Google's Project Starline Videoconference Tech Wants To Turn You Into a Hologram (wired.com) 21
Google on Tuesday unveiled a prototype machine for face-to-face meetings named Project Starline. From a report: The phrase "video booth" really is the simplest way to describe Starline in its current form: It's a large booth, like the kind you'd find in a diner, just way more technologically complex. I had the chance to test-drive it in early May. After an initial conversation with Bavor outside of Google's campus in Mountain View, California, I was led inside the almost empty building and escorted to a private office. There was the Starline booth, part wood-paneled and partly encased in gray fabric, with a built-in bench on one side and a 65-inch display on the other. I was instructed to sit opposite the display. There were lights, cameras, and not a whole lot of action until a product manager sat down across from me. From a very specific angle, he looked as though he was sitting across from me. But he was on a different floor of the building, piping into our meeting through Starline.
This is Google's idea for the future of videoconferencing, a giddy vision that only a small group of Googlers have had access to, and one that has apparently gotten a thumbs-up from chief executive Sundar Pichai. You couldn't be blamed for thinking that Starline must have been developed during the pandemic, while desk workers were umm-ing and muting and unmuting their way through an endless stream of Meets and Zooms. But Clay Bavor, Googler who heads up the company's augmented- and virtual-reality efforts, says there wasn't really any aha moment that led to Project Starline. In fact, it's been in the works for over five years. [...] The imagery is remarkable, and the visuals are complemented by spatial audio. What I'm actually looking at is a 65-inch light field display. The Project Starline booths are equipped with more than a dozen different depth sensors and cameras. (Google is cagey when I ask for specifics on the equipment.) These sensors capture photorealistic, three-dimensional imagery; the system then compresses and transmits the data to each light field display, on both ends of the video conversation, with seemingly little latency. Google applies some of its own special effects, adjusting lighting and shadows. The result is hyper-real representations of your colleagues on video calls.
This is Google's idea for the future of videoconferencing, a giddy vision that only a small group of Googlers have had access to, and one that has apparently gotten a thumbs-up from chief executive Sundar Pichai. You couldn't be blamed for thinking that Starline must have been developed during the pandemic, while desk workers were umm-ing and muting and unmuting their way through an endless stream of Meets and Zooms. But Clay Bavor, Googler who heads up the company's augmented- and virtual-reality efforts, says there wasn't really any aha moment that led to Project Starline. In fact, it's been in the works for over five years. [...] The imagery is remarkable, and the visuals are complemented by spatial audio. What I'm actually looking at is a 65-inch light field display. The Project Starline booths are equipped with more than a dozen different depth sensors and cameras. (Google is cagey when I ask for specifics on the equipment.) These sensors capture photorealistic, three-dimensional imagery; the system then compresses and transmits the data to each light field display, on both ends of the video conversation, with seemingly little latency. Google applies some of its own special effects, adjusting lighting and shadows. The result is hyper-real representations of your colleagues on video calls.
They found a way to make online conferencing even (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are holograms worth it? (Score:2)
It is nice for Science Fiction Movies, Because it gives the actors something or someone to interact with other than just looking at a screen. It makes great movies, but for real life, that is a lot of infrastructure, for rather limited value. As most of the time, we just turn off the video for our video conference, so we can be disengaged when we have to.
One line says it all (Score:2)
Been in offices back in the day when huge sums were spent on video conferencing no one would use because it was difficult to use, unreliable, and no one had the bandwidth. I am sure Google has campus to camps fiber needed to transmit these images, but I doubt few others do.
I do see firms like onlyfans renting out studios equipped with these for their performers.
It is also like HD tv, when people realized the sets had to rebuilt and you could tell the r
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just wait till "agony" is added to this booth. It will almost be like an early Trek future.
Re: (Score:2)
If it reduces business travel, I'm in favor of it for climate change reasons even if it has no other benefits.
Show off (Score:2)
and a 65-inch display
I'm sure people will waste no time modifying their holo-bodies.
hit your cap in 1 day! (Score:2)
hit your cap in 1 day!
Let's stop and think about this... (Score:2)
Personal identification verification via passwords is rapidly disappearing, thanks to the fuckheads in Silly Valley who make us all leap before they look where we're going. Identification methods are migrating to biometrics - fingerprints, retinal scans, and measurements of gait, body proportions, etc. So SURE, let's get live-action holograms of everybody and his dog stored in 'the cloud', because of course it won't be vulnerable to data breaches and it won't be used to spoof ID's in order to commit crime o
Nelson, (Score:2)
if you can hear me MAKE A GESTURE...
Google's Surface (Score:2)
That videoconferencing tech looks incredible, and I'm sure it looks amazing.
Like the original table-sized Microsoft's surface though, have to question the utility of it, how many people will actually use one.
I guess maybe over time the tech will be shrunk enough to be used by more people, but even smaller it just seems impractical compared to seeing someone on a screen, or overlaid on a headset visor.
Re: (Score:2)
I think I prefer Skype. It doesn't aim to be realistic, it's just video. This is supposed to look real, but you can see compression artifacts that remind you sharply it isn't. As a consequence I imagine in their heart people would feel more distance from the person they are talking to, not less.
Kind of like AI that every once in a while says something nonsensical and kills the illusion. Thumbs down from me.
Re: (Score:2)
Seems easy enough to dial up the bandwidth until the compression artifacts aren't noticeable anymore, then. Bandwidth is cheap (well, it is if you're Google).
Closer is better (Score:1)
Seems easy enough to dial up the bandwidth until the compression artifacts aren't noticeable anymore, then.
You could probably get it to work really well if whoever you were talking to was in the next room.
Holograms? (Score:2)
Google's Project Starline Videoconference Tech Wants To Turn You Into a Hologram
Well that sounds truly outrageous to me.
Er (Score:2)
pr0n? (Score:2)
No one yet commented on the vast interactive pornography potential?
OnlyFans holography upgrade - only an extra pr0ncoin per channel!
I played with one (Score:2)
It's a fun toy, but it's not really that much better than video chatting with someone on your phone. As you might expect, it's a minor improvement, not a major leap.