3D technology without glasses?

http://www.ottawasun.com/tech/news/2011/01/19/16952731.html

The Nintendo 3D hand held gaming device due in march also takes 3D pictures. No other competitor offers this kind of technology.

I wonder if this gets transferred into the TV market or even the theater?

The only difference is the 3DS has a "on the screen" 3D, whereas with glasses you can see stuff "off the screen". Not sure if I worded that clearly.

I get ya. So not really as impressive as I initially thought.

I've seen it on display, I'd say it's still pretty cool.

Here's another 3D sans glasses technology -- posted by Hoags on the random video thread:

https://gmcentralhockey.forumotion.net/t1829p440-random-video-thread#216700

wprager wrote:Here's another 3D sans glasses technology -- posted by Hoags on the random video thread:

http://www.gmhockey.com/t1829p440-random-video-thread#216700

Saw that one already which inspired me to post something that is actually real.

The tech used in the 3DS requires the viewer to be in a specific spot -- in this case, staring tight in the center at specific distance (it does not have to be *that* precise but the closer you are to the optimum spot the better the effect, I would suspect.

The same technology has been implemented in some recently-announced TVs, but with several such *sweet spots* (the larger the screen, the more viewing positions). The problem with this technology is that each of these viewing positions requires two images to be displayed (left/right). A typical 1080p set has 1920 horizontal pixels. If you still want the same 1080x1920 resolution on a 3D no-glasses set, you would need a 1080x3840 display for a *single* viewing position, and 1080x15,360 for four positions.

Clearly, they don't have displays like that yet. What's more likely going to happen is that the image will be scaled down (horizontally). THat 1080x1920 panel would be able to display 1080x240 images in 3D for 4 viewing positions. Worst thing is, they'd still call it 1080p.

Now, I'm sure they will increase the horizontal pixel pitch but the cost of the panels would be staggering.

I seem to recall the first Plasma TVs were in the 15 to 25 thousand range so like those TVs this technology will eventually decrease drastically and improve significantly as well over time.

I don't think so. I personally think that 3D will eventually pass away. All the technologies tried so far have resulted in a much worse picture quality for 3D (adding red/green hues, reduced brightness from the polarization, reduced frame rate, reduced resolution). And the picture itself looks fake and unpleasant. I can watch the demo reel and say, yeah, that's cool, but after 5 minutes I have to take the glasses off. I never had that feeling with DVD, progressive scan, high-definition, blu-ray. All of those technologies improved the picture quality and viewing experience. 3D goes backwards on both counts, while adding nothing but a "cool gimmick" which, at best, does not detract from the story telling. Plus it will be years before you get any 3D TV content other than sports.

Hopefully, before I'm too old to care, they'll figure out how to record, transmit and recreate holographic images that truly renders a scene in 3D -- in other words, a display that you can sit *around* literally.

For now, I think I'll skip the 3D display until my current one dies and the only replacements are all 3D-capable.