Slashdot Mirror


Harrods Sells Holographic TV

beuh_dave writes "Harrods is selling a holographic TV, CLARO, for £15,000. The Holoscreen is a revolutionary holographic film which displays any image fed through a projector at a specific angle on to a transparent display. All other light is ignored. The result is a remarkably bright and sharp image quality - even in brightly lit environments."

224 comments

  1. Cool by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 2, Insightful
    This is pretty cool and pretty looking, but wake me when they have holographic tv's that can display in true 3D.

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    1. Re:Cool by jakethejuggalo · · Score: 1

      first you'd need footage shot in 3D. i would imagine a 3D image that a tv extrapolates from a 2D broadcast wouldnt be too impressive.

    2. Re:Cool by Bertie · · Score: 2, Interesting
    3. Re:Cool by Jussi+K.+Kojootti · · Score: 2, Informative
      In short: No. They say it themselves: "The image is planar (2D), not volumetric (3D)"

      Still, I'm left wondering what the grandparent meant with 'true 3D display'... It's not exactly a well defined term.

    4. Re:Cool by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm left wondering what the grandparent meant with 'true 3D display'

      Well, there are volumetric and autostereo displays which could be adequate.

    5. Re:Cool by Bertie · · Score: 1

      You've got to admit, though, it's really cool.

    6. Re:Cool by ArsonPerBuilding · · Score: 1

      Sweet 503 Service Unavailible Error; I never knew they could be so lifelike!

      --
      1 tequila 2 tequila 3 tequila floor
    7. Re:Cool by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      Sorry for being vague. I meant volumetric.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    8. Re:Cool by Bertie · · Score: 1

      Oops - it would appear I've Slashdotted the poor bastards...

    9. Re:Cool by tomee · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wake me when I can afford it. Well, ok, maybe sleeping is not the best idea if I want to be able to afford it.

    10. Re:Cool by Evil_Timmy · · Score: 1

      When you do finally scrape up the cash, remember that you'll find it right next to the Holy Grail.

    11. Re:Cool by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Hmmmm....this would rock for my gaming table :)

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    12. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This is pretty cool and pretty looking

      Dude, you totally just brainfucked me with that one. I parsed both "prettys" as "very," and ended up staring at the screen for a good ten seconds, trying to figure out how the hell anyone could ever use "looking" as an adjective.

    13. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand why it is so expensive? Maybe this company will just be bought up by some projection screen mfg. for its technology.

  2. This isn't really "holographic" by rebeka+thomas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This isn't really "holographic" in the sense of a 3D image in space, or a perception of a 3D image.

    All it is is a screen that hangs in space (or supported by glass as in the site) and only shows images directed on it from a certain angle - from a projector sitting conspicuously on the floor behind it.

    It's pretty, but hardly world shattering.

    --
    RST
    1. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

      It looked really cool until I saw the projector sat on the floor behind.

      40 inch display is nothing, I have a 72" screen in a room smaller than that.

      Seems like a lot of money for a such a gimmic.

    2. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by CodeRx · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hide the projector in the wall / ceiling and this would be a much better trick - just a sheet of glass with a "magic" image on it.

    3. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by idobi · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Not only that, but:
      In a standard instillation the projector sits on the floor about 5 feet behind the screen, so while the bulkiness of rear projection screens has literally vanished, it actually occupies a greater amount of space.
      It takes up way more space than a regular projection tv, but let's market it in a way that makes it sound really cool!
    4. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by arodland · · Score: 4, Informative

      Maybe it's not really "holographic", whatever the quotes mean, but it is really holographic. It's not a sci-fi holoscreen, but it still uses holography to project a picture.

    5. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > It's not a sci-fi holoscreen, but it still uses holography to project a
      > picture.

      No, it uses a projector. It's just that the image isn't projected onto a flat screen. However, this doesn't make it a hologram.

    6. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by tod_miller · · Score: 1

      No it isn't holographic at all.

      A method of producing a three-dimensional image of an object by recording on a photographic plate or film the pattern of interference formed by a split laser beam and then illuminating the pattern either with a laser or with ordinary light.

      Their techniques could be called precise refraction at best.

      --
      #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
    7. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by tod_miller · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have actually seen a home brew on of these in a local store, basically rear projection onto a carefully planned or hacked refraction grid (I cannot wait for make your own sites to be out there)

      The point is, if it gives a good picture I would use a 45 angled mirror to reflect a projector from the ceiling onto this surface.

      Not a transparent solution (because of a mirror) but takes up only about 1 meter behind, and the mirror can fold up into the tv to just be a free standing mirror.

      Add a small motor to the wires holding it and it can go up and down auto matically and the projector can start.

      child safety is an issue, all that glass seems more scarey that even a large CRT with a vacuum inside.

      --
      #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
    8. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by Physics+Dude · · Score: 3, Informative
      Their techniques could be called precise refraction at best.
      Sorry, but ... This IS NOT refraction and neither is holography. As I'm sure you're aware, holograms are caused by recording the interference pattern of two wavefronts. After creating a hologram, it will direct light from a prticular direction (a laser usually) to be refracted at different angles. This device utilizes an interference pattern created in the same way as any other holographic film to procuce the same effect, but just utilized in a novel way. The novel aspect of this is that the inteference pattern effectively scatters light only when coming from a particular angle. This screen IS a hologram. It's just being used in a non-traditional manner to achieve a particular result.

      You could say that "Their techniques could be called precise DIFFRACTION", but then again, that's precisely what holography is.

    9. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by Physics+Dude · · Score: 1
      ... to be refracted at different angles.

      Er... make that " to be diffracted at different angles."

      I hate it when that happens! ;)

    10. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Main Entry: hologram
      Pronunciation: 'hO-l&-"gram, 'hä-
      Function: noun
      : a three-dimensional image reproduced from a pattern of interference produced by a split coherent beam of radiation (as a laser); also : the pattern of interference itself


      Thus sayeth m-w.com

      The fact is that this does not produce 3d images, therefore it is not a hologram, as the grandparent clearly states. It may use some of the same principles as holography, but it is not ipso facto a hologram.

    11. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by stoborrobots · · Score: 1

      what part of "also: the pattern of interference itself" are you failing to understand? The screen consists of a flim containing a pattern of interference produced by a split laser. The screen is a hologram.

      The image produced is not a hologram.

    12. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by tod_miller · · Score: 1

      ;-) no worries, thanks for the info. Don't suppose you know how to make on the cheap, Mr Physics Dude?

      --
      #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
    13. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by Physics+Dude · · Score: 1
      Don't suppose you know how to make on the cheap, ...

      For a traditional hologram, it would probably be fairly easy... if you have a large enough dark room and the ability to develop film of that size... (In my dreams). My guess is that for this application they're probably using bleached-phase holography which is probably done directly on the glass with a coating of photo sensative gelatin. Hopefully a patent search would reveal more information. :)

    14. Re:This isn't really "holographic" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " It's not a sci-fi holoscreen, but it still uses holography to project a picture."

      Not really. The picture isn't being *projected* by hologram, the hologram just provides a display screen which changes the direction of the light coming from the projector, so that it is directed towards the viewer.

      In this screen, the hologram plays an analogous role to the reflective particles used in a movie theater's front-projection screen. That's it.

      The image you're watching is not a hologram, any more than a movie at a theater is a reflective-bead-gram, or a presentation shown on an overhead projector is a fresnel-lens-gram.

