I saw this for about 10 seconds. Was it just a CGI image put over the screen to make her look 3D? Was Wolf talking to himself again?
Basically it's 3D green-screen technology - they put her in a tent with a ton of cameras and projected the image to the studio. I have no evidence, but I imaging Blitzer was talking to 2D representations.
I saw that and started laughing. So stupid.
Originally Posted by salwon
Perhaps a cardboard cut-out of John Candy?
I do notice that he's standing as far away as he can from the image, perhaps for fear of holo-plague...
Help us ObiBlitzKanobi, you're our only hope.
I'm glad they discovered this technology... I'd hate to see them have to resort to improving the quality of their actual reporting to get viewers.
Yeah, then it's not really that cool. Otherwise, it'd be awesome to beam myself to Halloween parties as Emperor Palpatine.
You know it's only a matter of time before the porn industry perfects this technology.
Porn industry is a pretty weak joke. Come on, there's some low-hanging fruit here in light of a few characters from the recent election, if you want to be a bad winner.
As cool as that would seem, I'll take video porn over a janky hologram.
Fruit not withstanding, CNN is slowly sliding downhill and they didn't start up very far to begin with.
They projected her into the studio? Why not just project her directly onto the 2d image that goes out to the TV?
Is that radically different from the NFL show they do on ESPN where Chris Carter can walk amongst football players when analyzing the games? They are 3d too. Of course, they aren't live feeds of someone, but they are animated renderings.
They were fine when Ted was calling the shots. Warner and OJ ruined everything.
OJ -- first his wife, then CNN.
They just added her in post?
The CNN anchors were not really speaking to three-dimensional projected images, but rather empty space, Kreuzer said. The images were simply added to what viewers saw on their screens at home, in much the same way computer-generated special effects are added to movies.
Kreuzer said the images were tomograms, which are images that are captured from all sides, reconstructed by computers, then displayed on screen.
Holograms, on the other hand, are projected into space.
Were they really projecting anything into a studio? It looked more like it was just green-screening with some clever camera tracking synchronization being composited in the televised feed.
I was hoping to see the correspondents kneeling: "What is thy bidding, my Blitzer?"
Post above yours explains. I blame Blitzer.
While the projection of the people was okay, the projection of the 3D Senate was very cool. THAT is what I want to see in future games.
As for the hologram, from what gizmodo posted, it wasn't viewable in studio. However Cisco and several other vendors have demoed viewable holograms, so it's entirely possible. Most likely they did not have room in studio for that specific display equipment (or perhaps it wasn't dark enough?) It did present an entirely 3D image of the person though, so they simply had to tell a computer to rotate the camera of the actor whenever the in-studio camera moved. To the viewing audience it appeared as though the hologram was in the room and rooted to one spot, viewable from any angle.
An example of a hologram really being displayed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcfNC_x0VvE
Whenever someone on TV says "look! we have this new gadget. It doesn't tell you anything new, but just look at it! Isn't it cool?" then you know it's time to switch channels. However, I have to say that John King and his Magic Board was a huge help to a foreigner like me to figure out what was going on. We dropped our own news shows and stuck with CNN on election night.
Respectfully
krise madsen
Yeah, I just felt embarrassed for CNN when they whipped out the "hologram".
And they felt it necessary to spend half the time showing a 3/4 rear view of the guests just to show -- look! -- it's 3D! Great, dumbass, but I want to see the face of the person who is speaking to me.
If anyone has forgotten that these are entertainment channels rather than news channels... here's your reminder.
Well, they can whip it out.
But when they make it a story of itself, that's pretty desperate.
That's pretty stupid, really.
You laugh now, but what about poor will.i.am, trapped in time and space?
I thought it was pretty moronic myself and immediately knew The Daily Show would be all over it. Which they were. I did like King's boardwork especially when he was breaking down the internal, precinct by precinct, returns of states or showing demographics ("As you can see there are more Latino voters since the last election in these counties.."). It was really smart to compare the current returns with 2004's as well as it gave me a sense of perspective.
Usually I like MSNBC but I found myself watching mostly CNN - except when I needed a nice jolt of schadenfreude. Then I'd hit Fox. "Well, Karl, word's just in that Ohio has been called for Barack Obama."
I like how there seems to be a slight blue glow around her. She's like Obi Wan Kenobi as a Force spirit!
I like how there seems to be a slight blue glow around her. I imagine it makes edge detection easier for when you want to edit the video to superimpose her against other hilarious backdrops.
- Alan
I like how there seems to be a slight blue glow around her. She's like... glowing. Blue.
Last edited by hong; 11-06-2008 at 05:13 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote