 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Email I got:
"Hello
I have an idea to use holograms to aid in camouflage while hunting. My idea
is that the hunter could carry a digital camera, photograph the terrain
right where he wants to sit and wait for his quarry, upload the photo into a
small holographic projector, and then project the image onto himself, or
onto a light mesh screen or some other see through fabric as camouflage.
Would you be interested in teaming up to develop and market this type of
product? I have contacts who do the marketing and some development but do
not have the expertise in the area of holograms, and also some contacts at
Cabela's.
Thank you for your time.
[name removed]
Construction Manager
TIC - The Industrial Company Wyoming, Inc."
I don't know what is most funny. That he thinks that holograms can just be
created from any regular photo and then projected onto any surface, that he
thinks people would actually carry and set up such a kit while hunting [not
that I have any experience with hunting, but it sounds clumsy], or that he
thinks it would be any useful. I mean, will the dear go like "Ooh, there's
some of the forest shaped like a person. How ever more convincing it is than
if he had worn regular camouflage clothes!"
What should I answer...? :D
Rune
--
http://runevision.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And the fact that there isn't any 3D hologram projector except on the
virtual world on your website :)
PS: I fell for it too. Great job there.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Rune" <aut### [at] runevision com> wrote:
> Email I got:
>
> "Hello
>
> I have an idea to use holograms to aid in camouflage while hunting. My idea
> is that the hunter could carry a digital camera, photograph the terrain
> right where he wants to sit and wait for his quarry, upload the photo into a
> small holographic projector, and then project the image onto himself, or
> onto a light mesh screen or some other see through fabric as camouflage.
>
> Would you be interested in teaming up to develop and market this type of
> product? I have contacts who do the marketing and some development but do
> not have the expertise in the area of holograms, and also some contacts at
> Cabela's.
>
> Thank you for your time.
>
> [name removed]
> Construction Manager
> TIC - The Industrial Company Wyoming, Inc."
>
> I don't know what is most funny. That he thinks that holograms can just be
> created from any regular photo and then projected onto any surface, that he
> thinks people would actually carry and set up such a kit while hunting [not
> that I have any experience with hunting, but it sounds clumsy], or that he
> thinks it would be any useful. I mean, will the dear go like "Ooh, there's
> some of the forest shaped like a person. How ever more convincing it is than
> if he had worn regular camouflage clothes!"
>
> What should I answer...? :D
>
Dear [name removed],
This is just about the most splendid new product idea that I've ever heard!
I estimate that the project could be completed in approximately five years given
an R & D budget of three million US dollars annually. For *technical* reasons,
it is imperative that the research be conducted in Namibia, the Republic of the
Philippines or some other county with no extradition treaty with the United
States. Also, since the holographic research equipment is very sensitive to
electromagnetic fluctuation, it would be best not to risk an electronic funds
transfer into a registered account. I shall forward the GPS coordinates at
which cash payment of the research funds can be airdropped. (Canadian Gold
Maple Leaf coins would work particularly well.) I am very much looking forward
to sharing this adventure in new technology with you and our partners.
Sincerely, ...
=========================================================
Be sure NOT to mention that "R & D" stands for Relaxation and Diversion ;-)
"Sincerely",
Mike C.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
surely the main problem is that vision comes after smell or hearing for most
animals...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> surely the main problem is that vision comes after smell or hearing for most
> animals...
...just went I thought there couldn't possibly be any more flaws in such
a small plan, somebody finds one. Yet, quite right sir! (Besides, I hear
that deer are colour-blind and and lack stereoscopic vision anyway...)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This is what I ended up replying:
Hello [name removed]
Thank you for your mail.
Your idea to use holograms for camouflage sounds very original and exciting!
Well, exceot for a few small details:
- I doubt that hunters would actually want to carry around and setup
technology like this, which would be humming, make bright flashes from the
camera, and require an electricity line for the projector.
- I don't see how wild game will be any more fooled by an image projected
onto a person than by regular camouflage clothes.
- Many animals use smell and hearing more than their eyes.
- Holograms cannot just be created from any regular photo.
- Holograms cannot just be projected onto any surface.
