Manchester Airport

[Martin]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/201 ... er-airport

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/201 ... er-airport

[holomaker]

2D images projected screens? whats the big deal with these ?

[Dinesh]

"But Julie's hologram, which runs through a 13-14 second script, is set up in the same section that Julie works — confusing some travelers."
Confuses a lot of holographers too!


Says Craig: "That's one of the benefits of [holographic] staff, of course, is they don't go sick, they don't complain, they just carry on doing what they do."
Until they turn off the lights. Truly, they are the light of their own lives!

[erose]

I work in the museum business designing exhibits. In my almost 30 year career I have had a good dozen companies contact me to present their "holographic" technology or whatever. NONE were true holograms! The word has become synonymous with anything projected on a clear screen, anything that appears to float and almost anything 3D. Now I have talked with actual holographic companies looking them up myself but I have yet to be solicited by a real holographic company on their own. It seems sometimes that other than the artists everyone is so caught up in mass-produced-embossed or portraits of the queen with not much in between. There is a very serious shortage of creative marketing and problem solving in the holographic industry (OH I hear the groans and complaints already....) but really, here we are 50+ years into it and we still have to work hard to clarify what is and isn't a hologram?

[holorefugee]

I think you are being kind. I have seen thousands of holograms and very few would be considered art. I have never made an art hologram after a couple hundred holograms.

[Dinesh]

but really, here we are 50+ years into it and we still have to work hard to clarify what is and isn't a hologram?

I think the problem is that we have to work hard to clarify what is and isn't a holographer. There seem to be three, maybe four, distinct subspecies of holographer. However, no one in the holographic industry/business seems to want to talk about their role in the holography world, nor do they seem to be comfortable in an examination of what they actually do. In this environment, is it any wonder that that the marketing and business community has bypassed the world of holography? There is no discussion on the meaning of holography, especially by holographers themselves, no discussion of the interpretation of holography, or holographers, in the wider world of commerce/art/science and certainly no introspection of the subject itself. I've mentioned this time and time again with no response from the holographic community! Yet, in the (somewhat similar) world of software, there are (or seem to be) distinct demarcations, definite borders and an appreciation of the role of specific software engineers/programmers in a commercial environment. A games programmer is not a data base programmer, is not a programmer for (say) CERN. And, of course, the seekers of a piece of software talk to the men and women in the front offices, not the ones in the cubicles!

In holography, we have the hobbyists who seem to be focused mainly on certain techniques or the paraphernalia of holographic construction, with apparently no interest in the meaning of holography. Thus, there is a focus on table construction, on imaging electronics, on fibre transmission etc etc. However, no talk on noise in a hologram, on scattering and its causes on the variation of polarisation in the image field etc. Understand, I'm not putting this down, it's simply a demarcation of the holographic world. The hobbyists have a "day job" and are not looking to commercialise or understand the subject in a deeper way, simply to find yet more creative ways of accomplishing a hobby. This is probably akin to my brewing. I can brew a particular kind of beer, but I know nothing about the manufacture of beers or the chemistry of beer or the ability to distinguish between the variety of different beers or the brewing industry itself.

You have the mass production holographers. They are(or seem to be) primarily making a standard product in a "cookie cutter" way to a specific market: security, product ID etc. The holographers in the environments are trained on a particular set of procedures and carry out these almost on an assembly line basis (I was one for a time myself!). The heart of theses companies are the sales and marketing forces who have a targeted market. They really don't care what is or is not a hologram, or even care about the science or technology of holograms so long as the customer pays for a perceived hologram that can come off an assembly line in the thousands or millions. One experience I had may be pertinent. In the mass production market I was working in, before the days of the dot matrix, I was (forcibly!) told that I was not making "display holograms", I was making "security holograms". In their eyes, you see, there's a difference!The dove on your Visa is not a dove, it's a "security device"

You have the engineering holographers, who use the science and technology of holography to create new devices that are used to create new functions, or old functions in a new way. The holographers in this world do seem to be concerned that the world at large thinks of these Pepper's Ghost images as holography. But, perhaps this is because it's a tough sell to convince markets to fork out thousands or millions for "holographic" function, when the customer, hearing the word "holography" immediately thinks of Pepper's Ghost.

