Looking Glass Go - 3D display for 2D pics (No glasses required)

The Looking Glass Go is a digital photo frame that will display your existing 2D photos in 3D - here's my review.
More info is available on the Looking Glass website lookingglassfa...
(NO AFFILIATION)
MERCHANDISE
Techmoan Merchandise is available from
nerdkeyz.etsy....
SUBSCRIBE
www.youtube.com...
SUPPORT
This channel can be supported through Patreon
/ techmoan
******Patrons usually have early access to videos******
OUTRO MUSIC
Over Time - Vibe Tracks • Over Time - Vibe Track...

[@SilverEagleDev]

It's amazing that they've managed to take something that was a perfectly elegant, self-contained, cloud-free solution to a problem (a digital picture frame with an SD card input on the back) and inject it with absolutely everything that's wrong with modern consumer electronics (cloud dependency, app dependency, ham-fisted nonsensical AI integration and monthly subscriptions). I really couldn't be any less interested in this thing, but I do appreciate you showing it to us.

[@baldyhead]

You have saved me typing out the same thing.

[@IcecalGamer]

This need more 👍 Even a pin.

[@castorchua]

@@baldyhead Techmoan could've gotten by with a simple "Don't buy 3d photo frames" message and devoted 15 minutes to the puppets

[@simonlb24]

Agreed. And whilst it does look mildly interesting, I really cannot think of a target market for this device.

[@hayleyxyz]

​@@Justin-d4l Those products still exist. A digital picture frame for example that works via SD card, there's plenty on Amazon. It's also something you'd be able to make yourself if you are so inclined.

[@NoThisIsPatches]

We've finally done it bois. Humans have created a picture frame that needs an account.

[@KevReillyUK]

Pay-per-view for your own memories. Borderline Charlie Brooker territory.

[@SeraphimLeo]

One step closer to a smart toilet roll holder that teaches you proper ass wiping technique through an AI. Only 30$ a month, but if the subscription runs out, or it loses its connection to wifi, the mechanism locks up and you're going to have to skate across your rug or do a handstand in the shower. Also has an inbuilt camera and microphone that sends all of your data to Microsoft and the Chinese communist party.

[@Noxedwin]

An account, a subscription, and ChatGPT. Actual brand poison. Actual enshittification.

[@thesteelrodent1796]

in a way that already existed - Google Photos (aka Picasa) and Apple iPhoto have paid options for more online storage (there's possibly more to it than just the storage, I don't use those things), and they both have slideshow modes to turn your mobile device into a digital picture frame - and they both require an account to use

[@Aves_1]

It doesnt need one. Blocks does. You can still plug it into your pc and drop files onto it

[@jays2001]

The biggest issue for me with a device like this that relies on a server somewhere is that if the company goes out of business it's a brick. If they are charging a monthly for using it the device needs to be much cheaper.

[@EvenTheDogAgrees]

This, you're counting on the company's continued existence, and continued goodwill and interest in supporting the product. All the while the company is being disincentivised to keep investing in support, because once the next product comes out, they of course want you to spend your money on that instead of continuing to use the old product. A device should be self-contained. It should never have to rely on an unnecessary tether to the manufacturer that serves no functional purpose, just as a way for them to charge rent on what you already purchased. Those business models rarely, if ever, work out, and the customers are the ones left with the mess. See Juicero, that Spotify car thing, or those baby monitors that suddenly started demanding a subscription fee for features that were previously advertised as free. There is no reason the cloud should be involved in converting the images to 3D. This should have been an application that runs locally on your own computer, and the device should present itself to the computer as a regular mass storage device when plugged in. As little proprietary stuff as possible, so that if the manufacturer goes out of business or loses interest, customers can still use their devices to their full potential.

[@Sithhy]

It doesn't even need to be connected in the first place

[@PaulMiller-mn3me]

Plus you have to upload your photos to said company to possess evermore

[@gingerbyte3698]

The fact that it relies on a server, and if the server is offline it is a brick reminds me of the Spotify Car Thing.

[@hobbitilius]

And really, it's not a "if" the company goes bust but "when".

[@artempriadko6974]

Subscription fee? No way!

[@andymerrett]

As Mat says, I understand there is a processing cost (though surely that should be built in to the device, it's expensive enough) but it feels like a money grab. Not quite as ludicrous as Logitech suggesting people take out a subscription for their mouse, but not far off. :)

[@acd96digital]

Pay £10 a month to display 100 potraits of my face with a barely visible background. Healthy self-esteem.

[@kempshott]

At least it doesn't show adverts - yet.

[@deineroehre]

@@andymerrett They just need some debian packet to install on a normal server and the processing would take place on the customer's server. Even if you have no proper Server, a RasPi would have enough power for rendering the photos. For people not having a server or access to it they could still provide a (pay-)Service. So it would be suitable for both normal users and powerusers with the advantage that since the server component is readyly available for download (at best it would be open source), even if the company is defunct or decides to stop support for their older product, you could still use the product. That is where the whole IT sector needs to go, cloud-only services are not needed or useful and need to be avoided or even forbidden, after all you bought the product for the full price.

[@srwapo]

​@@andymerrettdo they convert the photos over and over every month? Seems like a one time cost.

[@Lumibear.]

Can’t be adjusted, can’t be charged and taken with you, can’t do cropping properly, can’t do landscape, can’t adjust 3D mistakes and you have to pay a £100 subscription? That’s a no for me then. Thanks for your honest reviews mate.

[@GermanSausagesAreTheWurst]

this isn't a clever new device that they expect people to buy; this is clever new way to gather content to train their AI.

[@bubbledoubletrouble]

"can't be charged and taken with you" Out of all your complaints I'm actually fine with this. Anything with an end-user non-serviceable battery--particularly one whose main use case is being plugged in all day--has a built-in expiration date even without a subscription. It uses USB-C so you can just plug in a small power bank; plenty of folks have one of those.

[@mykelevangelista6492]

​@@bubbledoubletrouble Would you use a phone or tablet that could only be used whilst plugged in? No, I didn't think so, so why should this be any different. Even laptops manage at least a few hours on battery.

[@Nukle0n]

@@mykelevangelista6492 a PS5 doesn't have a battery, you need to plug it in. Plug this thing into a powerbank if you even want it.

