3D Display a Little Bit Closer to Reality

arielsebbag writes "According to CNET, Several high-tech companies including Sony and Sanyo have officially unveiled a consortium to create technical and safety standards for bringing three-dimensional displays to desktops, laptops and cell phones. They are probably focusing their efforts on the technology developed by Sharp. It looks like they are actually good to go and hopefully the 3D display will hit the market by 2004."

Slashdotting

Something really IS going to jump out of the display and hit those poor designers in the face

3D cellphones? Please NO...

Oh great... Like it's not annoying enough when I'm trying to have dinner with a friend and his stupid girlfriend calls him to nag him for 20 minutes in the middle of it... Now he'll actually get totally engaged in the experience of humoring her and completely forget I'm there. Isn't technology wonderful?

Re:3D cellphones? Please NO...

Dude, time to come out of the closet, maybe?

Non-gaming usage?

Is there going to be any legitimate non-gaming or high end science usage for something like this? I can't see this being relevant to any more than 1/100 of the computer using populace.

Re:Non-gaming usage?

I work for a company that creates software for the scientific community. You'd be surprised how many customers use our OpenGL-based 3D molecular modelling solution using stereo-3D display devices of various kinds (most often they use high-end shutter glasses). They would be all over this type of technology.

Re:Non-gaming usage?

Cad/Cam Medical Research engraving engineering model building mapping weather forecasting physics civil engineering automobile manufacturing shall I go on?

Re:Non-gaming usage?

You've got to be kidding. You're telling me you can't think of countless applications for painlessly and naturally being able to view something in 3D? How about checking out an item on EBay and being able to look at it from any angle? 3D videoconferencing? How about a 3D user interface where you can look "behind" things? 3D porn! 3D movies! Hell, even with just games... I think that'd be a bit more than 1% of users.

And best of all, this might finally give Slashdot some real depth. ;D

Re:Non-gaming usage?

Four words: "Blue Cube of Death".

What does this mean?

Can someone explain to me a little better what a 3D display is exactly? I dont get it. As far as I'm concerned, my monitor already does 3D.

Re:What does this mean?

These 3-d displays that they are talking about send two different pictures in different directions. In that ways, you get an illusion of parallax so you see depth.

On a regular moniter, things may be rendered in 3-d, but they are displayed in a flat method. This can be approximated in the real world by closing one eye. With these screens, you get the asme 3-d illusion that you get in a "magic eye", where your brain interprets slight differences in pictures between you two eyes as depth.

The problems mentioned, such as the fact that it does not know where your eyes are to send the right images to the right places, are being worked on, but eye tracking makes the system much more complicated.

There are other, more fundemental problems with screens. Among them are that the focus plain is still on the screen, eevn while the sterio says that the image is somewhere else. This can give people headaches.

<SHAMELESS PLUG>
I work at that MIT media lab Spacial Imaging Group, who were mentioned previously on slashdot [slashdot.org] They have a holographic video which in theory works, It has many other problems, including that the person who built it has graduated and moved on. But in theory, that would be the ideal solution.
</SHAMELESS PLUG>

Re:What does this mean?

No. That was precisely my point. A hologram is a real effect to the point that it has focal planes. In an analog hologram, every piece of information about a light wave, including its direcion and intensity, is saved in a diffraction pattern, that can be read by shining the reference beam again. In a holographic video system, something is causing the exact same diffraction patterns that the holographic plate would have stored.

The beam is never focused anywhere. It is brought back when the hologram is viewed. The loss of focus planes would come from projecting a focused image on a screen, the first place that happens is your eye. You can focus on the front of a hologram, and the back is out of focus, or visa versa. At my lab they have printed some holograms and messed up the focal planes so they just looked wrong.

Re:What does this mean?

No, no, I'm afraid it doesn't.

Ever watch a 3d-movie. The kind you need special glasses to wear. Like a 3D IMAX or some such movie. Or even the red/blue lenses kind. That's what they are talking about.

Two different images are projected, one for each eye. This gives the illusion of parallax. You are tricked in to thinking the image is 3d because each eye receives a slightly different image.

And, just as with a 3d movie, changing your viewpoint doesn't let you see the side of anything. It will simply make the illusion start sucking as you need to be in the middle for it to work perfectly.

Justin Dubs

That's totally awesome.

Totally.

mm...

3D BSODs.

Just what I always wanted.