And finally, you have the pure researchers (a lot of interesting papers on digital work in Photonic West, by the way). For them, they don't seem to care who thinks what of holography, they only want their papers published!

In our own case, we have worked in all of these areas between the two of us. We are adept in all phases of holography, but never get the notice of the marketeers and sales forces because to the marketeers and sales forces, "holographers" and "holography" translates to slick, well marketed high profile companies with slick, well marketed web sites and flyers. Mostly, the companies that can afford all this are the mass production houses, who don't know or care about the display and imaging side of holography and therefore cannot adapt themselves to a requirement for display of images, or they are high end optics corporations who again focus on military applications (because that's where the mega-bucks is!). They also show up in search engines because they can afford to, but when asked for a display piece don't seem to have the know-how!

We're also small enough and flexible enough to satisfy any requirement of a "real" hologram, but never attract the attention of those seeking novel applications because we can't afford the high end marketing and web presence that almost everyone relies on. Thus, to the "art holographers" and the display holographers, we're pure scientists, to the pure scientists, we are the "art" holographers! The marketeers have a vocabulary all of their own and seem to dismiss anyone who does not have the same set of semantics - which most holographers I know do not. The holographers don't seem to be able to hook up with marketeers because the holographers are always asked if they can do a "Princess Leia", (which by the way, we do have! Really!) or whether they can beam Prince Charles to some remote location.

In your field of museum displays, you need display holographers. However, I suspect you've not been able to find any. Mainly, almost all the display holographers have moved on to different fields. There's simply not a melding of minds between the marketing and customer base of viable commercial model and the holographer setting up mirrors and lenses.


You say you've talked

with actual holographic companies looking them up myself

But, how did you look them up?

In my almost 30 year career I have had a good dozen companies contact me to present their "holographic" technology or whatever. NONE were true holograms!

Possibly because these companies had high end marketeers, a slick marketing media presence and very, very well lit offices. Not a dingy lab where real holograms are actually made!

[Jeffrey Weil]

Hello Dinesh,

I'd like to add something to your post. About us mass reproduction embossing guys. When I was the lab director for the last Co. I worked for the work was pretty cookie cutter. Your right about that, and the place you and Joy worked for was the same I guess.

But, since I've gone out on my own and work for many different embossing companies my cookie cutter days are almost totally forgotten about. Every job seems to be different nowadays. Totally different recording techniques from one image to the next. I've even had jobs that I had no idea how to pull off until I gave it lots of thought and some experiments in the lab.

Now I even had clients asking for 3d models. It's like the 80's all over again!

My point is embossing holography can be cookie cutter due to the way many embossing companies work but it doesn't have to be. I've even seen an embossed art piece in a museum many years ago. It was pretty cool too.

Jeffrey Weil
NorthBeach Holography Inc.

[Dinesh]

Hi Jeff
As I was writing my piece, I was actually thinking of you as the exception. But I was trying to be general, that is, I was trying to capture the "mood" of the holographic world. Erose had written that he had tried to get in touch with "actual holographic companies" and my first thought was, "Hey what about us. We're an 'actual holographic company' "! This was more in the sense of "We don' get no respect!" than, "How much is the job worth?" That is, I was not overtly marketing ourselves, but rather my thought processes morphed from
"Wonder why people are always asking about holographic projects, but never find real holographers." to

"when they actually do find 'real holographers', these holographers are working out of a dusty lab with bottles of chemicals and wierd lights, which probably gives a bad impression to most marketing types, rather than the slick fluorescent-lit front office with the reception with a bland smile (no real holographers get respect!)" to

"wonder what people looking for us mean by 'holographic projects' ?" As I'm sure you know, the 'real' holographers out there are deluged by enquiries that range from the wierd to the really wierd! Finally, it occurred to me,

"What exactly is a "real holographer"? I wondered if, across the spectrum of all holographers, there was something that could be pulled out as some aspect or character of a holographer that was unique and could not be assigned to, say , a programmer.

However, as I wrote the piece about mass production holographers, I kept thinking, "Not Jeff Weil" But then, across all my sub-divisions, there was always a, "Not so-and-so". If I'd included all of these, it would have been unreadable! So, I figured I'd go for a generalised description of the holographic world, as I see it to give a flavour of the people in holography as holographers see it, or, at least, as one holographer, sees it.

