From Avatar to Light Fields: 3D’s Making a Comeback

[Guest]

Thanks to new technology, you could finally get glasses-free 3D at home, even on your phone.

From Avatar to Light Fields: 3D’s Making a Comeback : Read more

 

[JoeMomma]

The Lytro Camera was the 1st consumer light field device. It did not do 3D though.
https://www.amazon.com/Lytro-Light-Field-Camera-Graphite/dp/B0099QUSGM

 

[bit_user]

If you’ve noticed Big Hero 6

Funny you should mention that, because I had to import the 3D blu-ray from the UK - they didn't sell it in the US!

Pretty good movie, but a it bugged me a bit with the things these kids can supposedly build.

This is what Peter Jackson was attempting to do with filming and displaying The Hobbit at 48fps. Unfortunately for Jackson, a lot of people didn’t like the “non-traditional” look of high frame rates.

That's interesting, because the Hobbit 3D blu-ray looked horrible to me, until I turned on my TV's motion smoother (which effectively doubled what I presume was a 24 Hz version to 48 Hz per eye).

Honestly, you'll get used to the high framerate video. Then, you won't want to go back. Get a TV with a good motion smoother and just leave it on for a couple days. Except for video games, of course, since it can add latency. My TV's "game mode" automatically disables it.

Light fields can also fix some of 3D’s other problems already mentioned, but tackling this particular issue is where light fields truly shines.

This "accommodation" problem is one of the bigger issues with current AR tech. It's why AR is probably the killer app, for lightfields. That's why so many are excited about Magic Leap finally launching, this year.

The problem that crops up here is that each lens needs to have its own special image, or array of pixels, displayed for it to work correctly, and each lens equates to a single pixel of a normal, non-light field image.

The way I describe it is that each pixel needs to be able to simultaneously appear as a different color from different directions.

Movies and TV shows often rely on showing you a single perspective the director chooses. Allowing you to look at a different angle of a scene would mean you might miss important action going on in the scene (VR films have this same problem).

Definitely not the same problem as VR movies, which usually make the mistake of putting you in the midst of the action. Looking at a lightfield display is like looking through a window. It constrains your view much more than even watching a play performed live on stage, for instance.

I realize the article was already a bit longish, but some mention of Lytro, and the way it enables you to do retrospective pan, zoom, and focus could've been illuminating.

 

[linuxgeex]

Dude, Polarization is not Quantum Spin Up/Down. Polarization is the plane of orientation of the light, and/or the direction of rotation of the EM field components as it propagates. Typical polarizing lenses polarize the light to a plane, so placing 2 lenses at 90 degrees to each other blocks 100% of the light passing through the pair of lenses. The lenses used for theatres uses Clockwise / Counter-clockwise polarizing filters which don't manage to block planar polarized light but do manage to block the opposite circular polarization. This is why you can rotate your head without mixing channels, but it's also why there's always some ghosting - because when the light bounces off the screen a small portion of it changes polarization.

A Twisted Nematic (TN) LCD display has a single planar polarization which is why it has poor viewing angles - as you move off plane less and less light escapes in the direction you're looking from. That has nothing to do with Quantum Spin, which is a Quantum State of Particles - not light. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(physics)

 

[linuxgeex]

sorry I meant filters, not lenses.

 

[bob moog]

Calm down LINUXGEEX, they weren't really that far off. Technically polarization is the result of quantum helicity, but helicity is essentially the same thing as spin except that helicity is used for massless particles and spin is used for particles with mass (helicity actually means the component of the spin in the direction of motion). So their terminology was off but they were basically correct: a "spin up" photon would be the same thing as a right handed helicity photon, and a bunch of them together form a right handed or clockwise polarized light beam which goes through a clockwise polarizing filter. You get linear polarization from a sum of left and right circular polarization.

 

[AgentLozen]

As mentioned, the upcoming RED Hydrogen One phone will have a display that can shift from light field mode to 2D mode, with a display made by a start-up called Leia (yes, named after that Leia). Little word has been given on how the phone’s display tech works, other than that it will be some version of the holographic type of display, giving a wide enough field of view to allow you to tilt your head around it.

You say that the RED Hydrogen One is a phone that can display 3D images. I clicked on the link to the Leia website and they were showing pictures of some science fiction hologram stuff. I'm not clear on what the Hydrogen One's final output will be like. Will the user see an image like what the Nintendo 3DS provides, or will it project a holographic Luke Skywalker for you to duel with?

 

[bit_user]

I'm not clear on what the Hydrogen One's final output will be like. Will the user see an image like what the Nintendo 3DS provides, or will it project a holographic Luke Skywalker for you to duel with?

I can't comment on that specific device, but lightfield displays can produce images that seem to extend forward from the display surface (or recede back into it) in the same way as existing 3D technologies. Looking at the display from the side, you will see nothing. You have to be looking roughly perpendicular to the plane of the display.

The difference vs. 3D glasses is that you can move your head and see around things in the image. Likewise, it can support multiple viewers who will see slightly different perspectives. Again, very much like looking through a window, or at a holographic print.

The intro vid on this site is a cool proof-of-concept. Just watch it and you'll intuitively understand.

http://www.fovi3d.com/
(video direct link: https://vimeo.com/192728352/b38ff7b21a )


Worthwhile reading:

http://www.fovi3d.com/technology/


Also, a demo video of their new tech (seems less impressive to me, but what do I know?):

https://www.youtube.com/embed/oRjKKJM8IQc

 

[fellewein]

I've never seen glassless 3D content anywhere much less from a phone screen. I don't believe in this product at all. They cannot release any specifics, yet they act like the release date is around the corner? I really don't think this thing will even happen in 2018.


https://tvtapapk.com/

 

[AgentLozen]

I looked through those links you posted. That's neat stuff. I wonder what the viewing angle is like with this technology. In the case of the 3DS, your eyes had to be aligned juuuuuuust right for the best experience. It would be cool if there was a little more flexibility with this light field stuff. Thanks for the links.