4 ms·

Are the Looking Glass display real holograms with light interference patterns ? Or are they emitting different pixels in different view angles ?

• mhalle 7y ago
  No, they are not true holograms in the interference pattern sense. I am not fond of the misappropriation of the word, but Looking Glass is hardly the first. I had hoped plenogram would catch on (to make the connection to the plenoptic function that describes the travel of light in a scene).
• supermatt 7y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenticular_lens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenticular_lens
• tgvaughan 7y ago
  Aren't those two things essentially identical, at least as far as the resulting wavefront goes?
  • sp332 7y ago
    The Looking Glass only has 45 discrete views projected across 50 degrees (25 degrees left and right of center). I have one of the smaller ones and it's a very nice effect, but it's not the same as a "real" hologram.
  • dTal 7y ago
    In a sense, if the resolution is high enough. One notable limitation of the angular-pixel approach is that the angular resolution of the pixel becomes diffraction-limited as the pixel size shrinks - the puts you between a rock and a hard place with the twin goals of "small enough pixels that you can't see them" and "enough viewing angles that you can't perceive the steps", even if you had a hypothetical umpteen-zillion gigapixel display. "True" holograms are coherent across their entire surface, so they don't have this limitation. This isn't even close, though. Horizontal parallax only and only a few dozen angles (over a wide FOV!) puts it more in the territory of lenticulars than true lightfield displays. To be fair that is enough to achieve a 'wow factor', and a true lightfield display is a Hard Problem (that Fovi3d are trying to solve, if you're interested in the state of the art).