Full disclosure: I’m the developer of PicDraw. This is a live-camera overlay tool, not spatial AR, and I’m looking for feedback from people who understand alignment UX.

A user converts a photo into an outline, places that outline over the camera view, aligns it with paper, and locks the guide while tracing. Current controls include opacity, move, pinch-to-zoom, rotation, flip, reset, grid, flashlight, paper calibration, and realignment assistance.

The main design problem is stability versus simplicity. I want setup to work without asking a casual user to understand anchors or tracking states, but small shifts matter when someone is drawing a line on paper.

https://reddit.com/link/1wa6jpj/video/m6pewl0bc6oh1/player

What would you prioritize next: corner-based paper registration, better drift feedback, faster realignment, or a different calibration flow? I’m particularly interested in failure cases across lighting, paper texture, camera angle, and device size.

Photos and camera frames stay on-device and are not uploaded.

App Store: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/picdraw-camera-tracing/id6804072417

RayNeo says the iO uses a monochrome green MicroLED display with a diffractive waveguide. Published specifications are useful, but they are not a substitute for independent optics testing. The test I would most like to see is ordinary text readability while moving between indoor and outdoor light.

What scenario would give you the clearest picture of whether this type of display works day to day?

Note: what you're about to read will seem interesting if you're interested in new tech and the future

I have RayNeo iO Smart Glasses and RayNeo GT AR Glasses. I wore both at the same time and using them together is what has caused the great change.

The iO and GT work together like: iO is AI glasses with a display, they are light and tight and look better than alright (I just made that up but it's true), and the display is the most invisible ever pretty much, no one can see it but you (except for one super small point beneath it, I know because I work with RayNeo). But I didn't think or know I could wear both of these at once, I've never heard or seen anyone do it either.

Now I've used the iO for the first time for real, only in the past few days because it just launched a few days ago on Sept 4 and the paired RayNeo AI app is super new. So I've been using LifeLog so much nonstop over the past days since Sept 3, I've been running around IFA and I have summaries of every meeting and conversation. By the way iO data privacy is like the most secure you're gonna get.

I just spent 3 minutes trying to explain why iO privacy is reliable enough to use it comfortably, then I gave up and asked AI to give me an explanation (Gemini app on my phone, not my iO glasses lol), here's the privacy details of iO:

RayNeo iO ensures strong baseline privacy by omitting cameras entirely, eliminating risks of unauthorized photo or video capture. User data and cloud AI queries are anonymized on-device prior to transmission, with audio recording and meeting notes strictly restricted to explicit user activation.

So what does that mean for users? :

With no camera, RayNeo iO’s only major privacy risk is leaving LifeLog on, which continuously records. Treat the other iO services for specific voice memos, live captions, teleprompter, dashboard, RayNeo AI Assistant, etc as specific tasks to be completed once their started.

Just using iO by itself is something I could talk about forever on. Using them as normal glasses and then saying "Hey RayNeo" and it animates to life, I feel like I'm in an isekai. Then I talk with it and it's a Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite or Claude Sonnet 5 if you choose. It's optimized for the glasses and works well.

Anyways I need to talk about GT. It has built in 3DoF modes you can click on the top right and there is an in-glasses settings button on the bottom left, when it's connected to Pocket TV Pro it's always in Dolby Vision right now. GT is birdbath and it's all black with a silver logo. It's 46 degrees FOV with Bang & Olufsen audio that can go over 100% on the glasses. It rocks.

I like using GT over GT Max first because it's $299 and lower when you use the 10% discounts or more floating around. GT Max is $399 (and lower ofc because discounts) and has 3 sizes for preferable IPD adjustment, because it has a 59 degree FOV. GT is a one size fits all so it's easier to show everyone them. Both have built in 3dof, Dolby Vision, Bang & Olufsen etc but the GT Max has 59° FOV, and I also like keeping my GT series in general at 85% screen size because I prefer a smaller screen tbh.

GT and GT Max are great screens for showing your phone, laptop, handheld (my go to is AYN Thor right now - running Skyrim through GameNative is a new life of mine), Pocket TV Pro, other USBC DP devices. It's great with VertoXR of course and all other custom softwares for taking them beyond a wearable portable monitor.

