> which is significantly better than what came before It's a bit better. That's the point I'm making; it's just incremental improvement on existing process. Re

> which is significantly better than what came before It's a bit better. That's the point I'm making; it's just incremental improvement on existing process. Read the actual paper, eg. under 'Quantitative comparison'. If you think I'm belittling the effort I'm sorry, that's not my intention; ...but, for example, the other comments talking about using it to generate a full 3d model to display on a looking glass surface, or in VR displays a total lack of understanding of what has been achieved here.