Time-consuming capture process

(Anderson et al., 2016) Professional rig 16-camera circular array High-resolution, seamless stitching High cost and complexity

(Tremblay et al., 2019) Consumer cameras Low-cost 360° stereo capture Affordable, accessible Lower image quality

(Facebook Engineering, 2016) Professional rig 17-camera system Open-source, high-quality output Complex setup

Insta360 Pro 2 Commercial device 360° stereoscopic camera High-resolution, professional features High price

Stereolabs ZED 2 Commercial device Stereo camera with depth sensing Affordable, depth mapping Not 360°, lower resolution

Table 2: Speciﬁcations and Prices of Selected VR Head-Mounted Displays.

HMD Resolution Refresh Rate FOV Cameras Price (USD)

Meta Quest 3 2064 × 2208 (per eye) Up to 120 Hz 110

◦

4 MP RGB $500

Valve Index 1440 × 1600 (per eye) 80–144 Hz 130

◦

Dual RGB $1.000

HTC Vive Pro 2 2448 × 2448 (per eye) 90 or 120 Hz 120

◦

Dual RGB $800 (headset only)

PlayStation VR2 2000 × 2040 (per eye) 90 or 120 Hz 110

◦

4 Cameras $550

Pimax Vision 8K X 3840 × 2160 (per eye) 75, 90 Hz 200

◦

None $1.300

the Meta Quest 3 headset is updated to the latest

ﬁrmware version. Check for updates in the device

settings.

2. Enable Developer Mode: To access advanced

features, you need to enable Developer Mode:

• Install the Meta Quest app (Meta Horizon) on

your smartphone and pair it with the headset.

• In the app, navigate to Menu → Devices → De-

veloper Mode and toggle it on.

3. Conﬁgure Capture Settings: Set the desired res-

olution and frame rate for your recording. Meta

Quest 3 supports up to 4K resolution at 30 fps for

MR capture.

4. Install SideQuest: Download and install Side-

Quest on your computer from the ofﬁcial website.

Connect Meta Quest 3 to the PC via a USB-C ca-

ble and allow USB debugging on the headset.

5. Execute Custom Commands: In SideQuest, ac-

cess the ”Custom Commands” section and enter

the required commands to enable 3D recording.

6. Record Videos: Use the standard recording func-

tion on the headset to capture 3D content. This

recording will capture the stereo view needed for

videos with depth.

7. Transfer and View: Transfer the recorded videos

to your computer or through the Meta Horizon

app. Use a video player compatible with 3D con-

tent to view the videos in stereo.

8. Edit and Share: Edit the videos, if necessary, to

enhance the viewing experience, and share them

on platforms that support 3D content, allowing

others to experience the depth effect of the videos

captured on the Meta Quest 3.

To achieve the best possible video quality, con-

sider the following tips:

1. Lighting Conditions: Good lighting is crucial for

high-quality video capture. Ensure that the envi-

ronment is well-lit to minimize noise and enhance

image clarity (Jackman, 2020).

(a) Indoor Settings: Use artiﬁcial lighting to illu-

minate the area evenly. Avoid harsh shadows

by using diffused light sources.

(b) Outdoor Settings: Capture videos during day-

light hours. Overcast days provide soft, even

lighting, while direct sunlight can create high

contrast and shadows.

2. Stabilization and Movement: Smooth camera

movement enhances the viewing experience in

VR. Meta Quest 3’s built-in stabilization helps re-

duce shakiness.

(a) Handheld Capture: Hold the headset steadily

or use a mount to minimize motion blur.

(b) Dynamic Scenes: When capturing moving sub-

jects, maintain a consistent speed and avoid

abrupt movements.

4.2 Examples of Captured Videos

To evaluate the stereo video capture capabilities of

Meta Quest 3, we recorded one indoor and one out-

door scene:

1. Indoor Example: An indoor scene was recorded

in a living room setting, featuring static objects

and moderate ambient lighting, as illustrated in

Figure 3.

(a) Setup: The room was illuminated with over-

head LED lights providing even lighting.

(b) Result: The captured video displayed good

depth perception and color accuracy. Details

of objects were clear, and minimal noise was

observed.

