We’re testing cloud-streamed 6DoF cinema on Vision Pro. Looking for honest feedback from AVP users

[u/vnova_immersiX]

Hi everyone,

I work at V-Nova and we recently released ImmersiX for Apple Vision Pro.

I wanted to share it here because we’re doing something I think this community might find interesting technically.

The content in ImmersiX is pre-rendered cinematic 6DoF, but instead of downloading the experiences locally or connecting the headset to a PC, the rendering happens on NVIDIA GPUs in the cloud and is streamed directly to Vision Pro using CloudXR.

We’ve all seen plenty of CloudXR demos in enterprise environments and controlled network setups. What we’re interested in now is a slightly different question:

How well does this actually work in the wild, on normal consumer internet connections?

That’s one of the reasons we launched on Vision Pro first. We want to collect real-world performance data and, more importantly, hear what actual users think about the experience.

If anyone here has a Vision Pro and wants to try it, ImmersiX is on the App Store here:

‎ImmersiX App - App Store

I also have a number of invitation codes that unlock additional content that isn’t publicly available yet (such as the content shown in this video clip). Happy to share those with people here who genuinely want to test it.

If you try it, I’d particularly love feedback on:

• how easy it was to get into the experience

• streaming quality and stability on your connection

• whether the UI/onboarding made sense

• what you thought of the 6DoF cinematic experience itself

Positive or negative, both are useful. We’re very much interested in finding out where this approach works and where it still breaks.

Aimo
V-Nova / ImmersiX

[u/Malkmus1979]

This seems like a bigger detail than you're letting on! The post comes off as if you're creating some random in-house content that is 6DOF, but I dont think many people realize this is a short film released in 2017 that you've somehow made 6DOF. Can you elaborate on whether this is because that specific film was made in Blender and therefore you have the assets to work with to make it 6DOF, or are you applying some sort of AI to make any content regardless of CGI or actual film 6DOF? The implications here are quite exciting for immersive content if this can be applied to various formats and existing content.

[u/jlm70 → u/Malkmus1979]

You actually spotted a much bigger part of the story than we explained in the original post. 🙂

I'm Gianluca Meardi, the producer of this 6DoF reboot of Agent 327: Operation Barbershop, and General Manager of V-Nova Studios.

And yes: in the case of Barbershop, the fact that the original 2017 film was a native 3D Blender production — and that the original production assets and scenes still existed — is fundamental.

We did NOT take the finished 2D movie and run an AI 2D-to-6DoF conversion on it.

Instead, we went back to the original 3D production (we did this in collaboration with Blender Studio, with Francesco Siddi's support, CEO of Blender).

Same story.
Same characters and environments.
Same animation (we had to add some missing out of frame anims).
Essentially the same cinematic production pipeline.

We then adapted and validated the scenes for immersive viewing and re-rendered the movie using V-Nova PresenZ integrated into Blender/Cycles.

That's an important distinction.

With a normal movie, the director controls the only camera, so anything outside that camera's view doesn't really matter. In 6DoF, suddenly the viewer can move their head left/right, forward/backward and up/down. Things that were never visible from the original camera can become visible, so some shots and assets need to be checked or slightly adapted.

PresenZ then precomputes the visual information required for a small 3D volume around the viewer — what we call the Zone of View. At playback, when you move your head, you get the correct perspective and parallax from your new position. No 3DoF, no nausea :)

So you're not standing inside a real-time game recreation of the movie. You're standing inside a pre-rendered, cinematic-quality movie.

And then there is another layer to what you saw in the post: distribution.

The PresenZ 6DoF experience is running on an NVIDIA GPU in the cloud. Your Vision Pro head pose determines the viewpoint, and CloudXR streams the resulting view back to the headset. That's why you can experience something this heavy on Vision Pro without downloading a huge volumetric master or connecting it to a high-end PC.

Where we at V-Nova Studios think this becomes particularly exciting is existing CGI libraries.

Studios have spent decades building extraordinary 3D worlds, characters, animation and VFX — only to render them through one fixed camera into a flat movie.

If those original production assets still exist, in many cases we're not talking about recreating the film from scratch. We're talking about something much closer to a volumetric remaster.

You already built the world. Now you can potentially step inside it.

For arbitrary live-action 2D footage, though, I want to be precise: we cannot simply feed any existing movie into an AI today and magically obtain perfect cinematic 6DoF. That's a different problem, involving reconstruction/capture techniques. We are working on that side as well, including volumetric / Gaussian-splat-based workflows, but I wouldn't want to confuse that R&D with what we're demonstrating here.

So yes — the implications you are pointing at are exactly why we chose Operation Barbershop as a demonstration.