[@alexatkin]

@@mykelevangelista6492 Because its a fixed device, phones, tablets and laptop are not fixed devices. There's a £23 battery add-on if you want it to be portable, or as mentioned use the power bank many of us already have. Its good to not force us to buy the battery if we don't need it. Part of the confusion here is its primary purpose does not appear to be a photo frame as he reviewed it as, it can connect to your PC to be used as a 3D screen to view 3D models, etc.

[@JimmyRustler2112]

Managed to make me angry about a device I don't even own in about 10 minutes without being explicitly inflammatory, well done. This is everything I hate in modern consumer products.

[@Aves_1]

How? They released olugins for blender and unity for free to create your own 3D images. Then you just drop those onto the device's local storage and it works just fine without ever needing a server or account.

[@XanthinZarda]

@@Aves_1 And it still requires a rather expensive buy in for a laughably limited device.

[@dougaltolan3017]

Battery powered soap dispensers is my trigger tech.

[@edtwiss3240]

So many reasons why this product is a "no". Thank you Matt for reviewing!

[@oxymoron02]

The part about the file importing kills this for me. One-at-a-time interfaces, starting from the root directory again with each file, are the sloppiest coded UIs in existence.

[@enihi]

It's just unbelievably lazy

[@hyperturbotechnomike]

It's with a cloud subscription, ao of course it's sloppy and scammy

[@GermanSausagesAreTheWurst]

This isn't a clever new device that they expect people to buy; this is clever new way to gather content to train their AI.

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@hyperturbotechnomike this. Like many new products from new companies today it's a rentier moneymaker, not a lovingly-crafted product with a long-term vision.

[@bkzach]

It is a cool little idea, but it just asks for too much from the consumer like usual, they want you to sign in, then you don't even get to upload more than 20 photos without having to pay more. Then best of all they have a subscription service and app that will of course one day be gone. Thank you as always for a fair and honest review Matt.

[@LRM12o8]

And to top it off, the justification for the login and subscription is that they need your data and steady money flow to pay keep the servers running, when they could habe just provided an installation medium for the image conversion program and added an SD card slot and/or capability to display pictures from your own network and that would only cost the manufacturer ONCE! 🤦‍♂️ It's like being forced to sit in a wheelchair all day by someone acting as your disability assistant, who pushes you around in your wheelchair and gets stuff from tall shelves for you when you have two perfectly functional legs and would just do all of that stuff yourself if they just bloody let you! 😤😡 And then they have the gall to ask to get paid for patronizing you this way! 😖

[@Aves_1]

@bkzach not true. You can plug it in to your pc and upload things yourself. You just need to make the 3d yourself as well using their free plugin for blender

[@adammorrison9705]

Actually, I remember the digital photo frames being sold commonly about the early 2010s. Then, from the late 2010s to present, I've seen them in countless thrift shops.

[@jtr159]

It's an interesting enough idea but it gets old fast. What I do enjoy however is a Google Home Hub displaying photos from my albums automatically as the screensaver. No messing around with USB sticks or anything.

[@Ultra-Violet]

They were rubbish then and are rubbish now, it looks like a 15 year old phone in a charging port lol

[@zsombor_99]

I have a small USB powered digital photo frame, it can display 128×128 resolution images and it can store 70 of them in its memory. It requires its own software to manage the images, which is only for Windows XP. Despite these limitations it works, the only power source is the USB cable (with miniUSB plug), no battery. The images can be cycled in a set time interval or manually.

[@Nobody-Nowhere]

This is basically a demo piece, they are selling the tech. They are selling these for companies for advertising etc.

[@hugotellez3478]

I bought one still new in box at a thrift store, I still have it in box.

[@DaroWuff]

Subscription fee = NOGO. I wouldnt even review it if they sent me a free one. This subscription fee madness needs to end NOW!

[@lujho]

The subscription is *only* to convert existing flat photos to 3D. If you’re happy to just take new ones or create 3D content in other ways, you absolutely don’t have to subscribe at all. You can also find your own free ways to convert flat photos to 3D.

[@Thermalions]

@@lujho Assuming they're not using a proprietary 3D format/storage container.

[@lujho]

@@Thermalions they’re not. It’s all open. People have been creating content for it for years. All you need is an RGB image with a greyscale depth map, or you can use any 3D model from blender, game engines, photogrammetry, neural radiance fields, gaussian splatting, real-time video from a Microsoft Kinect, etc. People have got “holographic” Doom running on these things: kzbin.info/www/bejne/aZm7l6Z-n6l0ns0

[@tgheretford]

Everyone has to refuse to subscribe and boycott products and services that engage in it. The problem is, enough people are doing so for companies to make more money, to copy one another and engage in the same practices. Companies also prefer it because you don't own the product and it gives them total control over it, including enabling planned obsolescence.

[@amaruqlonewolf3350]

@@lujho That's the entire gimmick it has. It's like buying a smartphone and everything else besides making calls is on a subscription fee.

[@Veep_The_Goblin_Hermit]

My mom still uses an old one that cycles through pictures of my late father. She very much cherishes it.

[@MobiusVideo]

This reminds me of a subscription fee to use a mouse that was proposed recently (from the Logitech CEO I think). Crazy! 🤪

[@tgheretford]

Companies are only going to continue adopting this model because it's more profitable from those who will subscribe and it gives companies complete control over their product or service.

[@bobbuilder3687]

As always, thanks for posting

[@davecan-i-retire-yet4357]

They’ve found a way to recreate the little plastic ridged ‘3D’ pictures you’d find as a free gift in cornflakes packets in the 70s.

[@jonny5alive123]

And charge you $100-$2500 a year to use it.

[@caddelworth]

"… little plastic ridged ‘3D’ pictures little plastic ridged ‘3D’ pictures …" a.k.a. a *lenticular* image, for you pub quiz players. 🤣

[@gigaherz_]

The tech already existed 20 years ago. They didn't invent anything at all. Look at the history of parallax barrier screens (as seen in the Nintendo 3DS) and lenticular lenses. Nothing new here, they just turned it into an always-online service.

[@chaos.corner]

Notice this device does appear to have more than just two angles though. It seems to be using more interesting tech even if it's not something I'm interested in in itself.

