3D Viewing – Inventing the 3D Television

Written by Jason Scott. Posted in Daily Daft, Funny But True, Gadgets

3D has been around a lot longer than most of us realize. Anyone who was able to to produce 1.21 gigawatts of energy and force it into a flux capacitor knows that wearing 3D glasses was a style donned by more than just your average obnoxious bully sycophant from the year 1955. In fact the 1950s are known as the “Golden Era” of 3-D cinematography.

photo thanks wikipedia

photo thanks wikipedia

The concept of 3D is simple, show 2 different images to each eye in way that makes the put together image look like it has more depth. Unfortunately, quality 3D is a bit more complicated.

For those of you who remember the 3D ground breaking video game “Time Traveler” (see article: Top 10 Video Games of All Time) you are probably too old to be playing video games. That being said, the game had a sort of “Help Me Obi-Wan Kenobi, Your My Only Hope” look to it. Which means if society had really wanted 3D TV, we could probably have it by now if we had only been prepared to pay the $2.00 per game the inventors of time traveler were asking. In fact, 3D has a way of coming in and out of style.

So just how close are we to 3D TV?

There have been a few attempts at different ways of creating the effect, and we can only assume that when we do get the technology there will be an HDDVD vs Blue Ray, Betamax VS VHS type war.

Some possible attempts at 3D Technology include:

Stereoscope 3D.

Stereoscopic 3-D imaging is created by presenting two offset images separately to each eye ball.

How can we use it?

The idea here is to use two tiny screens that fit snug over your eye sockets. It would be the same idea as stereo head phones, except these would be eyephones (pardon the pun).

Back in the 1840s, Sir Chearles Wheatstone invented the stereoscope by taking nearly identical photographs side by side that the viewer would see through a pair of binoculars

This idea was later for cool iconic geek toys like the view master

There was even a view master that played sound!

So why does StrereoScope 3D suck?

Up until now, it has been too expensive to put two lcd screens behind a pair of glasses. As well, it takes away from the group experience, and people don’t like to wear bulky mechanisms on their heads.

So is stereoscope 3-D Dead?

There was a submarine game the Sega brought out call “Sub-Roc” where you would look through a periscope, but like most things by Sega, it didn’t take off.

photo thanks: wikipedia

The Pulfrich Effect 3-D

According to German physicist Carl Pulfrich things move slower in the dark, at least as your eyes are concerned. Since this discovery in 1922 we have had a Rolling Stones concert, Shark documentaries, Power ranger movies, and special episodes of Doctor Who (dimensions in time) all shown in Pulfrich 3-D. The best thing about the technology is that all you have to do is get a tinted monocle and you are are watching 3D!
It works because when you watch things moving side to side while wearing a darkened lens, the object appears to move in depth, towards you or away.

Why does it suck?

For the Pulfrich Effect to work properly, the objects on the screen must be always moving sideways at the right speed. This unfortunately causes some viewers to vomit.

The good news is, you can get the effect any time if you watch things like football games, nature shows, or certain musical scenes from “singing in the rain”

Red-Geen Anaglyph

Edwin Porter had a vision. A vision of half naked belly dancers dancing for him in 3D when he was away from the Gentleman’s club. In fact his idea was demonstrated before the television was even invented. It wouldn’t be until 40 years later that the same technology he demonstrated in 1915 would be used for home 3D TV viewing.

So why does it suck?

Originally it sucked because most people in the 1950s didn’t have color TVs, as well, the red green glasses required gave them headaches. (Similar to those who watched the red green show)

“The Red Green Show – known to cause headaches.”

On top of that, the 3D image was red and green and not true color so nobody really cared when the technology went away.

Why it doesn’t suck

Colorcode (Amber Blue Anaglyph) is a take off on Red Green anaglyph. The difference being that it uses amber and dark blue. Colorcode has been used successfully in the 2009 Superbowl ad Monsters vs Aliens as well as during a special episode of the show Chuck.

In fact, Colorcode is probably the best thing going so far as far a 3D TV is concerned, so it shows how revisiting an epic fail can turn it into a win.

Anyone for the creation of “New Pepsi”

Polarized 3-D Lens.

These lenses let in light vibrating in only one direction. By projecting two different images on the same screen using polarized lenses at different angles, you could route a separate image to each eye allowing for full color images.

Why does it suck?

Because there is no known way to send polarized images through a tv screen, so its pretty much useless.

So what are we to do?  How are we going to get a decent 3D image at home on our television?   Yes were asking you Obi Wan,  Help us, you’re our only hope.

If you’re looking for that retro feel check out our 80s retro iPhone case available in our Gadget Shop

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Trackback from your site.

Jason Scott

"They will Rue the Day They Gave Me Free Reign Over this Blog" Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha! (insert evil into laughter)

Comments (1)

  • Gadgetstron

    |

    I use to have a View Master and man I loved that thing. A 3D TV is just on the horizon, technology moves fast.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Copyright © 2009-2015 DaftGadgets.com. Your Trusted Online Source for Geek Toys and Gadgets, RC Hobby Parts and Vehicles, and Unusual Gift Ideas. All Rights Reserved.