Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Claim Breakthrough On Holographic Display
SpuriousLogic writes to tell us that University of Arizona researchers claim to have broken a barrier in holographic technology by creating an updatable, three-dimensional display with memory. While the existing model is only able to update once every couple of minutes, and isn't particularly suited for 3d images, it is certainly a step in the right direction. "Peyghambarian is also optimistic that the technology could reach the market within five to ten years. He said progress towards a final product should be made much more quickly now that a rewriting method had been found. However, it is fair to say not everyone is as positive about this prospect as Peyghambarian. Lecturer in Electronic Engineering at Bangor University in Wales, Dr Justin Lawrence, told CNN small steps were always being made on technology like 3D holograms, but, he couldn't see it being ready for the market in the next ten years."
Another revolutionary technology that will be adopted first by the porn industry.
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
When will I be able to have a FREE holographic lap dance?
Other than that small issue, sounds like a winner.
five to ten years.
-> hot air
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It can only update every couple of minutes? Not to worry, Lucas will stretch out Episode XXIV accordingly.
Trolling is a art,
actually I'm waiting for the pc market...I want to walk around through the world of warcraft and stab noobs in a upclose and personal way.
-Ours is the wisdom of Solomon, the magic of Merlyn, the fall of Icaris.
I can't wait to see those 2 girls and that one cup in 3d!!!
I saw it on Star Trek, it must be true!
R2-D2 had this shit down a long time ago.
We figured out a long time ago that it's easier to elect seven judges than to elect 132 legislators.
Who is this Dr. Justin Lawrence and why is he being cited as the authoritative naysayer for this technology? He doesn't seem to have any reasons to be unimpressed other than this cliche:
If it can only refresh every few minutes, it'd be perfect for airing CSPAN, right? I mean, it's not like Congress moves very fast - you really don't need a refresh rate measured in Hz.
And if they got it in 3D... It'd be just like you're there!
DATABASE WOW WOW
They had live TV, but small images. Unfortunately the head investigator Steve Benten died a few years ago.
Is this the technology that 3D Realms has been waiting for by delaying Duke Nukem Forever by this long? When it finally does come out, it's going to be awesome!!!!
ANOTHER breakthrough!? I'm thrilled!
seriously, how often have we read about holo-TV breakthroughs within the last - say - 15 years?
I stopped believing, although I'd love such technology...
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
thats about 0.0056 frames per second
still better than crysis on my rig
Peyghambarian words were "the market" (currently exhibition props and the like), not "the mass market".
So.. just use spheres for the heads.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
Link? More info? Who was broadcasting holographic images to allow "live TV?" And how would the "lead investigator's" death stop anything (did you mean "researcher?") -- This isn't Japan where people store all the key data in their brains and refuse to write things down. Surely he left notes, no?
everything in moderation
"HoloTV" conjures up images of...
- a display much like holograms, but instead with fully moving images (and I don't mean the ones that have moving images when you change the viewing angle)
- a holodeck, but confined to the 'space' of a TV.
Benton et al (mostly et al) did great work, but... ...it is neither of the above.
http://people.csail.mit.edu/wojciech/3DTV/index.html
A lenticular display is cool, but still depends a lot on the viewing angle, very precise registration, etc.
True '3D TV' is quite a long ways out as of yet.. there are plenty of existing and research methods, but all of them have their caveats that make them nowhere near '3D TV' a la "everything actually looks 3D, from any angle, without special glasses required, and without the surfaces appearing translucent, and with no more extreme requirements than a very high-end regular TV now".
red/blue | red/green methods - no color accuracy, need glasses, not actually 3D (fixed viewpoint)
chromadepth - no color accuracy, need glasses, not actually 3D (fixed viewpoint)
shutter glasses - need glasses (dur), not actually 3D (fixed viewpoint)
polarization - need glasses, not actually 3D (fixed viewpoint)
VR glasses - need the big VR goggles.
Lenticular displays - limited viewing angles, not actually 3D (multiple fixed viewpoints - typically on the horizontal plane, MIT's work has the vertical plane covered a bit as well)
Tracking displays - limited viewing angles and, moreover, limited number of viewers (just one.. the person being tracked. Also not really 3D (fixed viewpoints, but with greater 'fluidity' between viewing angles; no actual depth cues (could be combined with a 'glasses' method to overcome this limitation, however). In theory extensible to spherical displays to provide a - albeit awkward - free-viewpoint display).
