What is Digg?71 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+33At the very end of the video they move from one display panel around a corner to another display panel. It appears that the image is not truly 3D. Because the images displayed on the panel as they go around the corner are the same as on the first panel. In other words.... I want to walk around the display with the image of the car SITTING STILL and my perspective should change as I move around the display. From the video example, it does not appear to work like this.
- gwjc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+34Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi; you're my only hope.
- EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19I call shenanigans. Watching the video, it's clear to me that they have have a cool way of floating 2D images in the middle of their tetrahedron. The images themselves, at least in the video, are not 3D. As other people have noticed, you can tell because as the camera shooting this footage moves around, the image on the cheops display doesn't properly change its perspective (it does change often, but that's part of the video they're playing, not a function of the observer's POV).
There is a way to do 3D like this, but it would require a rapidly (10000RPM) spinning mirror in the middle and a video refresh rate to match. I don't see anything like that here.
Good for trade shows though. - MrBabyMan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18This looks like an updated version of Pepper's Ghost, a parlor trick that dates back to the 1800's
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepper%27s_ghost - raid517, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18Yay... The future is finally here...
- bobthehamster, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15one word: PORN.
- ophello, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14@anchorman
They would have to film the object from all angles. It would be prohibitivelly complicated. Computer graphics and light shows would be easy. Video is a totally different story. - Bob042, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9It's not really 3D video. It's 2D video viewable from 360 degrees. Still cool, but I question how useful it really is when you need that big frame around it.
- Elias1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8If it were really 3D, rather than the subtle side to side camera movements they do throughout the entire clip they would have paused the image and moved the camera a full 360 degrees around the display.
- NateMac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Yea I noticed what anchorman saw, when moving to the side panel, I should be seeing the front of the car if its true 3D, not the same side view from the other panel.
But never the less great technology. - digitaloxygen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9360 movie theaters! Theater companies could fix 75% more people or more people in the room by making 360 seating.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Just floating 2d. Wake me up when the future is here.
- Harabeck, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8If I recall, the projection R2 puts out is only a 2d image just like this nifty device here.
- OpCzar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Sigh, and I have yet to get an HDTV...
- Crystallio, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Trade shows? This thing is destined for 3d porn.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Why are you digging ophello down? He's right. You can't have 3D TV or 3D videos of real life, since you'd need to be filming every side of an object at the same time. Computer animation, CGI, ***** like that would be easy to make "real" 3D video with, but not real life stuff.
- anagoge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"Theater companies could fit 75% more people or more people in the room by making 360 seating."
You couldn't add a 360 cinema to most existing cinemas simply because all the seating is already in front of the screen. I guess it'd work if a new cinema was built, but hardly the best idea for existing ones. - rompom7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@digitaloxygen: People in movie theatres are annoying enough without having to be facing a bunch of them.
- Gerz1219, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5
- markingtime, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4well i guess we can sit it in the middle of the room and set up the chairs and couches all around it for easy viewing for everyone. for example, no one has to sit and watch from a horrible angle or anything like that.
- Tiak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Because there's a huge demand for us to have our women floating in mid-air viewable with the same 2D image from every direction?
- gandre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4must be better than staring at a monitor with one hand on the mouse and the other on the joystick
- Gerz1219, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@Tiak - Well, it occurs to me that by the time everyone's ready to see cool futuristic 3D programming, CGI would be advanced well enough that you'd only need to film the actors on a blue screen. Studios of the future could either be equipped with a whole range of cameras from all angles, or they'd just write software to use four or five and extrapolate the rest -- but humans are the only element which would need to be captured in real life. The result will be an entire generation of crappy, lifeless, poorly-acted movies like Sky Captain and the Star Wars prequels, only with significantly more realistic fake backgrounds, and in three dimensions.
- sadistical, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Except your R2 unit would need to have four gigantic plates of glass in the shape of a pyramid on its head to project it. It would never fit inside the Jawa's collector.
- rabidwalrus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Like others have said, not really 3d but reminds me of Minority Report nonethless
- bitcloud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Don't worry harbringer, I thought it was hilarious! :)
- Tiak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"tracks the viewer"? No, that'd be pretty pointless, after all, there would be multiple viewers in most scenarios, it's simply displaying the same images at all angles. And something configured to do that PROBABLY isn't going to do much but that, at least not yet. I could see a future device using the same technology to transmit a different image (which would mean a LOT of them, and an impossible ammount of data throughput. I mean if you think about it, HD movies already take up a LOT of data, now imagine that, but with seperate data for, say, 360 different angles (and that's not even incorporating the viewer moving up/down). If anything is going to actually be able to display 3D still images, in a believable manner, they have to be "real" images, not virtual images like this creates.