  3. Had to be said: by Laurentiu · · Score: 4, Funny

    Carry on. If you need me, I'll be in the holodeck.

    --
    Just /. IT
    1. Re:Had to be said: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carry on. If you need me, I'll be in the holodeck running the Bajorin Babe program.

    2. Re:Had to be said: by michaeldot · · Score: 1

      And obligatory Futurama reference:

      And don't worry about turning on the safety protocols in case a holodeck creation breaks its programming and gets loose and goes on a rampage over the ship ... because, hey, that almost never happens!

  4. Amazing! by samtihen · · Score: 1

    Wow. That looks amazing. The picture on the page linked says it all. It is VERY bright.

    I would love to have this, because then I wouldn't have to force a home theatre into the basement.

    1. Re:Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have to force a home theatre in to the basement then you are doing it the wrong way.

    2. Re:Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if you want a BIG screen (bigger than Plasma or LCD) than this might be the only viable option for a well lit room.

      I'm pretty sure, since this is just projection, that you could scale something like this up quite a bit.

    3. Re:Amazing! by MrRTFM · · Score: 1

      Oh, come on - just get some decent curtains to block out the light!

      --
      You can't expect to wield supreme executive power, just because some watery tart threw a sword at you
    4. Re:Amazing! by AndroidCat · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, I've never seen Photoshop look as good!

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  5. It's not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... A real holographic projector. At least, not the start trek uber advanced kind. It projects onto glass, giving the ILLUSION of a floating image.

  6. Harods [sic] by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 4, Funny

    I like how 'Harrods' in the summary's URL is misspelt, but that it's a redirect to the real 'harrods.com'. Pre-emptive Slashdot Editor protection! :-)

    --
    Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    1. Re:Harods [sic] by Deekin_Scalesinger · · Score: 4, Informative

      As an unwashed Yank, I gotta tell my fellow compatriots who don't know (of which there are more than I imagined) that Harrod's is a large department store in London, in the Knightsbridge section of town. Now, that is also like saying that Microsoft is a profitable company.

      Harrod's is an amazing store, 8 stories high if I remember correctly, owned by an Arab oil family who's son died in the car crash with Princess Diana. The first floor houses a food court the like of which you have never seen, with every food imaginable. The next couple of floors is devoted to clothing, which is someone boring, although Mrs. Scalesinger got herself a fine looking hat in their haberdashery. Then the floors start to get interesting again, with a large section devoted to true antiques for purchase, going all the way back to the stone age. That depaertment made me somewhat nervous, as it is museum quality with the added spice of "you break, you buy" hanging over the department. Oh yeah, a pub in the basement of the store wheeeee!

      If they have an electronics department (which I guess they have to, from TFA) I don't recall it, as I was so overwhelmed from the rest of the store. Highly pricey and eminently touristy, it is stil a can't miss experience that I enjoy every time I am fortunate enough to be on that side of the big drink.

      --
      "As the intrepid kobold companion continues his journey, he begins to wonder... if priests raises dead, why anybody die?
    2. Re:Harods [sic] by damsgaard · · Score: 3, Funny

      Don't know if this anecdote about Ronald Regan is true, but it's a good one non the less.

      Wisiting Harrod's he was told they could and would deliver anything(tm), so he asked if they could get him an elephant.

      The answer was: "Sir, would that be an african or an indian elephant?"

    3. Re:Harods [sic] by hungsolo · · Score: 0
      Yeah, it's pretty amazing. I was there last summer with my wife and did Afternoon Tea in the Georgian restaurant. Highly recommended, even though it is "girly".

      The bookstore is very well stocked, too!

    4. Re:Harods [sic] by smchris · · Score: 1

      Son, y'all get out to the States and we'll overwhelm you with quantity over quality:

      http://www.mallofamerica.com/about_the_mall/moa_ ph otos.aspx

      The aquariam in the basement is pretty cool, actually.

    5. Re:Harods [sic] by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 1

      At which point Ronald replied, "I don't know", and was wisked off into the air.

    6. Re:Harods [sic] by kbahey · · Score: 2, Informative

      Owned by an Arab oil family who's son died in the car crash with Princess Diana

      Minor correction: The owner is Mohamed Al-Fayed, and he is a self made Egyptian gazillionaire, not a Gulf Arab. He has nothing to do with oil. He is the only member of the 'family' of El Fayed, now that his son Dody is dead.

      I know that most people confuse "Arab" and "Oil" and these things, but it was worth pointing out anyway.

    7. Re:Harods [sic] by hawk · · Score: 1

      As an unwashed Yank,

      Son, y'all get out to the States

      Umm, aren't most of the unwashed yanks already here? (and the clean ones, too!)

      Never mind the mall of america--both downtown las vegas and the strip will put any food court that takes a mere city block to shame . . .

      hawk, nevadan in exile

    8. Re:Harods [sic] by Deekin_Scalesinger · · Score: 1

      Duly noted, and thanks. The wiki article you so kindly posted explains where the monies came from too. I gotta go to wikipedia more...

      --
      "As the intrepid kobold companion continues his journey, he begins to wonder... if priests raises dead, why anybody die?
    9. Re:Harods [sic] by jbridge21 · · Score: 1

      Arab oil family who's son died

      Sorry, man, but I've got to say s/who's/whose/ ! If you really are british then SHAME! I expect people from America to casually fuck up their grammar/spelling from time to time (insert extra apostrophes, etc), but I was hoping to be able to hold y'all to a higher standard. (And I'm from Texas, so I can reasonably complain about people here screwing up the language.)

    10. Re:Harods [sic] by Deekin_Scalesinger · · Score: 1

      Good sir, I direct you to my first line, which states:

      <<< As an unwashed Yank... >>>

      which I hope illuminates where I am from. Be grateful - I live in Philly. I assure you there is much worse grammar than that minor faux pas 'round these parts... :)

      --
      "As the intrepid kobold companion continues his journey, he begins to wonder... if priests raises dead, why anybody die?
    11. Re:Harods [sic] by Spodlink05 · · Score: 0

      That's outsourcing for you.

    12. Re:Harods [sic] by jbridge21 · · Score: 1

      okey doke then :)

      I assure you there is much worse grammar than that minor faux pas 'round these parts... :)

      Haha, I don't doubt that for a minute.

    13. Re:Harods [sic] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have a small electronic store. And this Holographic TV has been on display for **MONTHS**. I know because I am a Londoner.

      Jon

    14. Re:Harods [sic] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I expect the British to have bad teeth. What's your fucking point you limey prick?

    15. Re:Harods [sic] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other words, it's a shopping mall, only all of the stores are owned by a rich guy and are called "departments" instead of having independent names.

    16. Re:Harods [sic] by Captain_Chaos · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the huge books, toys and music departments. In the toys department you can buy a model Ferrari for your kids which costs the same (no kidding) as a real Ferrari.

      Also don't forget that it's the best place for REAL high tea, with little cucumber sandwiches, carre fours, scones with strawberry jam and whipped cream, etc. Not to mention the other fourteen restaurants. And the pub in the basement, next to the hairdressers'.

      And of course the jewelry department. There must be at least a couple of billion dollars worth of diamond rings, necklaces, watches, etc. in there.

      Visit Harrods once. Seriously. Schedule at least a full day.