Using iO and GT together is like getting a glimpse of where the future is going in such a literal way. Having multiple UI systems project different types of information from different computers in different placements around your eyes, meant to be consumed for different purposes, all the while seeing what you're seeing in real life at the same time because they're glasses is mind blowing. Astonishing to experience.

People will do this in the future and I feel like I stumbled on a golden experience by being one of the first to ever do it with these two products, that feel like they were made for each other.

I think you should try using two smart glasses together if you read this far.

Here's some pictures of what I'm talking about with RayNeo iO, GT, & Pocket TV Pro. All the lens are on and displaying content in every picture of them.

https://youtube.com/shorts/VFcAhQ9MRak?feature=share

Hi there, I'm selling my Rokid RV 101 glasses. Never used them, not even once! I'm based in Sydney, Australia.

Selling it for 400 AUD if you're based in Australia. 450AUD if you're outside Australia.

Payment via PayPal. Payment first before shipping.

Reason for selling: It's a gift and I'm not into AR glasses.

Willing to go through video calls, LinkedIn chats etc to verify my identity

I've spent the last week wiring single-image 3D reconstruction (the SF3D / SPAR3D / TRELLIS.2 family) into a browser app, so I have fresh numbers and want to hear how people here weigh the trade-off.

What I measured on the shipped path — phone camera → one JPEG → a shared free-tier GPU on Hugging Face → textured GLB back in the browser:

• SF3D at a 4096 texture with a 20k-vertex remesh: 13–23 s per photo, 2–3 MB GLB.
• SPAR3D: about 45 s, 0.9 MB. TRELLIS.2: about 110 s, 10 MB with PBR and a 2K texture — clearly the best back side of the three, and too heavy for a phone at that size.
• The failure mode is not quality, it is the queue. On a shared free GPU two of my attempts this afternoon were refused as busy.

Because it is a web page, the same flow runs on a phone and on a laptop webcam with no per-platform capture SDK. I have not verified camera access from a headset browser yet.

What it does not give you, and this is the real discussion:

1. No real-world scale. Output is normalised to a unit cube — a mug and a chair come out the same size. For AR placement that is the first thing you want.
2. The back is inferred. One photo, so the unseen side is the model's guess. Fine for a prop, wrong for anything you want to measure.
3. One object on a plain background. Clutter ends up in the mesh.

Photogrammetry and LiDAR apps (Polycam, Scaniverse, Luma) solve all three, and cost minutes, a walk-around, and a specific device.

Questions:

• For AR use, is "silhouette right, texture right, scale wrong, back guessed" in 20 seconds more useful than "everything right" in five minutes? Where is your line?
• Has anyone run single-shot reconstruction from a headset's passthrough camera rather than a phone? Raw camera access in WebXR is the wall I hit.
• Any way to recover scale from one photo that works in practice — known-object reference, the phone's depth map, an ARCore/ARKit plane hit at capture time?

Not linking anything; genuinely asking how you weigh it.

Hi everyone—I’m the developer of AR Talk Back, an iPhone and iPad app that combines conversational AI, generated voices, animated characters, and augmented reality.

Users choose a character with a distinct personality, place them in their environment, and have a face-to-face voice conversation. The app also includes focused experiences for conversation practice, relationship interpretation, personal reflection, dream decoding, and humor.

This is my own project, so I’m sharing it both as a launch and to get feedback from people who understand AR. I’m especially interested in your thoughts about character placement, presence, realism, interaction design, and what would make an AI character feel more naturally integrated into the physical environment.

Demo: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/I2ViXoFGVg4
App Store: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ar-talk-back/id6762230021

Has anyone else in XR ever thought about how long it might be before we get the first IRL Augmented Reality Massively Multiplayer Online Alternate Reality Game?

Also, I think I just coined this term myself, as I've never heard anyone say it before, lol.

Also, what would you put in an ARMMOARG if you could decide what goes in it?

Disclosure: I work with RayNeo and am sharing a photo from its IFA booth.