[@gigaherz_]

@@chaos.corner A lenticular lens can cover more than two columns of pixels, zooming in on one at a time based on angle. obviously you lose horizontal resolution, but you gain additional angles

[@Mckhus]

I feel like there is nothing going on with it, do not see a single positive. Everything that could be wrong with it is wrong. Size, format, price, subscriptions, the fiddling, no battery, apps. Quite amazing that they even released that.

[@LRM12o8]

It uses a lenticular 3D screen which, imo is a brilliant technology that's criminally underused. That's the only positive I can see.

[@terencejay8845]

It will disappear within two years.

[@martifingers]

@@terencejay8845 Agree. 3d is a graveyard for any number of technologies - anyone remember Nimslo? The whole idea seems misguided to me. We don't really want to create realism in our images. For most people the beauty of the medium are its limitations.

[@defiraphi]

​@@LRM12o8 It already existed in the early 90's, Kodak tried to do that but failed it didn't lasted long think two years before it got removed .

[@SeraphimLeo]

The size is arguably a benefit. It means you won't have to be lumbering around a big item when you inevitably give this to your local thrift store. That's the optimist in me speaking.

[@thesilverjackal]

We have my mother one of the skylight frames. I live over 1000 miles away and it's nice to be able to upload new photos from my phone right to her frame back home. She really enjoys it.

[@mvl71]

I didn't know that existed. Might be a nice present for my dad. Thanks for mentioning this!

[@strehlow]

And this is one of the very few justifications for needing a server outside. But it should be able to work with your own server as well. Putting up a website is no longer a serious barrier to entry, especially for photo sharing. Having the option to give it a URL you control to pull images from would open up many possibilities, as well as remove the dependency on one company to continue to support it.

[@SlyPearTree]

One day someone will make a paper clip that requires subscribing to a cloud service.

[@HansenPL]

AI paper clip 😂

[@Cenentury0941]

@@HansenPL clippy 2 electric boogaloo

[@KernArc]

I love how although the unboxing sequence was highly compressed with Matt talking over it, there still was that trademark "peeling off the screen protector" audio snippet playing in the background. Talk about brand consistency 🙂

[@ynotw57]

Thanks for pointing that out, totally missed it the first time.😂

[@sepangblues]

The 'subscription model' to continue to milk profits from your customer will be a disaster for many such small companies. Imagine paying a monthly fee for a fkin tiny screen that you own!!

[@Jehty_]

You own the screen, but you don't own their servers. If the processing of the pictures and maybe storing is done on their servers I totally understand why it has a subscription model. And I wouldn't call it milking. Just a different way to pay for these costs (instead of including these costs in the selling price).

[@sepangblues]

@@Jehty_ I have apps on my phone that do the same processing for free, offline. If they wanted to, they could make it completely offline. That whole server thing was done to introduce subscription. I haven't even touched upon what happens if the server shuts down? It's a brick.

[@lujho]

@@sepangbluesno it’s not. It doesn’t require the server, that’s just optional. It can be used completely locally if you want. You can do all sorts on things on it, like view 3D models in real time, play games etc. obviously their larger-screened devices are better for that than this one, but this still has all the same functionality.

[@castorchua]

It must backfire sometimes. I used to buy the new photoshop, now I pirate it

[@Jehty_]

@@lujho then how does the limit of 20 photos come into play? Is that just when you want to use their server? And if you do everything locally you can display as many photos as you want?

[@danielrose881]

Facebook has had a 3d photo option for a number of years now, after the initial novelty of it, no one uses it anymore.

[@andymerrett]

I see a few pop up from time to time. I get motion sickness just interacting with them. :)

[@Banderpop]

Unfortunately that option now uses AI and ignores the depth data from a 'portrait' mode, so it's gone from 'this is interesting, in time I could imagine this being amazing', to 'this is shite'.

[@thesteveruss]

I'm not sure what happened to 3D displays. About 12 years ago, LG had a phone with two lenses and a 3D screen that could take stereoscopic photos. It was amazing ...

[@Alfred-Neuman]

Yeah that's why I'm waiting for a 4D version. It should come to market soon, every 10 years or so they manage to add a new D to their devices...

[@caluna76]

Fuji made stereoscopic digital cameras back in the 2010s. The pictures and videos could be displayed in 3D on their glasses-free, lenticular digital photo viewers or on any 3D TV. They also had a photo printing service that would send you lenticular 3D prints of your photos.

[@ChaossX77]

I had the HTC version. It was really nice. Still have it but it's basically unusable now.

[@SpaceCowboyfromNJ]

I think a lot of what happened with 3d was everyone was because it could cause headaches in some people, all the manufactures decided to play it super safe to try to appeal to the largest amount of people possible. The problem with that was pretty much all the cameras that took 3d images were set up to take the two separate images from so close together, that there was barely any noticeable 3d effect. You could look at a normal high-resolution picture, and your brain could basically interpret just as much depth, making them kind of pointless.

[@alexatkin]

The LG Optimus 3D was too early, the screen was too low resolution (400x600px per eye) and dull, plus the cameras were really poor quality, even the CPU on the phone was really weak. Other phones at the time had far better screens, SoCs and cameras, so it felt very outdated from day one. Today technology is at a point where we can do this much better, but only Apple really have a reason to for their niche user base of the Vision Pro. I'm kinda hoping the idea makes a come back, as passive 3D TVs with HDR would be a real evolution compared to how we were doing 3D on TVs before. Plus nobody really cares about 8K screens, so they really need a new selling point for new TVs rather than improving the brightness, which only enthusiasts realise what a difference this actually makes. Plus it can actually make picture quality worse on highly compressed streaming services by showing where the dynamic range has been compressed. eg I have the TV show Evil on Bluray and its clearly better picture quality than the HDR streaming version where you can see the transition between shades very clearly thanks to the dynamic range being destroyed by compression and HDR just makes it very visible unless watching on a small phone screen.

[@hardlyworgen71]

Creating an account? That's a deal-breaker.

[@TheLadderman]

Maybe I'm an exception, but I've been to quite a few people's houses who own digital photo frames in the last 5 or so years. I think they definitely make more sense these days than they did 20 years ago.