      Oh yeah: furniture also. Not just antique, modern as well. It's hard to believe it all fits in one department store.

  7. Looks like... by Claire-plus-plus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Rear projection onto a transparent screen. Kinda cool but not worth £15000, not by a long shot. It seems to me to be a case of them mixing "can do" up with "should do".

    --
    99 bottles of beer in 175 characte
    1. Re:Looks like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because no new technology is ever ludicrously expensive when it first starts being sold.

    2. Re:Looks like... by krray · · Score: 1

      I can remember basic projection TV going for in excess of US$10K. My statement to buddy in his 20's was "here's your TV when you retire". If this goes mainstream (and it will) ... the price will come down. It may be 10 years before we see the same setup for ~$1,000...

      As already stated -- new technology is ALWAYS expensive.

    3. Re:Looks like... by stoborrobots · · Score: 1

      well, you can get them for up to 100" for under 6000 pounds... 40" starts a little over 2000...

      Of course, you don't get the Limited Edition Harrods Emblem...

      http://www.av-sales.com/html/svs_holoscreen.html

  8. Screenshot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Anyone have a screenshot?

  9. Beamer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why call a beamer 'holographic television'?

    1. Re:Beamer? by JohnFluxx · · Score: 3, Informative

      Exactly.

      Holographic means that you are producing/storing a diffraction grating. It doesn't even mean it looks 3D (like the 3D laptop screens - they just have 2 images, that's not holographic).

      Btw, my job is to make holograms :)

    2. Re:Beamer? by Inkieminstrel · · Score: 1

      Because 'holographic television' sounds way cooler than 'beamer'

    3. Re:Beamer? by Hal-9001 · · Score: 1
      Why call a beamer 'holographic television'?
      It could make sense if the primary component is a holographically-recorded optical element. However I'm reserving the term "holographic video" for this display,whenever it becomes commercially available.
      --
      "It take 9 months to bear a child, no matter how many women you assign to the job."
    4. Re:Beamer? by Hal-9001 · · Score: 1
      Btw, my job is to make holograms :)
      Wow, you and me both... I'm currently a grad student in the Leith lab at the University of Michigan. :-)
      --
      "It take 9 months to bear a child, no matter how many women you assign to the job."
    5. Re:Beamer? by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      Heh, email me - john @ geola.co .uk

    6. Re:Beamer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Btw, my job is to make holograms :)"

      Perhaps you'd better have a look at this then. You can even tell your boss it's work related. ;) Besides, when the average person hears "hologram", they think "3D".

    7. Re:Beamer? by RedWizzard · · Score: 1

      A general dictionary is not the place to be looking for accurate definitions of technical terms.

    8. Re:Beamer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, I feel left out! Email me!

      Oh, wait. I don't do anything to do with holography.

  10. /.'ed by essreenim · · Score: 3, Informative
    Heres the google cache.

    It looks great. If money was no obstacle...

    40" transparent screen !! nice : )

    1. Re:/.'ed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Or this one if you want something more than a text cache.

    2. Re:/.'ed by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Informative
      Heres the google cache.

      Nice thought, but the Google cache DOESN'T INCLUDE IMAGES. If you see any, they're from the original site, so (for an article like this, where the picture is vital) you'd save time just waiting for the original page to load. (This rant provoked by the idiots modding it "informative", no disrespect meant to the well-intentioned OP.)

      Mirrordot however does usually get both the images and text; if the page isn't brand new, try the Wayback Machine.

    3. Re:/.'ed by asbjxrn · · Score: 1

      Judging by the leftmost column, this is now the most popular article in their home entertainment section...

  11. dictionary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does anyone want to bother looking up the term hologram in the dictionary....when I think of a holographic TV I don't think of a flat surface displayed onto a tangable object you could easily break if you breath on it the wrong way when it falls over.

    When I think of a hologram I think of being able to throw my beer through my TV next time I see a horrible excuse of a football game...

    1. Re:dictionary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Maybe you should look up the term - try dictionary.com - it doesn't necessarily mean the screen isn't there.

      If you through a beer through your holographic TV, and it shattered, you should end up with multiple (jagged) smaller TVs, each with the whole picture at lower quality...

    2. Re:dictionary? by SpongeBobLinuxPants · · Score: 1

      Exactly... The mall by my house has had something like this for about 2 years... Just an LCD projector and a piece of special glass they hang from the celing.

  12. *drool* by hachiman · · Score: 2, Funny

    When I first saw the headline, I was thinking that it was something that would display a pseudo 3D image that floats in the air, but even though Iw as disappointed when the site _eventually_ loaded, I have to admit that it is still pretty cool.

    My only concern, and ultimately the only reason I won't buy one (hehehe like I could) is that it takes up too much space. I don't really have the space to put the projector as far back as it needs to be and those speakers.... I'd look like one of the little bad guys in HALO

    --
    Teamwork is essential. It gives the enemy someone else to shoot at
  13. Claro tv link by martin · · Score: 3, Informative

    this one is a better link to the currently /.-ed site..

    1. Re:Claro tv link by martin · · Score: 1

      hmm scrub that comment - one page of not very much info.

      I'll get my coat... ;-)

    2. Re:Claro tv link by mikkom · · Score: 2

      This one has more info and some photos if someone is interested.

      IMHO calling (not so usual but anyway) rear projection canvas "holographic" is just a big dummy marketing term.

    3. Re:Claro tv link by Inda · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Looks good.

      I'm wondering how much of the picture will be displayed on the ceiling after it's passed through the glass? That would not look good.

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
    4. Re:Claro tv link by stoborrobots · · Score: 1

      This appears to be the manufacturer of the screens...
      http://www.scanvisionscreen.dk/holo.html

    5. Re:Claro tv link by MyHair · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing none. If you'll notice the picture has darker-than-transparent portions meaning the actual viewing area probably looks completely black when the unit is off. So I'm guessing if the projector is properly aligned then all of the projection--minus some loss to allow a dark black--is refracted towards the viewer and none to the ceiling.

      It looks cool, but it would be far cooler if the projection film were completely transparent when the unit was off; that would look like art. Having a black rectangle makes it looks like a TV screen.

  14. Harrods? by panurge · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'll believe in it when I see it in John Lewis.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
    1. Re:Harrods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I'll believe in it when I see it in the Argos catalogue.

    2. Re:Harrods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      'ark at Mr. Fancy Pants!

      I'm off to Pound Stretcher..

    3. Re:Harrods? by pklong · · Score: 1

      I can go one better. I'll believe it when I see it in Oxfam.

      --

      Philip

      Signatures are broken

    4. Re:Harrods? by tcr · · Score: 1

      Luxury.

      See you in Cashconverters...

      --


      Information wants to be beer.
    5. Re:Harrods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm getting mine at the Spastic Society.

      I just hope the picture isn't all wiggly.

    6. Re:Harrods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Decadence!

      Meet you in the dumpster behind the vacant lot...

  15. A piece of technoporn in a magazine called gizmag? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come on, now. April 1st is on the first of April.

  16. Layers by EdZ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If it could me modified to only accept projected light from a given angle (grating or a very highly polarised filter perhaps?), sevaral projectors could be used to 'layer' screens into a 3d block display. Expensive, but for people who NEED high quality 3d displays then money is most likely not an object.

    1. Re:Layers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From TFA: "The Holoscreen is a revolutionary holographic film which displays any image fed through a projector at a specific angle on to a transparent display."

