# From Sci Fi to reality **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [April 17, 2011, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680 "2011-04-17T01:31:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![pinguin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ac8455/32.png) [@pinguin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pinguin)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/1 "2011-04-17T01:31:16Z")
Let’s start a thread about Sci Fi stuff that are getting real. I am very excited with the news that holographic displays are closer to reality. I hate those ridiculous stereoscopic glasses, that are nothing more than 19th century’s high tech :D. Nope. The way to go is the holographic screen… or at least “pseudo” holographic screen. Met Holovizio… [http://www.techepics.com/files/real\_3d\_display\_7.jpg](http://www.techepics.com/files/real_3d_display_7.jpg) And a movie [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28\_gL6GdXuU](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28_gL6GdXuU) I bet each screen costs 1 million US dollar now, but it seems it is the way to go. Sci Fi writers of the 40s would be proud of theirs predictions. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/2 "2011-04-17T01:42:58Z")
Was anyone in the '40s predicting holographic displays? I don’t recall seeing them any earlier than in _Minority Report_ - the movie, not the book. I’m sure they’re not original to that film, but I was under the impression that they were a fairly recent concept. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/3 "2011-04-17T01:57:44Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Was anyone in the '40s predicting holographic displays? I don’t recall seeing them any earlier than in _Minority Report_ - the movie, not the book. I’m sure they’re not original to that film, but I was under the impression that they were a fairly recent concept. In literature the concept of holograms goes bask to the early 60s at least. In terms of movies, they play a fairly major role in “[Star](http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/dvd/zs/rotj/ds2holo1.jpg) [Wars](http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/dynamic/00488/Pg-24-star-wars-ap_488008s.jpg)”, and that was '77. ---
**Author:** ![pinguin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ac8455/32.png) [@pinguin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pinguin)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/4 "2011-04-17T02:21:45Z")
Some earlier references to 3D screens and similar systems. Abruptly I was aroused from my musings by the sharp ringing of a bell at my elbow. “The telestereo,” I said to Hal Kur. “Take the controls.” As he did so I stepped over to the telestereo’s glass disk, inset in the room’s floor, and touched a switch beside it. Instantly there appeared standing upon the disk, the image of a man in the blue and white robe of the Supreme Council, a lifesize and moving and stereoscopically perfect image, flashed across the void of space to my apparatus by means of etheric vibrations. Through the medium of that projected image the man himself could see and hear me as well as I could see and hear him, and at once he spoke directly to me. From Crashing Suns, by Edmond Hamilton. Published by Popular Fiction Publishing Co. in 1928 …television went three-dimensional and became teledar, inexpensive enough so that every Eskimo could own a set and incidentally the only industry where an actor might make a living. As teledar took over entertainment, household devices began to move around in the form of robots powered by APRB (All-Purpose Broadcast Power)… From The Jester, by William Tenn. Published by Thrilling Wonder Stories in 1951 In the middle of this appeared a small solidograph image of the interior of the conveyor, showing the desk, and the control board, and the figure of Verkan Vall seated at it. The little figure of the storm trooper appeared, pistol in hand. From Police Operation, by H. Beam Piper. Published by Astounding SF in 1948 ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/5 "2011-04-17T02:22:38Z")
Several of Heinlein’s books also feature 3D TVs (_Stranger in a Strange Land_ comes to mind), though I always pictured what he was describing as a three-dimensional array of pixels, so you couldn’t display any more depth than the depth of the device itself. And even if you’re restricting it to movies, _Blade Runner_ has 3D photographs. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/6 "2011-04-17T02:34:13Z")
Sorry, for some reason when I read the OP, I thought “holographic _controls_,” and not “holographic displays.” I was thinking of stuff like Tony Stark’s lab in the _Iron Man_ movies, where his whole computer interface is a hologram projected in midair, which he manipulates by waving his arms around in the air. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/7 "2011-04-17T02:40:26Z")
`Holographic`controls, in the sense of detecting your arm positions in 3D space and reacting to them, is already here. Kinect does this. You can get virtual keyboards that are projected on tables and which you can tap - with the tap being interpreted by lasers aimed at the table. Open-air holography is just around the corner. By the way, we got a Nintendo 3DS, and it`s pretty amazing. You can take 3D photographs, then have 3D characters embedded in them, so it looks like they are right in the room with you. You can put one of the àugmented reality`cards on a table, then when you look at it through the 3DS screen little characters will jump out of the card and run around the table. You can even walk around the table and see all sides of them, just like a real hologram. You still have to look through the 3DS screen, but no glasses are required and the effect is startlingly real. ---
