Indeed. I think it is coming into its own, and I personally think that the 3D TV's of the future will/should use integral techniques. Wearing glasses is not sustainable, and if you can program the pixels behind the fly's eye elements, then you've got glasses-free 3D. With HD resolution, this shouldn't be too difficult. And such a system was demonstrated in 1978 and some modern prototypes from Toshiba, etc., utilize this idea.
PE, this article mentions the use of Kodak 649 GH plates and Kodak 649F plates. What are they exactly? Not still available I assume.
Sorry, I have no idea. I have never worked with plates at EK.
Those were Lippmann type films and plates, used for spectroscopy and holography.
Open Solicitation for Information Regarding Integrams and Roger deMontebello
This inventor, Roger deMontebello, is someone that I'd like to know more about. He resided in Ann Arbor, Michigan in his later life, as I understand and you can see his list of contributions to imaging in this link.
Specifically he made Integrams which were, as I've heard/read, perhaps the height of integral imaging. That could be an overstatement, but they were not pseudoscopic and apparently had a large viewing angle. There was some kind of commercial aspect to the invetion, so there has to be examples floating around out there.
I believe the integram was sold/developed under MDH Products Corporation of Ann Arbor, MI. In short, if anyone has information regarding Mssr. deMontebello or has an integram or anything related to integrams, MDH products, etc. please contact me!
The information out there is scarce to say the least, and it deserves to be studied and made available to others. I would pay good money to get my hands on an integram.
Auguste Lumière's Photostereosynthesis
This is an interesting and crude way to get a 3D image. Not quite up to the standrards of integral imaging, but interesting in it's own way and perhaps easier to do.
These links will give an idea:
The idea is to take several pictures with incredibly shallow depth of field of a subject at close range, each shot focusing on a different plane. You then have transparent prints made, slides, and you stack them with separation between each other. The 3D illusion is achieved by the in-focus areas and our eye's propensity to disregard the fuzzy, out of focus areas.
The links are from two different people; the first guy who has a lot of good historical information and a scheme for doing this with a modern dSLR.
The other guy has some examples that he actually made. Neither are groundbreakingly good, but I think there is a lot of potential here. By eliminating the out of focus areas in each shot, perhaps a cleaner 3D view could be achieved.
One thing that I'm not certain about is the necessity of changing the focal length. I need to keep reading perhaps, but I'm not sure how this is achieved exactly, especially with the 50mm 1.2 that the author proposes to use. Perhaps reading the original paper by Auguste would shed some light (2nd link) on the matter.
If you are the big tree, we are the small axe
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Rough OCR and Translation - But legible
Here is the 1920 Lumiere paper on Photostereosynthesis, OCR'd and roughly translated. Came out pretty good, but could certainly use some cleanup. Just wanting to make this stuff available to people...
BTW; I used these to programs to do it:
Take a screen shot of the PDF, crop in Paint and upload to this website -> http://www.onlineocr.net/
And translate with babelfish -> http://babelfish.yahoo.com/
If you are the big tree, we are the small axe
Do you aware of rotating mirror 3D 360 degree viewer ? You can walk around it and its like real. I think computer modellers would be crazy about it. I think finding a 360 degree 3D camera technology or a cheap viewer technology could make money. Viewer and camera could work with 2D slices and this is not too difficult may be.
I don't think I've heard of that specifically, but just today I've found many similar schemes that utilize rotating helixes. Roger deMontebello invented one himself, that's how I found it. (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3428393.pdf)
Do you have a link perhaps, or a reference?
And look, do you remember the 3D television, transparent cube idea? Well, as usual I wasn't the first! -> http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/np...6M&db_key=INST
EDIT: aahhh, here check out these schemes -> http://www.felix3d.com/web/index.php...%20Fame&type=2
UPDATE: Crazy patent: photo sculpture http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2891339.pdf
Last edited by holmburgers; 01-11-2011 at 03:31 PM. Click to view previous post history.
There is a recent patent by Paul Gilman for the rendering of 2D motion picture in full 3D. It works very well.
Is that Paul B Gilman ? There is several patents at google patents related to Kodak but I couldnt located one in this technology even after research at google.
Can you describe little bit ?
Hey , do all knows Kodak invented first digital camera and I think its their natural right to gain in this.
And 25000 dollars Leica S2 Body uses Kodak Sensor costs 12000 dollars to them
Last edited by Mustafa Umut Sarac; 01-11-2011 at 04:45 PM. Click to view previous post history.