[@caramelldansen2204]

Halo ODST chad spotted

[@martijnappeldoorn8686]

Yes that’s what I think, my parents got one 2 years ago, my brother sends photos and short videos to the photo frame of his kids. My parents are very happy with it, they don’t have to mess around with smartphones and tablets, this thing does it all automatically, it always a surprise to receive new photos.

[@jcollins1305]

I have one in my kitchen and with the app you can add or delete photos as you like. It’s great!

[@Vincent-ow9lj]

I recently bought two 2D frames for family members and they love them, as both are not very mobile or tech savvy.

[@Tahngarthor]

Back then, printing photos was still common. Nowadays, few people bother with that.

[@absurdbird3556]

I made a 2D digital photo frame using a 7 colour e-ink display and a raspberry pi, which scrapes images from a dropbox folder that members of the family can access. Despite the 7 colour limitation, pictures look really good, and with no backlight, as it relies on reflected light, it looks like a normal photo under all light conditions, and doesn't blare light at you and demand your attention. It takes about 8 seconds to fully change one picture to the next, but it's also not reliant on electricity to display the image, once it's there, you can turn off the power and the image will remain there for as long as you want. Maybe that's the future of digital photo frames. You could make a 3D version by using a lenticular lens, like those used on 3D postcards, the 3DS, and undoubtedly this device, if you also had access to the software to convert 2D images to 3D lenticular lens compatible images.

[@UnCoolDad]

Yes, I sure the number of colours and resolution will improve over time.

[@crazyivan030983]

Wow. A good quality colour e-ink can be a really cool way to do this.

[@IntegerOfDoom]

I'd totally use an e-ink version. I could never deal with the crap viewing angles and poor colors of those cheap photo frames.

[@EoinJones]

Sounds like a perfect use case for an e-ink spectra display once they become more widely available. kzbin.info/www/bejne/rqKvfaJtpN-Jas0si=p0xGsN7wbijr6iyU

[@BinaryCounter]

Cnlohr did something very similar to "prank" his mom with a framed picture that kept changing. It used a 7 color display and he ran it outside specs to get more colors out of it somehow, and then applied dithering. The quality is quite surprising. Good watch if you're interested. Goes into quite a bit of technical detail too.

[@markanne54]

Looks like a perfect example of a device that sets out to solve a problem that no one was looking to solve.

[@lassikinnunen]

Its a solution to sell a stock of screens, feels like.

[@atmel9077]

@@lassikinnunen The screens that were supposed to go in the Red Hydrogen One :D

[@lassikinnunen]

@@atmel9077 well yes back when lg had their 3d screen too etc

[@dougaltolan3017]

With heritage such as lasers, solutions looking for problems isn't the slight it might be.

[@hempbear]

Vertical, cloud based e-waste

[@whoshotdk]

My guess is that its a psychological issue - a printed photo is "real" in a way that a digital one is not. If the world suddenly ends, you can grab your printed photos from the mantlepiece before dashing out the door to become Mad Max. The digital frame would just be a crap digging tool at that point :P Edit; a little later; yeah, the PITA aspect you mention is very likely too!

[@SeraphimLeo]

I agree, but to use that as a business model is doomed to fail. The only people who reason like this are boomers, as newer generations are quite comfortable considering stuff like cryptocurrency, NFTs, Steam games, in-game items ect. "real" property. Not that they're wrong, I think both sides are right in this and the truth lies somewhere inbetween. But regardless, this way of thinking isn't going to be around for much longer and I suspect that the businesses that rely on it won't either.

[@whoshotdk]

​@@SeraphimLeo Good point. I'm a xennial, all of my own photos, games et al are digital, where in my childhood they were physical. It's better now IMHO. I would not dismiss "boomer" thinking permanently; ideals tend to go come and go, either through rebellion of ideals or by necessity. Perhaps a lot of that is because we are *all* searching for the middle ground you mention. Makes sense to me.

[@kaitlyn__L]

​@@whoshotdk Whoops, accidental semi-philosophical essay coming on media and ownership: I'm a millennial but I totally agree with you. I would add an extension that, to me, what makes something digital "really owned" by me is not met by something like NFTs or Steam games but is based-on whether I actually own the drives they live on. My personal digital photos have persisted for 15+ years due to being copied onto 2-3 drives at any one time in my possession, whereas when I moved I only managed to find one or two packets of 1-hour-photo prints from when I was taking film before that. (Though I do still have a number reels I never bothered getting processed, which I would like to do some day.) To me, I own those photos. Because I owned the drives I carried them in. If I only had them stored on some cloud photos service, and had to sign back into various accounts to find them again, that feels like someone else owns them and I'm just asking for permission to look at them. (Since it literally is renting disk space versus owning disk space.) Even though Steam has been remarkably customer-friendly compared to other online storefronts taking away "purchased" titles, I still don't really consider those games to be "games I own" in the same way. Especially with the family sharing thing they introduced about 10 years ago, my Steam library grows and shrinks depending on all sorts of factors. I think the most interesting thing to me is, despite all this meaning everything on my NAS feels secure to me in a way that streaming didn't... all the ways streaming has changed, and the similarity of UIs to Plex (though I still think of it as XBMC) now, I've found myself missing VHS and DVD. Went and dug out my teenage DVDs, and watched films I hadn't seen for ages even though I did have rips of them on my hard drives as well. So I've started buying my favourites on Blu-rays to... Have-have? Sometimes I tell myself it's also for reasons of bit-rate and quality versus a home-rip, but I think it's probably more about the emotionality of having something to hold. Similarly, for a long time I only bought physical books for art books that didn't do well in ebook form. Unless it was a friend's short-print release or something. But lately I've found myself wanting some more physical books too. I wonder if this is the start of a longer-term shift in my philosophy. I've even found myself printing-off some of the art I did digitally, to keep in my sketchbooks. (I'm so glad I still have my late-00s printer, before they'd really locked-down all the inks and made the printers self-destruct.)

[@kosmosyche]

Speaking of Looking Glasses, I wish Looking Glass Studios have returned and made another good Thief game.

[@StabStabStabStabby]

That's all I could think about when he kept saying looking glass

[@SirRigbyBaconKaiser]

I was thinking the same but only a new System Shock title.

[@pcpanikMusik]

Absolutely 👍 Thief Gold … one of my all time favourites .