VISAPP 2025 - 20th International Conference on Computer Vision Theory and Applications

968

Table 3: Comparison of Camera Resolutions and VR HMD Display Resolutions.

Device Capture Resolution Display Resolution (per eye)

Canon EOS R7 6960 × 4640 N/A

Meta Quest 3 Cameras Approx. 1280 × 720 2064 × 2208

HTC Vive Pro 2 N/A 2448 × 2448

Valve Index Cameras 960 × 960 1440 × 1600

Pimax Vision 8K X N/A 3840 × 2160

2. Outdoor Example: An outdoor scene was cap-

tured in a park during the afternoon, as illustrated

in Figure 4.

(a) Setup: Natural daylight provided ample light-

ing. The scene included moving subjects such

as people walking and trees swaying.

(b) Result: The video showcased vibrant colors

and effective depth cues. Motion was smooth,

and the stereo effect enhanced the realism of the

scene.

Figure 3: Indoor stereo scene captured with Meta Quest 3.

(Available at link).

Figure 4: Outdoor stereo scene captured with Meta Quest

3. (Available at link).

5 DISCUSSION

In this section, we analyze the results of our explo-

ration of using Meta Quest 3 for stereo video capture

in VR applications. We assess the quality and depth

perception achieved (subsection 5.1), compare the

performance of the Meta Quest 3 with professional

equipment (subsection 5.2), evaluate the cost-beneﬁt

implications (subsection 5.3), discuss the impact on

content creation (subsection 5.4), and acknowledge

the limitations and potential areas for future improve-

ment (subsection 5.5).

5.1 Quality and Depth Perception

Analysis

The stereo videos captured using the Meta Quest

3 demonstrated satisfactory quality for VR applica-

tions. The depth perception was effective, providing

an immersive experience when viewed through the

headset.

• Resolution: While the capture resolution is lower

than that of professional cameras, it aligns with

the headset’s display capabilities, resulting in a

coherent viewing experience.

• Depth Accuracy: The stereo separation provided

accurate depth cues, essential for immersion in

VR environments (Cutting and Vishton, 1995).

• Limitations: Some limitations were noted in low-

light conditions, where increased noise affected

image clarity. Additionally, rapid movements

could introduce motion blur.

5.2 Performance Evaluation

The stereo videos captured using Meta Quest 3

demonstrate that affordable VR headsets can serve as

viable tools for content creation. While professional

equipment like the Canon EOS R7 paired with dual

ﬁsheye lenses offers higher capture resolutions and

greater control over imaging parameters, Meta Quest

3 provides sufﬁcient quality for the resolutions sup-

ported by current VR HMDs.

Professional cameras offer higher resolution

footage, resulting in sharper images with ﬁner details.

However, the difference is less perceptible when the

content is viewed on VR headsets with lower display

resolutions (Wang et al., 2022).

5.3 Cost-Beneﬁt Analysis

The ﬁnancial implications of using the Meta Quest

3 for stereo video capture are signiﬁcant. The com-

Leveraging Affordable Solutions for Stereo Video Capture in Virtual Reality Applications

969

bined cost of professional equipment (camera body

and lenses) can exceed $3,000, whereas the Meta

Quest 3 costs approximately $500 and serves both as

a capture device and a VR headset.

• Initial Investment: The lower upfront cost makes

the Meta Quest 3 an attractive option for indepen-

dent creators and small studios with limited bud-

gets.

• Operational Efﬁciency: Using a single de-

vice for both content creation and consumption

streamlines the workﬂow and reduces the need for

additional equipment.

• Return on Investment (ROI): The reduced cost

lowers the ﬁnancial risk associated with VR con-

tent production, potentially leading to a higher

ROI for creators.

While professional equipment offers superior

technical capabilities, the marginal beneﬁts may not

justify the substantial additional cost, especially when

considering the display limitations of current VR

HMDs.

5.4 Impact on Content Creation

The accessibility of affordable capture methods like

Meta Quest 3 has the potential to democratize VR

content creation.

• Lowering Barriers to Entry: Reduced costs en-

able a broader range of individuals and organiza-

tions to produce VR content, fostering diversity

and innovation in the VR ecosystem (Ververidis

et al., 2022).