      I think they read your mind and already done it... :)

    2. Re:Layers by JohnFluxx · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A grating was my first thought. It only needs to be very very thin. Basically the idea is to have a micrometer thick layer that looks like this:

      \ \ \ \ \ \

      You can image the \ is a gap, and the white space is some material. Only light with the correct angle will fit perfectly into the gap and be bounced back.

      This is roughly how holograms work, and is called a diffraction grating. (A grating produced from the diffraction between the object light and some reference light)

      Another thought is that they use the brusters angle somehow. If the light is polarised, it would appear brightest (or dimmest, depending on which way is polarised) at exactly 34 degrees to the plate. (For glass that is anyway).

    3. Re:Layers by asbjxrn · · Score: 1
      Another thought is that they use the brusters angle somehow. If the light is polarised, it would appear brightest (or dimmest, depending on which way is polarised) at exactly 34 degrees to the plate. (For glass that is anyway).

      I don't know anything about brusters, but from http://www.anders-kern.de/presse/pr_holoscreen_en. html:
      All projectors with a digital keystone correction of 34 minimum are suitable for projection with the A+K HoloScreen.

    4. Re:Layers by maggard · · Score: 1
      several projectors could be used to 'layer' screens into a 3d block display
      No.

      "3D" is not simply layering a bunch of 2D images on top of each other. Frankly that enough folks thought so to mod up this mistake is appalling.

      You can demonstrate this for yourself pretty trivially: Print out a series of images on acetate (overhead transparency plastic.) Now stack them. Look 3D? No, it looks like a bunch of layers on top of each other.

      So what about just printing the outlines of each layer at that depth? Still the same problem, you've got a bunch of outlines a micron deep (or however thick your print medium is) and whatever value you select wide, at regular intervals. Still looks & acts nothing like 3D.

      BTW this is the same reason one doesn't get "3D screens" by layering a stack of LCDs.

      The closest this could get to a 3D effect would be by layering images of objects at different depths. Unfortunately if you moved your head, to actually use your stereo vision to see the depth differences, you'd also ruin the effect by having clipping issues with layers 'bleeding' through.

      --
      I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
    5. Re:Layers by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      w00t, we know how they do it then :)

    6. Re:Layers by EdZ · · Score: 1
      No, the reason LCDs can't be layered is because they're POLARISED! One layer switching would block the light to all the other layers.

      And layering the screens with enough gap between them (0.5 mm should be enough) would allow you to build up a block that can dsiplay images in 3d. You'd need a LOT of projectors, but it would work.

      Using your analogy, if you placed 100 layers of acetate on top of each other, you would get a 3d image forming.

  17. But it's still just television by Silver+Sloth · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    OK, so you've spent 15 big ones on the latest toy. You sit down to watch the super sharp image. And what do you get
    • Eastenders
    • Coronation Street
    • Big Brother
    Just because the picture's sharp doesn't mean the picture's worth watching, or not 15 grand's worth!
    --
    init 11 - for when you need that edge.
    1. Re:But it's still just television by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US slashdotters must wonder what they hell is going on when they read slashdot at this time of the day. It is like a British invasion or something.

    2. Re:But it's still just television by kubrick · · Score: 1

      You get the football. After all, isn't that about how much you pay for a season ticket these days? :)

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
    3. Re:But it's still just television by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Funny

      You can get TV on televisions, and not just DVDs? What will they think of next...

      On the other hand, I do agree on one point - fifteen grand just for a TV?! I'd rather have my house extended/refurbished/whatever... Then again, I'm not the sort of person who can afford 15k on anything, let alone a TV.

    4. Re:But it's still just television by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sod off,

      This Telly is clearly to be used for watching reruns of "the young ones"

      I still can not stand the lack of culture in my fellow brits today.

    5. Re:But it's still just television by d'oh89 · · Score: 1

      Luckily for us poor people, the proce will certainly drop over the next 2-3 years. (Plasma anyone?). I think the benefits of a new entertainment delivery system is great. Just think, if you had one of these, would you EVER want to watch regular TV again?

  18. I've seen it by djkitsch · · Score: 5, Informative

    I was down there last week, and despite the fact that it's not actually 3D, as the "holographic" would suggest, it does look pretty cool. It basically looks like a sheet of glass with a TV picture hanging in the middle of it - it's bright enough to look good and sharp under showroom lighting, too.

    Not sure it's worth the extortionate price tag for what's essentially a novelty toy, though.

    --
    sig:- (wit >= sarcasm)
    1. Re:I've seen it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Not sure it's worth the extortionate price tag for what's essentially a novelty toy, though."

      It may seem expensive at first, but they didn't say 15 000 pounds of what. I mean it's not like they're asking for real dollars or anything.

  19. astonishing by rich42 · · Score: 2, Funny

    the implications for porn are mind numbing.

    1. Re:astonishing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Keep some Windowlene handy!

    2. Re:astonishing by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 4, Funny

      Pledge polish: £0.89
      Duster cloth: £0.25
      Squeegy mop accessory: £175.00

      explaining to your parents how their new toy got smeared, priceless.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
  20. DIY version? by angryflute · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Pardon my ignorance, but can't something like this be done with any LCD projector and piece of glass (covered with a one-way reflective material)?

    1. Re:DIY version? by AngryScot · · Score: 1

      And can we put linux on it :P

      --

      All spelling mistakes are due to solar flares...honest

    2. Re:DIY version? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      why dont you shine a projector towards a mirror and have a look what you see in the mirror, thats right! a projector!

    3. Re:DIY version? by Coos · · Score: 3, Informative

      Its the "one way reflective material" thats the cunning part, and what you pay all the money for. The surface treatment of the glass 'screen' is what is holographic in this instance, not the image that is generated, which is just a flat TV image. The hologram is such that from your viewing angle, light just passes straight through the glass plate, but from the projectors angle, the glass is opaque enough for an image to form on it like a conventional screen rather than passing straight through like it does the window on a projector booth at a cinema). I don't think you could generate the 40" hologram at home as a DIY solution!

    4. Re:DIY version? by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Well, I've seen shop window displays that use a projector mounted high up, projecting onto a sheet of frosted glass hanging just inside the window. It looks pretty cool.

    5. Re:DIY version? by polyp2000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've seen it done - I've seen a few banks and building societies with them dangling in front of the windows. First time i saw one I thought some crazy but amazing display technology had appeared without me hearing about it. When I realised how it was done I thought it was a cool idea but its hardly the height of tech, Its basically a sheet of glass with a "Frosted" panel in the middle. an ordinary common or garden projector displaying the image. I cant say the image was as bright and sharp as they are making these claro things out to be though.

      --
      Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
    6. Re:DIY version? by Hal-9001 · · Score: 1
      why dont you shine a projector towards a mirror and have a look what you see in the mirror, thats right! a projector!
      Shine a projector onto a plane of specularly-reflecting material (like a mirror) and you see the projector. Shine a projector onto a plane of diffusely-reflecting material (like a white-painted wall or a projection screen) and you see the projected image.
      --
      "It take 9 months to bear a child, no matter how many women you assign to the job."
    7. Re:DIY version? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Its basically a sheet of glass with a "Frosted" panel in the middle.