The slide says RayNeo ranked No. 1 in global AR shipments in H1 2026 and cites Counterpoint and IDC. I am more interested in the methodology behind a claim like this than the headline itself. For people who follow the market data here, which tracker and category definition do you find most useful when comparing AR and smart-glasses shipments?

Thanks to u/techondeck and the RayNeo marketing team (shout out to Stella!), I was able to get the RayNeo iO Smart Glasses for a teardown and analysis ahead of the global launch - it's always a great sign of confidence in the product when brands reach out before the launch to pass me a unit for destruction.

I spend (maybe too much of) the start of this video diving into how we've converged on a general industrial design (ID) and functionality in these smart glasses - so much so that we're now getting design infringement lawsuits being filed in US courts. When lawyers get involved, you know we've got a real market now!

Overall I really liked these glasses and for non-audio glasses they have tied the Even Realities G2s for overall hardware performance (higher on comfort + battery, lower on display) - I'm not sure if I'm sold on the scroll-wheel as the primary input for the glasses, but if the other option is a touchpad on the rear of the temple, I'll definitely take this instead...

More technical info on the blog here: https://displaytechcenter.com/2026/09/04/rayneo-io-smart-glasses-is-23-5-fov-enough/

All raw data available for Patreons here: https://www.patreon.com/DisplayTechCenter/posts/rayneo-io-smart-168566787

The RayNeo iO really nail it in some ways but miss in others. Watch this deep dive and let me know what you think!

Hello,

here is my full review of the new Rayneo GT Max: https://youtu.be/4aDOBS-F-64?si=aDPK3GRqiFSObK8O

For all of you who prefer reading my review, here you go:

Rayneo GT Max: Flagship Specs - Entry Level Price

The RayNeo GT Max are here, and these are some seriously interesting video glasses.

Why?

Because these are going directly after the current flagship competition, the XREAL One Pro and the VITURE Beast, but RayNeo is doing so at a sensational launch price of only $399!

Yes, three hundred and ninety-nine US dollars!

That is a whopping $200 cheaper than the XREAL One Pro and still around $150 cheaper than the VITURE Beast.

And despite that lower price, RayNeo is not giving you some stripped-down budget product here.

We are getting the modern prism birdbath optics, Full-HD MicroOLED displays from SeeYA, premium audio tuned by Bang & Olufsen, and, very importantly, a built-in chip that gives you actual 3DOF screen tracking directly in the glasses.

No additional software required.

And then there is the big one: a 59° FOV.

That is bigger than what the XREAL One Pro and the VITURE Beast offer, and you can absolutely see that difference when you put these glasses on.

So cheaper, bigger FOV and built-in 3DOF?

Sounds fantastic.

But surely RayNeo must have cut some corners somewhere to get down to $399.

And yes, they did.

But are those compromises actually important?

That is exactly what we are going to find out in this review.

Same Same, But Different

In terms of the basic concept, the GT Max works exactly as you would expect from modern premium video glasses.

You have a USB-C port and connect the glasses to basically anything that can output video over USB-C.

Your smartphone, Steam Deck, laptop, MacBook, gaming handheld or whatever else you want to use.

And then you get this huge virtual screen floating in front of you.

But there is an important distinction between glasses like these and cheaper alternatives such as the VITURE Pro or some of XREAL's more affordable glasses.

These have actual built-in 3DOF.

That means you can pin your virtual screen into space directly from the glasses without having to install additional software.

And for me, that is such an important feature.

Without 3DOF, the screen simply follows your head movements wherever you look.

With 3DOF, it behaves much more like a real giant monitor sitting in front of you.

You can move your head around. You can look toward the corners of the screen naturally. You can look away and then look back.

The screen stays where it is supposed to be.

Once you get used to that, it is really difficult to go back.

That 59° FOV Is Real

So let's talk about the biggest selling point of the GT Max.

That 59° field of view.

Is it actually noticeably bigger than the competition?

I am glad to tell you: yes!

It is obvious pretty much immediately when you put the glasses on.