- Tiak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It -IS- a "cheap parlour trick", but said trick can apparently be mass produced, and is useful, seems to me better than projecting things on a paper screen at least. Around 1:20 when they show the Universal logo is the clearest example of this, since it'd be pointless to view such a thing from the back. There's also a car that's filmed at a downward angle such that the "back" would be, well, looking up from within the dirt.... Which they of course wouldn't do on a display like you're thinking.
It still would be a more convenient way to view things without other items getting in your way, and it's transparent, so has the coolness of feeling like projecting an image in mid-air. - Badaudio, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2computers used to be the size of rooms, it'll shrink eventually
- aelias, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2So they found the map room. Whoopity doo. I found it, like, 20 minutes into that level.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Parlor tricks! This is not the future of 3D video.
Augmented Reality is the technology you seek.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L6ee0KAdXA
http://www.t-immersion.com/home.asp
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%22augmented+reality%22&search=Search
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=%22augmented+reality%22
I have many of my own digg links on this subject as well, but as far as digg is concerned, they are irrelevant.
This 2D trickery reaches the front page yet the much better technology is WIDELY ignored. - zonk3r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"meh call me when it can make solid objects like the holodeck, then i'll be impressed."
also accepted would be :
"Lame. Doesn't do 1080p. No Digg."
or
"Only 3D? pshaw! I'll buy one when it does 4D."
Bonus points:
"Why do all of these 3D hologopraphy posts keep making it to the frontpage?!"
//typical sarcastic intarweb poster responses// - asteron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah basically its just a glorified projection screen. Its like that old sega arcade game with the popup cowboy that could travel through time.
- Absalon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"Welcome to the WORLD of TOMORROW!!"
- mcottier, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Have any of you ever seen that thing where you put a quarter, etc. in it, and it appears on top, like it is floating? It has been around for awhile, and this device uses that same principal I believe. I was wondering when they would take that concept to this level.
- justaboutdead, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1yeah... cheap parlor trick.... "Cheoptics360"....
Che(ap)optics.... get it? - molecool, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well, unlike that pyramid - this one actually fits into my living room: http://www.neovisionlabs.com
- iFrank, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The fine print: In order to view this, you must wear glasses comprised of one red lens and one blue lens. You may find a pair of such glasses: in a cereal box; on a very muggable Disney World Muppet-Movie-goer; on an actual Muppet.
- everfalling, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ok, so you can see a 2d image from any angle in 3d space. interesting, but a real hologram. a real hologram would be being able to see a stationary 3d object from every direction. all this does, as far as i can tell, is have the image follow you. i dont see it allowing you to walk around a stationary object and see it from all angles.
- molecool, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well, unlike that pyramid - this one actually fits into my living room: http://www.neovisionlabs.com
- TechyLah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1OK, it's not holographic 3-D. Nevertheless it's way cool and clever. Now for my suggestion.
They just need to combine this with the LCD-shutter type glasses/helmuts to get a truly awesome 3-d effect, probably even better than the 3-D Omnitheater!
I'm easy, though. I even get way off using the Anaglyph red/green 3d glasses driving all over the surface of Mars. (Nasa provides the 3d CDR) - rompom7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ziks: its not a 3D image, its a 2D image viewable across 3 dimensions.
- RedStateRetard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I remember a Coin-op video game in the late 80's. You were a cowboy and wizard would teleport from place to place. Linear play like Dragon's lair. But it was labeled 3-D hologram but used the same principal
- datagod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The video was too fast-paced to tell what was really going on. Just a big marketing sshmeer.
They should name the product CheapOptics360. - BrokenBeta, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1When trying to be cool by using words like "tetrahedron", first, make sure that it actually IS a tetrahedron, and not just a pyramid.
:-) - tanveer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1As much I agree the video looks really cool, I've a nagging suspicion back of my head...
From engedget comment: DJDoc @ Nov 2nd 2006 9:32AM
"They should show a STILL 3D image with the camera panning around, so we can see if the 3D effect is any good at all.
Annoying.
If they're rotating and moving the image while the camera is panning, we have no idea if it's any good. We can pan a camera in front of a flat display with a rotating 3D image on the display and it will end up looking like it's rotating in 3D space.
Otherwise it's a very cheap parlor trick. Show us a NON-rotating image, pan around it, and then we can tell what kind of (1) opacity (2) distortion the images have." - Beerduck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Quite an interesting effect, but far from 3D. This is 2D viewable from 360 degrees.
Hence inaccurate. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3@anchorman
I was thinking the same thing. The only problem with that is you would only be able to watch computer generated 3D objects.. no scenery, no background.. just floating objects. The depth would be very limited. Which would be cool for some applications like looking at a car, but certainly not for everything.
This, on the other hand, would allow them to set up a huge display in the middle of a large room, and no matter where people are standing or sitting, they'd be able to watch the video. Any video.. not just CG - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2holy ***** old news no digg
- kafka47, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I lol'd... thanks gerz :)
-
Show 51 - 71 of 71 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is