NICT researchers develop new method to make holography more practical

It's still not quite point-and-shoot, but it looks like some researchers at Japan's National Institute of Information and Communications Technology (or NICT) have gone some ways towards making holography a tiny bit more practical. As Tech-On reports, their method is based around a fly-eye lens that consists of a number of micro lenses, which allows for moving images to be captured in normal lighting conditions, and is also used to display the image after a computer works its magic on the raw images. There are still a few fairly significant drawbacks to the setup, however, as the image displayed is currently limited to one centimeter in size with a two degree viewing angle, although the researchers say they should be able to increase that to a four centimeters within the next three years. Check out an equally tiny image of an actual hologram captured with the system after the break.

[John H. @ Nov 24th 2008 5:23PM]

dang, that text is even harder to read than dos on a television

[John H. @ Nov 24th 2008 5:25PM]

cuz "3D" is hard to read...

i meant it's much less clear, but then again, it's a frickin hologram

[CubeGuy @ Nov 24th 2008 8:40PM]

I thought it was boobies.

=U

[Aguiluz @ Nov 24th 2008 5:24PM]

2 degrees viewing angle?

My goodness.... >_>

Step in the right direction I hope.

[aardWolf @ Nov 24th 2008 5:27PM]

So, how close do you have to get so that your eyes aren't too far apart for the 2 degree viewing angle?

[G Scott J @ Nov 25th 2008 1:03AM]

@ aardWolf
... Wouldn't you have to get further away to make the opposite end from the angle longer?

[billedluh @ Nov 25th 2008 2:30PM]

yes. yes you would have to get further away. and that isn't exactly better considering the image is one centimeter in size.

[Str1ker @ Nov 24th 2008 5:25PM]

Viewing angle: 2 degrees...LOL, next

[Samboini @ Nov 24th 2008 5:27PM]

You laugh, but where is your hologram with a better viewing angle? Technology isn't born overnight, although it sometimes gets dropped off by the techno stork.

[John H. @ Nov 24th 2008 5:29PM]

good thing they didn't say "black and white tv...LOL, next," wouldn't you agree?

[Str1ker @ Nov 24th 2008 5:34PM]

...and then magically after a year the viewing angle increases to 20deg; then after another year 40deg; then 120...etc etc
It's all a load of bullshit imo, and they purposely release products overtime with slightly better specs to make more money.

But seriously though, 2 degrees? Can anyone even stand still enough so he/she doesn't sway more than 2degress.

[bandigolo @ Nov 24th 2008 5:52PM]

hell, my rear-proj Samsung DLP is only like 4*.

(ok, not really, but it sucks unless you're on the couch)

[404 @ Nov 24th 2008 5:33PM]

I always knew they'd need a special camera to record holographic video, but I didn't know that's what they'd literally call it...!

Although I suppose the fact it's not called something like the HD iCamera Xtreme Ultra 4987GS makes a nice change.

[Loomis @ Nov 24th 2008 8:10PM]

For reference, that "special" camera is something called a "plenoptic camera", which has been around for a couple years (see, eg, Mark Levoy or Ren Ng or Ramesh Raskar and their "lightfield cameras"). It's recording a couple different viewpoints simultaneously, one from each fly-eye lens (as the translation calls 'em). That means that the reconstructed optical field has only a few discrete viewpoints -- enough to give a 3D effect with the holographic reconstruction, but it's not yet the complete optical wavefront from the object.
The poor clarity (especially noticeable with the text) is partly due to the tradeoff between number of viewpoints versus number of pixels per viewpoint and probably due to the fact that "3D" is in the defocused background... proving that it's 3D.
I'm also going to posit that the viewing angle is related to the size of the (SLM) LCD pixels, probably around 10 microns to give a 2 degree viewing angle for visible wavelengths. As the pixels become smaller, the viewing angle increases slightly: at 2 microns, 7.5 degrees, and 15 degrees for 1 micron pixels. Approximately.
Alright, it's time to head back to the lab.

[John H. @ Nov 24th 2008 5:33PM]

lol..."special camera"

does it ride the short bus?

[Chris @ Nov 24th 2008 5:34PM]

I can't make mine work. My half silvered mirror is more like 2/3, and I'm not sure what they mean by "optical filter" but other than that mine looks just like the diagram.

[G Scott J @ Nov 25th 2008 1:03AM]

Really? You probably didn't have your holographic data organized into a ring around the cables coming out the back of your blue PC box.

[Funke, Tobias Dr. @ Nov 24th 2008 5:43PM]

We're all that much closer to saying creepy things when we see a hologram of our sister asking for help.

[jepzilla @ Nov 24th 2008 6:10PM]

Ok, this is actually really cool. They're reconstructing a wavefront with just a special camera and then using that to digitally reproduce a hologram of the original image. Sure it's still very primitive, but this is real holography, not fake stereoscopic (or worse) stuff that people have been foisting for years.

This technology could (in a few years) give real, free floating 3d, no glasses or other trickery required.

[nathan.wong @ Nov 24th 2008 6:50PM]

This is very cool. I've been trying to think of ways to accomplish what these people just did. Now I can think up other things that other people will bring out before I even commit my idea to paper.

I hope to see it in action.

[spacegravity4me @ Nov 24th 2008 7:05PM]

ok, can someone please clarify something for me here. Whenever I have heard of holograms in the past it was always talking about those stupid little things like they have on credit cards that appear "3d" or really, to have some depth. What I want to know is are these people here talking about being able to make a freespace, 3 dimensional projection? I'm talking straight, holy grail, r2d2 style. That is what I want. If not, then what the heck is this? People seem to be confused as to what these holograms are and now I am too. Is it, hey let's project a 3d image anywhere we want into free space, in the air, no screen at all whatsoever, or is it just some stupid, hey it looks like the image stands out at me! wow, i'm so amazed! So which is it, the holy grail, or something esle? Thanks

[G Scott J @ Nov 25th 2008 1:03AM]

It's just a, hey looks like the image is coming out at me. It's an interesting process of combining two beams of light from different directions into one location so that new reflected light bounces off of the film slide (or sticker on your credit card) in the same way as it was first recorded and I recommend everyone go read up on it, but no, they're not talking about R2-D2. At least, not yet. (And, when they are, it will probably start with a 2 degree viewing angle.)

[ZIG @ Nov 24th 2008 7:21PM]

another question for you guys, on CNN on election night they were freakin beaming ppl in and making 3d holograms of the white house and stuff like that.. is that stuff even possible? what kind of technology were they using there?

cheers

[TubeTop100.com @ Nov 24th 2008 7:31PM]

Teleportation.

[Dude @ Nov 24th 2008 7:41PM]

It was all fake.

Not that they didn't do it, but that the people on the show weren't seeing what you saw, you saw what they added onto the video (holograms and stuff), they didn't see any of it, it was all added in.

[Real #D @ Nov 25th 2008 3:34PM]

Check out this web site. www.zebraimaging.com

They have full parallax hologram prints that stand up when a light is shown on them. As you walk around them you see all four sides of the building or object or building. They are also working on a 3D display. I have seen the ones that you hang on the wall and the image comes out about 2 feet and the ones on the floor stand up about 18 inches.

[muhbay @ Dec 5th 2008 5:30AM]

Actually this method is not the holography, but it is integral imaging, invented in 1908 and appreciated with nobel prize. However it can be easily corporated with holograpyh.