**Author:** ![pinguin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ac8455/32.png) [@pinguin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pinguin)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/8 "2011-04-17T02:49:27Z")
I wonder when the 3d transmisions for these holographic screens will start. Then at least one prediction more of science fiction will become reality. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/9 "2011-04-17T03:02:07Z")
Kicking around ideas or reminiscing is not a debate. Given the topic, we’ll try Cafe Society. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/10 "2011-04-17T03:29:21Z")
You should know that 3D movies without any need for special glasses have been around since the 1940s – Science Fiction writers in the 1940s didn’t have to predict them, as they were already a reality. Such lenticular screens were constructed in Moscow and some other Russian cities, and to my knowledge haven’t been constructed or used elsewhere. Why this should be, I don’t know. I’ve seen several references to them, starting with the book _Amazing 3D_\* by Symmes and Morgan and many times on the internet: > [@](#): > > Lenticular or barrier screensIn this method, glasses are not necessary to see the stereoscopic image. > > Both images are projected onto a high-gain, corrugated screen which reflects light at acute angles. In order to see the stereoscopic image, the viewer must sit within a very narrow angle that is nearly perpendicular to the screen, limiting the size of the audience. Lenticular was used for theatrical presentation of numerous shorts in Russia from 1940–1948[3] and in 1954 for the feature length films Crystal, Machine 22-12 and The Pencil on Ice.[14] > > Though its use in theatrical presentations has been rather limited, lenticular has been widely used for a variety of novelty items and has even been used in amateur 3D photography.[15][16 > **[3D film](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-d_film)** > > 3D films are motion pictures made to give an illusion of three-dimensional solidity, usually with the help of special glasses worn by viewers. 3D films were prominently featured in the 1950s in American cinema and later experienced a worldwide resurgence in the 1980s and 1990s driven by IMAX high-end theaters and Disney-themed venues. 3D films became increasingly successful throughout the 2000s, peaking with the success of 3D presentations of Avatar in December 2009, after which 3D films again de... > [@](#): > > Whilst all this was happening in Europe and America, The Russians had quietly been experimenting with various 3D systems, from alternating frame, through anaglyph up to and including polarised 3D. But in the end they decided to explore a completely different route by attempting to perfect a method of 3D presentation that did not require the audience to wear glasses at all: the parallax stereogram. > > This method of stereo photography had first been demonstrated in the early part of the century by A. Berthier, E. Estenave and our friend Frederick Ives, but by the early 1930s had been perfected by Russian engineer Semyon Pavlovich Ivanov. A parallax stereogram is produced by placing a screen, usually made up of fine wires, in front of a sensitive photographic surface, in such a way that parts of the surface are shielded from the left eye lens and other parts from the right eye lens. When exposed, this will produce a double image made up of interlaced left and right eye views of a scene. The printed photograph is then viewed through a similar screen which will allow each of the viewer’s eyes to see only the appropriate left or right eye parts of the image. The wire viewing screens were later replaced by plastic screens made up of fine lines which could be laminated directly on to a parallax stereogram, each line, in effect, acting as a tiny lens directing the eyes to their appropriate view. This type of stereoscopic process, which does not require viewing glasses and permits simultaneous viewing by any number of persons, is still used today, usually in the production of novelty 3D items such as 3D bubblegum cards, 3D postcards and even 3D posters. > > Ivanov then went on to adapt the principle for use in motion pictures. In his book Stereoscopy, Russian stereographer Nikolai Valyus, describes in great detail the incredibly complex and cumbersome equipment that becomes necessary when the principle of the parallax stereogram is applied to the projection of moving stereoscopic images; but a more concise description can be found in Brian Coe’s previously mentioned 1981 book, The History of Movie Photography: > > Ivanov adapted this idea for the cinema. His first patent was filed in 1935 and using a glass grating he demonstrated his process in 1937. In 1940 he replaced the glass grating with a fine wire screen. The system was installed in the Moskva cinema in Moscow in 1941; 112 miles of wire were used to make a grid over a screen of about 14 x 19 feet. The films were shot with a conventional camera with a beam-splitting device on the lens, producing two vertical format pictures side by side in the standard film area. The soundtrack ran between the two pictures on the print. The film was back-projected, with a grid on the projector side of the screen to divide the two pictures into interlaced line images. A similar grid on the audience side created the correct viewing conditions for 200 seats laid out in a fan-shaped area. This was necessary for in some places in the auditorium no true stereoscopic image was presented. > > The Russians produced two films for this system in 1940, the first being Concerto, which premiered at the Moskva cinema on the 4th February 1941, and the second, entitled Day off in Moscow, which continued there until the cinema was closed in June of 1941 because of WWII > > Coe goes on to explain that the wire screen was eventually replaced by a lenticular ribbed