[@andrewfishpool89]

Taffer :-)

[@BanazirGalpsi1968]

Make a landscape one with a 10 in or 12 in frame with a massive SD back up, your only subscription would be for processing, keep that under 25 bucks for the most expensive, all pics once processed store locally on device. Able to store a couple hundred not just 100.

[@tonstad39]

Everyone’s talking about the subscription, but my big thing is how you have to make an account to use this. Like why should my photos be anyone else’s business.

[@calebbell5018]

From the photos it looks like Matt had a Canadian Vacation! What a shock it would have been if I had run into him!!

[@Sac_slappper_4rce]

Can't believe he made it out of the traffic cone maze. He went to hell and back and even took pictures... the audacity!

[@Prelmable]

I hate, hate, hate products that rely on apps. It'll be a useless e-waste brick within a few short years when the app is obsolete.

[@geographicaloddity2]

People who shot pictures before smart phones think in landscape and the children think in portrait. I hate portrait mode for 99% of what I see is taken in it.

[@tonstad39]

Film cameras let you do portrait mode if you held the camera on its side and took a picture

[@t0raneko]

@@tonstad39 Phones let you do landscape if you held the phone on its side and took a picture

[@Peweskimooxy]

Portrait mode often makes me feel claustrophobic

[@VidarHaslum]

Portrait mode is great! For portraits...

[@TikTok_Sucks]

@@VidarHaslum It's OK for photos. Unacceptable for video.

[@godofacorns]

"I know which way this thing's going." Stone cold dramatic line.

[@mikgus]

So landfill in six month when the company goes under.

[@hankkingsley2792]

There's gotta be a word for the phenomenon where people end up not doing/buying a thing at all because a thing they won't even do/buy makes the thing they wanted unjustifiable. Everyone would ideally have a modern picture frame, but its hard to justify when a monitor that size that can display anything, or your existing TV could do it for free: and yet, no one is actually using a 19"-23" monitor for such a purpose, nor leaving their TV running 24/7 with family photos. Similar thing happened with music collections -- people stopped buying, ripping, or torrenting albums because streaming services came along... but then after they got too expensive and everyone cancelled them, almost no one went back to the old ways.

[@MattK-z4c]

this thing SCREAMS of AI and Ad data harvesting

[@isoguy.]

Could not agree with you more. Sell you a poorly designed product, charge you to use it, sell your data without your permission, Train AI on your photos etc etc Wouldent Touch it with the proverbial barge pole, even if offered free.

[@Aves_1]

@MattK-z4c the 3d photo display aspect doesnt need ai or anything. They have a free plugin for various software for you to create your own images and then you can just drop the files onto like a normal usb drive

[@CamdenBloke]

My elderly mom has one. My Echo Show is sort of like that. I use it for an alarm clock, and it generally displays photos from my online archives. Sometimes it shows one I'd rather not other people see, and I'm glad that I have my bedroom to myself. My TV has a slide show, but it's set to photos downloaded from the internet, meant for TVs.

[@DavidLye-no4ht]

Digital photo frames were for people who still wanted photos of their grandkids on the sideboard. A few years later, places like Boots introduced those machines where you can print off photos from an SD card, problem solved, digital photo frames disappeared again. The problem with them was that the makers didn't understand WHY people like having photos in frames on display, it's not a functional thing, its a decorative one, and a conversation starter.

[@cidiracing7481]

I'm pretty sure self printing stations are older than the digital photo frames. Somewhere around the late 90s or early 00s I had a Sony photo printer at home, so I would be surprised if the in store stations got introduced after the digital picture frame became popular. I see them as a hassle free replacement to needing to go to a store to print them and then store printed the prints somewhere, rather than the printing stations being a replacement to digital frames.

[@richmorrison8194]

@@cidiracing7481 i have a HP colour printer and was pleasantly surprised how well a job these new generation of inkjet printers did. I order my photo paper through amazon and haven't been back to Wal Mart or the local camera shop since for printing.

[@kubiakWU]

I will watch any video that gets posted here and enjoy it. Even when it's an interesting but ultimately bad product like this. This review is 1000% more interesting than the actual picture frame

[@BlueShankPEI]

It's a small world! The photo's shown at 7:35 sure look like they are from Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island. That's my "neck of the woods". I'm guessing you were on a cruise ship? Loads of those dock here during the summer season.

[@basshead2003]

Right before that was a picture taken at the Halifax Waterfront. I know exactly where that Smoke’s Poutinerie is, and I recognize the patio of the Waterfront Warehouse restaurant in the background. We also get tons of cruise ships during the summer and into the fall.

[@El_K_Bron_Del_Moycas]

Thanks for the honest review.

[@phranerphamily]

I got my mom a Frameo digital frame last year but it's wifi enabled and anyone who's her frame friends can send pictures to it. It's wonderful 😊 plus you can set it for hours to be on and off so at night it's not cycling

[@kennethnielsen3864]

I actually have two digital photo frames in my living room, and I love them. Thanks for sharing.

[@hfric]

you lost me on "and then you need a account" "You need to upload your pictures to theirs server to process"... when they harvest your data to train AI, and see what you have on there ... nope

[@andymouse]

Politely put ! I also see it as a bit of a gimmick that will live with the bread maker under the stairs

[@monkeystation]

Thank you for trying this product so we don't have to! It is absolutely wild that you need an expensive subscription for a gimmicky 3D photo frame. Surely at some point in the near future we won't know any better than photos and displays being 3D. But I can also imagine the conversion of our old 2D photos to be near perfect and cheap if not free.

[@RaccoonHenry]

the "take it off" was way too understated in this one, I bet that guy who hates it was barely annoyed at all...

[@Rehbet]

digital photo frames were too low resolution at the time to make sense. And once they made them up to "retina" resolution, it was too late and you'd be better off getting an old iPad.

[@alexatkin]

Same with 3D phones and cameras. Rather than make them stupidly expensive, they used lower resolution screens, outdated SoCs and bad quality cameras - compared to other phones and cameras in that price range. Understandably, they weren't very popular.