• Educational Applications: Educational institu-

tions and students can leverage affordable devices

for learning and experimentation without signiﬁ-

cant ﬁnancial constraints (Freina and Ott, 2015).

• Community Development: An increase in con-

tent creators can lead to a more vibrant commu-

nity, encouraging collaboration and the sharing of

best practices.

By making VR content creation more accessible,

affordable capture methods contribute to the growth

and sustainability of the VR industry.

5.5 Implications for High-End

Equipment

Our ﬁndings suggest that while high-end capture de-

vices offer superior technical speciﬁcations, their ad-

vantages are not fully realized given the current dis-

play limitations of VR HMDs. As VR headset resolu-

tions increase, the beneﬁts of professional equipment

may become more pronounced (Renganayagalu et al.,

2021).

Content creators should consider their target au-

dience and the platforms on which their content will

be consumed when deciding on the appropriate level

of investment in capture equipment. For many ap-

plications, especially those aimed at widespread ac-

cessibility, affordable solutions like the Meta Quest 3

provide a practical balance between quality and cost.

6 CONCLUSION

In this paper, we have explored the viability of us-

ing affordable devices, speciﬁcally Meta Quest 3,

for capturing stereo video suitable for virtual real-

ity applications. Our investigation addressed two pri-

mary objectives: demonstrating the capabilities of the

Meta Quest 3 in stereo video capture and evaluat-

ing whether investing in high-end capture devices is

justiﬁed given the current display limitations of VR

HMDs.

Our ﬁndings indicate that Meta Quest 3 serves as

a practical and cost-effective solution for stereo video

capture. The device’s built-in cameras can produce

immersive stereo content that aligns with the display

resolutions of current VR HMDs. Through compar-

ative analysis, we observed that while professional

equipment like the Canon EOS R7 with specialized

lenses offers superior technical speciﬁcations, the ad-

vantages are not fully realized when the content is

consumed on VR headsets with lower display reso-

lutions.

The analysis of VR HMDs revealed that even the

most advanced consumer headsets have display res-

olutions that do not match the high capture resolu-

tions of professional cameras. For instance, the Pi-

max Vision 8K X, one of the highest-resolution head-

sets available, offers 3840×2160 pixels per eye (Pi-

max, 2023), which is still lower than the resolutions

captured by professional-grade cameras. This mis-

match suggests that the additional detail captured by

expensive equipment does not signiﬁcantly enhance

the user experience in the current VR landscape.

Moreover, the cost-beneﬁt analysis underscores

the practicality of using affordable devices like the

Meta Quest 3. The substantial cost savings make VR

content creation more accessible to independent cre-

ators, educational institutions, and small studios. This

democratization of VR content production can lead to

a more diverse and vibrant VR ecosystem.

However, for high-end capture devices to make

sense and fully utilize their capabilities, advance-

ments in VR HMD technology are necessary. Specif-

VISAPP 2025 - 20th International Conference on Computer Vision Theory and Applications

970

ically, signiﬁcant increases in display resolutions are

required to display the high-quality images captured

by professional cameras and lenses effectively. As

VR technology evolves and HMD resolutions im-

prove, the beneﬁts of using high-resolution capture

devices will become more apparent.

Looking ahead, the VR industry is poised for con-

tinued growth and technological advancement. As

display technologies improve, with higher resolutions

and wider ﬁelds of view, the demand for higher-

quality content will increase (Renganayagalu et al.,

2021). In this context, professional capture equip-

ment will play a more critical role in delivering the vi-

sual ﬁdelity that next-generation VR experiences will

demand.

Content creators should remain adaptable, balanc-

ing the need for quality with practical considerations

of cost and technology limitations. In the interim,

leveraging affordable solutions like the Meta Quest

3 allows creators to produce engaging content with-

out prohibitive investment, fostering innovation and

experimentation within the VR community.

Our study reinforces the notion that affordable op-

tions for stereo video capture are not only viable but

also well-suited to the current state of VR technol-

ogy. While high-end devices offer superior capabil-

ities, their advantages are constrained by the limita-

tions of present-day VR HMDs. As technology pro-

gresses, the synergy between capture devices and dis-

play hardware will become increasingly important.