[Jeffrey Weil]

Hey Dinesh,

I see what your saying now. Your right.

If you do work for an embossing company the limited marketing and sales guys are going to sell the same type of hologram, the only one they can understand, over and over to different clients only changing the artwork. Cookie cutter for sure.

I'm lucky enough to make masters for different marketing and sales forces. So, different types of work.

I'm an exception to the rule in an industry that in itself is an exception to the rule. I love it!

What I've never understood about holographers is their reluctance to using the word "scientist" to describe themselves. The dictionary says its someone who uses science in their daily work, especially a physical science. Optics is surely a physical science and we use it daily in our work....why are holographers so shy about using that word?

Jeff Weil

[erose]

Dinesh,

I pretty much agree with much of what you are saying with maybe a few minor exceptions, or maybe just the semantics. I think you did leave out the ARTISTS as a group. It may be the smallest group but having spent time with folks like Rudie Berkhout, Sam Moree and Dan Schweitzer, who taught me holography, I believe there are true artists in the field. It is sad that out of that small list only one is still with us but I have met many others over the years who approach holography as art or maybe better said "utilize holography" to manifest their art. Many do not do purely holography but mix and match it with other medias as they see fit.

Personally I fit into the HOBBYIST category. Although I did sell a number of pieces many years back, I considered them more "craft" pieces than true art. You can go to my Flickr Page and see a small sampling of some of them: http://www.flickr.com/photos/erichrose/ ... 503562466/

My frustration comes as an exhibit designer trained in industrial design. My specialty is hands-on science and interactive environments, especially for kids and families. As an designer I was trained in problem solving. Often part of the "problem" is to make things cost effective, work within a budget. Nothing new there. Now let me qualify the next statements by saying that some of these anecdotes are 10-15 years old but I don't see 10-15 years worth of change today.

I had an idea for a natural history museum display for which I wanted some relatively straight forward image plane reflection holograms, maybe 10x12s and monochrome. The idea was that they were on a sliding panel and you would roll them over a fossil slab and a recreation of the living animal would be superimposed as the hologram over the bones or shell. The museum would supply the model of the critter to shoot the hologram and someone else would build the sliding mechanisms. The holographers just had to shoot the masters, H2 holograms, seal them and deliver them. I was quoted $10,000 for each! And it was dropped like a hot potato. And to make matters worse I know to this day some of my colleagues still think of holograms as outrageously expensive and beyond most exhibit budgets.

Now the flip side of that was going to Holographics North and talking to them about large format holograms. Although their prices were still in the multi thousands they seemed appropriate for the end product. Unfortunately the clients were often turned off by rainbow holograms. John Perry even had booths at museum trade shows and still stands out as one of the few holographers who "got it" and was doing things right.

I'm not going to go into who gave me those quotes other than to say they were all in the NY/NJ area. I had similar experiences with laser companies. It felt like everyone wanted to be paid enough to buy a new Krypton laser with each project. Maybe they would have negotiated for much less but by asking off the top for a huge sum they just put a bad taste in peoples mouths and nothing more happened. Now I knew enough about the costs involved, both materials and time to know that these would not be just a few hundred or even thousand dollars. But I also knew that we should have been able to get a better price. They never asked about our budget or what we really wanted. Instead they tended to want to upsell us on something we didn't really need and certainly couldn't afford. It always felt like they just wanted us to pay them to make what THEY wanted to make, not what we needed. I can't tell you how frustrating it was.

So what I see now in display holography is embossed technology sometimes used for larger, page-sized, stuff but still only cost effective when made in big quantities and the very large stuff like Holographics North or Zebra Imaging. I haven't had a use for holograms in an exhibit for a number of years but I want to be able to still consider them a viable media when appropriate. I certainly hope the next time I go out for quotes I am not disappointed.

Oh and one last thing: you asked how I looked them up? Well early on (80's) it was the yellow pages or thru the old museum. And there were a good half dozen in the NYC phone book. Later in the 90's and early 2000s it was via internet.

Well heck, I gotta get back to work...

later,