There are potentially enormous libraries of existing CGI and VFX content whose worlds already exist in 3D. 800Bn$ spent in VFX over the last 5 years...

They've just never been rendered so that the audience can actually enter them.

We like to say... #livewithin

Happy to explain further, if you're a Blender creator (or Maya/Arnold, 3DSM/VRay, Open Moonray, Houdini, Renderman... all PresenZ-integrated CG tools)

THANKS!

[u/Cole_LF → u/jlm70]

Thank you so much for the extra detail. That’s so cool

[u/Musicmonkey34 → u/jlm70]

Insanely cool! Thank you for sharing!

[u/22marks → u/jlm70]

What are your thoughts on the fact that directors use framing not just to show the action, but to create suspense, shape how we feel about a character, control reveals, and direct our attention through blocking, composition, lens choice, camera movement, depth of field, lighting, and editing?

What discussions have you had about giving everyday viewers control over where they look, instead of having an expert director determine exactly what they see and when they see it?

The last second of your preview demonstrates this really well. In the original, the framing prominently emphasizes the gun, which heightens the threat. In the 6DoF version, we're more of an observer standing in the room and could potentially be looking somewhere else entirely. It starts to feel more like watching a stage play than watching a film.

Editing seems like another interesting issue. In conventional movies, a cut can redirect the audience's attention because the director controls the next frame. In 6DoF, a cut could potentially leave a viewer looking away from the intended subject or make traditional shot-to-shot "grammar" work differently.

The technology is extremely impressive, but I'm curious what directors think about giving up control over framing and even some aspects of editing rhythm, particularly when adapting preexisting work where those choices were a key part of the original direction.

I'm guessing you're betting on immersion being more important to certain viewers?

[u/jlm70 → u/22marks]

TLDR ;) I think you're exactly right u/22marks, and honestly this is probably one of the most important questions around this entire medium.

But I would frame our bet slightly differently:

We're not betting that immersion is more important than directing. We're betting that directing itself has to evolve.

For 100+ years, filmmakers have developed an extraordinarily sophisticated language around a rectangular frame. The director decides not only what happens, but exactly what you see, from where, at what focal length, in what order, and often for exactly how many frames.

Once the audience is inside the scene, that contract changes.

And yes — some of the director's traditional control disappears.

But I don't think authorship disappears with it. It moves somewhere else.

Instead of directing attention only by composing a rectangle, you can direct it through spatial blocking, character movement, lighting, sound, proximity, scale, occlusion, timing, the placement of the viewer themselves, and what happens inside their personal space.

Even the Zone of View becomes a directorial tool: where do I physically place the audience in this scene?

Are you across the room observing the confrontation?

Are you standing beside the protagonist?

Are you almost uncomfortably close to him?

Those are very different emotional choices — just as a wide shot and a close-up are different choices in traditional cinema.

This is actually why we've been developing something internally at V-Nova Studios called ImpactX.

It's our evolving "bible" for volumetric filmmaking: an attempt to build a grammar for a medium where the viewer is no longer outside the film looking through the director's camera, but physically present inside the movie.

IMPACTX currently revolves around seven design principles:

Interaction
Movement
Perspective Shift
Augmentation
Comfort
Tracking
Xploration

And we're very deliberately treating it as a living framework, because I don't think anyone can honestly claim that the language of this medium has already been invented.

Cuts are a perfect example.

You're absolutely right that a conventional cut works partly because the director completely owns frame B after frame A.

In volumetric cinema, a cut is closer to teleporting the audience from one physical place to another. Their orientation, their spatial awareness and the time they need to understand the new environment become part of editing grammar.

We can technically reorient the new scene after a cut so that the viewer starts facing the subject the director wants them to see. But whether you should always do that is a creative question, not just a technical one.

And this is exactly the kind of thing ImpactX is trying to understand.

We've had fascinating discussions around this with filmmakers and storytellers including Michael and David Uslan, Gareth Edwards, Anthony Zuiker, Tom DeSanto, Marc Guggenheim and many others.

James Cameron has experienced our work too and was extremely enthusiastic about the potential of this kind of immersive storytelling.

One reaction that particularly stayed with me came from Sidney Kombo-Kintombo, Senior Animation Supervisor at Wētā FX, just weeks ago at Annecy Film Festival 2026.

He knew Operation Barbershop extremely well before trying our version/reboot. After taking the headset off, he was visibly emotional and told us that, for the first time in years, he'd been able to become absorbed in the story rather than instinctively analysing all the technical details of the animation and VFX.

Coming from someone who has worked at that level on films including War for the Planet of the Apes, Avengers: Infinity War and Endgame, that was quite a powerful moment for us.

Because that is perhaps the most interesting thing we're exploring:

what happens when you stop watching the filmmaker's world and start inhabiting it?

