Talk:Holography

message: the page about Gabor says he was electrical engineer, not a physicist  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.1.244.19 (talk) 19:44, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: He trained as an electrical engineer, but given he was awarded the Nobel prize for Physics, it is not unreasonable to assume that he was also a physicist! Epzcaw (talk) 20:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gabor was physicist or electrical engineer? 

message: The text says:
Total Recall (1990 film), the main character uses a device, similar to a wrisch, to produce a hologram of himself and deceive his foes.
Is "wrish" a typo for wrist watch?P0M (talk) 04:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrish one?

message: I don't think we should use the Kinebar image in this article (under security) because the Kinegram image displayed isn't actually a hologram. To quote the article on Kinebars, "Note that a Kinegram is not a hologram; a Kinegram displays a flat diffractive design, while a hologram is a diffractive device that displays a three-dimensional image."
FinrodFelagund9 (talk) 19:32, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I go along with this.  Maybe remove it in a few days time if not one presents a contrary view? Epzcaw (talk) 16:38, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Now done Epzcaw (talk) 16:10, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kinebar image? 

message: A "hologram" of Tupac Shakur appeared at the cocahella music festival. 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/16/tupac-coachella-hologram-snoop-dre-video_n_1427925.html 
: Reference to the Tupac hologram should be removed as it's not really a hologram but a usage of Pepper's Ghost (even listed on the Pepper's Ghost page): http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/04/tupac-hologram-merely-pretty-cool-optical-illusion.ars
: Tupac was not a hologram.  The company that did the projection even states they only project hologram illusions
http://www.avconcepts.com/holographic-projection/
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1683173/tupac-hologram-coachella.jhtml
Yes, it should be mentioned as a Peppers Ghost.  Or in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holography#Things_often_confused_with_holograms
67.49.102.91 (talk) 06:09, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Tupac Hologram

message: The Vocaloid concerts featuring Hatsune Miku amongst others has never used Musion Eyeliner or any Form of pepper's ghost. These concerts use a much more simple method of rear projection onto a semi-transparent "DILAD" screen.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.184.109.8 (talk) 20:56, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you elaborate this a bit more? "Rear projection onto a semi-transparent screen" seems to me pretty much the definition of Pepper's ghost. --Danh (talk) 10:53, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hatsune Miku Concerts Not Pepper's Ghost 

message: The "Holographic display" page consists of two sentences with no references.  It needs either to be expanded and references added, or deleted.  It should not be merged with the Holography page in its current form]]. Epzcaw (talk) 22:40, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It needs expansion and references but it should at least be mentioned in this article and not only deleted. --134.109.227.112 (talk) 21:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Without references, the article does not follow Wikipedia criteria.  I have put an unreferenced tag on it which means that it will be deleted in due course unless references are added.  Epzcaw (talk) 14:30, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: References have been added, but neither "holographic display" nor "Electroholography" are explained in the article so there is nothing to merge.Epzcaw (talk) 03:09, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody has made a case for this merge - the article @holographic Display' contains no information.  I am therefore removing the suggested merge link. Epzcaw (talk) 13:13, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested merge of holographic display page 

message: I think it is now time to take the bull by the horns, and remove this section from the "Holography" article, particularly in the light of the recent comment.
I propose to create a new article  called "Holography in Fiction" and move all the content to the new page.  This can then survive or not on its own merits, rather than cluttering up a serious article about holography, unless people strongly object to this. Epzcaw (talk) 18:24, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it, I also don't see any other way to keep the section from growing indefinitely. --Danh (talk) 21:16, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now created a new article Holography in fiction and moved all the content, plus the comment about "trivial or minor references to popular culture" to teh new article.  Epzcaw (talk) 13:51, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Poor grammar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hologram#Holography_in_fiction 174.45.224.10 (talk) 10:53, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Holography in fiction/popular culture 

message: Hi, I'm currently browsing this article and some parts I find difficult to understand. One example: the attached graphic "Recording a hologram" puts the viewer on the other side of the photographic plate. Which, imo, indicates that the graphic shows a transmission hologram. However, this paragraph: 
"Reconstructing and viewing the holographic image
When the hologram plate is illuminated by a laser beam identical to the reference beam which was used to record the hologram, an exact reconstruction of the original object wavefront is obtained. An imaging system (an eye or a camera) located in the reconstructed beam 'sees' exactly the same scene as it would have done when viewing the original. When the lens is moved, the image changes in the same way as it would have done when the object was in place. If several objects were present when the hologram was recorded, the reconstructed objects move relative to one another, i.e. exhibit parallax, in the same way as the original objects would have done. It was very common in the early days of holography to use a chess board as the object and then take photographs at several different angles using the reconstructed light to show how the relative positions of the chess pieces appeared to change."
says that regardless of the hologram type, the viewer is located in the reconstructed beam, which would be the location of the referene beam. Isn't that only correct for reflexion holograms? Imo, a lot of the paragraphs seem to be very vague so I'm really not sure.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.130.160.193 (talk) 10:35, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vague phrasing? 

