Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Walk-Thru Virtual Environment 168

Posted by timothy from the foggy-mcbottom dept.
diso writes "Walking through a wall is now really possible. WAVE, a Walk-thru Virtual Environment is a novel, low-cost, and simple method for forming a superior quality physically penetrable fog display. It is a break-through technology, literally! This work has international patents pending. An early prototype was constructed with honeycomb paper as a low-cost laminar airflow generator. When the screen is formed, images can be either rear- or front-projected onto it. Despite of being a very early prototype, the experimental fog screen already proves the operating principle with excellent results."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Walk-Thru Virtual Environment More

Walk-Thru Virtual Environment

Comments Filter:
  • ...as Penn and Teller would say.
  • It's a very cool thing for Halloween!
  • That is one of the cooler things I've ever seen.

    Think of the applications of this:

    Finally, something that closely resembles 3d holograms

    "Help me obi-wan, you're my only hope" and all that type of stuff

    Also, it could be used really well in a haunted house

  • Honest question (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Therlin ( 126989 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:15PM (#4412919)
    How is this different from the water screens that you see at the theme parks such as Disneyworld? (other than the fact that you do not need a lake)

    • Indiana Jones at Disneyland (Score:4, Interesting)

      by stefanlasiewski ( 63134 ) <{moc.ocnafets} {ta} {todhsals}> on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:38PM (#4413067) Homepage Journal
      There is a ride called "Indiana Jones" at Disneyland. One of the special effects used in the ride is similar to the water screens and to this WAVE.

      In the effect, a machine sprays some fog, and a projector projects an image of "rats crawling up some vines" onto the fog, and your vehicle travels through the projection, which makes it seem like your traveling through a bunch of "rats crawling up some vines".

      It's pretty cool, but only when the air is still enough for you to see the rats. People with rat-phobia can really freak out.

      Other times, air turbulance moves the fog around too much, so all you see is a very distorted image of the rats (Imagine watching a movie on a shredded movie screen).

      This product claims to reduce the turbulance by containing the fog inside a "laminar flow", whatever that means.

      • By some definition of liquid mechanics, a laminar flow is the contrary of a turbulent flow.

        This means that the molecules are supposed to flow nicely, together, instead of acting like the ./ crowd are raging around.

        Now, if you look at their pictures, those flows does not look laminar, but rather turbulent.

      • This product claims to reduce the turbulance by containing the fog inside a "laminar flow", whatever that means.

        It means that Reynold's number

        Re = Rho v D
        -------
        mu

        Re: Reynold's number
        Rho: density
        v: velocity
        D: length or diameter
        mu: viscosity.

        Ah, this brings back memories...

  • Not all new... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by therealmoose ( 558253 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:16PM (#4412928)
    This is cool, but not terribly new. At many light shows, sprayers/misters work churning out water vapor to provide something for the lasers to hit. I have witnessed several of these, and sometimes a screen is generated to facilitate the production of the light effects. This isn't really that much different, merely on a smaller scale.

    • Re:Not all new... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Nyarly ( 104096 ) <`nyarly' `at' `redfivellc.com'> on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:25PM (#4412988) Homepage Journal
      On the other manipulator, they do claim to have patented their novel fog screen dingus, so it would seem that the USPTO disagrees with you.

      Alternatively, a good demonstration of prior art would invalidate their patent.

      Honestly, the "new thing" seems to be the "non-turbulent laminar airflow" used to keep the fog confined and smooth enough to project convincing images on. Basically, it seems like the idea is to blow a smooth, flat stream of air, and then add fog or smoke to the stream. The smoother the stream, the better the image.

      Parting shot: is it a patent violation to disseminate kit ideas? I know that the patent itself needs to describe the invention pretty well, but would it be actionable to put DIY instructions on the web? Cause this is kinda neat, and it looks like it might be doable with honeycomb paper, a hair dryer and a block of dry ice.