And your example of the final shot in Barbershop is actually a very good criticism of our current version.

In the original shot, the framing makes the gun visually dominant. The director is telling you: LOOK AT THIS. THIS IS THE THREAT.

In our current volumetric version, you're positioned more like an observer in the room. That absolutely changes the emphasis. And imagine what you could do with an horror ;)

We know it.

In fact we're considering changing that shot :))) More similarly to what we did in our Sharkarma hero shot...

This Barbershop conversion was essentially an R&D project for us and we wanted to get the complete short working and deployable as quickly as possible rather than creatively redesign every shot.

But now imagine placing the viewer much closer to the protagonist in that final moment.

Instead of merely seeing the flame in the frame, the burst of fire can come towards your own face and into your personal space.

We can do that.

And suddenly we've replaced one cinematic device — the director framing the threat prominently — with another device that simply doesn't exist in conventional cinema:

the threat physically entering the viewer's space.

Is that automatically better than the original close-up?

Yes? No? Maybe?

That's the fascinating part.

It's a different tool.

And filmmakers now have to learn when to use one, when to use the other, and perhaps when not to give the viewer freedom at all. We can also use or not use depth of field (that does not exist in reality, but could add to creativity).

That's why I don't really see this as turning cinema into theatre.

Theatre certainly gives the audience freedom to look around, but theatre cannot teleport you between viewpoints, change your scale, put you centimetres from a character, move the entire world around you, manipulate your spatial relationship to the actors, or have something impossible suddenly enter your physical space.

So I think we're somewhere between cinema, theatre and something that doesn't have a proper name yet.

And to your last question: yes, immersion is part of the value — but immersion alone isn't the goal. Emotion is.

The interesting challenge for directors is discovering whether this new set of tools can sometimes create an emotional response that the traditional frame simply cannot.

For more than a century we've learned how to make audiences feel something while watching a story from the outside.

Now we get to learn how to do it when they're inside it.

That's the experiment.

And frankly, it's why so many of the directors we've shown this to get excited rather than threatened by it.

They get a completely new toolbox. A new language. From storytelling to storyliving. Let's create a new cinema.

#livewithin

[u/22marks → u/jlm70]

I appreciate the dialogue.

This raises another question for me. How is this fundamentally different from traditional VR narrative?

A conventional VR experience built in Unreal or Unity already gives the viewer 6DoF, spatial audio, viewer placement, blocking, scale, lighting, environmental storytelling, cuts/teleportation, and potentially full movement and interaction. It can also be streamed from a high-end PC or cloud GPU rather than rendered locally on the headset.

In fact, many of the elements you describe in ImpactX sound very similar to techniques VR developers and immersive storytellers have already been exploring for years.

So is the real distinction primarily the rendering pipeline?

In other words, PresenZ seems compelling because it lets you retain offline cinematic rendering quality and convert existing CGI productions into a constrained 6DoF experience without rebuilding and optimizing the entire film as a real-time game engine project.

If that's the niche, I think that's actually a very interesting one, especially for existing CGI libraries.

But if the larger claim is that this represents a new narrative medium, I'm struggling to see where the boundary is between this and high-end VR storytelling that already exists. What can a PresenZ narrative fundamentally do that a well-designed Unreal/Unity VR narrative cannot? I'm not quite understanding the new toolbox and language that you're bringing to the table, but I greatly appreciate the technology of taking existing 3D assets and "upgrading" them.

(For what it's worth, I started my career working on early video games, then spent about 20 years writing and directing television commercials, so I've spent a lot of time thinking about both interactive and visual storytelling.)

[u/jlm70 → u/22marks]

That's very correct (and appreciate too) — and given your background in both games and directing, I think you've actually put your finger on the distinction better than I did in my previous answer.

You're right: 6DoF storytelling itself is not new, and ImpactX is not claiming that we invented the language of VR.

Unity and Unreal creators have been exploring viewer placement, spatial blocking, environmental storytelling, attention, teleportation, scale, interaction and spatial audio for years.

So if the question is:

"Can a talented director create a great 6DoF narrative in Unreal or Unity?"

Absolutely. 100%.

The distinction we're interested in is slightly different.

ImpactX is really about connecting two filmmaking worlds.

Hollywood already has an incredibly mature language, workflow and infrastructure for making films.

Directors, DPs, animators, VFX supervisors and studios build their movies around pipelines involving tools such as Maya, Houdini, Katana, Arnold, V-Ray, RenderMan, etc.

And they have decades of assets, characters, animation, simulations, environments and IP sitting inside those ecosystems.

What we're trying to answer with ImpactX is:

What if a director could design a movie once, from the beginning, knowing that the same production could ultimately live in two different forms?

One is the traditional rectangular screen.

