Posted By
Marshal Rosenthal
February 20, 2012 at 7:28am
There’s a reason we’re attracted to 3D imaging in a way unlike 2D; we’ve been conditioned by time and practicality to expect and use the depth between objects as part of our survival skills. Whether that means subconsciously noting the distance between a foreground and background object where danger lurks (example: crossing a busy intersection of cars buzzing by) or the simplicity of knowing where to “grab” that box of cereal, it’s all about the addition of more than two dimensions that keeps things “real” -- at least as regards our life.
So it’s no wonder that 3D gets bandied about so readily -- how many video games are touted for “3D graphics” while in essence they are actual 2D? Or any of a number of applications (“apps”) for smartphones or tablets given the same moniker when the reality is “new and improved” or “this is better, look at this!”
A 3D image on a computer, flat-panel or mobile screen is a fake if there isn’t a real stereoscopic image involved. But there’s no denying that the desire to “see” 3D can and has been fooling the eye for a long time now. 3D modeling on a 2D computer screen purports to be 3D but it’s just a perception issue from the apparent ability to rotate an image to see other areas. Still, who wouldn’t prefer this to a flat image?
So in the spirit of this, here’s Upnext HD Maps. At its heart it’s a pretty sophisticated process of creating 3D modeling of streets and buildings; on the surface desired for the purpose of locating areas akin to using Google Maps (but because it’s free, it’s no surprise that it can show you places nearby for eating and shopping). But it can harness the power of the iPad or iPhone for 3D modeling -- or “3D” if you want -- instead of 2D maps. There’s’ certainly a “sizzle” factor using it to traverse through New York or LA or other cities built-into the app (note that a lesser known location may just render 2D imaging as a matter of course), but it’s not really 3D at all. Yet the view is many times more appealing to the eye, and there’s no denying that the brain is a lot more taken in by it (there’s that “perception” again). And an even newer app, Upnext 3D Cities (free as well), provides “full 3D” maps, again being perception, of such cities as New York, Chicago, Portland, Boston, etc.
But in the comments for the apps, besides the negative mixed in with the positive, it’s sort of taken for granted that the app is able to display 3D -- actual 3D. This makes me wonder if part of the reason for “true” 3D’s acceptance is being inhibited by the consumer (i.e., public) thinking that 3d modeling IS 3D. If that’s the case, adoption of real 3D is going to take even longer, and be even more difficult to integrate into our culture than all the surveys and statistics now say.