Did anyone see the hologram interview on CNN last night? That was way cool. Youtube it.....
Wolf Blitzer

__________________
The world breaks everyone and afterward many are strong in the broken places. ~ Ernest Hemingway ...

I didn't see it, but I just watched it on YouTube. From the way she described it, though, it's not what I would call a hologram. Wolf Blitzer couldn't actually see her. They were basically just superimposing video of her on top of video of Blitzer's studio in real-time.

It's more complicated but essentially the same technology that lets them put the little glowing flare on the puck in hockey games or showing the first-down line across the field in football games. You don't see it if you're there "live," only if you're watching the broadcast.

EDIT: But I'm dissapointed Yellin didn't take the opportunity to say, "Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi. You're my only hope."

__________________
SeanF

"Ask to understand, but don't challenge unless you have the knowledge."--NEOWatcher

The contents of this post are ©2010 by SeanF and may not be copied or retransmitted in any form without the express written consent of SeanF

I haven't seen it but I read up on the technology. A 'hologram' it isn't. And I'm ****ed off that they used that term. Its just a reverse of the CG studio setup that other stations use in place of a physical studio. I really hope someone brings the hurt on CNN for claiming it as a hologram.

__________________
---"Why do things have to suck so bad?" a friend once asked me.
"Because space is a vacuum and that's a lot of suck." I replied.
(Actual quote)---

Hey there.

If anyone is interested, the technology is quite simple.
basically, a HD camera array forms a circle around the subject (IR is used for tracking information), the information is sent to a computer (bank of computers) and is crunched then transmitted to the receiving end where another bank of computers decodes the information then sends it to a high resolution, high lumen projector which projects the image onto a clear screen.

Wolf could actually see her.

see Pepper’s ghost:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepper%27s_ghost
for information on how this technology can be implemented, but basically it works like a heads up display with the image being projected on a clear see through screen


One interesting and new aspect of this technology is the use of a really cool product by 3M called Vikuiti (vi CUE ah tee) which lets the clear see through projection screen reflect only the video image.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RYMR2LMVmQ
http://multimedia.mmm.com/mws/mediaw...66SgEiCOrrrrQ-
http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3.../Landing-Page/

__________________

-work in progress--

Hologram my as...cot. That's like calling a Prius a hover-car. Idiots. Oh well, it's "neat" but it's nothing really new--just improvement on old tech. CNN, wake me up when you have smell-o-vision. Wait, on second thought, don't.

__________________

I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.
"Facts are meaningless! You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!"
"Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything! 14% of people know that!"

I don't know man, Robin Meade is pretty... smell... o... rific. Nevermind.

__________________
---"Why do things have to suck so bad?" a friend once asked me.
"Because space is a vacuum and that's a lot of suck." I replied.
(Actual quote)---

In Disneyland, you've got (in the ghost house) these (what seems like, at least) 3D projections, I think they are projected on smoke. Of course they're prerecorded projections, but now that I hear about these transparent screens, I was wondering whether Disneyland really uses 3D smoke projection or 2D transparent screen projection?

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

Is that in Disney or at Busch Gardens? The "freakiest" one (to a little kid) was at the end, when your cars go by the mirror and they project an image onto the reflection to make it look like there's a ghoulish ghost sitting next to you. I don't remember much else of the ride, but aren't the projections you're talking about at the part where you're looking down into a "haunted ballroom" or something?

If I recall, there's a glass window between you and the room, and I thought it was just a projection onto that. I was probably 8 at the time though; I can hardly remember what happened last week let alone what happened 20 years ago.

__________________

I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.
"Facts are meaningless! You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!"
"Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything! 14% of people know that!"

When Yellin was explaining the technology to Wolf, she commented on how the cameras are linked so her cameras "move, and they know when to move when the cameras in New York move." If it was as you describe, where she was actually visible live, in the studio - Wolf could see her - then it would not matter "when the cameras in New York move." The only reason the cameras would need to be synced is if it's an in-camera effect.

And it is most assuredly not a Pepper's ghost effect.

EDIT: I'm sorry, I shouldn't actually call it an "in-camera effect," since that term has a pretty specific meaning in special effects terminology and it's pretty much the opposite of the way I've used it here. CNN's hologram was a video effect, not a live effect.