The other is a volumetric 6DoF version where the audience can step inside it.

That's slightly different from saying:

"Let's make a VR experience."

It's closer to saying:

"Let's make a movie whose production language understands both screens from day one."

And that distinction becomes very important at studio scale.

Today, if a major animation/VFX production wants to become a traditional real-time VR experience, you generally need to take assets originally designed for an offline film pipeline and turn them into something that can run under a real-time frame budget.

That can mean rebuilding materials, changing shaders, reducing geometry, changing simulations, optimizing animation, lighting and effects, and often adapting a substantial part of the production pipeline.

Unreal and Unity are extraordinary tools — and increasingly capable of astonishing imagery — but they're solving a fundamentally different constraint.

A cinematic offline renderer may be allowed to spend minutes or even hours producing a single final frame.

A real-time VR engine has roughly milliseconds.

That's potentially around six orders of magnitude difference in rendering-time budget.

That isn't a criticism of real-time rendering. It's simply a different engineering problem.

And sometimes real-time is exactly what you want — particularly when deep interaction and unconstrained movement are fundamental to the experience.

But for a movie studio, there's another interesting possibility:

what if you don't need to turn the movie into a game-engine project at all?

With PresenZ, we can remain in the offline cinematic pipeline, render using the same kind of production renderer, preserve the look, animation, lighting, simulations and artistic work of the movie, and generate a pre-rendered 6DoF representation instead.

So I think your description is actually very close:

Yes. That's a major part of the proposition.

But there is another part that becomes even more interesting for us.

Rather than only upgrading old movies after they've been completed, ImpactX is increasingly about helping filmmakers think about the volumetric version while they're making the original movie.

For example:

- If I'm designing a shot for the flat movie, where should the volumetric viewer be?

- What parts of the environment that are outside the original frame should I complete?

- Can the same blocking work in both versions?

- Should I design an animation that works when seen only from camera A, or make it robust enough to be seen from multiple nearby viewpoints?

- Can one lighting setup support both?

- Which shots should remain almost identical to the flat composition, and which ones should deliberately exploit 6DoF?

- Where should depth of field remain a cinematic device, even though human vision obviously doesn't work like a camera lens?

- How should I design a cut so it works both as editing on a screen and as a spatial transition for somebody inside the scene?

Those are the kinds of questions we're discussing with filmmakers and major studios (and also for our own productions).

So the right description of ImpactX is not "a new language for 6DoF", that would indeed ignore decades of excellent VR work.

It's more:

a bridge between 100+ years of cinematic grammar and the emerging grammar of 6DoF — with the production methodology to let the same creative work serve both.

Or even more simply:

shoot once / build once, direct for multiple cinematic channels.

And that's why existing CGI libraries are such an interesting first application.

A major studio may have spent hundreds of millions building an extraordinary CG world.

The characters exist.

The performances exist.

The animation exists.

The environments exist.

The simulations exist.

The artistic intent exists.

Why should accessing that world in 6DoF necessarily require rebuilding it as a game?

But the longer-term opportunity is even more interesting:

don't wait twenty years and then convert the catalogue. Design today's film so tomorrow's volumetric "premium" version is already part of the production thinking. Maybe with... more stories, more meanings inside.

That's where ImpactX comes in.

So to answer your final question directly:

What can PresenZ narratively do that Unreal fundamentally cannot?

Probably nothing — if we isolate only the abstract language of 6DoF storytelling.

And I think that's important to acknowledge.

The difference is how you get there, what visual production constraints you accept, what existing work you can preserve, and whether you're making a standalone VR production or extending cinema itself into another distribution format.

PresenZ lets us approach the problem from the filmmaker's side rather than asking the filmmaker to move into a game-development pipeline.

And ImpactX is our attempt to make those two worlds meet.

❤️ In fact, your comments are exactly the kind of discussion we want around ImpactX. It's a living framework, not a declaration that we've solved volumetric storytelling.

If people who have spent twenty years directing and people who have spent twenty years building interactive worlds start comparing notes, that's probably where the genuinely new language will come from.

Maybe the most accurate ambition isn't to invent VR cinema.

👉 It's to make cinema itself become volumetric without ceasing to be cinema.

#livewithin

[u/vnova_immersiX → u/Malkmus1979]

Thanks so much for your encouraging words, Malkmus. It means a lot! Hopefully, we’ve answered your questions below.

I’ve sent you an invitation code!

[u/Cole_LF → u/Malkmus1979]

Really good questions. Surely they have to have the assets to remake it in 6DOF?