Collated displays / array of displays - expensive, limited viewing angles (not as limited as lenticular, but if you look at the side of the array of displays, you're not going to see a whole lot), surfaces appear translucent, color inaccurate the deeper 'in' you look.
Spinning surface displays (in various forms) - noisy (even with the spinning surface encased and usually vacuum-sealed; for resistance purposes as well), flickery, surfaces tend to appear translucent although some level of opacity can be attained.
Making the air explode in gorgeous bursts of luminosity - loud. very, very loud.. zero color, not even greyscale; presuming technique perfected to at least allow greyscale (minor vs major bursts, or frequency bursts), surfaces will still appear translucent.
Of all of the above, Lenticular displays are the most commercially successful *right now*, and they're still not mainstream; that might change as more and more 3D movies come out and they start getting stuck on Blu-Ray/whatever, though.
I get the feeling I missed one, but it's likely to have some of the other usual drawbacks.
Overall, VR goggles give the best experience as long as the content is actually 3D.. but people don't like wearing even the little polarized glasses, nevermind a VR headset.
--
On top of that, though... shooting a movie in a stereoscopic format (glasses) is difficult enough; a lot of movie shots only really 'work' from a single angle - think one actor punching another... move a little right/left and it becomes a lot easier to tell that the guy never actually hit him; gets worse when you add in the original viewing angle and you get full 3D depth cues. That's not to mention any effects that have to get replicated in stereo (double the work; easy if it's a 3D feature film, not so easy if it's live-action and some poor artist has to rotoscope an actor's hair not once, but twice, and with stereoscopic cohesion.
And that's just stereo.. that's not even the common concept of 3D (cameras all around), nevermind full 3D (being able to look all the way around, instead of just orbiting the scene of interest).
No.. it'll be a long, long while more before 'HoloTV' is something we can all talk about the way we did about flatscreen TVs several years back.
How do you keep the Cheetos paste off the lens? I kid, I've rolled a d20 many times myself. And a large scale implementation like this could spur tabletop gaming from a backroom pastime in comics/hobby shops to something more on par with laser tag. Or both if its Shadowrun.
-=Bang Bang=-
Maybe it is just me, but sketpress releases like this are hardly news. Think of every breakthrough you've read about on Slashdot that was supposedly going to be a product in 5 or 10 years. ...
I love the comment that this kind of display is not suited for a 3D image. In other words, all this will do is allow you to see a flat image from any side of it. Uh, make a box with 4 monitors and call it quits. Save a few million in development costs.
jsut athnoer menagiensls ltitle psrhae for you to dcoede. Why do we wtsae our tmie dnoig tihs?
Link to info about this please.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
This news is from February.
More detail here...
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/feb08/5995
Comment removed based on user account deletion
" Lecturer in Electronic Engineering at Bangor University in Wales, Dr Justin Lawrence, told CNN small steps were always being made on technology like 3D holograms, but, he couldn't see it being ready for the market in the next ten years."
That guy is a prick and a true disbeliever.
I think it has been widely misunderstood what exactly this breakthrough is. It is not yet another display with a fast-rotating spiral in the center, or a box filled with smoke and crossing beams form a 3D picture.
No. What this is, is basically a "normal" hologram, the kind you have as small stickers on CCs or (ugh) EULAs, or the kind you hang on your wall if you're so inclined, just erasable. It's basically the CD-RW of holograms. With that technology, if they can 'erase' and 'write' images fast enough (fast enough for let's say 25fps), we finally can have a holographic display.
Power corrupts the few, while weakness corrupts the many.
And a large scale implementation like this could spur tabletop gaming from a backroom pastime in comics/hobby shops to something more on par with laser tag. Or both if its Shadowrun.
You realize if this works out, we're on the verge of being overrun by LARPers.
RUN! FLEE!
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
It's going to be awesome for my kids, watching 3D movies in our fusion-powered, flying family sedan running a light-weight, modular version of Windows.
And once I get home, I'll fire up my commercially viable Linux desktop and look at watch Netflix streaming Netflix movies, eating some Taco Bell (It will be the only "restaurant" left after the earthquake)
Fact: Everything I say is fiction.
Sure, so long as we change the definition to 'Laser Assisted' RPers.