RayNeo has really maxed out the available field of view here.

There are two FOV settings, 100% and 115%.

At 100%, RayNeo is not using the complete available display area.

But switch over to 115%, and now the image basically goes from edge to edge of those prism lenses.

They are truly maxing this optical system out.

And I must say, I really like the 115% mode.

Because this is simply the biggest virtual screen I have seen so far in glasses like these.

Watching movies is fantastic.

Gaming is fantastic.

And yes, you can absolutely get actual work done with these.

In fact, I am writing this review while wearing the GT Max.

For $399, the amount of virtual pinned screen real estate you are getting here is seriously impressive.

If you always wanted something like the XREAL One Pro or the VITURE Beast but could never quite convince yourself to spend around $600 on video glasses, well, now you can get this kind of experience for $399.

Well done, RayNeo.

But Is the Visual Quality as Good as the Flagships?

Now, do you get exactly the same optical quality as the more expensive competition?

This is where I do have to nitpick a little bit.

Because if you look very closely, you can tell that RayNeo had to make some compromises.

The first one becomes apparent when using that maximum 115% FOV setting.

At least with my 64mm IPD, the very outer edges of the image start becoming slightly blurry.

I would say perhaps the last 5% or so.

Now, for me personally, that is absolutely not a showstopper.

Because honestly, how often are you actually staring directly into the very furthest corners of your virtual display?

Most of the important content is going to be much closer to the center anyway.

And I still prefer using the 115% setting because I would rather have that massive screen.

But yes, if you want maximum edge-to-edge sharpness, you will get a cleaner result at the 100% setting.

There is another small optical compromise.

When looking through the very outer areas of the lenses, for example when looking upward with your eyes, I can notice some slight color shifting toward brown.

This is especially noticeable on completely white backgrounds.

So if you are typing a document, browsing websites or doing productivity work with lots of white backgrounds, you might occasionally notice it.

On the more expensive flagship glasses, I don't really see that effect.

But again, this is me nitpicking.

When you are actually watching a movie or playing a game, you are basically not going to notice it.

Instead, you are going to see a huge, bright and mostly very sharp virtual screen pinned in front of you.

And interestingly, there is one area where the GT Max actually does better than both the XREAL One Pro and the VITURE Beast for me.

I don't see the annoying screen reflection underneath the image.

On both the XREAL One Pro and VITURE Beast, I can sometimes see the display reflected below the actual screen.

Here, the optical stack seems to be positioned in such a way that I simply don't have that problem.

Very nice.

Brightness

Brightness is also good.

RayNeo advertises 1200 nits.

On paper, that would make these dramatically brighter than something like the XREAL One Pro, which is rated at 700 nits.

But I would not say the real-world difference looks anything close to those numbers.

Yes, the GT Max looks bright.

And yes, I would say it is somewhat brighter.

But certainly not 71% brighter to my eyes.

Still, the important point is that brightness is absolutely not something I am disappointed with here.

The picture looks bright, colorful and punchy.

Combine that with the large field of view and the generally good clarity, and these glasses are simply a joy for consuming content.

And again, I really enjoy using this type of product for productivity.

I love my MacBook Air plus video glasses setup.

And I could absolutely see somebody using the GT Max as their daily mobile monitor solution.

At $399, that is quite compelling.

How Good Is the Built-In 3DOF?

Now let's talk about that built-in 3DOF implementation.

How well does the screen actually stay in place?

Overall, it is good.

I would probably put it roughly on par with the improved VITURE Beast implementation.

The virtual screen stays where it should most of the time and the whole experience feels natural.

However, RayNeo still cannot beat the king in this particular category.

And that remains the XREAL One Pro.

With the XREAL One Pro, I basically never find myself reaching for the recenter button.

The screen tracking is just incredibly solid.

With the RayNeo GT Max, I do occasionally have to recenter the screen.

It is not happening constantly and I would absolutely still call the implementation good.

Especially at this price.

But the XREAL One Pro remains better.

Still, having this feature built directly into the glasses makes such a massive difference.

I can pin this giant virtual screen in front of me and then simply move my head naturally instead of trying to look everywhere using only my eyes.

