|
Another flight of fancy
Here's different possible direction for the technology to develop.
Suppose someone comes up with a super hot video graphics engine. A chip that does rendering, ray tracing, viewing planes, sprites, etc, on-the-fly, in real time. It's development is driven by the computer game market of course, but wouldn't it be usable for passive viewing as well? Then, video "feed" becomes a stream of instruction codes defining the presence of objects and how they are to move. Something along the lines of MIDI codes for music. Naturally, cartoons and animation would easiest. So instead of video info for every screen pixel at the refresh rate, there would be an initial load of objects... such as Nemo the clown fish. Then our display system receives instructions as to how Nemo should swim about, speak, etc. The first benefit of this system would be more efficient use of bandwidth and therefore better possible image resolution. However -- here's the kicker. We don't necessarily have to visualize Nemo as a clown fish! Why not make him a sea horse? The turtles can be Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (I suppose we'd have to pay some kind of royalty for using their images), but their lingo would be authentic. Soon there would be a whole industry creating viewable characters for this system. (And lots of public domain ones of course). Of course Nemo need not be a fish at all. I might like to see the story showing him as, say, a tropical parrot. The Great Barrier Reef scenery becomes South American jungle canopy, and Nemo's teacher, the ray is now a condor. Nemo gets caught and put in a cage, not a fishtank... Ok, maybe it's a bit far fetched but we can still dream, can't we? Sean |
"Sean" wrote in message ... Here's different possible direction for the technology to develop. Suppose someone comes up with a super hot video graphics engine. A chip that does rendering, ray tracing, viewing planes, sprites, etc, on-the-fly, in real time. It's development is driven by the computer game market of course, but wouldn't it be usable for passive viewing as well? Then, video "feed" becomes a stream of instruction codes defining the presence of objects and how they are to move. Something along the lines of MIDI codes for music. Naturally, cartoons and animation would easiest. So instead of video info for every screen pixel at the refresh rate, there would be an initial load of objects... such as Nemo the clown fish. Then our display system receives instructions as to how Nemo should swim about, speak, etc. The first benefit of this system would be more efficient use of bandwidth and therefore better possible image resolution. However -- here's the kicker. We don't necessarily have to visualize Nemo as a clown fish! Why not make him a sea horse? The turtles can be Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (I suppose we'd have to pay some kind of royalty for using their images), but their lingo would be authentic. Soon there would be a whole industry creating viewable characters for this system. (And lots of public domain ones of course). Of course Nemo need not be a fish at all. I might like to see the story showing him as, say, a tropical parrot. The Great Barrier Reef scenery becomes South American jungle canopy, and Nemo's teacher, the ray is now a condor. Nemo gets caught and put in a cage, not a fishtank... Ok, maybe it's a bit far fetched but we can still dream, can't we? It's an interesting idea, though it may not ever end up being the best way to do things or at least something that anyone spends the money to make available. One other benefit of such a system could be the ability to change viewing angle arbitrarily (look at something from the back), zoom in or out at will, etc. I think most possible applications of such a system are pretty far away though. But at some point in the distant future, I could possibly see (don't know whether anyone would bother to do it, just that it would be posisble) to watch, say, a soccer game this way. The stadium, players (plus refs, coaches, etc.) and ball could be modelled in advance (probably not hand modelled, rather, quickie camera-generated models could be done just before they walk on the field). Cameras would track the positions of everything at high speed, including player positioning and deformations for animation, and video tracking could alter expressions on faces, etc. It might not be perfect really up close, but it might be possible for it to be as good as or better than regular (HD)TV at normal viewing angle/distance, plus the ability to view the game from any virtual viewpoint (even from on the field, or from the eyes of one of the players!) How much detail the crowd would get, etc., would be an open question. With the highest level of detail for everything, this could easily use a lot MORE bandwidth than video, since it must include detailed information sufficient for up-close viewing of everything in the stadium... But with a reasonable level of detail, while it still might look/feel a bit like watching a high quality video game (only approximating a "being there" experience), it would still be a fascinating way to be able to watch a live sporting event. Such a thing might start off as a way to "capture" actual games for playback in regular sports video games (initially just for given actions or plays, as motion capture is used already, but ultimately maybe for complete games). As for instructions as proxies for pixels of just a straight 2D image or video feed, that could easily describe many existing compression systems. As for replacing one fish with another, that requires not just instruction-driven rendering but also some intelligence about that object being a discrete object (which regular video doesn't automatically "know"), as well as being a fish. The biggest problem with this (as with the 3D system I described) is that a very high level of abstraction is required (knowing that each player is a separate object, for instance), but computers aren't good at making these kind of distinctions without a lot of help. So for something that is set up well in advance (with a lot of human instructions and tweaking) might work, but something captured fully in real time is a very very long way away. Another way to look at this is the current use of such systems on the internet. This is how shockwave/flash animations work, for instance. They've caught on for some things (low-bandwidth animations), but aren't likely to be used for most others for some time to come. We've also been waiting for effective internet 3D for many years, as none of the previous or current standards and technologies has ever caught on, though now many if not most people have sufficiently powerful 3D cards to manage some pretty impressive stuff. The biggest problem is that it still takes a fair amount of time/bandwidth to transmit sufficient models, textures, animations, shaders, lighting information, etc. to make a good presentation. |
I get what you are saying, and it reminds me of compressed digital video
that we use today, I notice when I look closely at compressed SD video, a guy walking down the street has this sort of cloud around him where you can see the compression. I may be wrong, but I think the compression kind of re-uses the existing video. Like if the street the guy is walking on isn't moving, it more or less re-uses the street and only updates the walking guy. I think thats why high motion video can't be compressed as much as say a still scene of a field or something. Again, I could be wrong but I am pretty sure it kind of works that way. Not so far from what you are describing, only this method introduces noticeable compression, where your scheme would use predefined objects. --Dan "Sean" wrote in message ... Here's different possible direction for the technology to develop. Suppose someone comes up with a super hot video graphics engine. A chip that does rendering, ray tracing, viewing planes, sprites, etc, on-the-fly, in real time. It's development is driven by the computer game market of course, but wouldn't it be usable for passive viewing as well? Then, video "feed" becomes a stream of instruction codes defining the presence of objects and how they are to move. Something along the lines of MIDI codes for music. Naturally, cartoons and animation would easiest. So instead of video info for every screen pixel at the refresh rate, there would be an initial load of objects... such as Nemo the clown fish. Then our display system receives instructions as to how Nemo should swim about, speak, etc. The first benefit of this system would be more efficient use of bandwidth and therefore better possible image resolution. However -- here's the kicker. We don't necessarily have to visualize Nemo as a clown fish! Why not make him a sea horse? The turtles can be Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (I suppose we'd have to pay some kind of royalty for using their images), but their lingo would be authentic. Soon there would be a whole industry creating viewable characters for this system. (And lots of public domain ones of course). Of course Nemo need not be a fish at all. I might like to see the story showing him as, say, a tropical parrot. The Great Barrier Reef scenery becomes South American jungle canopy, and Nemo's teacher, the ray is now a condor. Nemo gets caught and put in a cage, not a fishtank... Ok, maybe it's a bit far fetched but we can still dream, can't we? Sean |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:14 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com