__________________
SeanF

"Ask to understand, but don't challenge unless you have the knowledge."--NEOWatcher

The contents of this post are ©2010 by SeanF and may not be copied or retransmitted in any form without the express written consent of SeanF

Disneyland Paris (as in France, not Hilton), but it's the very same attraction, at least it also had the man-in-the-mirror and the haunted ballroom scenes. I also remember a glass ball in which a (seemingly?) 3D projection of a witch head was talking to you.

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

how are you so absolutely, positively, 100% certainly sure that it is ????????

I will cite a source.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musion_Eyeliner

your turn

__________________

-work in progress--

oh yea, here is the patent for the system

http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...OS=20070201004

__________________

-work in progress--

I agree. I don't think she was projected 3D into the studio. He might have had a simple line monitor in the distance to view when he looked in her supposed direction (like the weatherperson looks at when green-screened and pointing at the map that isn't there) to fake the interaction.

I'm sure the only 3D was the original Yellin, her mathematical model inside some computer, and the impression in the viewers' minds who viewed the 2D projection.

I'd wager her 3D presence was as much a presence as the yellow computer-generated first-down marker line projected onto American football fields during the game (or similar for other sports, like on-field ads), none. They use the same sort of camera-motion tracking as Yellin described.

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

and the reason you need to have the cameras synced is because there is an array of them. 35 cameras actually.

http://gizmodo.com/5076663/how-the-c...w-system-works

__________________

-work in progress--

no, it was not a "real 3d" image of her, rather a projected image of her on a transparent screen,
i might be wrong, but i heard from an inside source that 3M and their new material called Vikuiti (vi CUE ah tee) was part of the technology.

__________________

-work in progress--

Yellin specifically made mention of multiple cameras at her location and in New York, and those cameras needing to be synchronized. You link to a system that is, in your own quoted blurb, a "simple one camera / one projector illusion" and wonder how I know they're not the same thing?

Anyway, here's Gizmodo's page on the tech:
Here's another page talking about the technology:
Trust me, this was a pretty high-tech realtime composite job, but it was just that - compositing. There was no "projection" in Wolf's studio.

__________________
SeanF

"Ask to understand, but don't challenge unless you have the knowledge."--NEOWatcher

The contents of this post are ©2010 by SeanF and may not be copied or retransmitted in any form without the express written consent of SeanF

yea your probably right, didnt mean to be a wet blanket.

i wonder why i heard that 3m had used their new projection screen technology.

it just seemed so self evident when i heard that.

The new Vikuiti material is really really really cool, and would make for a "more real" type of holographic effect, were both participants could actually see each other.

I am sure the fiber could handle the information.

__________________

-work in progress--

Trust me, this was a pretty high-tech realtime composite job, but it was just that - compositing. There was no "projection" in Wolf's studio. Right; and somewhere someone apparently things 'Hologram' means "Fancy compositing on the fly".

__________________

I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.
"Facts are meaningless! You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!"
"Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything! 14% of people know that!"

i think the layman (read: pretty much everyone in the media) has no idea what a hologram *really* is. 3d data stored in 2d is kind of hard to wrap your head around.

__________________
---"Why do things have to suck so bad?" a friend once asked me.
"Because space is a vacuum and that's a lot of suck." I replied.
(Actual quote)---

this is the system i was talking about and what i thought they used.
which can be used with from one to multiple cameras using edge blending techniques.

if you watch the video you can see the people walk on stage. everyone in the audience can see the "holograms"

http://www.musion.co.uk/Cisco_TelePresence.html

__________________

-work in progress--

I wasn't impressed. (I was able to pull up the one with that rapper guy)
First off: In many of the angles he was not on the circle both vertically and horizontally.
Second: That aura around him was rather irritating.

Do they really need such technology? It looks to me that green screen technology could have produced the same thing.
Put the interviewee in a 360 degree green room, and synchronize the green room camera with the studio camera.

Maybe Jay can chime in with an answer.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

wait,

http://iryanhd.wordpress.com/2008/11...buts-hologram/

says this:
"The technology is called the Musion Eyeliner Hologram Effect. It’s the same technology that’s also used at Universal Studio’s Disaster ride. Very cool."

the web site
http://www.musion.co.uk/

and here:
http://www.overstock.ws/article.cfm/id/146348


so maybe, just maybe, i might be right?