      Actually, you're wrong. There is no frosted panel - with the projector turned off this would look like a piece of clear glass. Thats why it costs 15k rather than the cost of a can of spray frosting. You could fake something that looked a bit like it with frosting, if you could live with a frosted display image.

  21. Diffractive optical element? by Hal-9001 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article (which is rather lacking in technical details), the display sounds like a holographically-recorded diffractive optical element on a glass substrate. If so, I'm curious how they compensate for the dispersion intrinsic to the diffraction phenomenon (since selling a 15,000 quid monochrome display is probably not a commercially-viable option :-p). Also, since the display claims to be angularly selective (it has to be if it only accepts a specific projection direction), I wonder if it has a similarly selective viewing angle (like early LCD displays, which were only bright and clear at normal incidence).

    --
    "It take 9 months to bear a child, no matter how many women you assign to the job."
    1. Re:Diffractive optical element? by stoborrobots · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's actually much cheaper... you can get them from around 2.5 thousand pounds...

    2. Re:Diffractive optical element? by billh · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wow. Do we really talk like this? No wonder my wife never understands what I'm saying.

    3. Re:Diffractive optical element? by CableModemSniper · · Score: 1

      Maybe, maybe not. GP sounds like he's just barely teetering on the edge of troll territory.

      --
      Why not fork?
    4. Re:Diffractive optical element? by Hal-9001 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think I've worked out the basic details of how this screen works from this link. The heart of the screen is a diffractive optical element, holographically-recorded on a thin photopolymer layer. Based on the range of acceptance angles, I think the element is the hologram of a 27-degree deviating prism. The viewing angle problem is solved by placing a weak diffuser (an example of a strong diffuser is frosted glass) on the viewing side, either in contact with or in close proximity to the diffractive optical element. The diffuser scatters the projected light over some relatively narrow range of angles (about 25 degrees, according to this link). The close proximity of the diffuser also takes care of the dispersion problem because it doesn't give the different colors much distance over which to spread out, and that spread is masked by the angular spread introduced by the diffuser.

      --
      "It take 9 months to bear a child, no matter how many women you assign to the job."
    5. Re:Diffractive optical element? by Wordsmith · · Score: 1

      What's scary is I can't tell if this is technobabble, or technospeak.

    6. Re:Diffractive optical element? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I *am* you wife, you insensitive clod, and I *do* understand what you're saying!

    7. Re:Diffractive optical element? by i41Overlord · · Score: 1

      From the article (which is rather lacking in technical details), the display sounds like a holographically-recorded diffractive optical element on a glass substrate. If so, I'm curious how they compensate for the dispersion intrinsic to the diffraction phenomenon (since selling a 15,000 quid monochrome display is probably not a commercially-viable option :-p). Also, since the display claims to be angularly selective (it has to be if it only accepts a specific projection direction), I wonder if it has a similarly selective viewing angle (like early LCD displays, which were only bright and clear at normal incidence).

      The essential paradigm of cyberspace is creating partially situated identities out of actual or potential social reality in terms of canonical forms of human contact, thus renormalizing the phenomenology of narrative space and requiring the naturalization of the intersubjective cognitive strategy, and thereby resolving the dialectics of metaphorical thoughts, each problematic to the other, collectively redefining and reifying the paradigm of the parable of the model of the metaphor.

    8. Re:Diffractive optical element? by Hal-9001 · · Score: 1

      "Reify"...I haven't seen that word since I briefed Critical Legal Studies for high-school debate... :-D

      --
      "It take 9 months to bear a child, no matter how many women you assign to the job."
  22. Limited edition with ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Harrods discreetly engraved on the glass...

    Wow these guys are snooty!

    1. Re:Limited edition with ... by Gabrill · · Score: 1

      No more snooty than your local Ford or Chevy dealer . . . freeking dealer badges . . .

      --
      Always going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse.
  23. Seems familiar by grundie · · Score: 1

    This systems looks very similar to screens I've seen in pubs and shopping centres. Instead of a fancy holgrapic system, all that is used is a bog-standard projector and a piece of frosted glass.

    1. Re:Seems familiar by woah · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but the image quality was probably crap.

  24. not from the article but by sakura+the+mc · · Score: 1, Informative

    you can check out their website
    http://www.clarotv.co.uk/

  25. Wrong URL by ReVMD · · Score: 1
  26. Star Wars by P-Nuts · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Help me buy one of these, Obi-wan Kenobi. You're my only hope.

    1. Re:Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aww thats funny. Offtopic....sheesh.

  27. Something's missing.. by rasty · · Score: 1

    Looks like this screen has all the bells and whistles.. but is still not /. proof! :)

  28. how inconvenient by idlake · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Given the way this thing works, it has to sit somewhere in the middle of the room. That is not a good place for a display or TV; it is an even worse place for a transparent piece of glass (because you are going to run into it and knock it over).

    1. Re:how inconvenient by nagora · · Score: 2, Funny
      because you are going to run into it and knock it over

      Didn't your mama tell you not to run in the house? This is exactly what she was thinking of!

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    2. Re:how inconvenient by ReVMD · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But the kind of people who are going to buy this will most likely have huge rooms and not really care about it taking a lot of space.

  29. Oh, Whoopee. by nonuttin · · Score: 1

    Put a fancy name to something and they will buy? Wake me when it's real....

    1. Re:Oh, Whoopee. by cablepokerface · · Score: 1

      Put a fancy name to something and they will buy? Wake me when it's real....

      Yes, that concept works, please e-mail these guys for more information.
      So; *triiiiiing* (sound of alarmclock).

  30. Tech info... by stoborrobots · · Score: 4, Informative
    1. Re:Tech info... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > It has been around for a while... Yes-- a long, long time ...

    2. Re:Tech info... by psergiu · · Score: 1

      Also - Harrods had the same thing on display last summer. So once again - Slashdot == old news.

      --
      1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
    3. Re:Tech info... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Old news, really? Slashdot? I've never ever seen an article on /. that was old. It's always so new and fresh! Thank you, sir, for showing us the light! Really, you must be some sort of genius, to come to the conclusion that this article is old news! I must bask in your glory, since you are light that leads me through the dark annals of slashdot, telling me what's old and what's not! It's a good thing you're around, or we wouldn't know which articles were old or not. Thank god.

  31. Optical Principles by gridzilla · · Score: 1

    Harrods didn't exactly reinvent the wheel, it's been around for quite a while:
    http://www.kingmaker.co.uk/holopro.htm

    "Optical Principles

    The Holo Screen is a hologram in the form of a thin film, laminated to a transparent acrylic plate. This hologram will only respond to light rear projected from 30-35. All other light - such as sunlight and other ambient light - is ignored. The Holo Screen has a gain of 3.2 at 30-35 horizontal projection angle. The hologram is very selective about the direction from which it receives the light. This makes it suitable for use in the most extreme cases of ambient light, such as shop windows. The holographic film is designed in such a way that the screen remains transparent where there is no projected image. This allows users to be creative in the content and images used on the screen. The holographic film consists of four holograms which are tiled together in the manufacturing process, so the film appears as one full hologram."

  32. Gone for the ride by Blitzenn · · Score: 4, Funny

    "hey Fred, if we get rid of the big box surrounding these old rear projection tv's, Jack the price way up and call em something fancy, I'll bet we can finally sell these things off"

    "Great Idea Barney! Let's call 'em 'Hollow Graphic'. No! No! Wait! I got it Holographic! No one will know the difference!"

