Whatever became of holography? (2011)

(americanscientist.org)

77 points | by cainxinth 2 hours ago

13 comments

  • ninefathom 29 minutes ago
    There are a few of us around who still make them. I do film photography and have my own darkroom already for that purpose. Adding holography on top of that is a relatively minor lift, and every once in a while the urge strikes and I'll get the equipment out.

    The main challenge is that there are, to my knowledge, only two remaining manufacturers of the plates - in France, and in Russia.

  • ubj 1 hour ago
    Dan Smalley's research lab at BYU is actively developing 3D volumetric holography technology.

    https://youtu.be/N12i_FaHvOU

    The video is a bit old, but it has a few fun demos of the capabilities they've developed.

    • mojuba 23 minutes ago
      Strictly speaking that's not holography if I understood it correctly. Holography is based on interference created by a surface with a special pattern, and it doesn't require any matter other than the diffractive surface. Whereas here they say they move "particles" (what particles? dust? atoms?). Still pretty cool of course and a thing on its own.
    • ijustlovemath 29 minutes ago
      I'm not sure if you can edit, but consider removing the ?is= parameter, to keep the link anonymous.
      • ubj 0 minutes ago
        Good catch, link updated!
    • colordrops 1 hour ago
      Seems fun but also no idea how that could be scaled or made to work in consumer products.
      • fragmede 9 minutes ago
        It's "just" an engineering problem at that point though. It works. First it'll be at Disneyland for tens of millions of dollars and then it'll be in Vegas for millions of dollars and then eventually we'll be able to get it at BestBuy for $1,999 in 40 years.
  • Nition 2 hours ago
    I went to a whole art exhibition of holograms as a kid that blew me away, and I've always wondered why holograms are so rare ever since. I had one for a while, the famous one of the microsope with the lens that you can actually look through to see a computer chip inside. There's nothing else like it.
    • behringer 24 minutes ago
      Maybe if you could figure out a digital work flow with digital development method it could really take off. But holograms are analog and hard to deal with.
    • moron4hire 2 hours ago
      I suspect, for your typical art nerd, holography is prohibitively expensive and limiting in expressiveness. And for your typical tech nerd, it's also prohibitively expensive and limiting in expressiveness.
      • Nition 1 hour ago
        Probably true, but I reckon there's surely at least some money to be made for a commercial enterprise if anyone wanted to go big, and nobody has. Get the price down via mass production and automation. Get some holograms into the shops. Sell them in an online store (you can buy holograms online already, but only a few from small operators at high prices, or second-hand). Let people send you their 3D models or 3D scenes and you'll send them a hologram of it. You can even do short animations (there's nothing stopping every new perspective being a different frame!). Have your AI convert people's photos to 3D and then output a hologram of them.

        You do need to have a decent point light to shine on it, but you can sell that too. You can even sell a frame that has a clip-on light that's just right[1], although a perfect lighting setup is not required.

        [1] Like Dutch Holographic Laboratory does: https://holoprint.com/pages/components.php#Telescope

        • dTal 1 hour ago
          >Let people send you their 3D models or 3D scenes and you'll send them a hologram of it.

          Oh hey, I have worked in exactly this business (taking people's random 3D models and bullying a rendering pipeline into feeding a digital holographic printer). It's hard, for many reasons. Mainly it's that holograms are expensive in materials, labor, and capital outlay (adding up to several k just for something the size of a piece of paper), and mass production of digital holograms isn't really possible without massive further outlay - writing them is time consuming, and copying them is fraught. It's like being a graphic design / print workshop, except everything is way more fiddly and expensive and nobody wants your product.

          Analog holograms are a bit more tractable. But that's even more niche on the consumption end.

  • case540 2 hours ago
    3blue1brown’s video on holography is one of the coolest math videos I’ve ever seen. Basically magic.
    • treetalker 1 hour ago
      • shagie 54 minutes ago
        One of the most magical parts of the hologram for me is that if you cut it (the film media) in half, you have two copies of the hologram. The reduction in size is a loss of resolution - but the scene stays the same.

