Looking Glass observations

[Giovanni Remigi]

I want to start a conversation that is a bit off-topic but still related to the Lenticular field and it is about the new Looking Glass Portrait developed by the Looking Glass Factory.

This device challenges my current knowledge of lenticular. I did a bit of research and found the following information about the device display:

Diagonal: 7.9"

Form factor: 4:3

Width: 4.74" (1536 px)

Height: 6.32" (2048 px)

These values match with the iPad Mini Retina display, 7.9", 1536x2048 which has a resolution of 324.051 PPI.

When I received the device, I had a look at a configuration file that reports the following information:

Pitch: 52.58790040712976

Slope: -7.161397095759771

Center: 0.7432299004945404

DPI: 324.0

Width: 1536.0

Height: 2048.0

Let assume that the above pitch is the Optical Pitch and not the Mechanical Pitch i.e. the physical size of the lens.

The device seems to mount a lenticular lens with an optical pitch of 52.58LPI and rotated by -7.16 degrees.

If we divide the screen resolution by the pitch we obtain 6.16 images per lens. 

I did some tests by displaying quilts of numbers and found out that I can clearly see up to 11 perfectly distinguishable images.

Even if we take into account the pitch of a lens rotated by 7 degrees, which becomes 52.18LPI, we still get 6.2 images per lens.

With all tricks that can think about I still cannot account for the 11 distinct images that I can see on the display.

It would be nice to understand how they achieved this because it could be applied on standard lenticular.

Any idea?

Giovanni

[Parallax Printing]

I was speaking with a person a few months back who was doing work with lenticular display tech in South Korea and he was using a subpixel interlacing approach for 3D. Not sure if this relates to breaking the RGB channels apart or what exactly but he made it sound like it was fundamental to what he was doing.

Chris

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lentigram" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lentigram+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lentigram/5a53ee0e-5a93-43c8-8616-10ef20c9dbadn%40googlegroups.com.

--

Chris Dean  |  2615 Wolcott St. Suite D Ferndale MI 48220  |  248-397-5156

[Derin İsler - Deep Affairs]

When you put 1 frame between each in 6 frame sequence you can get 11 frames. 

On a led display the rgb leds forming 1 pixel are not over each other. Instead they are spread as 2x2 matrix for 1 pixel which are 2 Greens and Red Blue.

They may have found a way to expoit this. Thats maybe what Mr. Dean is telling.

[Giovanni Remigi]

Lentigram uses a subpixel interlacing approach too, but this means that a pixel contains information coming from more than one image. By using this approach you cannot see distinct images, but only blended images.

Thanks,

Giovanni

[Giovanni Remigi]

I see, for sub-pixels here we mean the Red, Green and Blue components of a single display pixel. It would be definitely interesting to understand how it works and see if it is applicable on printed lenticular.

Giovanni

[Derin İsler - Deep Affairs]

Mine was actually a deduction from the mediums.

If we continue, it goes like this;

On the display the organization of the rgb pixels are fixed. And it is usually if GR is on top line there is BG on bottom line

GR   GR

BG   BG

this is for 2 pixels.

If you take 1st pixels right leds and 2nd pixels left leds you can still form a pixel.

If we somehow can do this on printing it can only be done with ofset printing where the cmyk dots are all organized too.

I guess with digital printing it wont be possible since the position of the dots are not precise and organized.

I know it still sounds fantastic. (:

[Parallax Printing]

Is it an easy fix to increase the max dimensions allowed by lentigram? I have a piece that is 110" tall that will require an awkward workaround if I can't interlace it as one piece. Thanks

Chris

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lentigram/0961e46b-0b2f-42f4-beaf-dc359d82e700n%40googlegroups.com.

[Giovanni Remigi]

It is easy but it requires me to make a new release for version 2.

As a workaround, have you tried cutting each image in the sequence in two, half up and half down with Lightroom, and interlace the two sequences separately? Then it is just a matter of merging the two interlaced images together with photoshop.

Giovanni

[Parallax Printing]

That's what I ended up doing, had to cut it in 3 pieces for printing purposes and there were 90 frames so I made an action in photoshop. But cool to know it might end up in the next version.

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lentigram/0cbb8a72-99e5-4d85-922c-b5c45c0a26ean%40googlegroups.com.