• Vegas sphere - no educational applications?

    From legg@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jan 17 10:37:47 2024
    It seems odd that the Las Vegas sphere hasn't dipped
    into the programming that's accumulated for planetariums.

    A lot of the original planetariums have fallen into
    disrepair - education not being a big source of income.

    I wonder what would be involved in translating the format?

    RL

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to legg on Wed Jan 17 09:09:58 2024
    On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 10:37:47 -0500, legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:

    It seems odd that the Las Vegas sphere hasn't dipped
    into the programming that's accumulated for planetariums.

    A lot of the original planetariums have fallen into
    disrepair - education not being a big source of income.

    I wonder what would be involved in translating the format?

    RL

    $2.3 billion. I doubt it will ever make a profit.

    Sounds uncomfortable, watching a spherical screen.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to legg on Wed Jan 17 20:03:43 2024
    On 1/17/2024 8:37 AM, legg wrote:
    It seems odd that the Las Vegas sphere hasn't dipped
    into the programming that's accumulated for planetariums.

    It's Vegas. You were expecting something OTHER than entertainment?

    A lot of the original planetariums have fallen into
    disrepair - education not being a big source of income.

    I wonder what would be involved in translating the format?

    My understanding is that planetariums use projectors
    to cast the imagery onto their "screens". Presumably,
    that imagery is (now) in a digital form so it would just
    be a numerical processing task to make the conversion.

    But, the medium suggests there should be far better
    (more expressive) uses that wouldn't really have been
    practical in the planetarium venue (think: moving pictures)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From legg@21:1/5 to blockedofcourse@foo.invalid on Thu Jan 18 07:31:42 2024
    On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 20:03:43 -0700, Don Y
    <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

    On 1/17/2024 8:37 AM, legg wrote:
    It seems odd that the Las Vegas sphere hasn't dipped
    into the programming that's accumulated for planetariums.

    It's Vegas. You were expecting something OTHER than entertainment?

    A lot of the original planetariums have fallen into
    disrepair - education not being a big source of income.

    I wonder what would be involved in translating the format?

    My understanding is that planetariums use projectors
    to cast the imagery onto their "screens". Presumably,
    that imagery is (now) in a digital form so it would just
    be a numerical processing task to make the conversion.

    But, the medium suggests there should be far better
    (more expressive) uses that wouldn't really have been
    practical in the planetarium venue (think: moving pictures)


    I figured the conversion wouldn't be impossible. Any 'film
    stock' or image can be digitized with the same spatial
    coordination.

    Planetarium displays I've seen are often limited to a half
    hemisphere, doubled.

    'expressive'?

    I can't see it's use in making films - green screens don't
    cost $2B.

    RL

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to legg on Thu Jan 18 10:16:09 2024
    On 1/18/2024 5:31 AM, legg wrote:
    On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 20:03:43 -0700, Don Y
    <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

    On 1/17/2024 8:37 AM, legg wrote:
    It seems odd that the Las Vegas sphere hasn't dipped
    into the programming that's accumulated for planetariums.

    It's Vegas. You were expecting something OTHER than entertainment?

    A lot of the original planetariums have fallen into
    disrepair - education not being a big source of income.

    I wonder what would be involved in translating the format?

    My understanding is that planetariums use projectors
    to cast the imagery onto their "screens". Presumably,
    that imagery is (now) in a digital form so it would just
    be a numerical processing task to make the conversion.

    But, the medium suggests there should be far better
    (more expressive) uses that wouldn't really have been
    practical in the planetarium venue (think: moving pictures)

    I figured the conversion wouldn't be impossible. Any 'film
    stock' or image can be digitized with the same spatial
    coordination.

    Yes, but the types of "content" that planetariums have
    typically presented are pretty lackluster compared to what an
    electronic medium could present.

    Planetarium displays I've seen are often limited to a half
    hemisphere, doubled.

    They also tend to be governed by mechanisms and the physical limits
    imposed on them.

    'expressive'?

    Ever been in a 360 degree presentation? Or, a flight simulator?
    Imagine sitting *amid* an ongoing battle of spacecraft or
    other "immersive" experience. Manipulating someone's visual field
    can be very convincing to a casual participant.

    I can't see it's use in making films - green screens don't
    cost $2B.

    You can't sit *in* a green screen. Even imax is a scenario where
    you are "outside" the experience, regardless of how "big" the
    presentation.

    Vegas is all about The Draw... how do we get folks (and, more importantly, their MONEY) to come to see *us*. And, once we've accomplished that,
    there's a good chance that their money will stay behind after they've
    moved on!

    Why a big pyramid? Or, animated fountains? Or a car museum? Or...

    Look at Disney{Land,World}... all that hassle and expense for a handful
    of "rides" in a full day? (When I was last there, E tickets still
    existed. Now, it's probably a day's pay for admission!)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)