VirtualBoy

Talk of 3D screens always make me think back to the failed Nintendo VirtuaBoy. It gave you glocoma (Yes, you can smoke pot legaly, but that's beside the point.)

People don't want to watch TV/use a computer on a peripheral device. They want to do it sitting back in a comfy chair.

There goes everyone elses eyesight...

While objects in the background do not pose problems, viewing objects in the foreground can cause the eyes to shift back and forth rapidly.

The main reason I wear glasses is by using a poor quality monitor for about 6 years, since the pixels jiggle my eyes would constantly refocus. Hopefully, they can fix this to some extent...

Bah!

It will never happen! Remember that no technology becomes popular without being embraced by the porn industry and how the heck will the porn industry work with 3D displays?!? It's pointless to think about it I mean it's completely and utterly ridiculo...
ooh...
ooohhhhhhh!!!

ummmm nevermind

Longhorn/Blackcomb

I've heard that future versions of windows will escape the standard 2 dimensional desktop and add a 3D element to the GUI. Will these be the types of displays it will use? and how can they code for a 3D GUI without having a device to use it with? Or was it just 3D-looking on a standard 2D display.. ideas?

Does it hurt to use?

We've been seeing 3D display technologies for 50 years. Some have been better than others, but they have all suffered from the same flaw. Namely, that using them for any length of time results in a headache/eye strain. The article notes near the end that this technology is not free of the problem.

I'm not saying it might not be usefull in the same applications it's usefull in now, but untill I can use one for 6 hours with no eyestrain, I don't think I want one.

UT2003/3D would be pretty damn cool, though...

What about poor MS?

They'll have to replace DirectX with "TotallyInYourFaceX" or "DirectAndToThePointX" or something similar.

Seriously though, 3D displays are extremely useful for a variety of applications, from architecture (actual 3D renderings that you can actually walk around and see) to medicine (detailed and accurate 3D MRI imaging).

Of course, this particular article deals with 3D for entertainment purposes, so of course I have to mention the most probable use for 3D displays, which is 3D pr0n (in case you didn't catch the 50 or so other posts making the same exact joke).

I'm such a hack.

Re:What about poor MS?

So what you're saying is that 3D pr0n would use... "DirectXXX"?

How is this better than a holo?

Cool tech, two LCDs seperated by a screen rather than glasses, but the eye strain problem seems to be a killer. Think of all the problems with eye strain from a regular monitor (ergonomics, hysteria to some degree, possibly law suits).

The CNN and news.com.com articles were a little short on details, the each eye recieving a seperate image makes me think that the alignment of the two screens is horizontally side by side, rather than one behind the other with a slight offset.

I could've missed something however.

Anyway, I seem to remember a projection based holo game (was some kinda wierd space western) I played in the arcade in the early 90's, it used various projectors onto various pieces of glass to generate a 3D image (and looked pretty good if I recall). Isn't there better tech out there for true 3D rather than a flatscreen LCD?

Idea for a 3d display

I thought about using some kind of gas which would be suspended in a chamber. You'd need 2 lasers (X and Y axis) which would shine into the gas and light it up. Voila! 3d display which you could walk around, probably on par with the one in Star Wars.

x3d

As long as it is not like those x3d googles [x3dworld.com]

be wary of anything marketed "as seen on tv"

Sim City 4

That's all I've got to say.

3D, but must be viewed from a fixed point

For example, the 3D images are best viewed from 40 centimeters away, Sharp representatives said. Sitting closer or further away results in seeing two overlapping images As with all other 3D attempts, doesn't this kind of defeat the purpose? You pretty much have to view the 3D model from a fixed point, so you may as well just render the image in 2D. How is viewing a "3D" image any better than a 2D representation of a 3D model when you can't rotate your head around the image?

health and safety issues

"As you get closer and closer, there is more eye strain," Nakagaw said.

So.. they want to limit the 3D effect, so programs don't take it upon themselves to pop out and poke you in the eye?

How do you make standards for eye strain? Maybe they need to define some unit of pain. Like, using this display for one hour is equivalent to x hours using Windows...

You can already buy them

Seen 3D displays already from 15" LCDs to 50" plasmas from ddd. Check them out at www.ddd.com

to real?

3d pr0n, OMG duck!

DUPE!!

this was on about a month and a half ago.. I wish I rememberd the link...

3D displays could help me!

I would really like there to be a practical 3D display technology.