message: Hologram should not redirect to this page, as there should be a page about holograms, of the ilk in science fiction, which has been invented in real life. I came onto Wikipedia to find a page on that. I want to know the name of the man who invented actual holograms (via projecting the images onto tiny water droplets), because I want to name a character after him. But, instead, you guys rigged Wikipedia to point me to this... Thank you, for being a nuisance.--174.19.244.195 (talk) 09:54, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: "Projecting the images onto tiny water droplets" would be a form of 3D display, not a hologram. The reason you got to the wrong page was because you failed to enter the correct search term. First of all read this article to find out what a hologram is, it will also tell you what it is not, and then find out what the display technique that involves "projecting the images onto tiny water droplets" is actually called and search for that. You may have better luck.86.148.103.129 (talk) 09:09, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  These Are Not Holograms 

message: Microsoft announced their HoloLens glasses a few days ago. Since it are augmented reality glasses and doesn't involve holography (except for the marketing part), I would propose to add it to the list of 'Things often confused with holograms'. Jerisson (talk) 21:41, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You have no way of knowing that HoloLens doesn't involve holography. There are quite a few reasons to believe it does involve holography, including direct quotes from the project lead that the device has "holographic lenses". Moving into original research territory, hands-on reports with the HoloLens suggest that it does not focus all virtual objects at a fixed distance which implies optical technology that likely involves holography. I don't feel the need to add this information to Wikipedia at the moment as it is somewhat speculative and based on original research, but it would be absurd to add the HoloLens as an example to this section on the basis of the unverified sentiment that it's a misnomer. 128.189.233.115 (talk) 02:55, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: There seems to be a consensus that the virtual objects are augmented reality and not true holography. I did not consider the possibility of focusing on virtual objects, or simulating its effects, back then. Indeed, I cannot say for sure that the HoloLens does not involve holography. But from what I know electronic color (RGB) holograms (for example NICT's display http://spie.org/x107477.xml ) still requires a lot of room and there is still a lot of research going on to get a decent quality. However, focusing (accommodation) does not require holography, but can be achieved by much cheaper and easier to implement technologies such as lightfield displays (lenslet based, multiple LCD layers, ...). These displays are often considered as a much more feasible solution than holography for this kind of 3D video. Headmounted lightfield displays that allow the eyes to focus on virtual objects have already been presented. Knowing this, it is reasonable to assume that the HoloLens might, at most, use lightfield technology.Jerisson (talk) 22:35, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microsoft HoloLens 