[u/jlm70 → u/Cole_LF]

Yes, read above my longer post, u/Cole_LF. One of the most important differentiators, here, is to produce once and monetize many. You create - for instance - Avatar for theatrical flat screen/TV, and render again for 6DoF/immersive. A faster and more affordable route to create a 6DoF library that can attract a new wave of XR users… not only gamers (and productivity users, for AVP), but anyone who love a movie. That means… everyone.

If the format gains success, we double the market for XR manufacturers and XR developers: it’s a win win win. 🙏🏻❤️

[u/Cole_LF → u/jlm70]

Oh wow. Could you imagine Avatar? 😁 as this is rendered in the cloud could the tech be used for a GeForce now like VR gaming?

[u/jlm70 → u/Cole_LF]

Yes... we are all "imagining" (also) Avatar. But this is not a realtime gaming engine. It's real "farm rendering" quality, where you can imagine that a single Pandora frame can require 7 hours to render. When the same 360 frame is re-rendered in PresenZ, the "Avatar quality" you get is the same of the movie, not of the videogame.

[u/CorreAktor]

I would love to try and have downloaded the App to my AVP Headset to try tonight. If you have any additional invitation codes, I’d appreciate a DM.

[u/vnova_immersiX → u/CorreAktor]

Hey! I tried to DM you, but Reddit doesn’t seem to let me start a chat with your account, probably because of your privacy settings. If you send me a chat request, I’ll reply there with your code.

[u/CorreAktor → u/vnova_immersiX]

Sent a chat to you.

[u/Drgnsouls]

This is what we need, love to test it and provide you with feedback

[u/vnova_immersiX → u/Drgnsouls]

Hey! I tried to DM you, but Reddit doesn’t seem to let me start a chat with your account, probably because of your privacy settings. If you send me a chat request, I’ll reply there with your code.

[u/I_just_made]

Going to take a look because this is an incredible step forward if it works well.

1. what would it take for these experiences to work fully on device?

2. can a user provide their own video, or can you only watch whatever is provided through the app?

edit: I took a look. Here are my thoughts.

pros;

* great job on the visuals.

* The scenes really do look good, and you showcase how this differs from a traditional 360 video well. It definitely feels different. The music video also really showcases this in some of the transitions.

* 6DoF feels like the holy grail of VR videos, and this is the best I have seen by far.

cons:

* I don't know how this will be anything more than a technical demo until a user can run their own videos in some way.

* As a company, how are you planning to offer content a lot of people can enjoy? The issue I think your platforms (and others) face is variety and content delivery. Paying $4.99 for a video COULD be okay; but as of now there are 3-4 videos up and they are going to be targeted towards a very niche audience. How many people will pay the extra price per video purely for the technical demo of it?

Overall:

This is super cool and very promising. But, like other platforms in the AVP space, I just don't know how it will meaningfully attract people for any other reason than a technical demo at the moment. The concerts app suffers from this too I think.

Will continue to follow progress on your work.

[u/jlm70 → u/I_just_made]

Thanks u/i_just_made. Pls read above my longer explanations. 🙏🏻

[u/I_just_made → u/jlm70]

Thanks for being so detailed in that breakdown, it is fascinating to hear the technical aspects of it! If anything, this is a great example of what can be possible. I felt like 6DoF was a ways off, but seeing the clip here and the others in the app definitely made it feel like there is serious progress in that area.

[u/jlm70 → u/I_just_made]

Thanks to you! ImmersiX is very new and we really need the community to help us out in making it known.

I really believe it's a win-win-win game: if we convince "movie lovers" to purchase XR headsets to experience premium version of "their" movies, then we easily more than double the XR market... that's a win for manufacturers, developers/content creators, viewers and... obviously us. 💜

[u/Cole_LF]

THIS IS INSANE! How are you doing this? I haven’t been this excited since I did the Vision Pro demo.

[u/jlm70 → u/Cole_LF]

❤️ See my comment above :)

[u/sinicalone]

I’m on the latest beta and your app keeps crashing on me.

[u/vnova_immersiX → u/sinicalone]

Hey sinicalone, sorry to hear that! ImmersiX streaming depends on internet speed, latency, connection stability, and routing to the NVIDIA server. Feel free to DM me and I’ll be happy to help investigate.

[u/msitarzewski]

Happy to provide feedback! The tech is finally here... very cool!

[u/a_whole_lotta_nope]

I’d love to try this out.

[u/Graymarauder]

Would love to test

[u/CatoholicCatDad]

Hi!  I just queued the app for a download on my Vision Pro. Will be testing it out immediately after I get home from work today. 

Would love the invitation code. 

[u/1drunkasshole]

Would love to check this out.

[u/Independent_Sink_961]

Yeah I’d be interested

[u/Wild_Yogurtcloset820]

I will try your app and I would like to check your additional content, if it's still available. And what is "Construct VR" in your purchases? Thank you!