glass screen and the vertical format images changed to square by reducing the size of the sprocket holes on the film. In February of 1947 a film entitled Robinson Crusoe was shown on a 5 metre square screen at the Vostock Cinema in Moscow, and the Russians went on to produce several more 3D movies prior to the 1950s: Pal; The Pencil on the Ice; Precious Gift; Lalim; May Night; Crystal and Aleko. [http://www.widescreenmovies.org/WSM11/3D.htm](http://www.widescreenmovies.org/WSM11/3D.htm) As the Symmes and Morgan book reports (and the Wikipedia page linked aove does, as well), 3D movies have actually been around for quite a while – the first commercial 3D movies ran in the 1920s (before the invention of Polaroid, or before they used the read-and-green anaglyphics), and patents for 3D movies go back to the 1890s (!). Science fiction writers, even in the 1920s, were doing what they do best – extrapolating from existing technology and research (and working that into a story, often on how it impacts society), rather than simply “predicting” the future. ---
**Author:** ![pinguin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ac8455/32.png) [@pinguin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pinguin)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/11 "2011-04-17T03:36:44Z")
Now that you mention this technique, I remember seen a very bad quality 3D effect in some postcards of the 70s! I don’t know if the principle is the same as the Russian movies, but certainly is not comparable with the holovizio. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/12 "2011-04-17T06:52:37Z")
The Nintendo 3DS uses an LCD lenticular display. The same technique as those old postcards. The difference is that the Nintendo is much higher in resolution, so the image looks more photographic than those old postcards, where the lenticular screen material itself was very visible. It was low-res 3D. Modern lenticular is high-res 3D. The big problem with lenticular is the that you have to be looking in exactly the right place or the effect collapses. So it works well on a small personal screen, but not so much on a TV or theater screen. And it wouldn’t work well for a hologram-effect, since it couldn’t hold the 3D image while you walk around it. The future of 3D is probably eye-tracking hardware and software that tracks exactly what you’re looking at and maybe even where you are focusing, and uses that to tailor a 3D image for you using some form of 3D image projection technology. The biggest problem with 3D is eyestrain. In real life, when you look at something, all the other things around it go out of focus. But cinema 3D or holography cannot tell where you are focusing, so it has to render everything in the 3D space completely in focus. That makes your eyes constantly want to shift focus, which causes eyestrain. It’s also why computer-generated 3D looks strangely artificial. - even in 3D photographs like ViewMaster. They may be super clear with a strong 3D effect, but it still looks - strange. And it hurts to look at it too long. ---
**Author:** ![pinguin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ac8455/32.png) [@pinguin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pinguin)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 11:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/13 "2011-04-17T11:11:24Z")
As far as I know, Holovizio doesn’t work with lenticular screens, but rather with a novel system that follow the principle of holograms. You can find the technological principles here [http://www.holografika.com/Technology/Technology-Principles.html](http://www.holografika.com/Technology/Technology-Principles.html) As you can see, that screen is a lot more advanced that anything else in the market. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/14 "2011-04-17T17:03:20Z")
Quoth **Sam Stone** : > [@](#): > > Open-air holography is just around the corner. If you mean by that what I think you mean, not only is it _not_ right around the corner, but we don’t even have the foggiest idea of any basic physical principles which could conceivably lead to it. All 3D technologies that we have any clue of (which includes all the schemes with special glasses, lenticular, mirrors, genuine holograms, etc.) require that there be a screen or the equivalent on the line of sight. So you could have a screen as a “window” into a 3D world, and you can have things in front of a screen (as long as they don’t protrude beyond the edges of the screen), but you can’t just have a small thing that you put on the floor and which projects an image above it, which you can see from the sides. And for the things with images in front of a screen, you have to be careful of obstruction: If you made the entire wall of a room into a holographic screen, you could have an image projected between you and the wall, but the effect would be ruined if you reached around behind the image: Even though your hand is behind the image, it would still obstruct that portion of the image, a very disorienting effect. ---
**Author:** ![glowacks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/glowacks/32/5548_2.png) [@glowacks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glowacks)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/from-sci-fi-to-reality/578680/15 "2011-04-17T20:30:10Z")
I recently saw some small card-collecting binders that had some sort of lenticular cover that caused the image of it to appear 3-D unless looking at it from a very shallow angle. Given what it was on, it had to be extremely cheap to make (was just a repeating geometric pattern) but the effect was very good and very wide angle. Unfortunately, it hurt my eyes a _ton_ and my head really started to hurt right after spending 30 seconds poking around looking at it to see just how much of an angle you had to see it from for the effect to be dispelled…