-=Bang Bang=-
The display is only half the problem for a holographic "TV." You also have to have a holographic "camera", and those are not easy, especially since they require LASER light. I can't see it being safe for humans to "film" them with three lasers simultaneously (you need Red, Green, and Blue) that are intense enough to create the interferograms with enough contrast and to override background light.
But by including animated 3d projection would get people away from a console and play the games on the living room floor.
We used to do that without any electronic gear - just a set of dice, some rulebooks, and maybe some notepads. Oh, and pizza.
Was that just the poor-kids' D&D? I can't imagine any of these electronics improve the fun.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Too soon!
...because this is the first "holography" article in mainstraim media I've ever seen that appears to actually have to do with holography (as opposed to 90% of cases which are Pepper's ghost and the remaining 9.99% of cases which are just crackpots). Bottom line: holograms aren't projections. They're no magic Star Wars Princess Leia hologram, accomplishing that would require a photon to fly off in one direction and then change direction by itself at some point. And they don't like doing that so much. So I don't think the "coffee table" model they're proposing is quite what most readers are going to be picturing.
Porn is usually the deciding factor between two competing technologies
Counterexample: video game consoles vs. PCs running Windows. The consoles have no pornographic games, yet PC gaming hasn't slaughtered console gaming. Why is this?
The root of his (Peyghambarian) last name is "Prophet" in honor of the Prophet Muhammad, sal Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
The people don't look small when they're in your 2D TV, but with a holo-TV, they will look like tiny dolls in a dollhouse.
Useful for some things, but not TV.
http://www.media.mit.edu/spi/holoVideoAll.htm
This is the work that was started by Benton. Unrelated to the CSAIL work posted above.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Holograms look great on stickers and slurpee cups but I've never seen any static effect that really impressed me so who really cares if the same lame effect can be animated?
Why can't we just have a big rotating mirror sitting on the table with some sort of laser/dlp type projection system like the good ole tie-figher demos? Seems cheap and dooable to me.
The real problem is going to be convincing little jonny that if he tries to touch yoda his hand is going to be transformed into a bloody stump... Safety dome spoils the effect and we can't have that.
For anyone doubting the claim...
Peyghambarian is sooo optimistic that the technology could reach the market within five to ten years that he made this statement two times continously in TFA.
"So, if this project is realized, you really could have a football match on your coffee table, or horror-movie villains jumping out of your wall.
Peyghambarian is also optimistic that the technology could reach the market within five to ten years. Peyghambarian is also optimistic that the technology could reach the market within five to ten years. He said progress towards a final product should be made much more quickly now that a rewriting method had been found."
I distinctly remember sitting in my 4th grade classroom, in 1970, and listening to the teacher read an article to the class, telling us about "the future".
One of the breaking news items was that scientists were working on making televisions that could "hang on a wall like a picture frame", and we would see it homes within 5 to 10 years.
I won't hold my breath on this holographic TV thing. I don't even think I'll bite on the "within our lifetime" bait at the start of the article.
You tune in to a set of coordinates.
Their they're doing there hair.
love our television, and for no good reason. im already bombarded by about 8 minutes of commercial breaks during movies and such. product placement has me all but convinced proctor and gamble and ford solve mysteries on CSI. my dvd's and blu ray wont let me skip ads for tv shows and the absolutely insulting "dont steal a car" crap. Even the Tivo has been taught to hurl ads at me mercilessly. can i pay my way out of it? no, that just means a cable or satellite provider get to kill me with service oriented ads and targeted demographic marketing.
until TV programming and the ad model improve drastically in favor of the consumer, its hard to imagine i would actually like to have a 3d TV. the 48" 1080P i bought does nothing but whine about my fat ass, erectile dysfunction, inability to cook without a gadget, and my latest ailment requiring a questionably useful medication.
Good people go to bed earlier.
They aren't even close. 3D Holo G is being experimented upon in many places, so there may be a real breakthrough, perhaps by next year, even. This sounds like they're only seeking investors (like government grants) with such a lame article like this. They take the grants, and pretend to always be on the cusp of great achievement, always close to breakthrough, etc. They end up at the pub, or on a date with an associate(s), spending part of the money, writing it off as research expenses, bragging how important they are because of their 'work' etc. I believe the quote, "It isn't particularly suited for 3 D images..." says it all. What are they making, a flat hologram? We already got it, called, TV. Holo G's await the arrival of very powerful processors.