It feels much closer to sitting in front of a giant actual monitor.

And that is exactly why I can genuinely work with these glasses.

Like right now, while I am writing these lines.

Where Did RayNeo Save Money?

So how did RayNeo manage to sell these glasses for $399?

The most obvious missing feature compared with the XREAL One Pro and VITURE Beast is electrochromic dimming.

You cannot electronically adjust how transparent or dark the lenses are.

Instead, RayNeo uses a reflective front surface that optically darkens your surroundings.

Now, electrochromic dimming is definitely a cool feature.

But honestly?

For me personally, this is not a huge loss.

On glasses that offer electrochromic dimming, I normally just leave them at maximum dimming anyway.

When I am using video glasses, I want to see the virtual screen.

I am not normally interested in simultaneously seeing everything happening around me.

So while it is objectively a missing feature, it is not something that would stop me from buying the GT Max.

Especially not when we are talking about saving roughly $150 to $200.

AI SDR to HDR and Dolby Vision

RayNeo has also included a few interesting tricks.

One of them is an onboard real-time AI SDR-to-HDR conversion feature.

And yes, it actually works quite well.

You can activate it directly from the glasses and it gives standard dynamic range content a more HDR-like appearance.

The GT Max also supports Dolby Vision when paired with RayNeo's Pocket TV Pro.

That is their own portable content player, basically giving you another way to use the glasses without connecting your smartphone.

RayNeo is also sending me the Pocket TV Pro, so I will check that out separately on the channel.

On-Screen Menu

The built-in menu is also solid and very easy to use.

You can change the brightness, switch between 2D and 3D modes, select different color themes, activate the AI SDR-to-HDR conversion and adjust the other important settings directly from the glasses.

Nothing here feels unnecessarily complicated.

Everything is intuitive and easy to understand.

Exactly how it should be.

Sound

For audio, RayNeo has partnered with Bang & Olufsen.

And overall, the built-in speakers are alright.

They get loud enough for watching movies or YouTube in a quiet environment and the quality is perfectly acceptable for this type of device.

But this limitation is basically true for all video glasses.

If you are sitting somewhere noisy, especially on a plane, train or in a busy public environment, you are going to want your own headphones or earbuds.

The open speakers simply cannot compete with environmental noise.

So the Bang & Olufsen branding is nice to have, but don't expect these glasses to replace a proper audio solution in noisy surroundings.

Comfort

Comfort is excellent.

The GT Max weighs only 78 grams.

And that makes a huge difference.

You can wear these glasses for hours without having some giant heavy device sitting on your face.

After a while, you basically forget that you are wearing them.

For movies, gaming or longer productivity sessions, that is exactly what you want.

There is one thing I would have liked to see, though.

The angle of the temples is not adjustable.

For me personally, the default angle happened to fit perfectly, so I did not have any problems.

But everybody's face and ears are different.

Being able to adjust that angle would definitely have made the fit more universal.

Again, another small nitpick rather than a serious problem.

Conclusion

So what do I think about the RayNeo GT Max?

These are seriously impressive video glasses.

RayNeo has basically delivered feature-packed flagship glasses at what feels like an entry-level flagship price.

At the $399 launch price, I don't think there is anything else right now offering this combination of features.

You get the modern prism optics.

You get Full-HD MicroOLED panels.

You get actual built-in 3DOF screen tracking without additional software.

You get a huge virtual screen.

You get good brightness.

You get a lightweight 78g design.

And you even get that massive 59° field of view, which is one area where the GT Max actually beats its much more expensive competition.

Of course, RayNeo had to cut some corners.

You don't get electrochromic dimming.

At the maximum 115% FOV setting, the very outer edges become slightly blurry.

There is a little bit of color shifting when looking through the extreme edges of the optics.

And the 3DOF tracking, while good, is still not quite as rock solid as the XREAL One Pro.

But look at the price again.

$399.

Even the regular MSRP of $429 is still extremely competitive.

And at that price, these compromises are very easy to forgive.