We've been working with 3D video and 3D live web cams [robert.to] for the past few years, and the biggest obsticle is the need to wear "funny glasses".

3D CyberSex

Is it just me or would this add to the ever expanding potential of ruining your keyboard all over again? And think of the consequences this would have on the ever popular questions "How long is it?"/"How big is it?". Thats right guys! We cant lie about having an 11-incher anymore!

Of course it would dramatically impact the joy of NetMeeting on a new level by actually letting you see how REALLY ugly and fat your "partner" is.

As for Counter-Strike/Quake/UT ect.. nothing is better than actaully feeling the urge to DUCK when a peice of someones skull comes flying at you because of the rocket launcher explosion right behind them ;)

3dwm

Finally, we'll be able to use 3dwm [3dwm.org] in its full glory !

3D Display...

Does anyone remember FELIX 3D [felix3d.com] displays? I know they can't be used on cell phones, but at least they work...

3D File Formats

3D displays would require quite a bit of change in hardware and software to be useful, as far as I can tell. I doubt that any video cards made right now are (currently, anyways) capable of displaying the 3D illusion.

And to take full advantage of 3D displays, it would require 3D file formats, no? New formats for movies and pictures would need to be created. *.mpg3d or *.gif3d or something. It's an interesting idea.

Dimension Technologies

Dimentions Technologies Incorporated have been selling 3D monitors (without the glasses!) for years. When they first came out they got very favorable reviews, but the major quip was with the price. Well, the prices have come down significantly, and you can get a 15" True 3D flat panel monitor, for $1700, and an 18" for $5000. 32-Bit color, resolutions up to 1024x768 (for the smaller ones), and 1280 x 1024 for the big ones, that's not such a bad deal. Also, it goes from 2D monitor to 3D at the toch of a button. Not bad if you ask me.

Site is here [dti3d.com].

Game from the late 80's

What was the 3D (actually holographic) video game from the late 80's? Had something to do with a time travelling cowboy and was similar to Dragon's Lair in that you manipulated video rather than actually played a game...

Does anyone remember that? I thought the overall effect for that was pretty revolutionary. Really did look like the Millenium falcon chess game between Chewbacca and R2D2.

I wonder why actual games and that kind of technology wasn't developed further.

A Premonition: Apple will popularize this

I can't help but think that this is the kind of jump in technology that Apple is uniquely positioned to popularize.

One day, they'll simply announce that they'll only sell 3D displays from then on. There will be alot of customers buying 3rd party monitors for a while, just like there were when they switched to all LCDs, but plenty of customers will buy the displays just 'cause they come with their Macs.

Meanwhile Apple gets to drop selling plain old LCDs, which by then will be a low profit margin commodity, just as CRTs were when they dropped them, and move to selling only higher end/higher profit displays. And selling them in more volume than anyone else is likely to be at the time, because of their access to all Mac customers.

And Apple is well positioned for the move on the software side too. They have already re-implemented their entire windowing system in OpenGL. It would be relatively trivial to add 3D window positioning and widgets. (And damn cool in some ways too, there will certainly be some useless eye candy, but some simple obvious things like being able to look behind a window just by moving your head a bit, would by really cool imho).

Other large volume computer companies, like Dell, would undoubtedly follow in Apple's footsteps, looking for the same advantages, but none of them have the secure vertical niche that Apple has.

Yay.

Best way to dispose of unwanted grandparents : have them die from an heart attack by putting in a DVD of *insert cheap action flick here*

I'd Rather Have OLED

This technology sounds like a more complicated (and expensive) version of the already-complicated and expensive LCD technology we have. Furthermore, it doesn't sound like the technology will work well with the OLED's that are just starting to come out.

Given a choice between "3D" LCD and 2D OLED, I'll take OLED, thank you very much.

2D vs 3D

It's been said before and I'll quote it again:

3D is just bad 2D.

Save for games, I have yet to see an application where 3D doesn't make things worse.

-Chris

3D will be assimilated

"One of the first subcommittees will examine establishing methods for tweaking software applications so that they can take advantage of 3D screens. Hardware input-output specifications will be the subject of another subcommittee."

3D Consortium member list:
Sony, Sanyo, Itochu, NTT Data, Sharp, Microsoft, Kodak,Olympus
Who's proprietary drivers will be the only thing it works with for the first few years?

Britney and DDD

I recently saw the 2d to 3d conversion of the britney spears pepsi ad that DDD did. It looks absolutely fantastic Anyone else catch that???

