8 ms·
It's not impossible, computers have been modeling 3D fluids for a long time. It might be computationally intensive, but definitely not impossible.
by bufferoverflow 8y ago
It's not impossible, computers have been modeling 3D fluids for a long time. It might be computationally intensive, but definitely not impossible.
- simias 8y agoHe's talking about reproduction, not modeling. You can model the painting's physics all you want, you still won't be able to make a faithful reproduction on a flat and gamut-limited LCD screen.
- mrob 8y agoWith head tracking it should be possible to get close. The thickness changes are small, so the 3D effect is mostly from the uneven light reflection revealed by head movement, not stereopsis.
- jdietrich 8y agoThe texture of oil on canvas is extraordinarily complex and subtle. You would need billions of pixels and polygons and trillions of rays to even begin to capture the heavy impasto of Van Gogh or the coarse diffusion of Bacon.
- cr0sh 8y ago> You would need billions of pixels and polygons and trillions of rays So give it 5 years, and you'll have it on your phone... If there's one thing I've learned over the decades about computer technology, it's to never say "impossible" or "never"... Eventually, what you once might have thought to be only in the realm of "big and expensive" inevitably becomes "cheap and commodity" in a far shorter time than you expect.
- HeWhoLurksLate 8y agoThat was one of the rather unexploited features of the Amazon Fire Phone, which I loved for that very reason. Unfortunately, it didn't see much use, but you could take pictures that could capture depth (created by rotation) and it was so cool.
- Dylan16807 8y agoPlus you can prerender 99% of the lighting. Or even just take ten million photos from almost the same spot, presenting the one that matches the user's subtle movements.