      • They claim "patent pending" which means they've applied for a patent. And hopefully, the examiners will have enough sense to reject it because of prior art.
      • There was something like this a few years ago... was a big thing in architectural circles. At a fair (I think), they built the shell of a house using only this fog technique, and allowed people to tour it. The only problems: 1) had to be built on a lake to keep the water supply up, and 2) the pictures they tried hanging on the walls kept falling off.

      • On the other manipulator, they do claim to have patented their novel fog screen dingus, so it would seem that the USPTO disagrees with you.

        They're from Finland.

        Besides, write something like this down in language that's precise enough, and similar-but-not-exactly-the-same things wouldn't count as prior art, I think.

    • I'm also wondering how practical it is since I don't have any liquid nitrogen around the house. AFAIK, you need a permit to even handle the stuff. Maybe there are other practical sources of non-wet fog but that doesn't seem likely?
    • The reason its not like normal water(vapor) projection, the droplets wont wet a surface. Which is important for indoor use.
  • who thinks these displays look like cr*p?
    • I don't see anything inovative? Isn't it just blowing dry ice into an area and projecting a light on it? .. uhm.. whats the point? - it doesn't look like a wall which someone could magically walk through, it looks like someones displaying a picture on fog.. big whoop. yes the display looks like cr*p

    • Re:Am I the only one (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      cr*p?

      c followed by zero or more r's, followed by p, followed by any digit? shit, man, I don't get it.

  • Vaporware? (Score:5, Funny)

    by njchick ( 611256 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:17PM (#4412933) Journal
    This gives the word "vaporware" an entirely new meaning.
  • "Guess I forgot to put the fog-lights in"!

  • That's Nothing.... (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Those of us who grew up in the seventies have been in a fog ever since.
  • Now I'll be able to play and it will feel real!

    I wonder how dying will feel in this kind of environment.
    • Computer! Quake1! Deathmatch mode! 1 bot, skill Nightmare! Map DM4! Timelimit 3 minutes!

      ...still waiting for the day...

      Note: I'm sure the first iteration of such a machine can only do various shades of brown:-)


  • Cars and Planes? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ksplatter ( 573000 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:20PM (#4412953)
    This would be pretty cool if you could add it to a car. When there is a heavy fog to drive through you could project images of the road in front of the driver.

    Fog has also been know to shut down airports for quite some time. If they could project an image of the terrian pilot would be able to take off without a hitch.

    sounds pretty amazing
    • The problem with this idea, is that naturally-occuring fog is 3-d (the depth is roughly the same size as the height and width) This 'machine' produces fog which, ideally, is only a centimeter or two thick, and dense enough to reflect light efficently.

      With naturally occuring fog, if you had (for instance) a projector that projects an image of the road into the fog, it would be VERY unreliable as the light would reflect back well in one section, but not be reflected back in another. Yo umay think this is fine, as if no light gets reflected, you can see the road, right? Wrong. It is like watching an old 8mm being projected onto CmdrTaco's fat back, it would be distorted in most areas, and you can't see the part of the screen that shines outside his love handles. With projecting onto natural fog, it's VERY inconsitent. - Try this with a 'Batman' template and a good Maglite flashlight one night in the bathroom (with a hot shower running)

      The other point I wanted to mention, is that the reason airports get shut down and you have a problem is because of the 'reflecting' nature of fog. If, for some miraculous reason, you were to project an image onto the road (or FROM the road in an airplane's case), and it was visible to the driver/pilot, the vehicle you were controling would have to shut ALL forward-pointing lights off, otherwise, the projected image won't show up. If you want proof, then make your own 'walk-thru wall' and shine a bright light at the image you are viewing. What do you see? NOTHING. (except for fog)

      I didn't mean to criticize, but I wish we could make driving and flying safer because of this 'discovery', but alas we cannot. Not yet.