    "Yea Fred there's a sucker born every minute."

    "You got that right Barney. Now lets see what we can think up for all these foam tiles these old tv's came packed in."

    "Wait a minute Fred! I already sold those to NASA as shuttle repair kits. You won't believe what they paid me for them!", Fred gives Barney a big High Five.

  33. Two years selling them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My company, Venue Telecom has been selling this kind of screens for two years now. (We are located in Spain but sell worldwide)

    It's very good, with a good contrast and bright, but it's only for inside. Sun light makes image almost imposible to view.

    Indeed, we have another screen of this kind that is just a slim film. You can stick it to a shop window and it simply rocks.

    If you are interested in buying one, just e-mail me: pgquiles@SPAMPROTECTIONvenuetelecom.com.

    1. Re:Two years selling them by rasz · · Score: 0

      are you joking ?
      "This page is not Valid XHTML 1.0 Frameset!"
      you lying bastard

  34. Harrods is expensive by Gax · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd like to know how much these devices will cost elsewhere. Harrods have a reputation for inflating prices above and beyond high street level. For example, a toy that costs £10 in every other shop is selling for £25 in Harrods. You are paying for the experience of shopping in the store.

    1. Re:Harrods is expensive by ReVMD · · Score: 1

      The kind of people who buy stuff from Harrods that aren't souvenirs (mugs, keyrings etc) are people who don't care about price, or they work there and get a decent staff discount.

    2. Re:Harrods is expensive by basingwerk · · Score: 1

      You also pay to get the plastic carrier bag, which you can re-use whenever you go shopping to make people think you've been to Harrods!

      --
      I stole this .sig
    3. Re:Harrods is expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not true. Harrods is no more or less expensive than anywhere else IME. They just generally only stock things in the very top price range.

  35. HelioDisplay by bitrex · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not holographic, but I think something like the Heliodisplay http://www.io2technology.com/dojo/178/v.jsp is a lot more impressive, considering it can display images in free space "Help me Obi-Wan" style, without any screen whatsoever. Now if only something could be done about its $19,000 price tag...

    1. Re:HelioDisplay by narcc · · Score: 1

      I was just looking at that site (an AC posted it) The whole time I was reading it, I was thinking "this has to be a hoax". Can anyone verify that this is a real product? If it is real (which I doubt) can anyone give some insight into the technology?

  36. So much for quality by MoebiusPT · · Score: 1

    For something that should be high tech, they sure do some low tech screenshots... geez

  37. Tasteless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was going to say something really tasteless about Di, Dodi and glass screens but decided better.

    AC.

  38. So? by KiroDude · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What would be the main difference from projecting the image into a wall instead of that plastic thing in the middle of your living room??
    You save space!
    This is another one of those "must haves" that you really do not need...

  39. Harrods display film by Jononon · · Score: 2

    Here is film of the Harrods' Christmas display that started all the hype about these screens. Although I feel bound to be cynical about a £20k piece of glass, the Peter Pan display was pretty extraordinary.

  40. Re:This isn't really "holographic", but it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except it is holographic in the correct meaning of the word.

    The technology can do more than one thing, the angle dependance is what can make images 3D, here it is used to cut out crap.

  41. Bright+Sharp, but what about Contrast? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The blurb claims that the picture were bright and sharp, but what about contrast? Has anyone found pictures (not the photoshopped kind shown on their website or gizmag's) of this while the projector is off? I'd expect the screen to be black in this case, otherwise the contrast would depend heavily on the lighting of the room.

  42. Wonderful by Nine+Tenths+of+The+W · · Score: 0

    This is fugging brilliant.

    --
    Slashdot: News for Nerds, Stuff that matters only to them
    1. Re:Wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something makes me think that your comment went way over the heads of most Slashdot readers...

  43. Why bother..... by Godboy_g · · Score: 0

    I'm not sure why anyone would actually buy this. I mean If you're going to use a projector, why not mount it in the ceiling, and project it on a wall. That way you don't end up taking up half your livingroom with a giant slab of glass. Better yet, just buy an LCD television, and mount it on the wall.... It would at least be cheaper ;-)

    --
    I LIKE TOAST!!!
  44. Yeah, but is it childproof? by pdamoc · · Score: 1

    Honey... you wouldn't happen to know what is this ball doing here where our £15,000 CLARO used to be?

  45. Some points on the Gizmag article by wowbagger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    First of all:
    Given we are talking about how wonderful this new tech is, how much contrast it hat - how about some contrast on the freaking article! Come on, grey text on a white background? Obviously we now know where some of the layout people from Wired Magazine went.

    Second of all:
    The pictures in the article look too damn good - I smell retouch. If you want to convice me of the value of this technology, you need to show me a movie of the produce in use, as the camera moves around the room. After all, I can take your average rear-projection TV and make it look fabulous, IF I pick the camera angle to maximize the brightness of the screen. But as anybody who has ever looked at a rear projection TV knows, the "sweet spot" of the image is very narrow, and if you leave it, the image fades tremendously.

    Third of all:
    The single biggest cause of loss-of-contrast on a light sourcing display, be it a projector or a CRT, is the fact that the light in the room is reflected from the screen, making the blacks of the image not black. Now, this display may be wonderful at redirecting the light from the projector, but if the "glass" is clear, and the wall behind it is NOT black, then the blackest the image can be is the color of the wall behind it. If you wanted to truly get deep blacks, you would need to put something like black velvet behind the glass, to absorb the ambient light.

    Fourth of all:
    Back to the viewing angle issue: holographic techniques usually are VERY angle sensitive - the diffraction grating allows light from a very specific angle to be redirected to a very specific angle. Is this image REALLY viewable from more than one or two places in the room?

    1. Re:Some points on the Gizmag article by Zemrec · · Score: 1

      One thing I was wondering though, is since its an image produced by a projector, how exactly does it produce "black"? In a CRT, LCD or a rear projection TV, the screen itself is quite dark, and when projecting "black" it simply doesn't send any light to the pixels that are black.

      But since with this thing the display is transparent glass, what will black look like? Will it just be transparent so you'd see whatever you have behind the glass?

      I saw the pictures from the website, they're low quality and do seem to be retouched or maybe faked. Lots of advertisements for other displays are faked ("simulated") so why not this?

    2. Re:Some points on the Gizmag article by Retric · · Score: 1

      When it's off you see a black film inside of two panes of clear glass so you can't see though it just the glass. What makes it cool is when it's on it looks like there is a "floating" immage in the middle of glass with no wires.

      But if you get behind it the coolness factor drops a lot.

    3. Re:Some points on the Gizmag article by joshuao3 · · Score: 1

      I didn't see reference to this black inner layer in what I read. Did I miss it? Do you have insider knowledge? Or is this just a guess?

      The first post made an interesting point and I've been wondering ever since. If your answer is 100% founded, I can rest easy. So please, let me know!

      --
      Monitor bandwidth usage on IIS6 in real-time: http://www.waetech.com/services/iisbm/
    4. Re:Some points on the Gizmag article by Retric · · Score: 1

      It's an educated guess. From what there saying the material absorbs most ambient light and only let's light pass though from the position of the projector.

      Now when the projector is off it's going to put off a lot less light than the rest off the room which means the film is going to absorb most light that comes into contact with it which means it's going to be much darker than the rest of the room. Also if this effect was not enough to make it look black they're going to paint to projector black because it's going to be much more aesthetically pleasing to look at a black screen than the projector when it's off.