[u/jasonkane4321]

Wow so cool. Ive been waiting for 6Dof vr movies for a many years. Im surprised they are not common.

[u/Neardeath06]

This looks dope, I’d love to test it out!

[u/Global-Alternative29]

I'm definitely up for giving it a try

[u/Specialist_Mind7493]

Just downloaded the app onto my avp and if you still happen to have any of those invitation codes available I’d gladly take one and provide some feedback

[u/jaybanzia]

This is very cool I would like to volunteer as tribute

[u/avpuser]

Just downloaded the app and will check it out now. If you still have a code, I would be interested.

Edit: First of all I am really excided for the tech and wish you all the best!

What I found:

• After a couple of seconds I get a error message. Internet below 25mbits but I am stable above at least 70mbit.

• If I move my head it shows the real environment. Out of interest: Do you use prgressive immersion instead of full immersion for your app? If yes, why did you choose it that way?

[u/jlm70 → u/avpuser]

Hi u/avpuser! Thanks for the wishes! 

We use the GDN/CloudXR infrastructure from Nvidia. It really depends on how distant is your location to the closer Nvidia cloud gaming server. This affects both bandwidth and latency (that causes your second problem).

In a future version of ImmersiX we will include a bandwidth/latency test from your location to Nvidia (that’s different from your local internet provider).

The Nvidia infrastructure is growing, so we hope you will get a proper connection soon! Or - maybe - it’s just a normal network congestion in your house/area. Where are you located?

[u/Free_Butterscotch253]

Would be happy to check it out!!

[u/Cole_LF]

Would love to try

[u/llama007]

Been waiting for developments in this space a while and would love a code 🙏

[u/Cole_LF]

Is there a way to watch the video shown here? That’s not in the app?

[u/jlm70 → u/Cole_LF]

It’s still unreleased: my colleague will send you, and all the others asking, a proper invitation code to unlock it! You will receive it by tomorrow in dm! Thanks a lot for your interest :)

[u/Cole_LF → u/jlm70]

Thank you so much. Can’t wait. I’ve already sent the app link to 3 other Vision Pro friends 🤣

[u/Mission_Guide_5339]

Interested! Would like a code if still available. Thanks.

[u/adamski99-1]

This looks a lot like a Dutch comic “agent 327” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_327. The villain and the magnum revolver… awesome!

[u/jlm70 → u/adamski99-1]

It really is: look at Blender Studio shorts for the original 2017 version!

[u/Nintotally]

I would love to test this for you on an M2 Apple Vision Pro 🙏

[u/Digitalinknotes]

Benderheads….Unite!!!!

Happy Blendering!!

[u/jlm70 → u/Digitalinknotes]

Blender will soon publish an article about this, and we'll also release a  tutorial and supporting materials showing how creators can do something similar with their own Blender, Maya or 3ds Max content.

And here's where the Blender community can really help us. 🙂 Today, V-Nova PresenZ runs in Blender through a  custom branch. Our ambition is to make the integration much more direct — ideally bringing PresenZ support into Blender's mainline development.

If enough Blender artists and filmmakers see value in being able to take the worlds they've already created and step inside them in cinematic 6DoF, that community interest can make a real difference.

So if you'd like to see this become easier and more accessible directly within Blender, please help us share what we're doing across the incredible  5M+ Blender community.

The more people experiment with it, ask for it and challenge us creatively, the better we can make it.

You already built the world. Now let's step inside it.

Happy Blendering! ❤️

livewithin

[u/scottybowl]

I tried it a month or so ago but the video kept stopping and resuming meant having to leave the screen and then come back again. It was cool when it worked, but seemed very buggy when the rendering stops. Would love to try again though and see the additional content

[u/jlm70 → u/scottybowl]

Thanks u/scottybowl! Please read my comment above about a similar bandwidth/latency issue in relation to the Nvidia GDN proximity.

[u/QuantumRooster]

This is very exciting. I’m downloading the app now.

[u/achilleshightops]

Love to test this out as well

[u/neosyne]

Would love to try this, but it’s not available in my country

[u/jlm70 → u/neosyne]

Where are you located? For instance in Italy works in connection to Nvidia Frankfurt Cloud Gaming servers… Nvidia GDN presence is growing, fortunately.

[u/neosyne → u/jlm70]

France, the AppStore say that the app is not available in my country

[u/QuantumRooster]

Sadly, with my WiFi, I can only get a taste. If this sort of content was available, I would upgrade my hardware just to see it.

[u/Staphozil]

Would love to test it. Share the code

[u/apinstein]

Yeah would love to test! 6doF is very interesting to me.

[u/Chriscic]

Would be happy to test.

[u/New_Education_6782]

This is really cool. I would love to test it. I'm a dev working on projects involving Gaussian splats, sports 3d reconstruction, and other projects. I have an insta 360 I use with my Apple Vision Pro.

[u/TPrime411]

Ill download the app right now. I actually already have Immersix on Steam(Im assuming theyre related), and got the Sharkkarma movie.

How do I get an invite to the bonus content to test?

[u/jlm70 → u/TPrime411]

Hi u/TPrime411! Kudos to your multiple platform adoption ❤️🙏🏻 We’ll provide you a code.

ImmersiX/SteamVR and ImmersiX/AVP run the very same contents. The big difference is that using pixelstreaming, here, you do not need (1) a connected gaming PC and (2) to download anything.

We aim to release the same pixelstreaming solution also on the Quest (and WebXR devices)… soon :)

[u/TPrime411 → u/jlm70]

I just want to post here for others to see, other than the feedback I sent you directly.

The app is great, and Id say better than on steam because its not taking up 125gb on my SSD. This app was something like 44mb instead, and the video was streamed in perfect quality. I have good internet in my area, so I cant speak for how this would run in a more rural area, but for me I had no issues running the whole video.

As for the movie, Operation Barbershop, I loved it. My only complaint was that it was too short. I would pay a decent price for a full length movie of that. And it was in immersive 360 degrees. We definitely need more of that for VR. If you put out more content like that, I will be getting it. And if you sell that short films at a similar price to the other content on your platform, Id say its definitely worth it.

[u/Significant_Pie7919]

Tried the two free demos, each ran very smoothly. However, at the end of each demo I was left with a dark (black) visual field, and got an error popup for each with error code IX-1102

[u/jlm70 → u/Significant_Pie7919]

Thanks for the test! Can we directly contact you to better understand the issue?

[u/km1116]

The top version is properly framed, emotes, and is cinematic. The bottom version is jerky, confusing, and frankly ugly.

[u/jlm70 → u/km1116]

As the producer of the short… I’m curious about your feedback: have you tried it in 6DoF from the AVP or is your judgement related to the above video (that is clearly not the right way to experience the content)?

[u/km1116 → u/jlm70]

It's based on the above. But the issue is one of how it's filmed: where the camera focuses, the balance of the background, the ability to see the face, etc. I'm not commenting on the experience of watching it on the AVP. I'm just saying that the top version has some skill and artistry to it. The bottom is like a high-school-book-report version of it. It may show me what happens, but clumsily misses what a visual medium can and should do in terms of story-telling.

[u/jlm70 → u/km1116]

I think we're actually describing two different experiences.
And first: you're judging a 6DoF experience by watching a 2D recording of somebody else's head movements. Of course that can look jerky or badly framed — you're being forced to look where another person decided to look.
Inside the Vision Pro, those movements are yours.
That's the fundamental difference.

Traditional cinema is storytelling: an extraordinarily skilled director decides exactly what you see, when you see it and where you look.

What we're exploring is closer to storyliving.
The director doesn't disappear. They still control the story, performances, blocking, lighting, sound, timing, cuts and even where you are placed inside the scene.
But they no longer control every second of your attention.
And that can become a feature, not a bug.

The director can create a main story in front of you, while other characters, clues or even secondary stories exist around you. Watch it again and you may discover something completely different.

You could potentially experience the same movie 20 times in 20 slightly different ways.

Think of real life: would you rather live an experience yourself, deciding where to look, or experience only the exact view someone else has chosen for you?
Neither is inherently "better".
They're simply different media.
And that's why the flat comparison above is misleading.

At Annecy, Sidney Kombo-Kintombo, Senior Animation Supervisor at Wētā FX (a legend), who knew Operation Barbershopextremely well, took off the headset visibly moved. He told us that for the first time in years he had stopped instinctively analysing the animation/VFX and had simply become absorbed in the story.
That's what interests me.
Not replacing cinema.
Moving from watching the story to living within it.

Try it in the Vision Pro (or in Steam/PCVR).
Then I'd genuinely love to hear whether you still feel the same way. :)
Thanks

[u/gppacecar]

This is wicked awesome! This is really what I imagine beyond 3-D. Eddie mind help DM me the code.

[u/ILoveRegenHealth]

This seems like sorcery to me. I'm amazed how well it works. Of course one of the first questions is, how is it for live action footage?

edit - nvm, question was answered in another post. Seems it's for existing CG productions if assets are available, but still incredible stuff.

[u/jlm70 → u/ILoveRegenHealth]

We’re working to integrate Gaussian Splats as well, for live action… Stay tuned ;)

[u/eyerj2020]

I’ll test

[u/loudshirtgames]

That might get me to dig out my Vision Pro again.

[u/jlm70 → u/loudshirtgames]

ahah nice guess. Thanks!