        Though that also is part of the reason that a they're not more common. Each hologram is the film rather than a "print".

        If someone wants to make 100 holograms to be able to sell them as more than a one off art piece you're making 100 units of the film.

    • mrheosuper 40 minutes ago
      Agree, that is the first hologram that truly blows my mind. Literally windows to different dimension.
  • kev009 19 minutes ago
    Widely used in commercial and military weapons sights.. EOTech (famous/infamous depending). The legendary FN (Belgian military contractor) just announced one.
  • daniel_reetz 2 hours ago
    There's a phenomenal book on this topic called "Holographic Visions" (ISBN 978-0198571223).

    I've had the pleasure of working behind the scenes on holography related stuff (primarily optomechanics) for years now. Fascinating field full of phenomenally interesting minds.

  • ggm 1 hour ago
    Monochromatic laser light makes these things look other-worldly. They look amazing and they look increadible, but its not even close to uncanny valley it's so unreal.
  • s0rce 2 hours ago
    I got to make one during a visit to the MIT museum maybe 25 years ago, was neat.
  • midnitewarrior 2 hours ago
    I wanted to pick up doing holography again, but I discovered that Integraf, founded by legend TJ ( https://www.integraf.com/about/tung-h-jeong ), stopped selling the film and supplies.

    Much of the supply chain for modern hobbyist holography was sourced out of Russia, and the ongoing wars have made those materials unavailable.

    There are some newer processes out there, but there were probably thousands of us that grew up using those HoloKit holography kits distributed by TJ.

  • zoeysmithe 1 hour ago
    They always felt gimmicky to me, like something out of a kid's museum, and I imagine I'm not the only one.

    Its this odd often blurry and hard to see thing that certainly has interesting aspects but is not something you can create easily at home, unlike a photograph. Then the world changed and mobile devices ruled and everyone had a good camera sensor in their pocket, TVs were thinner and higher resolution than ever, games started looking amazing, etc and there really wasn't any room for less practical things like holograms.

    I think its one of those things we just weirdly romanticize like a car that is also a boat or a jetpack, but in reality has no real place as a consumer product.

    • JKCalhoun 1 hour ago
      There were different degrees of quality with holograms. To my recollection, a hologram on glass, that you illuminated with a laser, were stunning in clarity and sense of three dimensionality.

      All other variants were degrees of magnitude worse.

      • TheOtherHobbes 39 minutes ago
        The Science Museum in London used to have a life-sized holoportrait of Denis Gabor. It looked like a milky plate until you pushed the button that turned on the laser, and... there he was. Stunning.

        There was a short-lived flurry of art establishment interest in high quality glass holograms, but the process is just too expensive and fragile to create non-niche art.

        I always expected that at some point we'd have dynamic holographic displays, but the processing and resolution requirements are insane.

        Holographic film has a resolution in the region of 100,000 to 250,000 ppi, which is quite a bit more than 300dpi for print or a few thousand PPI for plain old film. If you could build a 27" display with that resolution you'd need maybe 1TB per frame at a minimum.

        You could probably apply quite a bit of compression to get that down on input, but that's still the order of a workable frame store memory.

        Multiply by three for colour.

  • tootie 1 hour ago
    I had the opportunity to work with a lenticular display a few years back. Just takes an HDMI input and can render a 3d scene like you'd build in Unity and you'd be able to see at least a range of aspects of the image at once by looking from different angles. Not fully 360 but maybe 90 degrees of perspective at once. It was neat but we spent weeks trying to make an impressive demo and none of it was fun for more than 5 seconds.
  • bashmelek 1 hour ago
    The touchable holograms, “fairy lights” seems to have not advanced at all, perhaps a dead end, but when I first read about it and thought of the possibilities it was all utterly amazing.