At the recent Integrated Systems Europe conference, I tried two different approaches to 3D video meetings. Cisco showcased its Spatial Webex Meetings solution, which leverages Apple Vision Pro goggles. There’s widespread speculation that the next generation of Apple Goggles will be less expensive. Google offered sneak previews of its innovative Starline technology, which utilizes equipment from HP to deliver a 3D experience without the need for specialized eyewear. Both demonstrations were remarkable.

2D video is normalized, but it’s not natural. We deal with 2D video all the time on our phones, television sets, theaters, and more, and find it acceptable. However, it’s 3D that is natural. The world is 3D, faces are 3D and so are most objects. Watching 3D video is far more natural, and I imagine in the distant future that 3D video will be prevalent. Someday, 2D video will be as anachronistic as black-and-white films are today, but it won’t be anytime soon.

Understanding 3D

3D, or three-dimensional, encompasses length, width, and height. Screens, like paper, can display length and height, depth must be inferred by the viewer. Portraying depth on a 2D surface can be accomplished by adding real depth. In print we have amazing pop-up books, typically for children. Marvels of the printing world.

Another approach is to give 2D surfaces the illusion of depth. Humans perceive 3D because our two eyes provide slightly different perspectives, which our brains combine to interpret depth. To replicate this on a video screen, we need to capture and display two separate images, one for each eye. Dual cameras positioned closely together can capture 3D images. Or computer-generated imagery (CGI) can simulate 3D imagery in post-production, but this is a simulated effect.

The harder part is presenting the two images separately for each eye. One popular approach is to use 3D glasses, which can use color or polarization filters to direct distinct images to each eye. However, these methods present difficulties for video meetings, as color synchronization with screens is crucial, and polarized glasses are impractical with standard monitors.

Spatial Webex vs. Google Starline

Both Cisco and Google have solutions for 3D video. Cisco Webex Spatial Meetings is currently available, and Google Starline’s sixth generation, the first to be available to the general public, is expected later this year.

Cisco's Webex Spatial Meetings utilize two room cameras on its Room Bar Pro for image capture and Apple Vision Pro goggles for viewing. What’s particularly clever about this is that the Room Bar Pro already had two cameras, one used for room analysis. The Spatial Meetings feature was launched in conjunction with Apple’s goggles. Customers who bought the goggles had free access to this new spatial meeting feature.

Google Starline employs a different strategy. The prototype at ISE was the fourth generation. HP is currently developing the sixth-generation model, which is slated for release later this year. Not many details are available yet on the new equipment, but it will presumably be better and cheaper than what I saw.

Starline is a video booth design, and the experience requires the same equipment on both ends for one-on-one 3D meetings. What makes Starline stand out is that it provides a genuine 3D experience without any special eyewear. Starline uses advanced processing and multiple cameras to create separate images for each eye. The equipment I experienced had six cameras in each booth, Google manipulates these images into a single stream optimized for the impressive 65” light field display (LFD) screen. LRF displays present images with slight angular variations. The booth format narrows the space where the participants sit, so the 3D effect is optimized for a small viewing angle or target. The remote participant appears life-size, in 3D, as though they are seated across a table.

Cisco Webex Spatial Meetings has a big advantage because it can use existing or standard video equipment in the room and uses Apple’s (expensive) goggles. A key drawback is the goggles obscure the wearer's face. Starline's strength is its glasses-free experience, but it is currently limited to one-on-one interactions. Both solutions can integrate with existing, larger meetings on popular conferencing services but without the 3D effect.

In summary, Cisco requires Apple Vision Pro goggles, while Google necessitates a specialized booth. Cisco's solution is available, having launched previously. Starline, while in its sixth generation of development, has yet to be released to the public. General availability of new Starline equipment from HP is anticipated later this year.

The Value Proposition of 3D

The concept of 3D video is not new, but it’s never really gone mainstream. Simply stated, the complexity and costs are too high. While the novelty of 3D video is undeniable, its adoption hinges on demonstrating tangible value beyond being cool. Consumers, and especially businesses, need to justify the cost. Offsetting travel expenses would be a strong argument. However, modern meeting experiences are already high quality, which makes the added benefit of 3D video challenging to justify.

3D TV failed as a consumer device for multiple reasons. The most significant was that it required a behavior change on the part of the viewers – specifically the wearing of glasses. TV watching is an easy task – often only part of what people are doing. Having to don special glasses was a step too far for the consumer. A similar pain point exists for 3D video meetings. Users who need to examine the intricacies of an object will undertake special effort, but the typical business meeting user will likely not.

There are two major barriers to mass adoption, complexity and price. The complexity could be overcome at the right price. By partnering with Apple, Webex Spatial Meetings made progress on the cost. Apple’s goggles are relatively inexpensive compared to designing a new product. But that’s about the only comparison where Apple’s goggles win on price. Google is aiming at adoption by focusing on a more natural, glasses-free technology, but these LRF booths won’t be inexpensive.

A strong use casefor 3D video is to bring together distributed design teams to evaluate physical prototypes. Both systems can facilitate this, but Cisco offers more scalability. Two-person design teams would prefer Starline. In theory, the Starline system could scale to many systems, but each system would have one participant. Webex Spatial meetings can present one prototype in 3D to many users simultaneously if they all have Apple goggles.

Cost remains a significant barrier. Even organizations with the Cisco Room Bar Pro would need to acquire Apple Vision Pro goggles, which, with support and accessories, cost more than $4,000 apiece. HP has not yet announced pricing for the Starline booth, but it is expected to be considerably more expensive than Apple Vision Pro because it entails more sophisticated technology and a booth setup. LRF displays are costly. The key question is demand, and the key answer concerns price. Until significant price drops, deployments will be one-offs instead of mass rollouts.

Although mainstream adoption of these products is not imminent, they do signify important advancements. 3D is coming, but objects in the mirror may not be as close as they appear. We are essentially moving into the era of mass-produced prototypes, which also includes Apple’s goggles. These products represent ambitious visions for the future of 3D interactions, well ahead of the current market.

These companies are pioneering new categories, aiming to define the future of communication in an increasingly distributed world. These products serve as proof-of-concepts, designed to gather use case insights and user feedback. Vendors must refine their technologies, optimize manufacturing, and incorporate user input to enhance future iterations. This iterative process should lead to more affordable 3D meeting solutions.

Starline also carries the “Magic Leap” burden. How many organizations can “launch” a technology before it actually becomes available? Will it be the lucky sixth generation that makes it to market? For every additional year that people hear something fantastic is coming, they build numbness to it.

Concluding Thoughts

Vendors are building out the 3D meeting space .Cisco Webex offers this functionality, and Google Meet and HP plan to introduce it later this year. It's an impressive experience that will find niche applications that justify its expense. Furthermore, costs will decrease. For those with specialized use cases, the tech is here or coming soon.

However, don’t hold your breath waiting for a the democratization of 3D video. Your favorite meeting room continues to get better with more intuitive controls, better audio, better video, better camera switching, and more, but it will remain 2D for the foreseeable future.

Technological advancements, economies of scale, and competition will reduce the price of components like micro-OLED displays, processors, and LFD screens. The problem is prices need to drop considerably for mainstream adoption. I hate to make predictions beyond ten years, so I won’t. For now, 3D meetings will remain exclusive to a select few, a common trajectory for emerging technologies.

Dave Michels is a contributing editor and Analyst at TalkingPointz.