Until then, devices like Meta Quest 3 provide a prac-

tical and accessible means for creators to contribute

to the evolving world of virtual reality.

REFERENCES

Anderson, S., Gallup, D., Barron, J. T., Kontkanen, J.,

Snavely, N., Hern

andez, C., Agarwal, S., and Seitz,

S. M. (2016). Jump: Virtual reality video. ACM Trans-

actions on Graphics, 35(6):198.

Canon (2023a). Canon eos r7 mirrorless camera

body. https://www.usa.canon.com/content/canon/en/

search.html?q=EOS%20r7&r=products. Accessed:

11/18/2024.

Canon (2023b). Canon rf 5.2mm f/2.8 l dual ﬁsheye 3d vr

lens. https://www.usa.canon.com/content/canon/en/

search.html?q=RF%205.2mm%20f%2F2.8%20L%

20Dual%20Fisheye%203D%20VR&r=products.

Accessed: 11/18/2024.

Canon (2023c). Canon rf-s 7.8mm f/4 stm dual lens.

https://www.usa.canon.com/content/canon/en/

search.html?q=RF-S%207.8mm%20F4%20STM%

20DUAL&r=products. Accessed: 11/18/2024.

Cutting, J. E. and Vishton, P. M. (1995). Perceiving lay-

out and knowing distances: The integration, relative

potency, and contextual use of different information

about depth. Handbook of Perception and Cognition,

pages 69–117.

Facebook Engineering (2016). Introducing

facebook surround 360: An open, high-

quality 3d-360 video capture system. https:

//engineering.fb.com/2016/04/12/video-engineering/

introducing-facebook-surround-360-an-open-high-

quality-3d-360-video-capture-system/.

Freina, L. and Ott, M. (2015). A literature review on im-

mersive virtual reality in education: State of the art

and perspectives. The International Scientiﬁc Confer-

ence eLearning and Software for Education.

Fuchs, P. (2017). Virtual reality headsets-a theoretical and

pragmatic approach. CRC Press.

Jackman, J. (2020). Lighting for Digital Video and Televi-

sion. Routledge, 4th edition.

Meta (2023). Meta quest 3. https://www.meta.com/quest/

quest-3. Accessed: 11/18/2024.

Peleg, S. and Ben-Ezra, M. (1999). Stereo panorama with a

single camera. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer

Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern

Recognition, volume 1, pages 395–401. IEEE.

Pimax (2023). Pimax vision 8k x speciﬁcations.

https://cn.pimax.com/8kx-tech-specs-old/. Accessed:

11/20/2024.

Renganayagalu, S. K., Mallam, S. C., and Nazir, S. (2021).

Effectiveness of vr head mounted displays in profes-

sional training: A systematic review. Technology,

Knowledge and Learning, pages 1–43.

Slater, M. and Sanchez-Vives, M. V. (2016). Enhancing

our lives with immersive virtual reality. Frontiers in

Robotics and AI, 3:74.

Tremblay, E., Lapierre, M., and Gosselin, C. (2019). Low-

cost 360 stereo photography and video capture. In

Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Virtual Real-

ity and 3D User Interfaces, pages 1400–1401. IEEE.

Ververidis, D., Migkotzidis, P., Nikolaidis, E., Anastasovi-

tis, E., Papazoglou Chalikias, A., Nikolopoulos, S.,

and Kompatsiaris, I. (2022). An authoring tool for

democratizing the creation of high-quality vr experi-

ences. Virtual Reality, 26(1):105–124.

Wang, J., Shi, R., Xiao, Z., Qin, X., and Liang, H.-N.

(2022). Effect of render resolution on gameplay expe-

rience, performance, and simulator sickness in virtual

reality games. Association for Computing Machinery,

5(1).

Wang, X., Xie, L., Dong, C., and Shan, Y. (2021). Real-

esrgan: Training real-world blind super-resolution

with pure synthetic data. In International Conference

on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCVW).

Leveraging Affordable Solutions for Stereo Video Capture in Virtual Reality Applications

971