      EOF
    • Well, except that the residents of the foggiest city in the world (which happens to be Saint John, NB) would hardly be able to afford such vehicles given that the average income there is about $14,000(US).
    • i dont think it would work for cars. if you can't see the road, then how will anything else see it? and if the image of the road was taken previously, how does that work for things like oncoming traffic (which aren't displayed in the fog image)
    • In this case, it doesn't seem like having a surface to project on is the problem. After all, there are already heads-up displays that show you things like your speedometer. The bigger problem seems like it would be generating real time terrain maps that a human could understand.
      • The bigger problem seems like it would be generating real time terrain maps that a human could understand.

        A problem like generating them by rendering stored images of the terrain?

        Use Infra-Red or UV and your problems disappear.

        Don't Caddilac and Pontiac allready do this with their Heads Up Display-equipped cars?

    • When there is a heavy fog to drive through you could project images of the road in front of the driver.

      You could also project images of ghosts and goblins in front of the driver. As long as it's not me.

  • Sounds like diso is in the advertising business ...

    • Re:Promotion? (Score:1, Offtopic)

      by bartash ( 93498 )
      See http://slashdot.org/~diso/
      He/She has posted 1 story and no comments.

      I love slashdot but the weakest part of it is the selection of stories. I wish the editors could be more discriminating.

  • nothing new .. (Score:5, Funny)

    by jest3r ( 458429 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:24PM (#4412979)
    commisioner gordan has been projecting images onto gotham city's foggy night sky for years ...

  • How cool is this?!? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Cervantes ( 612861 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:27PM (#4413000) Journal
    It's about damn time... think of the applications once it gets out of alpha...

    - use it as a screen in a home theater... minimal exposed hardware, no screens to pull down or cats scratching at the pretty moving lights... woohoo! (downside: sneeze, and you'll have to pause the movie until the turbulence dies down. And Linus help you if you open the windows!)

    - If this could be scaled down, think about the niftiness of laptop screens made with this! You could even scale them to your particular situation. (on the plane in Coach? Have a nice 12" screen. Made it to the hotel in one piece? Crank it up to 12'!)

    - Use this in place of LCD screens for that fancy artwork on your walls... hmm, I wonder if you could rig up to sense movement in the fog field... nifty "Minority Report"esque GUI, here we come!

    - (submitted by co-worker who just happened to walk by) Rig one up in the ladies locker room, and project the wall about two feet from where it actually is. Hide behind fog, enjoy view. Hope they don't have a towel-snapping fight and blow away all your fog...
    ( he made me post that, I swear...)
    (posted mostly verbatim, gross sexual innuendos, hand gestures, gutteral grunts, stick figures, and hastily made pop-up book omitted)

    - This might make videoconferencing and videophones cheaper too... it would be nice to see some figures estimating how much cheaper this will end up being then LCD.

    Ok, /wild_speculation (Dim as dim)

    • It would probably be less expensive than the costly projector required to use it. It should probably be sold seperate from projectors, becuase it really should work with any projector. Becuause the only thing it does that a regular canvass screen can not do is allow you to pass through it, I doubt it will be popular in laptops, as most people would opt to reach around their LCDs. Look for it in plays and other stage performances as well as physically interactive entertainment venues.

  • I've been looking for a trapdoor for my office (Score:3, Funny)

    by cuberat ( 549657 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:28PM (#4413003)
    This would work perfectly, without all the messy doors and hinges and stuff. "Sure, come on in...a little to the left..."

    Still, it doesn't solve the problem of where to put the bodies, but my current moat-with-alligators seems to be working OK.

  • OT: Cut and pasting the destination site. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Christopher Thomas ( 11717 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:28PM (#4413005)
    Ok, I've reached my plagarism threshold.

    Yes, this is a very nifty toy. Yes, it deserves to be posted to slashdot.

    But can you, the submitter, not scrape together the two brain cells required to post a summary in your own words? Or space the two seconds to type, "From the site:" and put quotes around your text?

    It's getting to the point where two thirds of the articles posted have summary text directly copied from the site being linked to. This went from "minor irritant" to "annoyance" a while back.