[@garymoore4392]

I've still got a 20" full HD photo frame in my living room, still love it

[@jonathanmarceau5684]

Thanks for sharing your pictures from a trip to Quebec

[@danielnoye223]

And Prince Edward Island

[@equinoxe3d]

Yeah at 6:33 I immediately went "yep, that's in Montreal"

[@Mofonator8000]

@@equinoxe3d haha me too

[@DeHelmonder]

@@equinoxe3d I thought it might've been Luxembourg at first. They use the same types of bright orange/red signs for road works lol

[@YoshMaster]

A poutine snack bar and blocked roads because of construction , the official main features of Quebec 😝

[@HarlotEffect]

My grandparents had one that my uncle bought them, and that was around 15 years ago. Only used a couple of times. I think my grandmother might still have it. But you're right, it's not really used.

[@brs8285]

Absurd to have a subscription fee for such an expensive device. I know that cloud processing has a cost but is not justified here. Depth map calculation has become one of the many things that offline computing has no problem calculating, especially today with heavy optimized neural acceleration processors. And integrating all the buzzwords just doesn’t make the product better.

[@lujho]

Right, which is why the subscription is completely optional. If you want to create 3D content on your own you're free to in any way you like. Use the Apple portrait photos which have a depth map built in, or convert your own 2D photos however you want. Render something in Blender or Unreal. It's an open system.

[@brs8285]

@@lujho Ok cool, I didn’t know that. But I don’t think is an easy option for the average consumer or built in the app. Well personally I would only use custom made 3D content if I had the device.

[@lujho]

@@brs8285 Yes, overall their consumer-targeted products are niche and for hobbyists/early adopters/creatives. This latest device is a way to give it a bit broader consumer appeal, but it's still something of a fancy toy for nerds. People focusing on the optional subscription are missing the point, which is the 3D tech. That's what the company does.

[@alexatkin]

@@brs8285 Which is precisely why there is subscription service to handle the hassle for people who don't want to learn how to do it themselves. I don't like subscriptions in general, but people have gotten too used to getting things for free when someone has the pay the bill, and usually that's by selling your data and advertising.

[@da5idnz]

Back in the early 2000's I had one of those Kodak frame lenticular kits that worked with the same model printer. The software program converted it into a lenticular image, let you print it out, which the frame merged.

[@inelegy]

"We took a stupid idea and made it stupider!"

[@OneBiOzZ]

i really like how the app shows depth with a line that goes along the surface thats the only thing i really like about it

[@Crazy_Borg]

+ Subscription based + no offline storage, online only + When the server shuts down, you get an expensive paperweight. + Overpriced for a novelty item NOPE!

[@alexatkin]

From what I can tell, only the 2D > 3D conversion service is subscription based. He never really properly addresses all it can when plugged into a computer, which is where things get interesting.

[@XanthinZarda]

@@alexatkin Think of the average consumer. Do you really think someone is going to casually pop open Blender or Unity to do this themselves?

[@Banderpop]

My first sighting of a Looking Glass stunned me. It was set up in landscape, very high contrast, and with an Xbox Kinect attached to it. I was able to see a 3D version of myself in the Looking Glass, moving around just as I was, and I could not only peer around this mini replica of me from left to right, but from top to bottom also. Presumably it could work in portrait as well as landscape. I could not see any sort of lenticular surface. And it could run other 3D demo videos also, all looking much more vibrant than I did in my beige jacket. I could imagine it being a lot of fun for vivid 3D games, like recreations of isometric adventures from the ZX Spectrum era for example. It was however, a little on the low resolution side (putting it mildly - I think it was in the 320 by 240 ballpark), and a bit small. At about £500 I was tempted to be an early adopter, but I chose to wait for an improved or cheaper version, hopefully with some useful or fun software too. And it never came. Instead it's become this thing that's less than half the size and far less capable by every measure besides probably being a lot lighter, and it got stuck there. In parallel it looks like cameras with depth sensors are being forgotten too. They've vanished from most Android phones, Apple and its users don't really talk about them so I have to assume that theirs aren't seeing much development, and there has been a shift to extracting depth from photos with AI, which really doesn't yet work anywhere near as well as having a 2 megapixel infrared depth map from even an old budget Android phone (no online service required).

[@chaos.corner]

Yes. First thing I noticed when Matt moved it from side-to-side was that it was not lenticular. I had not connected it with those other displays. That makes it much more interesting but it still seems to fall short. Matt should have tried moving it up and down too.

[@jasonhawkins4528]

It's like those old 3d stickers we used to get back in the 80's. Remember them? I guess it's similar but in a software form.

[@clonkex]

Well it's the same technology, just with an LCD screen behind the lenses instead of a fixed image

[@sohatyi]

I remember the digital photo frame era. At the time, digital prints were expensive and most cameras weren't amazing anyway. Modern digital prints are so cheap and you can print them in your local supermarket nowadays.

[@anyajenkins4611]

App required is a code for straight in the bin...

[@slaphappy7559]

A pop up card is a good comparison, must say I like the effect, and I would not normally go for such things, just like you said I bought an EFrame for my mother 20 years ago

[@SaraH-ph4qm]

In the last year I bought 2 digital frames, my mother kept getting me frames for printed photos of which I had none. So I bought the digital frames for my office and living room so I can finally see my pics.

[@PBTophie]

"When was the last time you looked at those photos you took on your holiday in 2018?" Oh, Matt. I'm American. I don't have money for holidays. 🙃

[@JohnDoeRando]

A holiday in 2018? No but I had one as recently as... 2013.

[@MartinPittBradley]

Instagram, TikTok and whatever else took over: You now melt your brain looking at other people’s photos

[@wobaguk]

I had a digital photo frame a few years ago, and put a bunch of things on it, movie stills, etc, and put enough on there so they cycled every 5 minutes for the whole day so I ended up associating the different pictures with the time.

[@whompronnie]

Congratulations, you reinvented the clock!

[@strayiggytv]

That's what I use the two I thrifted for. I dunno why people think you have to display photos only on them. Just use them as digital art displays

[@stevew8513]

I remember a lot of digital photo frames had phone jacks on them so you could send photos of the kids to the grandparents in another town. That was when a lot of people were getting rid of their traditional phone lines. After that, I remember the cheap, limited viewing angle screens on those things. The idea behind photo viewers is decent, but you really need a painting-sized screen to be of real usefulness. And the majority of people aren't willing to spend that much money.