- The hologram on my website is not even real but a fake animation, which I
have made clear on this page: http://runevision.com/3d/anims/hologram.asp
But besides those minor details, the project sounds promising. I regret to
say that I cannot help you with it, but I wish you good luck!
Best regards,
Rune S. Johansen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v7 a écrit :
> nemesis wrote:
>> surely the main problem is that vision comes after smell or hearing
>> for most
>> animals...
>
> ...just went I thought there couldn't possibly be any more flaws in such
> a small plan, somebody finds one. Yet, quite right sir! (Besides, I hear
> that deer are colour-blind and and lack stereoscopic vision anyway...)
>
And even if they do have stereoscopic vision, I wonder how well it works
at relatively large distances... The human eye at least seem to be
fooled quite easily by flat pictures, trompe-l'œil paintings on
buildings for example.
--
Vincent
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune wrote:
> Email I got:
>
> "Hello
>
> I have an idea to use holograms to aid in camouflage while hunting. My idea
> is that the hunter could carry a digital camera, photograph the terrain
> right where he wants to sit and wait for his quarry, upload the photo into a
> small holographic projector, and then project the image onto himself, or
> onto a light mesh screen or some other see through fabric as camouflage.
>
> Would you be interested in teaming up to develop and market this type of
> product? I have contacts who do the marketing and some development but do
> not have the expertise in the area of holograms, and also some contacts at
> Cabela's.
>
> Thank you for your time.
>
> [name removed]
> Construction Manager
> TIC - The Industrial Company Wyoming, Inc."
>
> I don't know what is most funny. That he thinks that holograms can just be
> created from any regular photo and then projected onto any surface, that he
> thinks people would actually carry and set up such a kit while hunting [not
> that I have any experience with hunting, but it sounds clumsy], or that he
> thinks it would be any useful. I mean, will the dear go like "Ooh, there's
> some of the forest shaped like a person. How ever more convincing it is than
> if he had worn regular camouflage clothes!"
>
> What should I answer...? :D
That it'll probably would result in an arms race where the deer have to
buy holographic projectors themselves. That that would result in their
bankruptcy given their low cash status. Which would mean the end of
hunting.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> surely the main problem is that vision comes after smell or hearing for
>> most
>> animals...
>
> ...just went I thought there couldn't possibly be any more flaws in such a
> small plan, somebody finds one. Yet, quite right sir! (Besides, I hear
> that deer are colour-blind and and lack stereoscopic vision anyway...)
I saw a demo of the Microvision projector on TV the other day...
http://www.microvision.com/
So I'd say it might be possible to set up an adaptive camo screen,
http://www.techbriefs.com/content/view/1771/32/
for it to be "holographic" it would need to track the target animal,
this could be done with an indicator that the hunter would use,
or possibly by using an IR camera to guess at the location of
aproaching animals. Something like face tracking for web
cams. Still, it might not work well in low light conditions...
TIC appears to be a construction company,
http://www.tic-inc.com/
I'm guessing that the post is legit, I'm not sure if Microvision
is geared up to produce end products, they're going after the
cell phone market, so they're licensing OEMs.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Attwood wrote:
> I saw a demo of the Microvision projector on TV the other day...
Perhaps it would be easier to mount a head-mounted stereoscopic display
on the buck's antlers before starting to hunt him.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
It's not feature creep if you put it
at the end and adjust the release date.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"andrel" wrote:
> That it'll probably would result in an arms race where the deer have to
> buy holographic projectors themselves. That that would result in their
> bankruptcy given their low cash status. Which would mean the end of
> hunting.
Dang, I should have included that one. :P
Rune
--
http://runevision.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Wouldn't it be better to project a female deer hologram to attract the buck instead of
just
projecting camo?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
When hunting deer you don't want to be totally camouflage.
You might get SHOT!!
Deer are color blind, so you can wear bright orange!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Leroy wrote:
> Deer are color blind, so you can wear bright orange!
No you can't - but you can wear nicely dappled and patterned orange
without much issue. ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <477e910f$1@news.povray.org>,
nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom says...
> And the fact that there isn't any 3D hologram projector except on the
> virtual world on your website :)
>
> PS: I fell for it too. Great job there.