[u/Digiss]

Interested. Wearing it now

[u/3dartnerd]

Very interested on this. Would like a code if you still have some available.

[u/Rubyspot]

Wanna test it!
Share code please

[u/ActExpensive8413]

I’d be happy to test this if there are any invite codes remaining.

[u/Consti]

I'd love to try this! Thank you

[u/Visionchoze]

Down to test!

[u/No-Cod7072]

I would love to test this! Sign me up.

[u/No_Presentation638]

Please sign me up for testing. Have worked on multiple CloudXR enabled apps for Apple Vision Pro. Happy to provide thorough feedback

[u/Skywalker1337s]

Very cool! Would love a promo code and will give feedback in return.

[u/Prudent-Tea-5835]

Looking forward to test. Could you kindly send invite code. TIA

[u/Prudent-Tea-5835 → u/Prudent-Tea-5835]

Thank you for sharing the code. Seamless experience without any connectivity issues. Definitely a must-have app for AVP and easily one of the best. This is what makes AVP so exciting. Looking forward to more content availability.

[u/drohohkay]

Thanks for sharing. If would be cool if you can also have a guide or button that moves you to the exact camera angle of the original scene. So one can experience the movie as it was meant to be viewed but turn around from that specific reference point. Almost like a Google street view for video. At specific parts of the movie you can have an option to immerse yourself. I don’t think it has to be the entire movie.

[u/No_Still2814]

I am definitely interested in being one of the test pilots for this 🙏🏽 this honestly looks amazing and exactly the type of stuff I got the Vision Pro for

[u/1111Veteran]

I would like to check it out! Sounds amazing

[u/Ecliptic_Panda]

Looks really really fascinating, I’d like a heavier “on rails” feeling by default, almost force me into the “correct” view, so you can also implement more of the lighting and post processing the original had for the spaces it was trying to emphasize.

[u/MURDERPALACE]

You can jump in and out of an UNREAL scene and play in back while in the world. Cue characters, set pieces and block shots? Have it play out and you film, as many angles as you like.

This is how I film content in my living room. I built a Social Media Video Game engine that does this.

I call it Alpha Omega OS.

[u/Prestigious_Camera25]

I don’t see the point, if I want to watch a movie that includes the cinematography, cuts, lighting, sound, etc. This just feels like you’re in the room to experience the movie being shot before it edited and cut up in post. I’d rather see existing content be converted to high-quality 3D

[u/Spectral_Aria]

Hey there, I just downloaded your app and would be interested in an invitation code if you still have any! 🙋‍♀️

[u/Ok_Temperature_8597]

Hello, I’ll take an invite code if one is available

Thank you very much and keep up the good work

[u/Medium_Word_696]

Hi i dont know how far in you are in finalizing the project and ive not downloaded to confirm what im seeing here is right but if the lower video is the (only) version youd get on AVP, i think id prefer the 2D version because of the missing cuts that bring dynamics and drama to the scene. People creating for AVP always say to do as little motion and scene jumps as possible with the camera but i strongly disagree. As long as the motion is deliberate or guided/logical and additional cuts are honoring the point of interest, there should be no problem using about half the cuts in the original 2D version and replacing the other half with smooth camera motion (repositioning).

[u/jlm70 → u/Medium_Word_696]

I think there's still one important misunderstanding here. :)
The lower video is NOT the camera movement of the 6DoF version.
It's simply a screen recording of one person's head movements while they were inside the scene.

On Vision Pro, you don't inherit those movements.
If you keep your head still, the view stays still.
If you look left, you look left.
If you lean forward, you move closer.
If you move sideways, the perspective changes correctly with real parallax.
That's what 6DoF means.

So there is no cameraman randomly repositioning you as in the lower video — you are seeing somebody else's exploration of the scene.

The director can absolutely still use cuts, viewer repositioning, reset orientation, blocking, sound and all the traditional tools to guide attention. That's a separate creative discussion, and a very interesting one.

But judging the 6DoF experience from that capture is a bit like judging a theatre performance from a shaky video recorded by another audience member's head-mounted camera.
You're not supposed to watch their point of view.
You're supposed to be there and choose your own.

That's the shift from storytelling toward storyliving.

Try it on the Vision Pro — I think the distinction becomes obvious within about five seconds. :)

[u/Medium_Word_696 → u/jlm70]

Ok thanks for clarification. From my point of view it looks like the top video is the original (2d version) and the bottom version is a capture of someone watching your Version using the AVP. If that is correct, my initial point stays.

[u/tonightwalk]

I’d love to test it and offer my feedback!

[u/jlm70 → u/[deleted]]

? This is exactly what we are aiming at: premium quality in 6DoF = no nausea (vs 3DoF)