VR (virtual reality) can offer true depth perception with binocular/vergence, parallax/motion, and (if possible) focal/accommodation cues.
360 image/video supports pan and zoom, but not real 3D depth, not least motion parallax. It is a form of IBR (image based rendering), but not VR.
Combining multiple wide angle videos/images has been a hot topic in the late 90s (for those of you who are not old enough), but rehashed to ride the recent VR hype wave.
The obsession with paper length is a legacy of printed proceedings.
What matters most is readability.
I would rather spend 1 hour reading a 20-page paper than 2 hours reading a 10-page paper.
Then follows file size: the smaller the better for storage and transmission.
Back in the good old days when I was working as a GPU architect in NVIDIA, we had suites of tests for various stages of GPU development: architecture, RTL, driver, real chips, etc.
Ogtest, consisting of tests written in OpenGL, can be applied to all stages. Each test is written to be as compact as possible, the tests are ordered from simple to complex, and collectively they cover the entire target space (e.g. all applications to run on the target GPU).
For example, the first test is to draw a flat colored triangle, the next is a textured triangle, and the next is called son-of-the-textured-triangle (with two textures instead of just one, if I remember correctly).
I then went on to add a test called daughter-of-the-textured-triangle (I am all in for gender equality) which consists of two textures but exercised a different path through the texturing and shading units (if I remember correctly).
I like to think of these as the basis test cases for the entire target space, analogous to basis vectors in linear algebra.
This applies to all research and development projects. Instead of jumping to debug full-scale applications, it can help to design a set of basis cases first. The process can clarify our thinking, and help us debug and explore algorithm/implementation issues. The basis cases can even be part of the analysis section of a research paper.
Identify the common relationships between the following pairs of papers.
Discrete element textures, SIGGRAPH 2011
Vignette: interactive texture design and manipulation with freeform gestures for pen-and-ink illustration, CHI 2012
Dynamic element textures, SIGGRAPH 2013
Draco: bringing life to illustrations with kinetic textures, CHI 2014
Motion field texture synthesis, SIGGRAPH Asia 2009
Energy Brushes: interactive tools for illustrating stylized elemental dynamics, UIST 2016
Since HKU asked for this and resumes do not usually contain failures, I reckon it could be a good idea to share my paper acceptance rate.
For SIGGRAPH (the top venue for computer graphics and interactive techniques, in case you don’t know), my life-time acceptance rate is 36%, and 40% in the last 5 years.
As a milestone of seniority, I couldn’t recall how many SIGGRAPH papers I have until doing this calculation.
I am not keeping track of my submissions to other venues (such as CHI, UIST, I3D, TVCG, EGSR, etc.), but I am pretty sure the overall rate is at least 50%, and much higher for some venues, such as EGSR (100%).
For reference, the overall acceptance rates of many graphics venues can be found under http://kesen.realtimerendering.com/.
In his PhD application, a student indicated that he is collaborating with a famous professor on a recent SIGGRAPH project.
I asked that professor about the student. He told me that the project has 20 students (most are not co-authors), and the particular student is probably not even a secondary helper.
In comparison, most of my projects so far involve 0 or 1 student, and none over 2 students.
When I was in grad school I thought UI is about tuning widgets and doing user studies (a lot of research did exactly that). I preferred working on algorithms because they seem more interesting and more fundamental.
Later on, I realized how wrong I was. User interface is crucial as long as humans remain biological and machines remain mechanical.
A good UI can save a not so good algorithm, but not vice versa.
And UI research can also be fun and fundamental.
Hiring PhD students is even harder than hiring employees because younger folks have more potential to grow.
And unlike an industry researcher who can let interns come and go, a university professor sticks with the students.
Two prior PhD applicants to HKU whom I passed on have turned out with outstanding performance.
One of them is still collaborating with me, so I did not regret as much. Actually, if he had not gone to another school we would not have access to some crucial hardware environment for our project, and his adviser might not have warmed back to SIGGRAPH. So I probably still made the right call.
I clearly have a lot to learn, and will have hundreds of cases to practice every year.