h a l f b a k e r yWhere life imitates science.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Jim has noticed quite a few different attempts at adding a third dimension to tv.
Jim reckons all that is required is a stack of transparent LCD screens.
Job done.
Somewhat baked
http://www.lightspa.../FAQHowItWorks.html
Not identical, but quite similar. [AntiQuark, Feb 07 2011]
Virtual Boy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtualboy
Real 3-D [EdwinBakery, Feb 07 2011]
[link]
|
| |
Jim really needs to do a lot more research before he posts his ideas. This one is almost as old as LCD displays. |
|
| |
Jim has noticed that, every time he gets stoned out of his
mind and starts babbling, his friend [madness] writes it all
down. |
|
| |
Jim reckons he needs a new friend. |
|
| |
There WAS a videogame system with genuine 3-D technology - it was called Virtual Boy, it was by Nintendo. It ended up being a flop. But it was genuinely 3-D - it was these large "binoculars" on a stand that you would stick your eyes into, and the system shoot lasers into your eyes or something to make you see in 3-D - things that were far away actually LOOKED like they were far away, you did actually perceive depth. The limitation was that everything appeared in shades of red going to into a reddish white (and no-light black at the other end of the scale), also, it was annoying to keep your head in it. |
|
| |
I had one and remember it and the 3-D was quite impressive, but overall wasn't an amazing system. |
|
| |
That Virtualboy is very interesting, in the way it solved the problem with the limited technology available. |
|
| |
Strictly, though, it's not 3D. It should really be called stereoscopic, as it simulates binocular depth from a single point of view. A true 3D display would show the correct image from multiple points of view, like a hologram. By the same token, all the so-called 3D movies and TVs coming out now should properly be called stereoscopic. |
|
| |