Computex 3D

Lorraine and I went to Computex today – the last day of the event here in Taipei.  We were mostly interested in seeing the 3D screens and gadgets that have been covered in the news as if there was an amazing 3D revolution.

Suffice it to say that I was big time the opposite of incredibly overwhelmed with the 3D offerings . . . for one, most places touting 3D weren't even talking about stereoscopic 3D.  It seems that everyone and his nephew have stuck the characters 3 and D in their product pitches in an effort to make 'em sound sexy and jump on the next big thing bandwagon.

Hint . . . those monitors that have motion tracking so when you wave your hand in front of them are NOT 3D so stop calling them 3D touch or whatever.  Those are motion trackers.  Sure, the "Real World Space" is three-dimensional but there's not good reason to call it 3D space, just call it real time or spatial tracking or whatever and stop confusing people who are looking for stereoscopic displays.

Next, a printer that prints out models is not a 3D printer.  Sure, it's closer to 3D than a spatial tracking device but you're really printing sculpted parts and that's so much kooler than a stereoscopic printer might be.

As to the stuff that's actually got something to do with stereoscopic "true" 3D visual display . . . the pickings were both slim and rather on the pitiful side.

The koolest thing was saw was the line of 3D digital cameras and camcorders coming out from DXG.  We saw three or four cameras and they had a big ol' TV set up with passive polarized glasses to demonstrate image quality (I so wish more companies would use passive systems like that as the glasses are so much cheaper and could be had for a few dollars rather than US$35 to US$60 we're going to be seeing for the active shutter glasses most systems seem to be opting for).  Problems with the DXG presentations?  Most of the cameras have very very closely spaced lenses which make them very appropriate for closeup or portrait photos (something I really like) but terrible for mid to long range subjects.  They do have one model that has 76mm spacing which should create some very nice depth in the 3D images.  The test footage they were showing folks was mostly just outside of Computex at the World Trade Center in Taipei in the complex right across from Taipei 101 . . . unfortunately, instead of shooting a lot of people and portraits as the lenses should be very good for, they were shooting buildings so the 3D effect was minimal.  It looks like these may be really good products (which I was pointedly told would NOT be available in Taiwan so the sales girl didn't even want to give me a product flyer until I pushed her for it and even then the damned promotional materials she finally did give me had NOTHING about the 3D products I was asking questions about and they were showcasing).

Still, DXG had the best presentation that we saw at Computex this year.  At least they have innovative new products that will do the job.  For most of the other real 3D products we saw it's as if the folks designing the products don't really understand what 3D is or should be able to do and the sales folks who are supposed to answer questions have no clue at all.

We saw an autostereoscopic photoframe that was near abyssmal.  It's basically a lenticular barrier that uses a very poorly placed lens spacing so that there are extremely obvious and annoying lines going down the center of the frame with very little depth and an incredibly narrow sweet spot that makes it nearly useful.

One company was showcasing their amazing water screen high definition television screens with a 3D display.  Unfortunately, there was little to no depth at all in the footage they were using and the delivery system they were using actually has serious flaws that the sales folks thought were features.  I pop the glasses on (active shutter glasses) and there is NO depth at all.  So I ask the salesguy if there's a button to activate them and he shows me where the inconveniently located button is.  I push it and lo and behold it's reversed with a LOT of flickering so I push it again and finally get true 3D but with a ton of flickering.  I tell the sales guy there's flickering and he says that's a good thing so I know I have the 3D on.  Uh, NO.  Flickering is a very BAD THING in a 3D system as it leads to headaches, eye fatigue, and even seizures for some viewers.  The reason the good 3D TVs are 240mhz is so that there is NO flicker at all, as 240 is well above the minimum required for flickerless viewing, even with view systems that cut the resolution and refresh in half.  The flicker is NOT a feature, it's a design flaw or it's operator error and in this case it seems to be both.  It would be an incredible waste for someone to shell out the bucks required to purchase a high definition 100" 3D tv system only for it to be impossible to watch an entire evening's worth of good quality high definition 3D content on it (say and evening of Avatar, Alice in Wonderland, some 3D home movies, and a few HD 3D porn titles out on blueray this year).

One interesting system we saw was an interesting approach to the cost of 3D . . . a system that plays 3D content as anaglyph (red-blue) so there's no refresh issue, no flicker, and no high cost glasses or televisions.  Brilliant idea that would allow families without large budgets to catch the 3D wave and the anaglyphic conversions aren't too bad . . . not great but not bad.  I applaud the determination to cut the cost issue for 3D but I hope that efforts will be concentrated in polarized or shutter systems and bringing their price points down as those are far superior in terms of quality when compared to anaglyph.  It is NOT unreasonable to expect innovative 3D display systems (either projection based or standup monitors) to be developed that can provide stereoscopic display while slashing price point.

In any case, Lorraine and I enjoyed Computex for the most part . . . we are disappointed overall in what we saw of the 3D offerings (granted, we were in Taipei and did not go to the Nankang site so we don't know if anything worthwhile was there).  We do know there's a whole bunch of really kool things coming out this year . . . they just weren't in Taipei for this Computex.

I am hopeful . . . but not holding my breath . . . that at least some of those really neat things coming out this year will actually be worthwhile products.  I've been shooting 3D photos for years (I have a personal collection of close to fifty 3D film cameras and a few digital solutions) and so I've a bit more knowledge and experience with 3D photography and filmography than most people so I have a very critical eye when it comes to 3D products.  However, I also saw that even folks who were untrained in the intricacies of 3D were walking away unimpressed . . . all that technical stuff I asked sales folks about isn't just trivia.  There really are bare minimums and very basic principles that 3D equipment must meet or risk producing really crappy product and in the end, the quality of the image is what sells the beasties.

Please note . . . the above is MY opinion.  I was only at Computex for a short time today and so I probably missed some kool stuff.  This is my opinion on what I did see, that's all.

All the best,
Brian

(If you are reading this blog post via a stream, go to https://briandavidphillips.net/ to access the full post with any videos or photos included.)

 HYPNOSIS VIDEO COURSES
http://www.briandavidphillips.net/store
    
Hypnosis Shows, Sessions, Training . . . and MORE! 
See 
http://www.BrianDavidPhillips.com for details

Brian David Phillips, PhD, CH [brian@briandavidphillips.com
Hypnotist, Hypnotherapist, Intuitionist, Trance Wizard 
President, Society of Experiential Trance
Associate Professor, NCCU, Taipei, Taiwan