      Anyway it's going to look like a mirror, that's pointing at the projector and has a dark film over it, when it's off. I just asume there goign to paint the projector black when it's off as that would look better than looking at the projector.

    5. Re:Some points on the Gizmag article by kobotronic · · Score: 1

      You're completely mistaken. The panel does not in any way darken light transmitted through the device. There's no contrast, nothing that would cause the solid blacks so fraudulently suggested by the article images.

      The panel re-transmits light coming in from the projector angle, that's about all it does. Light from other directions pass through. There's presumably an anti-reflective coating reducing glare.

      The device resembles nothing so much as a large free-standing pane of glass. You can see right through it. If you're displaying black video then there's no evidence that it's supposed to be a display device: Certainly no black rectangle hovers in mid-air suggesting the blackness of the video. When an image is showing, it's simply equivalent to the photoshop 'screen' layer composite method - a ghostly washed out apparation with no contrast.

      The image has no opacity.

      It's pretty much the crappiest looking image you'll ever get from a rear projection display except possibly an antique big box CRT type a decade overdue for a convergence tune-up.

  46. $1 = 0.532510 Brittish Pounds by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...As of yesterday $1 = 0.532510 Brittish Pounds .

    --

    ___
    It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
  47. In use at the BBC by stevie-boy · · Score: 1

    This type of screen is used on the set of BBC News 24 - you can see it on the photo at the linked address with the logo on it

  48. Free if you view banner ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Maybe they could put a continuous banner ad above and below the display and then give these TVs away for free!

  49. Masturbation by Nikkodemus · · Score: 1

    What happens if you're into 'self-abuse', watching Anal Eskimos Vol. 5 or some such, that screen looks like it would wobble a fair bit.

    From the point of view of design, they obviously haven't thought about all the wankers out there.

  50. MIRROR with PICS by waxxie · · Score: 2, Informative
    Site Here

    "the new Claro holographic TV (£14,999 plus £9,999 for matching speakers) that allows you to project video on a transparent display. Plus all other light is ignored which means you get a sharp image even in brightly lit environments."

  51. I'll be interested... by joschm0 · · Score: 1

    when I see it at BestBuy.

    --
    01/20/09
  52. who gives a toss? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hehe

  53. Seen it, appreciated it, eh. by maggard · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Last year a shop in downtown Montreal had this in their window. It was interesting for novelty value, mebbe designers would go gaga over it. I could imagine some uses for it.

    The hook was it being video, apparently floating in the shop window. No wires, no frame, in was creepily like Picture-In-Picture for the real world.

    In the brightly lit shop window the image was equally bright, whatever in the ceiling driving it was pretty powerful. The only evidence there was anything 'going on' at all, beyond a block of video floating in space, was two, nearly invisible, mono-filament lines holding up the sheet of plastic. Also from the sides of the shop window one could spot the edges of the plastic if one looked carefully at the edge of the bright moving distracting video (in short - not obvious at all.)

    Uses aside from novelty value?

    Well as many folks have noted this is just an improvement on the old frosted-sheet-of-plastic trick so anywhere that goes this can can too. Places where you want a display with the only accessible part being a bit of plastic, like in public venues. Also spots where you don't want a lot of hardware 'hanging around' but want a cleaner look.

    I could see this being popular for indoor stadiums, hanging off the edge of the deck above. Those fans are woefully under-served with TV during games (sarcasm).

    Airports are gonna love this. Many have gone from banks of big CRTs squatting over folks to frames of flat panels, this will be the next step in their search for sleek 22nd century tax-paid coolness.

    Designers, heck yeah! The mantra has been "thin is in", but they've still been vexed by cables and how to handle that awkward screen when it's not in use. Here is something that can mounted in the ceiling ($$$), the screen put in a convenient corner, and (with the house cleaner dusting it regularly) won't spoil the elegant lines of the room with evidence of proletarian TV tastes. I bet HGTV just ordered a shipping container of 'em.

    For the rest of us? Unless you've got a real desire for 'floating TV' I bet most /.'ers would rather spend their money on more features & toys then just 'look it *floats*!'.

    YMMV.

    --
    I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
  54. /.ed by Particle010 · · Score: 1

    I imagine a holographic image is all that's left of the server right about now...

    --
    "Not the Earth!!! That's where I keep all my stuff!!!" - The Tick
  55. The Person that bought it by colin8651 · · Score: 1

    And now an interview with the idiot that bought it.

  56. So, Dodi walks up to his bodyguard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And says "Do you want to come with me and Di?"

  57. Seen it at Harrods, unimpressed by tvolpe78 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Harrods have actually had this on display for a couple months, I walked past it when I was Christmas shopping. It was surprising to me that it was visible on the glass under regular lighting, but the picture didn't look far and away higher definition than a good LCD. All in all I (and other customers walking by) found it unimpressive with no one crowded around this, and tons of people around the hug LCDs. So it projects onto glass, big deal. Plus, think about what it would look like if you had the glass a couple feet from a wall, as most people do with their TVs... you're going to get a double image of sorts from the glass image and the wall image. Just my perspective from as guy who walked by it a bit ago.

    1. Re:Seen it at Harrods, unimpressed by ReVMD · · Score: 1

      Its still on display in Harrods (walked past it this lunchtime) the picture is sharp, but the colours are washed out.

      It doesn't compare to the 40" LCD's from LG next to it.

    2. Re:Seen it at Harrods, unimpressed by Gil-galad55 · · Score: 1

      It's not surprising that it's no higher definition than an LCD since it was probably an LCD projector driving the picture, and probably a DVD feeding the projector...

      --

      To follow knowledge like a sinking star, / Beyond the utmost bound of human thought. ("Ulysses", Tennyson)

    3. Re:Seen it at Harrods, unimpressed by baker_tony · · Score: 1
      Yeah, I agree. I saw this at Harrods a few months ago. Looks impressive, especially with the huge clear speakers on each side, but I wasn't impressed with the washed out picture quality. I'd spend that sorta money on a kick ass plasma or LCD in a heartbeat. There was a crowd around it when I saw it because it is novel looking.

      Basically, it's designed for companies to put in waiting rooms to make them look cool. That sorta thing.

      It's sure not "3D" looking in any way, as the "holographic" word used to describe it suggests.

  58. WTF, were's the beef by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    I see ~$1200 for the projector, $800 for the nifty rear-projection screen (ok, maybe some $$$ to license the patent...), $500 for the speakers. So how do they justify the £9,999 price? (Oh wait, this is Harrod's, the Hammacher Schlemmer of Britain.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:WTF, were's the beef by codeguy007 · · Score: 1

      Try about £25,000 for the whole thing. The speakers alone are £9,999. It's £15,000 for the Sheet of Glass and projector.

  59. ew.. by torpor · · Score: 1

    pearls versus swine, my man, pearls versus swine ..

    (give me style over mass, any time..)

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    1. Re:ew.. by smchris · · Score: 1


      If only. Weeds so typically overtake a garden unattended and glitz trumps anything that requires refinement from the customer. That's why I said "quantity over quality". Truth be told, a great number of Mall of America stores don't even represent the best of the region. It's just a HUNKIN' LOT OF STORES IN ONE PLACE in my opinion.