    • I'll waste some karma replying because, as a story submitter, I've been caught in the double bind you're annoyed by. If you give it some thought you'll grant that the writer of the story being submitted has taken the time to adequately summarize his/her article, or, a secondary source has done an even more thorough job of summarizing the data. Often the submitter of a story is better serving the community by quoting the anterior summary, versus, say, struggling to come up with an alternative summary at the expense of clarity. Really, aside from the cardinal sin of not quoting the source, the submissions heavily ladened with quotes are often the better. I'm now going to try get rid of the time I've too much of on my hands. :) cheers
      • Really, aside from the cardinal sin of not quoting the source, the submissions heavily ladened with quotes are often the better.

        Which is why quoting the source was one of the two options I noted in my original post.

        Posting the article text as one's own is, IMO, Very Wrong. Especially given that adding attribution takes next to no effort.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Articles that end up getting linked are usually written by experts on the subject. It's unrealistic to think that in the 5 mins you've dedicated to link the story that you can come up with a more compelling, more descriptive few sentences than the introduction of the article itself.

      In my opinion this is a lot like trying to re-invent the wheel. If someone has already spent two days working out catchy slogans, and good tight compressed language to describe a particular story, then it's probably the best set of 80 words to describe the story.

      If you want to pour the holy water of "though shalt not plagerize because it makes you look like a telegraph repeater" on the ground and roll in it, then knock yourself out.

      But to those of us who aren't interested in distributing credit like a bunch of girl-scout merit badges, and are just interested in the story, please keep on copy-pasting. Yes your high school teacher taught you that copying was wrong, but you're all grown up now...and it's time to throw away childish ideas.
  • Seaquest DSV? I seem to remember the captain had a holographic AI projected onto a fog screen in his office. And that series was quite a few years ago now... I wonder if we'll be seeing a /. stroy on a "dolphin translator" next :)

  • Holodeck porn (Score:4, Funny)

    by SexyKellyOsbourne ( 606860 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:31PM (#4413033) Journal
    They may have used the Holodeck to meet with Einstein and Newton on Star Trek, but we're too irresponsible with our technology to do that.

    Immersible fog technology will be used for only one thing: PORNO, the same technology that brought a VCR and a computer into every household.

    Fog porn will be the collapse of society! Beware!
  • Thats pretty cool. I remember they had something like this in seaquest. I can't really think of a practical application for this though. The resolution won't be good enough for entertainment (or anything else requiring decent looking graphics). Or reading/typing text. I dunno, I guess I just can't think of anything I'd want to use it for. Oh yeah, and:

    it is a break-through technology, literally!

    Timothy, you are guilty of wanton pun usage, and for that you must die.

    • Re:Whoa. (Score:3, Funny)

      by Kenja ( 541830 )
      "Timothy, you are guilty of wanton pun usage, and for that you must die."

      Dont you mean he should be punished?

  • I Cringe (Score:3, Funny)

    by teamhasnoi ( 554944 ) <teamhasnoi@ y a h o o . c om> on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:33PM (#4413041) Journal
    whenever I see stuff like this:
    Instead of using blowers, natural wind could be used to generate the airflow. If the laminar unit and fog nozzles are suspended over a bridge or such constructions, enormous vertical and/or horizontal fog screens become possible under suitable weather conditions.

    Madison Ave has just creamed their Calvin Klines.

  • Tomorrows Mega Cinema Centres (Score:5, Funny)

    by jukal ( 523582 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:33PM (#4413044) Journal
    Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, Mexico City, Cairo, Bangkok, Beijing, Bombay, Calcutta, Delhi, Jakarta, Karachi, Manila, Seoul, Shanghai, London, Moscow...maybe a few more.

    Finally, some use for the smog.

    • Fog City Theater....


      Actually, London would do pretty well, and sometimes Seattle.

  • I am Confused (Score:3, Funny)

    by ksplatter ( 573000 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:33PM (#4413046)
    I don't have the FOGGIEST idea what the hell this article is talking about!
    I know, that was pretty corny.

