palmerc@infonode.ingr.com (Chris Palmer) (10/01/90)
I read a very small blurb about Texas Instruments new 3D bubble display that creates a 3D image in a 2" diameter sphere. The image is viewable from any angle without special lenses or glasses. Question: How does it work? What is the image quality? Is real-time animation possible? Is it color? (OK, that was more than one question :-) ) I am VERY interested in this because I am working on a viewer-independant 3D system myself (no details yet, I am still experimenting). I want to know if TI has beaten me to it or if there is still hope for improvement or different approaches. Posted or e-mail replies welcome. Thanks in advance, Chris Palmer -- | Christopher M. Palmer #|Quote section| | | | | | || / Intergraph Corporation #| | Closed For| |o| | | | |\ \ Internet: b14!abulafia!palmerc@ingr.com #| | | |Repairs| | | | | | |/ | UUCP : ...uunet!ingr!b14!abulafia!palmerc #| | | | | | | | | | | | | ||
mccool@dgp.toronto.edu (Michael McCool) (10/02/90)
palmerc@infonode.ingr.com (Chris Palmer) writes: >I read a very small blurb about Texas Instruments new 3D bubble display >that creates a 3D image in a 2" diameter sphere. The image is viewable >from any angle without special lenses or glasses. >Question: How does it work? What is the image quality? Is real-time > animation possible? Is it color? TI had a demonstration of this at SIGGRAPH this year. It was very impressive, but has drawbacks. It works by scanning a laser over a rotating double helix of plexiglass (or something) coated to "stop" the laser beam and produce a dot in space. The relative timing of the laser illumination and the rotation of the helix determine the height of the spot. Make that a 2' diameter sphere, with a 5^3" working space to one side. The center can't be used; the axis of the helix is there (singularity). It is like the old calligraphic displays, except it is even more limited: it can only display points in space. I guess the computation to scan a "line" would be too nonlinear and would have singularities at some orientations of the line (such as vertical). Like calligraphic displays, there is a limit on the number of points that can be displayed while still avoiding flicker. There is a flicker anyways from the limit on the rotation speed of the helix (noisy, too, but with a neat, science-fictionish OMMMM sound that fits, somehow). Color is possible by having more than one laser, and having them scan independently: multiply the cost of the system by 3. Multiple lasers can also be used to decrease flicker by having them scan points in parallel. The display was also a little blurry, since the disk needs a finite thickness and invariably disperses the laser point a bit. Of course, some phenomena are impossible, such as opacity and reflectance. Not a replacement for 3d computer graphics. I have nothing to do with TI, I just went to their booth and asked annoying questions 8-) michael mccool@dgp.toronto.edu
rick@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Rick Ottolini) (10/02/90)
Didn't the first versions of TV in the 1920's use mechanical scanners before magnetic beams were perfected?
jim@baroque.Stanford.EDU (James Helman) (10/03/90)
(Repost... posting problem...) Does anyone know how it compares with the current version of the Spacegraph that Larry Sher built at BBN? E.g., how many points can be displayed without flicker? The big problem I see with both the Spacegraph and TI's system is that they both produce "cloud" type images. Transparency is useful for some applications but usually it gets in the way of understanding complex structures. It's not at all well suited for CAD/CAM or architectural modeling in which solid surfaces and lighting cues are important. But it might be useful for missle trajectories or air traffic control. For most things, I'd rather have head mounted stereo displays. Where will the big demand for these devices come from? Jim Helman Department of Applied Physics Durand 012 Stanford University FAX: (415) 725-3377 (jim@KAOS.stanford.edu) Work: (415) 723-9127
ron@vicorp.com (Ron Peterson) (10/03/90)
In article <1990Oct1.160621.5445@infonode.ingr.com> palmerc@infonode.UUCP (Chris Palmer) writes: >I read a very small blurb about Texas Instruments new 3D bubble display >that creates a 3D image in a 2" diameter sphere. The image is viewable >from any angle without special lenses or glasses. > >Question: How does it work? What is the image quality? Is real-time > animation possible? Is it color? > >I am VERY interested in this because I am working on a viewer-independant >3D system myself (no details yet, I am still experimenting). I want to know >if TI has beaten me to it or if there is still hope for improvement or different >approaches. I read about a 3D display in EETimes that I think had been built by TI. It was a plastic hemishpere that enclosed a clear plastic disk or ellipse that rotated at high speed and was drawn onto with a laser beam or bright light. The image with this kind of approach is viewable from any angle without glasses or special optics. The picture showed a bubble about two feet across. It was being demonstrated at some convention like SIGGRAPH. I don't think TI invented this approach and considering how slow the big companies are in bringing out really inovative products I would suggest pursuing it anyway, even if the method is the same (so long as they haven't patented it.) ron@vicorp.com