Just computers?

All the discussion I've seen thus far assumes, understandably, that these things are going to be next gen. computer monitors. What about next gen TVs?! Insert "Virtual" into "Reality Television."

3D webcams NOW

http://www.realtime-3d.com

there are graphic @dult 3d videos and images availabe that display the possiblities.

Ouch

Imagine the first time you get the crap scared out of you by a 3d X-10 popup ad.

What they fail to mention...

...in the article is that, to achieve the illusion of depth, the user must continuously blink one eye, then the other, exactly 30 times per second.

SIG FAULT

This is great

... and safety standards...

Thank goodness they are outlining some safety standards for there displays. I sure wouldn't want to zoom in on a pixilated 3D model and have a nipple poke me in the eye.

I only have one eye you insensitive bastards

I lost an eye five years ago to a mugger, so everything is 2D for me.

Yeah, I know, the punchline isn't very funny.

Focal depth (slightly OT)

I have read through the posts, and many people have stated that it only simulates 3D through twin images, but hurts the eye due to it all being on a single focal plane. While I can understand this, what I don't get is how does the eye know what the focal plane is?

I mean, if I close one eye and look at the monitor, it is in focus. If I then hold my finger ~10cm from my eye, it will be out of focus unless I try to look at it, in which case the monitor will be out of focus. In what way does a SINGLE eye have to change to focus at these different lengths? And how does it "know" where to focus on without the input from the second eye? Would it possible to trick the eye into thinking that the light is coming from a particular distance, regardless of where it is really coming from? If so, then you'd be able have true 3D, wouldn't you?

What goes around

More interesting uses of screens can directly improve the bottom line. At Comdex, for instance, Sharp showed off a new version of its Muramasa notebook, which weighs just over two pounds. Earlier this year, the company showed off an LCD panel with an embedded Zilog microprocessor. Sharp envisions a time when complete computers will be embedded into monitors, Nakagawa said. - Sharp to license Commodore Pet?

Wow..

..so when I'm playing quake and move my head to try and see round the corner, or lean over when my sister leans over when playing some daft driving game, it will actualy work as opposed to making the game player simply look stupid.

Finally!

Now Ralph Kramden will be able to buy a TV!

3D phone offered by NTT DoCoMo right now!

NTT DoCoMo, Japan's major mobile-carrier, already offer a phone featuring one sort of 3D screen. SH251iS as can be seen here:

http://www.nttdocomo.co.jp/english/p_s/products/ke itai/251i/sh251is/sh251is.html

The phone also features a camera and imageprocessing software to convert CMOS picures to 3D for viewing on the display. I checked it out and it's actually pretty cool. No glasses needed ofcourse since it's based on the new SHARP screen as was mention earlier on here.

at least it's a step in the right direction!

I have to think that all the negativism about the technology is maybe just indicative of the general mood. Sure it's riddled with flaws. Yes, we know it's been done. (And NO, it is not right for EVERYTHING!) But at least we are being offered this reminder that someone isn't going to quit until we can all beam a 3D movie of real-live Princess Leia onto our coffee tables. Me likey the 3D! Me wanty the 3D! We might take further encouragement from the fact that big guns like Sony and Sharp are moving in (again). Besides, you know a technology is about ripe when a big brand moves in and claims victory for years of everyone else's hard work, right? We are taking big steps in the right direction.

3D cell phones?

3D for cell phones is a waste of time. I can't imagine anyone using a handheld device for web surfing, buying a tie online for Father's Day or watching a movie. Interfaces need to be a certain size and at eye level for it to be tolerable.

The best application of this technology...

And the most profitable...

3D porn... I know it's the lowest common denominator, but I bet you anything that it will drive the consumer market :D

We should stop calling it 3D

And start calling it 'that display that makes you go all cross-eyed for an hour after you look at it'.

Or possibly 'the Dolly Parton' since that's what it'll be used for most...

Old...

I did a project on this technology for school back in 1994. I would have posted it but Slashdot didn't exist back then.

Re:Will make 3D programming easier

Actually, i'm not sure if this will have any effect on making programming easier. If i understand it correctly you'd still have to perform all of the rendering and rasterizing, except you'd have to do it twice at slightly different perspectives to send to each eye. It's still just a 2D image, there's just 2 of them now. So this could possibly cut frame rates in half i guess.