Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Looking Glass – A new type of holographic interface

feld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–89 of 89 posts

Re: Looking Glass – A new type of holographic interface

#81

Post by Luuseens »

Animats wrote: post #61

It's not a hologram, of course. It's a stack of flat displays. That's been tried before, in many ways. The first try was a vibrating mirror.[1] There's a flat rotating mirror system from FakeSpace.[2] It's not bad; you can walk around it. Move vertically, though, and the illusion breaks down. There's a scheme with gas ionized by intersecting laser beams. That's very low-rez, but truly volumetric. Eventually, someone…

There's also multi-planar rear-projection screens by Lightspace[1], they essentially have a stack of liquid crystal diffusers (20 or so) that can switch between transparent or diffusing state.

[1]http://lightspace3d.com

Re: Looking Glass – A new type of holographic interface

#82

Post by mozumder »

ryandamm wrote: post #58
mozumder wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That assumes your pixel distribution has much higher potential addressable resolution than the signal you care about. It doesn't need that at all. Light fields can be interpolated like anything else, just like bayer filter for color on camera sensors or 4:2:2 color compression on the signal side. But if you're doing 3-D rendering, you can match rays exactly to your distribution on the display if the renderer knows…

With all due respect, interpolating light fields is far less trivial than you make it out to be. It's a 4D field, and naive interpolation leads to loss of detail, and often edge doubling (itself a form of aliasing). Furthermore, if you're interpolating rays, you're necessarily not doing what you originally proposed, which is to only light up a (random or pseudorandom or evenly distributed) subset of the pixel display…

Tru dat. Interpolation will probably be too difficult in 4-D space.

Re: Looking Glass – A new type of holographic interface

#83

Post by enjrolas »

itronitron wrote: post #39

this is similar to what I imagined when I first read the initial press release for Magic Leap (years ago now) albeit on a smaller scale. This looks far more promising for the entertainment industry than vr/ar goggles. My only nit is that they didn't use the dancing baby (from ~1998/99) for the demo video

all you had to do was ask https://youtu.be/V4vVUXNotI0

<3

Re: Looking Glass – A new type of holographic interface

#84

Post by itronitron »

enjrolas wrote: post #83
itronitron wrote: post #39

this is similar to what I imagined when I first read the initial press release for Magic Leap (years ago now) albeit on a smaller scale. This looks far more promising for the entertainment industry than vr/ar goggles. My only nit is that they didn't use the dancing baby (from ~1998/99) for the demo video

all you had to do was ask https://youtu.be/V4vVUXNotI0 <3

this is awesome :)

Re: Looking Glass – A new type of holographic interface

#85

Post by dosy »

_ph_ wrote: post #79
dosy wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a great explanation, thanks. For the way you described it, to me, it doesn't sound that hard. - Create interference pattern - Record interference pattern - Shine ref light onto pattern to recover emitted light If done perfectly would this yield a convincing hologram (what I might try to describe as "visual sense impression of real 3D object being present" ) ? What are the major limitations in the current techn…

The catch is, that the patterns have the resolution of the wavelength of light. You cannot take plain black and white film for this, you would need extremely high resolution film material. Agfa actually produced special film for holograms for a while, high contrast and very high resolution, but with a sensitivity like ISO 10. The resolution is far higher than normal LCD screens offer and that would be the main impedi…

This is so interesting, thanks.

From my photog background, yep ISO 10 would be very tough to work with.

Re: Looking Glass – A new type of holographic interface

#86

Post by mung »

aeorgnoieang wrote: post #76
mosselman wrote: post #62

"I think most people don’t want this 1984 vision of the future, where everyone is geared up 16 hours a day." I assume the author means the book '1984' by George Orwell and I come to the conclusion that the author has never read the book and does not know what it is about. Not every dystopian story is 1984. A far more logical reference would have been to 'Ready Player One' by Ernest Cline which is in fact about a dyst…

"1984" also just means 'dystopian'. It's not always a literal reference to that specific work.

I think it really only means 'dystopian' to people who have not read 1984. Otherwise there is a perfectly good word:'dystopian'.

Re: Looking Glass – A new type of holographic interface

#87

Post by pndy »

chmike wrote: post #59

Holography is a very particular set of 3d image rendering technique. This volumetric display is not holographic. To me it's a frustration. Microsoft's highjacking of the word holography is also frustrating. Such abuse does not server the product and it's inventors. Truly holographic displays will emerge once we can control ligth interference in the display.

Volumetric display isn't as appealing as holographic when it comes to marketing. And masses often don't care about details, they just want to be thrilled that each day technology brings us closer to Star Wars-like holograms.

Re: Looking Glass – A new type of holographic interface

#89

Post by aeorgnoieang »

mung wrote: post #86
aeorgnoieang wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"1984" also just means 'dystopian'. It's not always a literal reference to that specific work.

I think it really only means 'dystopian' to people who have not read 1984. Otherwise there is a perfectly good word:'dystopian'.

'1984' is a particular type of dystopian; it has specific connotations, associations, etc.
Post reply on HN