      I seldom get to MOA since my wife hates malls but I sort of think of it as a Babylon 5 test site -- with a Snoopy theme amusement park in the middle. (But who says the first real Babylon 1 _won't_ have a Snoopy theme amusement park in the middle?) A technie factoid of interest is that they don't heat the place in a climate that can touch -20F in the winter. Conservation and clever circulation of the heat given off by the shoppers and other waste energy. More of a challenge to cool it in the summer with venting strategies.

  60. what about the HUGE speakers!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ive seen the display and what is really wicked are the massive speakers that they have. They're massive cones made of clear polycarbon about 5 to 6 feet high with a shiny gold spike in the middle. kids and older idiots always stick their heads inside the cones.

    paxtons tonight shaun?

  61. That's better! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    The link in the parent page as a more sensible configuration that looks like it's about as deep as a conventional projection TV.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  62. Yawn... but wait! by PeanutGallery · · Score: 1

    So, what, they take a Best Buy LCD projector, aim it at a sheet of plastic and quadruple the price?

    Lame.

    (Of course, it could be a fun project hack up in a person's basement...)

    --
    -- Just another unsolicited opinion... from the Peanut Gallery.
  63. That's MR Skinflint McPinchpenny to you, bub! by Thud457 · · Score: 1
    "You can buy your own one cheap here: http://www.av-sales.com/html/svs_holoscreen.html"

    What a strange new usage of the word "cheap"!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  64. What if... by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    If the critical component of this is the holographic film, couldn't they apply it to a curved piece of glass? (Curved perpendicullarly to the grating. ?) Seems like that would make for some cool psuedo-3D effects.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  65. Um... no one seems to have caught this... by Sefert · · Score: 1

    But wouldn't the picture be backwards?

    1. Re:Um... no one seems to have caught this... by Sefert · · Score: 1

      Never mind. I'm an idiot... It's not a reflection, but rather a selective passthrough of light. Doh!!!

  66. Not a Hologram, but closer than this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a very cool projector out there that is much closer to a hologram, it projects an image onto free air (and is touch sensitive to boot!) unfortunetly, it is not perfict yet, and cost the same a a small car.

    www.io2technology.com

  67. Forget WAV, Encode to MP3 by Alien+Venom · · Score: 1

    The article is rather misleading.

    Essentially, the Output Stacker plugin "stacks" the DirectSound output plugin on top of the Wave Out plugin. This is not really "cracking" anything. Winamp users should be familiar with the result, it converts the song to WAV format, useful for many things, like CD burning.

    There are limitations to this, however. In order to convert a song, you have to listen to the whole thing in Winamp (as its converting it in the background). If you want to convert a MP3 to WAV, simply change the output plugin to Disk Writer, and it'll convert it as fast as it can (doesn't play it), but because the WMA files provided by Napster are DRM-encrypted, it is necessary to play the file back (like normal) and convert it as it plays.

    Instead of converting it to WAV, you can download the LAME MP3 Codec, configure the Disk Writer plugin (in Output Stacker) to use the MP3 codec so when you play it, instead of it generating a huge WAV file for you to burn, it'll create an MP3 instead, you just have to rename it.

    Windows XP does come with a MP3 encoder built-in, but it's rather shitty and only allows encoding up to 56 Kbps, which sounds like total complete ass. This is why it is necessary to get the LAME MP3 Encoder, which essnetially takes over the default MP3 encoding capabilities. ID3 tags are not perserved in encoding to MP3, but for complete albums Tag&Rename should take care of the ID3 tags.

    1. Re:Forget WAV, Encode to MP3 by Alien+Venom · · Score: 1

      Whoa, what the hell? I'm not sure how it got attached to this post... It was supposed to be attached to the post related to Napster... Perhaps a mod can move it.

  68. Help me... by dual_boot_brain · · Score: 1

    obi won kanobi you're my only hope.

    --
    There is no reset button in life; however, there are bonus levels.
  69. HUDs are "holographic" imaging systems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many HUD systems are considered holographic even though they are displaying data in 2D. They are considered holographic because they use holographic lenses to project the data. The early holographic lenses were holograms of a lens arrangement. Remember the holograms in stores where you could look through the microscope, telescope, or binoculars? It's the same principle. I think the newer holographic lenses are computer generated.

  70. Necessary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The novelty of it, as well as the price tag is the reason some people will buy it. Where else can you get a gadget where your dinner guest will ask the price for, and get an answer "15000 GBP"?

  71. Floorspace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who the hell has 5' of dead space behind their TV? Who would want it?

  72. Meh by BayBlade · · Score: 1
    The Ghermisian's Triple 5 (who build MOA) built an even bigger mall than MOA in another country.

    I mean if quantity is cool, why go to the second largest?

    --

    The key difference between a Programmer and a Senior Programmer is that one of them is Mexican.

  73. How's it do black? by HeedlessYouth · · Score: 1

    One thing I can't quite figure out is how this thing achieves black in the projected images. If the image is projected onto a "sheet of translucent", why doesn't it continue to look translucent in the regions where no light (i.e. black) projects onto it?

    --
    I feel like a nematode trapped in fungal hyphae.

  74. 15,000 pounds!!! by Namlak · · Score: 1

    7.5 tons of television is going to buckle the floor of my house!

  75. Yawn by jafac · · Score: 1

    This is nothing more than a pretty rear-projection TV.

    --

    These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  76. It's called holo-pro by mr+i+want+to+go+home · · Score: 1
    This glass has been around for a while now - it's made by a company called holo-pro.

    Basically there is interlayer in/on the glass that has a very high reflectance from one particular direction only (this means you need to set up your projector in roughly the same spot each time if you move it around).

    We're using it on a number of buildings around the place at the moment - it really enters into it's own league when it's in a 20m x 20m format ;)

    One of the soon to be completed large scale projects is here. I'll post some photo's when it's done.

  77. How is this different than a projection screen TV? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is this not the same thing as a projection
    screen TV? Take some frosted glass; aim an
    LCD project at it; call it a "holographic" TV.
    Big wow... This is industrial design and marketing -- not engineering.

  78. It's not so much a holographic TV... by eno2001 · · Score: 1

    ...as much as it is a hyped up rear projection screen. Neat. But still not true holography.

    --
    -"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
  79. But it's not 3d. by i41Overlord · · Score: 1

    The picture that it is displaying contains no information for the 3rd dimension because it was never recorded that way. It's still a 2d picture.

    1. Re:But it's not 3d. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holography isn't just 3-D.

      The parent poster was correct - this is holography. Please just google for it and you'll find some basic faqs explaining what holography really is - and that encompasses 2-dimensional images.

  80. 1st one to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nothing to see here... o, nm

  81. It's spelled Brewster's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewster%27s_angle

    Simple is often better.

    1. Re:It's spelled Brewster's by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      Heh yeah. The funny thing is that I was editing that wikipedia page the day before.

  82. Apple Store has had this for over a year by warth0g · · Score: 1

    in Northpoint Mall - alpharetta GA - the entire storefront consist of like 6 similar devices, i always thought they were pretty slick looking - 15,000 q is like what $30k US? I still don't see how it could possibly be holographic since its converting a standard signal - its neigh impossible - this would be cool for video conferencing though, like your sitting at the conference table with some chaps over seas...

    --
    - Warth0g
  83. Cool Display..... by savage1r · · Score: 0

    ....But can you play Doom III on it?