__________________

-work in progress--

you mean this one?
http://www.musion.co.uk/Gorillaz_MTV_Awards.html

__________________

-work in progress--

No; the other CNN holographic interview...with will.i.am.
(I'm having a bit of problem with CNN video lately, so providing the link is a bit of a pain)

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

Sorry, afraid not.

One thing you'll notice with all the links you've provided to "Pepper's Ghost"-type illusions (which, make no mistake, are very cool!) - they all involved darkened stages. That's a necessity for that type of reflection effect, regardless of whether it's a nearby physical object or a video image projection that you're reflecting off the screen. The CNN videos are in bright, uniformly lit studios.

Also, the CNN videos have shots showing the backs of the "holograms" and the front of the real people (Blitzer and Cooper). "Pepper's Ghost" is only visible from the front.

Geez, what we really need is for somebody to just ask Blitzer or Cooper, "Now, could you actually see that image in the studio, or did it only show up on the monitor screens?"

__________________
SeanF

"Ask to understand, but don't challenge unless you have the knowledge."--NEOWatcher

The contents of this post are ©2010 by SeanF and may not be copied or retransmitted in any form without the express written consent of SeanF

I thought it was pretty obvious that no, he could not. But I never went in and read the details of the set-up (suprise), so maybe I'm mistaken.

For me, theres two true tests for a "real" hologram: One) can you throw something through it without breaking anything, and Two) can you walk around it and observe the object in three dimensions.

From the peices I've read in this thread, it sounds like there were "360 degrees" worth of camera footage on the woman, but not at Blitzer's studio. I know they spoke of multiple cameras at both locations, but what studio only has one camera? Doesn't mean Blitzer had a 360-rig--just that the compositing system had to be co-ordinated each time they switched to a different camera shot. Regardless, since the composit was only done in one direction (only she was being "beamed" to his studio, and not vise versa), On blitzer's end all that would be required is motion-sensing set ups on the active cameras. You don't actually need to film the studio in 360; just the "holographed" (if they can use words losely, so can I!) subject.

__________________

I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.
"Facts are meaningless! You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!"
"Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything! 14% of people know that!"

Yup. Which makes Yellin's description to Blitzer kind of misleading, I think. She talked about her Chicago cameras being linked to the New York cameras so that her cameras "move when the NY cameras move." That's not necessary, especially if they've got 360-degrees of cameras around her.

The system needs to know when the NY cameras are moving so that it knows which signals from the Chicago cameras to composite, but her cameras don't need to know or do anything. They just sit there and broadcast.

However - and this just occured to me as I was typing this - the cameras in NY can also move (and pivot) up and down, and the cameras in Chicago would need to be able to match that movement.

__________________
SeanF

"Ask to understand, but don't challenge unless you have the knowledge."--NEOWatcher

The contents of this post are ©2010 by SeanF and may not be copied or retransmitted in any form without the express written consent of SeanF

However - and this just occured to me as I was typing this - the cameras in NY can also move (and pivot) up and down, and the cameras in Chicago would need to be able to match that movement.

Ah, good point--unless they shoot everything from pre-defined heights/angles. But if you do indeed need to send motion data back to her location, why would you need a 360-degree rig? If you send motion for one thing (dirrectional/pivot information), why not just have the whole camera move coordinately aswell, and only need one moving camera?

Or maybe there wasn't an array of 360-degree cameras as I envision; rather just one camera per camera in Blitzer's studios. Each studio has the cameras set on tracks, so that movement between the two can be matched. That'd work--but wouldn't be much more than glorified remote-control cars with video compositing as the result.

__________________

I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.
"Facts are meaningless! You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!"
"Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything! 14% of people know that!"

It is NOT a hologram, but simple blue-screen using two cameras in synch, or in their case, a semi-sphere of 35 cameras.

Very disconcerting to have the POV continue sweeping back and forth, much like the crazy overuse of zoom in the 60's.

Also, to Wolf Blitzer, it did NOT look like she was right there, except on the studio monitors. All he was doing was looking towards the red spot of light on the floor.

__________________
"Toward no crimes have men shown themselves so cold- bloodedly cruel as in punishing differences of belief." - James Russell Lowell

I so would have done that.

__________________
When you're standing on the edge of nowhere, there's only one way up...
"If you think the LHC will create black holes, you might as well believe Hobbits are at the bottom of your garden."- Dr. Mike Inglis
Rovers forever! - ToSeek