  • A new meaning for movies... (Score:3, Funny)

    by gmuslera ( 3436 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:34PM (#4413047) Homepage Journal
    ... like "Gone with the wind"

  • neato, but necessary? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mugnyte ( 203225 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:36PM (#4413057) Journal
    First interpretations:

    This technology has a bit to go to achieve commodity-level feasibility. However, its very promising. I would expect to see this in clubs, concerts, and tradeshows.

    This isn't 3D. Its a flat image projected on a water-based screen.

    The drawback continues to be the placement of a projection device and its medium (if not a wall). Here, you have a fog wall and a projection TV device. Until those two converge, we'll all still hope for those "Help Me Obi-Wan" shots.

    Shouldn't there be a way to build a floating image from the interference of two separate light beams? Wherever the beams intersect would be brighter/changed. Hmm.. Maybe only good for vector displays.

    • Being done.. I don't have the url handy.

      Some research team somewhre is working on it.

      A chamber full of some special gas is used... and it takes the energy of 2 beams of invisible laser to cause an individual atom of the gas to emit a photon.... so they can use this to trace images in 3 dimensions.

      For a truly volumetric display, we would expect it to be vector-like anyway, no? It wouldn't make sense to rasterize a 3d space.
      • For a truly volumetric display, we would expect it to be vector-like anyway, no? It wouldn't make sense to rasterize a 3d space.

        Well, it's 3d space, but it's still a point movnig through space. Drawing something as simple as a filled square would require scanning/tracing like a TV does, anyway. I suppose it depends on what you're displaying. If you want wireframe polyhedrons vector is fine. If you want painted/textured planes you might as well rasterise it and display with timed sweeps like TV or VGA, but in 3d.

        Damn, XF86Config is going to be a bitch to configure then. Not only vert and horizontal frequencies, but Z, too!
  • in my tiny Apartment. Brought the projector home from work and we all sat and chain smoked watching movies just underneath the beam.

  • The floating hand... (Score:4, Funny)

    by thelinuxking ( 574760 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:39PM (#4413072)
    Wouldn't even exist if it weren't for the Slashdot Effect. It isn't really a technological, fog screen thing...its the spirit of the server's ancestors, trying to warn the server about what could happen...
  • Looks like an ideal camouflaging method for my private Scud launcher.
  • 2 guys. 6 pack of beer. 1 LAN Party with crappy projector. "Billy, I need some more ice". Open refrigerator door. Presto! A walk thru a game of HALO and a story of Slashdot.org

  • Eery (Score:2)

    by Dan D. ( 10998 )
    I don't know about you people, but the picture of the foggy baby that you can walk through gives me the heebie jeebies. There's a reason I stay away from dropping acid, and its not because I'm afraid to get addicted or something. It's because seeing really freaky weird stuff or seeing freaky weird stuff as a ghostly image scares the poop out of me.

    Geez! I can just imagine this with doom. I jumped enough with my 14 inch display, I can do without it being life size and ghostly.

    • But does the baby dance?

      (Sorry, had to be said.)

      I'd guess the general concept of projecting an image onto a wall of fog must surely has tons of prior art...I would assume that the patent either has some specific technological "breakthroughs" to make this technique easier/better or it will certainly find many challenges.

  • Turbulence? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Da Fokka ( 94074 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @06:58PM (#4413164) Homepage
    I wonder how they prevent turbulence problems. Someone moving 'through' this virtual environmen obviously wordt perturb the smoke and distort the image.
  • That would remove the need for having a 'stale'
    air environment... Think about it. The projection TVs right now do it. And it adds that nice look to it. So if this was encased between 2 sheets of plexi (both transparent, or the back one black) and sealed on the sides, with a vent on top, Voila, instant HUGE screen display. And no problems with it being 'foggy' (couln't help myself) or distorted..

    What do you think?

    Now that'be nifty picture frame for displaying my 5mp images on a wall, and it wouldn't necessairly stick out of the wall too much.