[@klaernie]

One really subtle nice thing: in some of the images Mat shows, one can clearly see that he is a talented photographer!

[@derstreber2]

I suspect the reason the device is in portrait mode is because of limitations in the screen hardware to give the 3D effect. Notice that the screen goes completely black if your viewing angle strays too far from straight on. In order to widen that angle it would require packing more directions into the multi-directional pixels. Landscape mode would require a wider horizontal angle. Imagine 4 of these devices side by side (simulating a larger landscape screen), as you look at the one on the left strait on, the one on the right would likely be dark. This would mean the only way to make a landscape screen with the current technology would be to use the current width but trim down the screen vertically to have the correct ratio. This would make the screen very small, perfect for a 3D VideoNow player.

[@ModernClassic]

I have a feeling the real market for this is actually those who want to use the ChatGPT avatars. That's a literal Star Trek tech and while I doubt it works very well at the moment, it is something I know a lot of my nerdier friends want. (In Angela Collier's 4 hour takedown of Star Trek: Picard, it is the only thing in the series she really liked.) Anyway while it obviously is also a digital picture frame, I feel like that's at most a trojan horse, if not just a secondary function. On the subscription plan page, it even seems like they talk more about the Liteforms stuff than photos.

[@stepheng8779]

More landfill

[@perrybarton]

💯% re your thoughts on landscape vs. portrait. Our field of vision is a wide rectangle, not a tall skinny one. SMH when people shoot a vertical video/pic and then put a blurred, zoomed version of the same image behind it so that there aren't black bars on the sides when it's displayed on a monitor or TV. To quote Stuart Smalley's dad, "waste of space." 🤓

[@excrutiated]

Theres no way i could habitually take photos in portrait. Im not a maniac.

[@dulume]

pro plan is 2500$ per year... right, sure. If you're in desperate need of lots of crappy pseudo-3D images that serve no purpose, I guess it makes sense.

[@YOG3NSHA]

300 bucks and then they expect you to pay a subscription? What?

[@lujho]

You absolutely don't need to pay a subscription. The subscription is just for the optiona conversion service.

[@YOG3NSHA]

@@lujho It's useless without it, 20 conversions for free - that's it. The whole point of the thing is to convert your images and display them.

[@lujho]

@@YOG3NSHA You don't have to convert them, you can take your own 3D photos with a phone, which is unlimited. You can also find other free ways to convert 2D photos. There are dozens of other things this device can do, and it's all an open system. Devs have been creating content for it for years now.

[@XanthinZarda]

@@lujho Okay, let's talk about Bus Factors. IE, what happens if the developers are hit by a bus. And why does there need to be an account and subscription?

[@katobrucelee08]

What I need is a e-ink photo frame. I scanned all my old photos and have them on an SD card playing on a old digital photoframe I got super cheap a few years ago

[@simonlb24]

I'm also wondering if there is a clause buried in the T's & C's stating that you fully agree that any photos uploaded are now the property of Looking Glass and can be used by them for whatever they like forever, including marketing and promotional material.

[@Kanbei11]

There is, although you retain ownership they can do whatever the smeg they want with it. Plus, since this is a common clause, if they upload it elsewhere then that other host gets the same licence and so on. Also in the terms is an indemnity clause where you are responsible for any claims that may come from your content. Also buried in there is that the item is your responsibility once it's handed to the courier instead of when it's delivered making any shipping problems something you need to deal with

[@simonlb24]

​@@Kanbei11I'm pretty sure that under the UK's Distance Selling Regulations the seller is wholly responsible for ensuring the items are delivered to you as your contract is with them, not a delivery courier. If the items are not received because the courier 'loses' them, that is for the supplier to resolve and you are entitled to a full refund if you want one.

[@Kanbei11]

@@simonlb24 I believe you're right too - that part of the terms must be aimed at American customers. It saddens me that there are places where the seller can hand the product to the courier and wash their hands of it. Basically abusing the power dynamic between the company and a consumer

[@ASBO_LUTELY]

Guys, I have this great idea for an oven but this time I'm going to make it smaller and more power efficient! What would I call it though?

[@jul1440]

I wonder if this would work to display Nintendo 3DS 3D photos and videos...🤔

[@abdelali9279]

I was thinking how they could offer so many features, but of course, there's a subscription fee.

[@StevenScott_studio53]

fact of the day: at 9:40 the Can on the left is my Render

[@nelo7149]

Oooo it looks great!

[@alanbarker2279]

CAN you be certain?

[@StevenScott_studio53]

@@alanbarker2279 I CAN...

[@miker8225]

I hate prescriptions and that puts me off instantly. I think there's too many things that exist just to screw you out of money rather than being a decent product people would buy and they can earn a bit of money from too.

[@AmoralTom]

My mother wanted a digital frame just a few days ago! She loves it.

[@MacXpert74]

Don't get her this one though! 😂

[@NumptyMcNumptyface]

The fact that you need an app this use device is an automatic no for me, especially when it requires an account. If the app is no longer available or the company shuts down the server you have little more than a paperweight. And an expensive one at that.

[@pcpanikMusik]

Human eyes are horizontal… I will never understand why on earth so much people take videos and landscape photos vertically…

[@chaos.corner]

TVs even went *wider* than 4:3 as soon as that was economically feasible.

[@JuhaLehtinen]

Your sight is still about round, but out living space is horizontal, so out brains are used to process horizontal view. Execpt humans, who tend to stand vertically, so portraits of people are more natural to view vertical, even when when our eyesight is same all the time, it is just what our brains are used to do.

[@SenileOtaku]

Because they're too lazy or too incompetent to rotate the phone.

[@chaos.corner]

@@SenileOtaku Yes. Though I think it would actually be better to have a square sensor and allow people to choose if they wanted to shoot landscape or portrait (or even square) while holding the phone the same orientation for either. I often feel the grip for taking landscapes is not as secure as for portraits.

[@altern8tive]

Not only another tiresome subscription business model but a connected device that can become a paperweight at the whim of the manufacturer and/or cloud service provider

[@TransistorBased]

You can tell exactly who this device is meant for with the vertical 16:9 aspect ratio. Definitely not photographers...

[@nickwallette6201]

Silicon Valley philosophy at its best: Find a solution, monetize it, then try to find a problem that it solves.

