Talk:Holographic display

Untitled 2010 comment

There is no independent page for "holographic display" currently. Instead I have added a redirect to CGH. I know this is a pain in the ass, but CGH and holographic display technology are very closely interwoven subjects and as long as there is so little independent content on the technology, I do not like the idea of distributing it piecemeal over several articles.

Should this be a disambiguation page? DarkArcher25 (talk) 17:00, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Electro-holography

Now that some references have been added, it would be useful if an explanation could be given as to what "electroholography" actually is. If it is the same as Computer-generated holography then there is an existing article on this topic. If there is anything new, it should be included in this. If not, then a new article entitled Electroholography might be appropriate.

I would suggest that a "Holographic Display" page is not required - the Holography article already discusses display holograms. Epzcaw (talk) 20:06, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

First sentence

The first sentence here now says:

Holographic display is a type of display technology that has the ability to provide all four eye mechanisms: binocular disparity, motion parallax, accommodation and convergence.

This doesn't make sense - how does a display provide 'eye mechanisms'?

Does it mean to say that a holographic image provides all four cues required to give a 3d image? This does not, however, agree with the cited article which says that 'a large number of cues' trigger 3d perception. It mentions:

"monocular cues such as shading, occlusion, relative size, fogging, perspective distortion, and texture gradient as well as binocular ones such as vergence (angular disparity) and stereopsis (horizontal disparity)." Parallax, accommodation, blur in the retinal image are also mentioned. The cited reference does not, therefore match what is stated in the article.

Also, the same reference should not be cited twice. Use "ref name" to re-cite.

I still don't see the point of this "article". The Holography article already says

Holography is a technique which enables three-dimensional images to be made. ..........The image changes as the position and orientation of the viewing system changes in exactly the same way as if the object were still present, thus making the image appear three-dimensional.

There may be a case for expanding on why a 3d image is obtained, but that it debatable - may just be confusing. Epzcaw (talk) 22:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Electro-holography is not the same as computer-generated holography. The holography article does not mention electro-holography yet and needs expansion and perhaps a new section in the dynamic holography section about real time holographic display technologies. In my opinion it should also explain on how a 3d image is obtained. http://www.intechopen.com/books/advances-in-lasers-and-electro-optics/holographic-3-d-displays-electro-holography-within-the-grasp-of-commercialization is a good source for a start. --Fluffystar (talk) 12:01, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

No explanation is given about what electroholography is - the "article" says:

Electro-holographic display is a type of holographic display that uses electroholography for recording and reconstructing 3D objects.

This is a tautology and provides no information at all. You might as well say "A television provides a television image".

An article about electro-holography must explain what electro-holography is, how it works, what it does.

I don't know what you mean by a "holographic display". Do you mean a hologram which is illuminated to provide a holographic image? Or are you referrring to a dynamic hologrpahic image? Or what?

Electro-holography may or may not merit an article on its own - since I don't know what it is, cannot comment on that. Anyone is free to write such an article on Wikipedia, and the general community wil then decide whether it merits its place.

If you believe that the hlography article needs more detailed information about how a 3d image is obtained, then you are free to add this information. I suggest you first do this in the talk page or ina a sandbox.

Have you looked at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia? Epzcaw (talk) 17:25, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree with many of your criticisms of this article. At this time, it has several defects: it does not define "holographic display," it uses the term "eye mechanisms" when perhaps "depth cues" is better, it claims that electro-holographic displays provide full parallax imagery when that is not always the case (many are HPO), and it implies that other 3-D display technologies do not provide full-parallax imagery.

This is a tricky entry to repair, for a few reasons, some of which are stated above. (1) Workers in the field do not agree on nomenclature, and furthermore, (2) the layperson sometimes uses "holographic display" to refer to *any* 3-D display rather than one relying principally on diffraction. Also, is there an additional article for "display hologram" against which "holographic display" must be differentiated? ("Display hologram" is just one type of hologram - other types of holograms exist, for example, in the field of non-destructive testing.)

We ought to also make a more subtle distinction. Some displays use holographic optical elements to provide a 2-D image to a viewer. This should probably be excluded from the class of "holographic displays," which (in my opinion) should be three-dimensional. This begs the further question: "what is meant by 'three-dimensional'?" and so on. Gregg Favalora (talk) 14:50, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

It's not much, but for now I adjusted the first sentence to match the cited source. As User:Epzcaw pointed out, the SeeReal Technologies paper cited for the sentence, "Holographic 3-D Displays - Electro-holography within the Grasp of Commercialization," didn't actually support the original claim. I believe the sentence was a misinterpretation and/or misattribution by User:Virtualerian of a similar statement from the paper "Stereo 3D Displays and Telemedicine." The statement in the "Telemedicine" paper is similar down to the phrasing, but in this article it read somewhat as a definition, whereas in the "Telemedicine" paper, it does not. The "Telemedicine" paper also cites the SeeReal paper for its statement (which is where I believe the misattribution comes in), but I believe that it is a typo. The "Telemedicine" paper cites the article, "An updatable holographic three-dimensional display" for a subsequent statement about misapplication of the term "holographic display" for marketing purposes, but that statement fits perfectly with the SeeReal paper as a reference. Dancter (talk) 03:07, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

The Looking Glass

I found some of the info below on the Lenticular printing page and adapted it, since it seems to be about a holographic display rather than a lenticular one. Because I don't understand the holographic display technique very well, I could not figure out where it should go on this page (or possibly on a different page if it turns out to be a different technique after all).

The Looking Glass is a holographic display that shows 45 different angles. It was introduced with a very successful 2018 Kickstarter campaign, mainly aimed at 3D creators. Joortje1 (talk) 06:44, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

References

Volumetric display

Isn't this just talking about volumetric displays? I assumed this was talking about displays that used holography, but it lists a bunch that clearly don't, like laser plasma. — DanielLC 04:12, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

The 3DS screen

The 3DS has a holographic screen. It could be mentioned in a short list of the most common 3 Dimensional displays on the market that work without special glasses. I think it's relevant since over 75 million 3DS have sold, making it the best sold Holographic display to date. 2600:1700:8830:8DF0:188E:1EF4:DC28:5C6D (talk) 04:19, 16 April 2023 (UTC)