    I want one ;-)

    • Yeah... what do you call those things? Screens? Besides, that would remove the ability to walk through the image.

      On another note. There has been some crazy case mods on /. before, but has anyone seen someone mod a case of bannanas [cs.tut.fi] before? A flavored fog-screen perhaps? I can only imagine the names: "tropical mist" or "mountain dew".

    • And exactly how would it be different to project on fog trapped between plexiglass and projecting on other types of screens?

      It would stick out just as much as with any other projection technology - the problem with projection is being able to project a clear enough image with high light intensity without ending with a ridiculously deep screen. That problem is exactly the same whether you project on fog, a piece of cloth, or your ass...

  • Although I think this is a very cool display, I have to wonder: How is this really different from the on-fog projections I've seen in the past? To me, making a semi-flat, semi-motionless wall of fog and projecting something onto it is not a new idea, nor is it a new method of implementing an old idea.

  • obligatory simpsons quote (Score:4, Funny)

    by klparrot ( 549422 ) <klparrot@hotmai l . com> on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @07:05PM (#4413201)
    Bart (over the radio): "Rod, Todd, this is God."
    Rod: "How did you get on the radio?"
    Bart: "What do you mean how did I get on the radio? I created the universe!"
    Todd: "Forgive my brother. We believe you."
    Bart: "Talk is cheap; perhaps a test of faith: Walk through the wall; I will remove it for you ..."
    (Rod walks into the wall with a thud)
    Bart: "... later ... hahaha."
  • granted, it's cool... but I'll be impressed when it makes it onto the market. I can easily see this falling into the "really-cool-but-never-gaining-widespread-use" category.

    plus, they mentioned that "The turbulence is due to poor fog feeding construction." but the time it takes for this to be developed, marketed AND find its way into more than 3 homes will give plenty of time for alternatives to arise that don't blow away when I leave the window open.
  • This _not_ any kind of 3D display. There is no real depth, the source is 2D, and the main piece of equipment is a 2D projector. All it is is a way of adding what appears to be thickness to the display; things like the image of the hand will have depth but not hand-shaped depth, that is it will look like an extruded cookie-cutter of illuminated fog.

    It's kind of cool, but beyond the novelty and perhaps some real niche applications, pretty pointless.

    And this was posted some time ago, either in the comments or as a story, although I couldn't find it with a few searches.
  • Could this technology be applied to projected interfaces, (such as the projected keyboards that are soon to come out)? It seems like this technology might possibly supply a type of portable or unobstructive interface when coupled with the non-physical interfaces. Say, you need to have a large interactive interface, possibly like a touchscreen, in a place where no flat surfaces are available. Or maybe a mall ad which when activated provides not only the ad, but an interface to interact with it.
  • ... but it's not something entirely new... All this will/might do in the future is replace thise little pull down screens for projectors and such. If they require liquid nitro to make them work, then I dont see anyone other than maybe advertisers or the milatary who may want to use them. They will not revoutionive laptop screens. Consider the weight of a LCD as compared with a jug of liquid nitro, and a projector. Projectors are big heavy things, and putting one in a notebook, that is intended to run off of batteries for any given amount of time is just crazy. I believe someone tried to make a laptop with a projector built into it a while back, and it didnt work very well. (anyone got a link? I cant find it) It would be cool to have a portable (pronounced "luggable") very large screen for political presentations, lans, expos whatever though. ~Lack of sig~

  • Random thought to counter /. effect (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I'd like to view the movie on that page. I can't. It's /.-ed.

    But I know quite a few people will have already downloaded and cached the file. Couldn't someone build a P2P system that automatically mirrored websites that /. linked to, and then other people can download it from peers? It could make use of Gnutella or some existing network.

    I can't see it causing any more copyright problems than the Google Cache, if it obeyed robots instructions and the like.