message: > a hologram can be broken up into small pieces and each one will enable the whole of the original object to be imaged. One does, however, lose information and the spatial resolution gets worse as the size of the hologram is decreased — the image becomes "fuzzier". The field of view is also reduced, and the viewer will have to change position to see different parts of the scene.
What happens, when the hologram plate is not broken per se, but a large hole (oval or rectangular) is cut into it? I would assume the cut-away part will behave as a lower resolution version of the full hologram. However, what happens to the mutilitated whole plate? For example, if the hologram depicted an Earth globe and a part of it showing Australia was cut off? Please clarify this aspect! Thanks in advance! 92.52.225.75 (talk) 20:30, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Viewing broken holograms, please be more specific. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Holography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120208030253/http://www.litiholo.com/Hologram%20Kit%20article%20Physics%20Teacher%20Nov%202010.pdf to http://www.litiholo.com/Hologram%20Kit%20article%20Physics%20Teacher%20Nov%202010.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101106135632/http://www.holowiki.com/index.php/G307_DCG_Formula to http://www.holowiki.com/index.php/G307_DCG_Formula
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:32, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Holography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120927132803/http://webmuseum.mit.edu/browser.php?m=objects&kv=67243&i=14558 to http://webmuseum.mit.edu/browser.php?m=objects&kv=67243&i=14558
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120307232834/http://www.holowiki.com/index.php/Special%3ASearch?search=Blyth&go=Go to http://www.holowiki.com/index.php/Special:Search?search=Blyth&go=Go
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150413044945/http://revolution-news.com/first-hologram-protest-in-history-held-against-spains-gag-law/ to http://revolution-news.com/first-hologram-protest-in-history-held-against-spains-gag-law/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:08, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The current Wikipedia definition for holography states that it should be a "physical recording of an interference pattern which uses diffraction to reproduce a three-dimensional light field, resulting in an image which retains the depth, parallax, and other properties of the original scene". This seems to exclude computer-generated holography and any other artificial holographic imagery that may exist. The current Wikipedia definition of Holographic display simply states that it is "a type of display that utilizes light diffraction to create a virtual three-dimensional image" and thus could arguably include artificial holographic imagery. Can the current holography definition be adjusted to also include artificial imagery, or can it be more clearly differentiated form artificial holography?
I suppose this is like comparing photo-realistic CGI to authentic photography. However, since most people already seem to think of a hologram simply as a 3D image, I believe this desperately needs disambiguation/clarification. Maybe the "physical recordings" will be commonly named holophotography (and possibly holocinematography?) in the future?
Joortje1 (talk) 07:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a valid point.  I will think about how it could be re-phrased and publish it here first. Epzcaw (talk) 15:28, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've written an amended version of the Introduction.  It is on my sandbox page.  Comment/ amendments welcome. Epzcaw (talk) 11:20, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'll add detailed comments to the sandbox talk page as and when I get time. I'm not sure I really  understand Joortje1's comment above: it's inconsistent about "artificial imagery". A CGI image of an imaginary space alien displayed on a computer monitor doesn't actually have anything to do with photography. Likewise a CGH of an imaginary space alien is a synthetic construct that's meaningless until you create the physical plate to display and view the image. Given the widespread confusion about what holography actually is, I think it's more important for the article intro to stress that we're using the reference beam to record the phase, (rather than just any 3-d image). The phrase "computer-generated holography" is already explicit that it's using a computer to do something that otherwise doesn't need one, isn't it? Louis Knee (talk) 16:25, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Louis Knee -  I've amended my introduction to take your comments into account at my User:Epzcaw/sandboxpage. Further comments welcome.  Epzcaw (talk) 18:54, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi Epzcaw - I left comments at the sandbox talk page... Louis Knee (talk) 21:13, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Artificial holography

message: Most people think of holography as purely an optical process.  To ensure that the article covers only this,I suggest that the name is changed to Optical Holography.
Someone may want to do a more general article on holography which could link to articles about the various forms of holography. There is already an article on Electron HolographyEpzcaw (talk) 10:05, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change the name to '''Optical Holography''' 

message: I am confused as to why the 'FMCG industry' sub-heading contained within the article does not have an editing pencil icon next to it but the others do. Xboxsponge15 (talk) 16:10, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  'FMCG industry' sub-heading within the article does not have an editing pencil icon next to it 

message: This has become very long and muddled.  I've had discussions with other authors about how it should be changed, but we did not get to a final agreement, so I've done it myself.  I've written a new much shorter introduction. I've moved nearly all of the previous introduction content into the next section, and re-ordered it to make more sense.  This section now needs some work as it is a  bit rambling. Epzcaw (talk) 09:25, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: I propose to address this issue by moving the detailed physics discussion to a separate article. 
I've written this article Draft:Physics of Optical Holography which is now awaiting approval.  Epzcaw (talk) 10:22, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: This article has now been published as Physics of Optical Holography where I have moved the mroe technical details and added a more detailed physical description.  I will now remove the ""Too technical " template.  Epzcaw (talk) 09:49, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too technical template 

message: I've amended this to make it more coherent.  I've mainly moved bits either around or to other parts of the article.  May still be too detailed.Epzcaw (talk) 19:37, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Overview and History

message: I think there needs to be a section on the Mathematics of Holography. The word 'Math' doesn't even appear in the article. Given the close relationship between Holography and many kinds of mathematics and mathematical problems. CessnaMan1989 (talk) 18:48, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The mathematics is all laid out in the Physics of optical holography article. What do you think is missing from there? Louis Knee (talk) 16:07, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps more linking and clearer references to that article are in order. CessnaMan1989 (talk) 16:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mathematics 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:24, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I can find no explanation for why this request for deletion had been made Epzcaw (talk) 10:34, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion