There were no holograms used in any way.
And while we're on the subject, let's be clear that hologram technology to present a true 3D image which could perform onstage is still decades away. Everyone keeps describing the recent virtual Tupac performance as a "hologram" but in fact it was just a 2D image reflected onto glass. It was not 3D in any way- just a flat 2D reflection.
The people sitting in front of this 2D reflected image would have had a fairly convincing performance, but the people sitting further around the sides would have seen a distorted Tupac because of their viewing angle.
It's a shame, but a full-3D holographic artist onstage which can walk out into the audience and not be confined to a projection screen is still science fiction.
Last edited by JRtherealJR; 06-09-2012 at 06:22 PM.
True 3D Holograph would be something you could see in all 360 degrees.......left, right front, back. That would seem to require filming an individual from all those angles simultaneuosly....how could that be done in the case of someone deceased......without a double or standin of some kind with a morphed face or a computer generated face???? As you say technology is many many years away from this.
Work in Progress!
Here's a great article on the hologram/virtual Elvis that's coming. It's going to be done for not just tours but for television projects as well. Maybe we will get the real Elvis story in virtual technology? http://www.tgdaily.com/games-and-ent...-as-a-hologram
It's all done in-camera mate- her "image" (or what you seem to believe to be her hologram) is not even in the studio, it's all done in real-time from studio to studio for the benefit of the TV audience, who are the only people who can actually see her.
Technology like this to project a full 3D hologram does not even exist yet.
The videos you posted were a "virtual" hologram ie it was just a camera trick. She is in another studio ringed with cameras so that different angles of her can be instantly fed and matched with the different cameras in the other studio.
It's the same principle as TV presenters who sit in a virtual studio- the only people who can actually see the studio is the TV audience.
It's a very clever trick yes, but just a trick.
Here is a link to a story on how the FAKE CNN HOLOGRAM worked:
Last edited by JRtherealJR; 06-10-2012 at 04:39 PM.
I love Elvis ♥
I find it amazing that some people think that the "holograms" presented on American Idol and other shows are real, and they actually believe that these "holograms" are there in front of the audience- when they are not! They can't seem to get their heads around the fact that it is all done with camera tricks and the only ones who can see the "holograms" are the people watching at home lol.
CNN's Fake Hologram Could Become Real in Future
By Frederick Lane
November 6, 2008 1:54PM
Jessica Yellin's image on CNN's Election Day broadcast from New York wasn't a hologram, but what viewers saw could be a glimpse of the future. With the aid of computers and 35 cameras, she appeared Star Trek-like on CNN, but experts say anchors like Wolf Blitzer can look forward to real holograms in the future.
CNN correspondent Jessica Yellin's virtual visit to the network 's New York studio from a trailer outside President-elect Barack Obama headquarters in Chicago may not have been a hologram, as dozens of bloggers have spent the last 48 hours pointing out, but it was a tantalizing glimpse of the future.
On Tuesday night, during CNN's election coverage, host Wolf Blitzer warned viewers that "I want you to watch what we're about to do, because you've never seen anything like this on television."
On cue, Yellin appeared to materialize in the New York studio, in a fashion similar to the fabled Star Trek transporters. In this case, of course, Yellin was not recreated atom by atom; instead, 35 high-definition cameras were used to capture her image. Twenty cameras in Chicago crunched the image data and transmitted it to the New York studio, where additional computers synced camera movements there with the shots of Yellin in Chicago. Further processing power was used to mesh Yellin's image with the feed from one of two New York cameras.
Not a Hologram -- This Time
Although CNN dubbed the image of Yellin a "hologram," it really wasn't. But experts suggest it may not be long before a host like Blitzer could in fact see a holographic image in the studio.
According to researchers at the University of Arizona, it may only be another decade before it will be possible to purchase holographic television sets that will bring life-sized, 3-D scenes into the home, or make it possible to watch a holograph of Monday Night Football on a tabletop.
The talk is that the new "hologram" that will be used for the upcoming projects by Digital Domain could be the end of the ETA and impersonators. I wouldn't mind seeing that myself. I have always felt that the majority of impersonators have done more harm than good. But some are good and do some justice to the image and the legacy.
Here's the official definition of what a hologram is.
A three-dimensional image formed by the interference of light beams from a laser or other coherent light source.
A photograph of an interference pattern that, when suitably illuminated, produces a three-dimensional image.
Its just the media's lazy way of reporting which used the term hologram in the first place.
If you recall the Star Wars film and the Princess's message that was in hologram form-360 degrees of the Princess was shown-now movie magic did that for the film but that is what a hologram is-view from 360.
Try looking up the term "Pepper Ghost"
Work in Progress!
"NO-ONE, BUT NO-ONE,IS HIS EQUAL, OR EVER WILL BE. HE WAS, AND IS SUPREME".Mick Jagger
i vote for the elvis hologram the tupac hologram was amazing .
to see elvis on stage for anyone who was never there and was it's a great idea for new and old fans i'm looking forward to it.
" I Just LOVE MY ELVIS !"
I'm all for new technology and flashy gimmicks, but I'm not really sure that Elvis can be completely captured without becoming some sort of over the top caricature envisioned 4 decades after his death. There are a lot of people who have taken a false Image of Elvis and expanded it into folk law, there are many Elvis tribute acts good and bad who have focused on the 70's aviators and the 'thank you very much's' so much so that the reality is far from the original human being.
The other problem is there will be an inevitable push to produce something new or a modern take on Elvis' back catalogue, surely this is an infringement on an artists integrity? My humble opinion is that any virtual Elvis Presley should only be used to uphold the original material, albeit improved sound etc.
Artists pass away, shouldn't their work stand as a testament to how they were when they were alive, remixes here and there enable the casual listener to learn more of the original material. I'm just not sure Elvis would approve of a 'Virtual Elvis' taking over his career, the creative control is completely removed, the decision process is masterminded by money minded individuals who's moral compass is to make money and not always have Elvis' integrity foremost in their mind...