    Has anyone else thought or suggested anything like this before?
  • Wasn't this technology formally introduced to the widespread public in the sixties?
    Its called marijuana.
    "Fog Screen Virtual Environment" is just another way of saying hot boxed.

  • It's cool, somehow.. cold even (Score:3, Informative)

    by E_elven ( 600520 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @07:58PM (#4413499) Journal
    I've actually witnessed this thingy live in action, and must say it looked much better than in the pictures -although it's still not quite on the same iceberg with traditional contrivances for visual information.

    The 'new' part about this is indeed the system to keep the fog smooth enough to be able to make it useful, as some bright individuals have already deducted, not the idea of projecting video on fog..

    E
  • That should be an acronym by now, shouldn't it? BDB=Been Done Before.
    Long ago, probably 10 years ago, I saw old-style "laserium" projections onto aerosols. They often do outdoor displays on lakes or rivers (usually in conjunction with fireworks) and they have barges with pumps that spray up big sheets of water. They project the laser light onto the water spray, it makes a nice white reflective screen that shimmers. It looks really cool.

  • Cardboard box science (Score:3, Funny)

    by helix400 ( 558178 ) on Tuesday October 08, 2002 @08:05PM (#4413534) Journal
    Heh, my favorite part is this picture.

    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~ira/kuvat/web2.jpg [cs.tut.fi]

    "Say, what should we do with this old banana cardboard box here?" "I know! Lets use it as a stand for our futuristic invention!"

    • That old banana box IS their futuristic invention, it holds the fog until it's released via plastic drinking straws. It's the cutting edge I tells ya.

      Read the pdf [cs.tut.fi] on the site, it's a lot more informative than either the site itself or the slashdot article.

  • "Mommy, someday can I see the video, too?" "Yes, son. As soon as the Slashdotting is done." "When is that?" "When all the nerds find something else to click on, honey."

  • Ok, this is a deja-vu for me since I remember seeing this type of display technology on the SeaQuest series several years ago, where Capt. Bridger talks to his computerized friend who shows his face on the "fog screen".

    Anyone done any research on this, or where the SeaQuest producers got the idea?
  • As we all know, a neccesary component of any future society (Star Trek aside) is really crappy display technologies which are "cooler" than they are functional. If it's vertical and transparent, who needs legibility? If they can make this shizit three-dimensional by sacrificing some more resolution and possibly some framerate, we'll have a definite winner.
  • If we're talking gaming applications, this could be a serious revelation for places like LazerZone or similar simulated combat situations... who knows? Eventually we could end up with games so realistic you actually die in them [bbspot.com].
  • Mixed reality and immersive projection technology can use CAVE-like virtual rooms with fog walls, making them effectively "virtual virtual rooms".

    The preceding sentence is effectively unintelligible without immersive technical jargon technology.

    What the fsck is *mixed reality*!? Immersive projection technology is obviously cooked up because *fog screen* is just too mundane. *CAVE-like virual rooms with fog walls*!?! And the topper: *effectively virtual virtual rooms*? Both sides cancel leaving an effective semantic value of null.
  • Anyone remember Seaquest DSV? I remember the show had something similar in the captain's or computer room. A screen made up of fog or something that apears to be flowing but not solid.
  • it's called Gardaland [gardaland.it]. They project a story on a 'wall' made by water shot at high-pressure all around. Nothing much.. but the fog was a good idea. I wonder if they can keep the fog in a glass sphere and then use lasers to make certain point inside the sphere (in a 3d plan) to be colored, thus obtaining a hologram.
    Maybe fog can be substituted by a more transparent gas, just to improve definition.

    oh well, just ideas.
    cheers
  • OK, the white light and vapor display is walk-through, but not truly 3D volumetric.

    I wonder if you could create a real 3D volumetric display using an aerosol of a fluorescent substance, and illuminate it so that the energy required for fluorescence is only present where two beams cross, then you could scan out 3D voxels.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Most of us, when all is said and done, like what we like and make up reasons for it afterwards." -- Soren F. Petersen

Close