[@ETC_Rohaly_USCG]

0315 in the U.S. Pacific time zone... and my Uncle still has a digital frame from over 25 years ago! Runs it 24/7, and has photos of my Cousin, myself and the family. My Cousin; his son, lives in Sweden now. He has images on it from when my cousin and I were about 8, and it still runs! 😊

[@BronyumHexofloride]

why would i go out of my way to throw £300 on a device that will have no function if the company goes out of business and will try and push a subscription service in the meantime?.. i love the idea but as others have mentioned unless it can function untethered, standalone and offline its useless

[@frankowalker4662]

Ha ha. I got my first Digital Photo Frame last month. It's a Sanyo. (Ebay £5 lol) It's great. (EDIT : Mine has no subscription, no software updates, no stupid app, it is landscape or portrait. Put all my photos on SD Card and leave it. Easy.)

[@caramelldansen2204]

When someone asks why I always buy old tech, I tell them: "My devices are _so_ old, they were made to actually be good."

[@andymerrett]

@@caramelldansen2204 That doesn't make sense.

[@caramelldansen2204]

@@andymerrett I'm describing (and I hate this word...) enshittification. Old things didn't have subscriptions, or tethered phone apps that brick the device when the app disappears...

[@CptJistuce]

But it isn't 3D! Okay, seriously, 3D is cool. It is a shame that it is bogged down with so much additional crap.

[@castorchua]

@@CptJistuce Every 3D product has proven to be a gimmick / fad

[@MeitsMSX]

a subscription to something you paid for. a no go. if they go out of business, you're stuck with a brick.

[@halcyondaystunes]

And it's only for portrait mode photos. The one thing that really grinds my gears when people who know nothing about photography always take portrait photos.

[@alexatkin]

Portrait video is worse though, especially when they're shooting sports so the person they are shooting is constantly running out of shot, or a stage where they are using digital zoom to focus on a single person so it looks garbage.

[@AllDaWayJay]

0:19 LMFAO word. It’s been a minute or two. I still dig on those digital photo frames but never copped one

[@Fuogor]

It's amazing how well they've taken a 1440p screen and made it look like 240p!

[@oryxis]

I assume that each image "pixel" is actually made of multiple physical display pixels - one for each angle you view through the lenticular lens - i.e you're effectively showing (I guess) around 10 images - 1 for each angle - so that 1440p is more like a 144p image x 10 viewing angles.

[@johnjohnhasabashat...2279]

To be fair, the Amazon Echo Show and the Google Nest Hub's are photo frames with extra functionality. I love my Google Nest hub. While you do need the internet to use them, they work. Saying that. We bought my partners Grandmother a digital photo frame and filled it with pictures from her past. At the time we didn't know she was developing alzheimer's and it was triggering her outbursts. It was a rough couple of years.

[@kFY514]

This actually _is_ a proper hologram. Nintendo 3DS had a stereoscopic display, that showed precisely *two* images, one for the left and one for the right eye. So it only looked right when looked at from dead front - not just because of the LCD viewing angles, but because it's the only angle for which it has the right data. This thing reportedly shows 100 images at the same time, for 100 different viewing angles. It's in a very different league than a 3DS. That being said, you're probably right about it. It's technically amazing, but in the end just a novelty that will end up forgotten.

[@Michael-zf1ko]

The move to cloud dependency with a subscription model will be their own downfall. Yea, it won't move past novelty if they have such stupid restrictions on a not very cheap device.

[@kFY514]

@@Michael-zf1ko Even if it weren't for the subscription model - what use cases do you actually have for a 6" vertical holographic display? Sure, it can be useful in specialized applications (and it has integrations with Blender and popular 3D engines so can be used for that) but they also offer a 16" model that is probably much better suited for professional use cases. And for consumers... It has that wow factor for a couple of days but then you won't miss it 🤷

[@lujho]

I get what you’re saying, it has full horizontal parallax, but it’s still not a “proper” hologram. Perspective doesn’t change with distance, for example, nor is there any vertical parallax. I have one of their other models and while the 3D effect is cool, it’s definitely not fully equivalent to the pop-culture idea of a “hologram”.

[@CptJistuce]

It is impressive, but it isn't a proper hologram. In some respects, it is better than a proper hologram.

[@thingi]

Although it can display 100's of angles your eyes are only ever seeing 1 at a time per eye (otherwise it would just be a blurry mess). So that 1440 pixels becomes 720p per eye which is appallingly bad and why it looks pixelated. It's a novelty display and a last ditch grab for money from a dying company because it's main tech (big holographic monitors) have not taken off anywhere near expectations and the software Dev. side of all their products is virtually non-existent, the 'eco-system' is TINY.

[@GreenJimll]

I was given an unwanted small digital photo frame many years ago. The only use case I ever had for it was as a small, continuously cycling display on stalls at community events, especially ones where a laptop or tablet might "develop legs".

[@cathrinelord]

Yeah, on the subscription thing, the image processing speaks of just an excuse to gouge out the user for more payment, because my phone (and most phones in this modern era) can do all the processing needed on the device itself. a few years ago I was using an image to 3d program to make 3d models, and it seemed like every app I found wanted to charge me for processing the images, regardless of if it's sent off, or done on my device, but it really does speak of gouging out the consumer for a quick buck, rather than making a "good" product.

[@DeathInTheSnow]

Funny you should mention the 3DS - people often forget that it could playback 3D images and videos that were saved to the SD card, and this lead to a small community of people making adult content being made specifically for the device, in full 3D, using the 3D cameras of the time. They may even still be up online! But I'm curious if they use the same file types.

[@LRM12o8]

Now that's an interesting little fact I need to... investigate 😂 (Actually, it might indeed be just investigatory for me. Since you say small community, it may well just all be straight content... 🥱)

[@paralytaatylarap9715]

Hundreds millions of people know that the 3DS could display 3D.😂

[@andymerrett]

@@paralytaatylarap9715 you've asked them all have you?

[@castorchua]

resting next to Apples 3D touch and a sea of 3D TV's

[@CptJistuce]

​@@paralytaatylarap9715This is true. But OP isn't wrong that they usually forget it has multimedia viewing capabilities and isn't just a game machine.