>
Well, this isn't 100% true now. Some guy is developing a system that
takes a laser, runs code through a standard 3D card to determine the
pattern of interference needed to make a 3D image, then alters the
laser, using some optical technique that apparently eliminates the
mirrors normally used, to generate a hologram. I.e., he is doing the
reverse of what you do to get a holographic print. Like other holograms,
it isn't projected into mid air, but on a flat surface. It is also only
monocolored at the moment, though that wouldn't matter much for most
animals, and takes up a room the size of a small refrigerator truck. He
hopes to make it work with multicolor lasers, and get it down to the
size of... a copier machine, or some such, in the relatively near
future.
Now, whether you could a) generate an image from data, like a picture,
which would work, b) find some place to hide something the size of a
refer, and c) really hide behind it usefully, is another matter. lol You
are probably better off just buying camo netting. 5-10 years from now...
who knows, especially with new developments in laser technology, 3D
hardware, etc.
Think I read about it is MIT Technology Review, but not sure if that was
the magazine or not.
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Deer are color blind, so you can wear bright orange!
>
> No you can't - but you can wear nicely dappled and patterned orange
> without much issue. ;-)
I think the typical deer blind is box nailed to a tree, or a
movable tower with a box on top. Not much chance of
mistaking it for a deer.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> In article <477e910f$1@news.povray.org>,
> nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom says...
>> And the fact that there isn't any 3D hologram projector except on the
>> virtual world on your website :)
>>
>
> Well, this isn't 100% true now.
Well, when I was doing my final year at uni, one of the professors was
talking about a new 3D TV technology that was "nearly ready to market".
It still hasn't appeared.
There are quite a wide range of technologies out there for generating 3D
animated images. None of them has ever become all that popular. And
certainly none of them enable you to "project" a hologram into mid-air. ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <4780aca0@news.povray.org>, voi### [at] devnull says...
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
> > In article <477e910f$1@news.povray.org>,
> > nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom says...
> >> And the fact that there isn't any 3D hologram projector except on the
> >> virtual world on your website :)
> >>
> >
> > Well, this isn't 100% true now.
>
> Well, when I was doing my final year at uni, one of the professors was
> talking about a new 3D TV technology that was "nearly ready to market".
> It still hasn't appeared.
>
> There are quite a wide range of technologies out there for generating 3D
> animated images. None of them has ever become all that popular. And
> certainly none of them enable you to "project" a hologram into mid-air. ;
-)
>
Well. The problem with the 3D TV system is a) recording, b) storage and
c) transmission. Your talking about a *massive* increase in data. Like,
a blueray disk might store 20 minutes of the data needed (instead of
like 10 DVDs, or what ever it is supposed to support). This guys idea
"looks" like its projected into space, since it works just like a
projected holographic plate, and while the laser assembly is large and
complicated, the hardware needed to calculate the image is already
sitting on your desk. A number of improvements in chip based lasers, and
other tricks, are ***very*** likely to make it viable to have a
holographic display on your desk in very short order. Recording and
playing back "TV", where you are using a camera to record the data, is
going to require either a) a vastly different technology, or b) some
method of reading the data from two cameras, calculating a 3D mesh(s) of
the objects in the scene, mapping textures to those, then reintegrating
them at the other end. I.e., each frame would need "image" data, as in
the textures, and "mesh" data, defining the location of the objects in
3D, onto which you want to map those images. You *might* be able to code
something that can make a decent approximation now, but its going to be
something that has a surface, but no solidity. I.e., a movie made using
3D software could place an object in the center of scene, which could be
seen from all angles and sides, while something mapped using the sort of
3D system we *can* build, would look like one of those topo maps they
make, which is just plastic formed into a shell, then painted.
This isn't what they are trying to create though. They want something
more detailed, and I don't think they have the software, cameras,
hardware *or* bandwidth to manage it yet. And storing the data at all,
instead of doing it live....
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> There are quite a wide range of technologies out there for generating 3D
>> animated images. None of them has ever become all that popular. And
>> certainly none of them enable you to "project" a hologram into mid-air. ;-)
>>
> Well. The problem with the 3D TV system is a) recording, b) storage and
> c) transmission. Your talking about a *massive* increase in data.
Massive increase in data? Yes. Corresponding increase in
compressibility? Maybe.