news@helens.Stanford.EDU (news) (10/03/90)
Does anyone know how it compares with the current version of the Spacegraph that Larry Sher built at BBN? E.g., how many points can be displayed without flicker? The big problem I see with both the Spacegraph and TI's system is that they both produce "cloud" type images. Transparency is useful for some applications but usually it gets in the way of understanding complex structures. It's not at all well suited for CAD/CAM or architectural modeling in which solid surfaces and lighting cues are important. But it might be useful for missle trajectories or air traffic control. For most things, I'd rather have head mounted stereo displays. Where will the big demand for these devices come from? Jim Helman Department of Applied Physics Durand 012 Stanford University FAX: (415) 725-3377 (jim@KAOS.stanford.edu) Work: (415) 723-9127
ncramer@bbn.com (Nichael Cramer) (10/03/90)
ron@vicorp.com (Ron Peterson) writes: |palmerc@infonode.UUCP (Chris Palmer) writes: |>I read a very small blurb about Texas Instruments new 3D bubble display |>that creates a 3D image in a 2" diameter sphere. The image is viewable |>from any angle without special lenses or glasses. |I read about a 3D display in EETimes that I think had been built by TI. It |was a plastic hemishpere that enclosed a clear plastic disk or ellipse that |rotated at high speed and was drawn onto with a laser beam or bright light. |The image with this kind of approach is viewable from any angle without |glasses or special optics. The picture showed a bubble about two feet |across. It was being demonstrated at some convention like SIGGRAPH. I saw this at SIGGRAPH. Your description is basically correct except that I believe the shape of the rotating sheet was a helix. Therefore the height of the point of light was determine by (and limited to) the height of the helix. In cross-section: Axel -------->XX XX XX===========*============= <--- Cross-section XX o of Helix XX o XX o ========================XX o XX o XX o XX o o -o- | | | | | | Laser Source |>>Question: How does it work? What is the image quality? Is real-time |> animation possible? Is it color? Well, basically what you have is a vector-drawing system, with all of its inherent limitations (e.g. no surfaces, etc). The limiting factors for the image quality and speed/quality of animation are "pixel" resolution size of the material of the rotating sheet and refresh rate (i.e. how fast can you get a two-foot diameter sheet of plastic rotating like this). Re color, etc., you could presumably add more than one laser. Another (vaguely) related system is BBN's SPACEGRAPH system [yes I work here, but I'm not related to the SG group so, this isn't really an advertisement. Honest]. In the case of SPACEGRAPH the lasers beams are drawn onto a mirror whose center is rapidly vibrating. This has the same advantages of "equipment-free" 3D viewing without the mechanical hassles of the large body movement and the image size is not limited by the physical size of the helix. NICHAEL nichael@bbn.com -- "This is my Email to the world..."
sao@athena.mit.edu (Andy Oakland) (10/06/90)
In article <1990Oct1.212142.18501@morrow.stanford.edu> rick@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Rick Ottolini) writes: >Didn't the first versions of TV in the 1920's use mechanical scanners >before magnetic beams were perfected? It's true; I've seen one of these monsters. Imagine a big (~3') spinning disc, punched with holes. At the top of the disc, a neon (?) bulb was behind it, and a translucent screen a few inches square was in front. The bulb flickered in time with the incoming video signal, the disc spun, and the holes in the disc were arranged so that the bulb showed through progressively lower scanlines. The resulting image was about the size of a postage stamp. Amazing. :Andy Oakland sao@athena.mit.edu
domingo@boulder.colorado.edu (Alberto Domingo) (10/06/90)
In article <1990Oct5.193803.13819@athena.mit.edu> sao@athena.mit.edu (Andy Oakland) writes: >It's true; I've seen one of these monsters. Imagine a big (~3') >spinning disc, punched with holes. At the top of the disc, a neon (?) ... > :Andy Oakland > sao@athena.mit.edu This device (the disc) is called a Nipokow disc, and it is a very smart idea for obtaining a 2d scan in both directions. It is also used (even today) in some special optical microscopy called confocal and this is the only way to obtain this kind of microscopy in real time (deflected laser beams are much slower). Just a short note. Alberto