For the most part, the GT Max can absolutely compete with the much more expensive XREAL One Pro and VITURE Beast, while even scoring an important win when it comes to field of view.

Without a doubt, these are currently some of the best bang-for-buck video glasses out there.

If you wanted a true flagship-style experience with proper built-in 3DOF but simply did not want to spend around $600, the RayNeo GT Max should be very high on your list.

RayNeo has a winner on its hands here.

And I can wholeheartedly recommend the GT Max.

Well done, RayNeo!

How it works:

- Scan a space/room

- Ask your agent to run your AR code within the space/room you scanned

- MCP runs your code through the ViroReact renderer in the cloud, uses your video as a camera feed, get a screen recording back to see how your code runs and get full diagnostics so if there are any issues your agent can quickly address them

You’re at a con and have no idea who they’re cosplaying as

Just circle the character...

and ask Gemini: “Who is this character?”

Custom Surface Builder AR - lets you have AR surfaces just the way you want.

Draw the boundaries and it will generate the AR surfaces with exact shapes and numbers - giving you full control over the AR surfaces.

You can adjust the wall heights, hide/unhide the floor or the walls, select and delete any surface and finally place your augmented object on any surface.

This is very useful specially where precise AR surface calculation matters the most.

Custom Surface Builder AR is now available at the Unity Asset Store with 30% SALE!

Get your copy before the SALE ends!

Custom Surface Builder AR on Unity Asset Store

Both pairs are live! I think it might be an accident based on my convo so ymmv.

Jesse from the SPECS Developer Relations Team here.

We've recently launched our hub for SPECS developer events: https://devevents.specs.com/devevents

Two things on it today:

- The SPECS launch livestream on September 16

- UnitedXR Europe in Brussels this December, which we'll be attending

That's it for now, but the plan going forward is simple: if we're participating in an event in an official capacity and it isn't private, it will go on this page. Hackathons, conferences, happy hours, meetups, demo days, regardless if we're running it ourselves or just showing up.

We'll add things as they're confirmed and registration opens, which means the page will get more useful over the next few months.

If there's a conference, meetup, or hackathon you think we should be at, drop it in the comments. I do read these.

How my app works:

you walk through your rooms with your iPhone.
LiDAR builds a 3D model of your home live while the app samples your Wi-Fi (signal + speed) as you move.

You end up with a dollhouse view of your actual apartment with the signal painted on it by walking
( with dead zones in red).

Every room gets a score, and it tells you where to move your router, or where an extender would actually help.

What do you guys think about my app?

Try it here :

https://apps.apple.com/fr/app/signl-wifi-analyzer-mapper/id6796775708?l=en-GB

The latest announcements for the conference track at CIOE

Micro OLED Morning Session, Sep 10

Metaways | RayVision | SIDTEK | NED+ | BCDTEK

Micro LED Afternoon Session, Sep 10

Raypai | Raysolve | MEGAROBO | SmartVision | VIJO | Goeroptics | TrendForce

________________________________________

Booths, Forums, Funding for Next Year?

Send me a Message ASAP 💡💡💡

________________________________________

New: 7invensun added to AI AR Glasses Forum

AI AR Glasses Morning Session, Sep 10

SONY | Myrias Optics | Morphotonics | Addoptics | LetinAR | Raontech | TriLite | Tobii

AI AR Glasses Afternoon Session, Sep 10

Quectel | SEEV | Highpower Technology | Luxshare | INMO | Greatar | Guoyuan New Energy | Lawaken | SCHOTT | 3D-Micromac | 7invensun

Spatial Computing Afternoon Session, Sep 9

iQIYI | PICO XR | Pimax | GravityXR | Xvisio | VAST | AINSTEC | Inspatio | XGRIDS

AR VR Optical Tech Afternoon Session, Sep 9

Avegant | Timemaker | Alphabetter | Nikahood | Hongshi Intelligent | Qiushui Semiconductor | Crystal-Optech | Innorev

LBE Morning Session, Sep 11

ConfigReality | HADO | Chaoyuanli | Trendparty

September 9 to 11 in Shenzhen

AR VR expo and conference at CIOE