> Recording and
> playing back "TV", where you are using a camera to record the data, is
> going to require either a) a vastly different technology, or b) some
> method of reading the data from two cameras, calculating a 3D mesh(s) of
> the objects in the scene, mapping textures to those, then reintegrating
> them at the other end.
This technology already exists. See, for example, The Matrix. Record a
scene from several directions, and then pan around it in (nearly)
arbitrary 3D by interpolating between camera angles. Apparently they
call it "time slicing". (In the still image case at least.)
> This isn't what they are trying to create though. They want something
> more detailed, and I don't think they have the software, cameras,
> hardware *or* bandwidth to manage it yet. And storing the data at all,
> instead of doing it live....
I suspect it's technically possible right now. As to whether it will
ever become economically feasible... I doubt it. But maybe.
And I return to my original point: nobody has a system that can
*project* a hologram into free air yet. Nor even a vague inkling of how
to approach such a task. ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Recording and
> playing back "TV", where you are using a camera to record the data, is
> going to require either a) a vastly different technology, or b) some
> method of reading the data from two cameras, calculating a 3D mesh(s) of
> the objects in the scene, mapping textures to those, then reintegrating
> them at the other end.
They did that for Minority Report, but I think they used something like
15 different camera angles to get the geometry calculated correctly.
I'd have to go back and look, and I'm feeling lazy atm.
--
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v7 nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2008/01/06 17:19:
>>> There are quite a wide range of technologies out there for generating
>>> 3D animated images. None of them has ever become all that popular.
>>> And certainly none of them enable you to "project" a hologram into
>>> mid-air. ;-)
>>>
>> Well. The problem with the 3D TV system is a) recording, b) storage
>> and c) transmission. Your talking about a *massive* increase in data.
>
> Massive increase in data? Yes. Corresponding increase in
> compressibility? Maybe.
>
OK. Any voxel of open space will be zero, you will have a LOT of those.
Any voxel inside a closed surface can be set to zero, as there will be no way of
recording nor vewing those.
Finaly, you are looking at absolutely huge compression capability, as long as
you don't have to much non uniforn fog and smoke.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
You know you've been raytracing too long when you tell stories to your kids that
include stuff like "Once there was a polygon mesh who was very sad because he
was only Gourard shaded."
-- Taps a.k.a. Tapio Vocadlo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <47815407@news.povray.org>, voi### [at] devnull says...
> >> There are quite a wide range of technologies out there for generating
3D
> >> animated images. None of them has ever become all that popular. And
> >> certainly none of them enable you to "project" a hologram into mid-air
. ;-)
> >>
> > Well. The problem with the 3D TV system is a) recording, b) storage and
> > c) transmission. Your talking about a *massive* increase in data.
>
> Massive increase in data? Yes. Corresponding increase in
> compressibility? Maybe.
>
> > Recording and
> > playing back "TV", where you are using a camera to record the data, is
> > going to require either a) a vastly different technology, or b) some
> > method of reading the data from two cameras, calculating a 3D mesh(s) o
f
> > the objects in the scene, mapping textures to those, then reintegrating
> > them at the other end.
>
> This technology already exists. See, for example, The Matrix. Record a
> scene from several directions, and then pan around it in (nearly)
> arbitrary 3D by interpolating between camera angles. Apparently they
> call it "time slicing". (In the still image case at least.)
>
Yeah. It uses like 18-36 cameras, or some crazy stuff like that. I.e.,
one camera per "slice" of the 360 degree pie. Its not possible in real
time, yet, and is limited to what you can place a ring of cameras
around. As for what they did in the Matrix. They took time slice images,
then integrated CGI into the scenes along with it, so most of it wasn't
time slice, or 3D in that sense anyway. Its a very limited, but very
interested technology, and while you *could* build meshes and map
textures with it, its just not practical, for most cases. We need
something that uses fewer cameras, preferably two, and can "map" a scene
the same way human vision does. I.e., build a believable 3D result,
using limited data, and a very narrow wedge of perception. And that we
*don't* have.
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
> Yeah. It uses like 18-36 cameras, or some crazy stuff like that. I.e.,
> one camera per "slice" of the 360 degree pie.
There exists at least one documentary and one music video which use this
technique very well. The documentary has quite impressive images. Too bad
I can't remember the names.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
