There's no way on earth that was a real hologram (i.e., a 3-dimensional projection in the studio with Wolf in Atlanta).

Based on what I saw, and the reporter described, it was essentially a chroma-key (and a bad one, based on the blueish outline around the subjects). They surrounded the reporter (standing in a totally blue-colored room) with static, locked-off cameras, in a 360 degree circle, so that they could shoot her from any angle. The new 'trick' CNN used was that the cameras in the Election Center in Atlanta talked to the array of cameras at the remote location, so that as an Atlanta camera zoomed into empty space (where Wolf Blitzer was pretending to look, and the alleged hologram was being 'projected') the camera at the remote location zoomed in, in sync. Also, different camera angles in Atlanta caused different cameras at the remote location to be selected, to match the sitelines and angles correctly.

For a news organizaton to call that a hologram is really, well, lying. And it didn't even work, witnessed by how rarely they used it.

It's a composite effect. In other words, create by mixing images in synch. There is no in-studio hologram, only a viewer "hologram."

Tricky to light, I'm sure 360º cameras means cameras are pointing at other cameras so how is that keye'd out of the image? Challenging.

Also, they should have gone for the geek cred: put analog distortion on the reporter, scan lines, and made her monochromatic. You know, make it very StarWars.

Although I never saw it, I read a lot of articles about CBS's early color process. It involved a special TV set with a filter wheel moving in front of the TV screen, synchronized with a similar wheel in front of the camera. Here's the chronology of the process and how it was supplanted:

http://novia.net/~ereitan/CBS_Chronology_rev_h_edit.htm

This is a similar gimmick. It isn't as useful as the genuine innovation of "vitual sets" used in football and news shows. There's no way to simplify the 3-D chroma key process, unless broadcast quality cameras get cheap enough that every station can have dozens of them. Even if it were possible, this process wouldn't be useful for regular newscasts or even remote interviews. CNN blew a lot of money for nothing.

I watched CNN until this goofy stunt came on. It reminded me of that silly "bullet time" gimmick they used at the Super Bowl a few years ago. Just as pointless and equally annoying.

http://www.eyeliner3d.com/cisco_telepresence_holographic_video_conferencing.html

They used it with Prince Charles during the World Energy Summit. It's probably not what CNN was using, but it's not sci-fi by any means.

It's definitely a composite, they key in the reporter over the studio, and track, or "lock" the shot to the background based on points in the background image.

It seemed to me that they spent more time focusing on Jessica Yellin's backside than on her face. What's the point of that? I don't think any reporter would want that.

I didn't get to see this, but Ray Kurzweil, futurist and inventor, has used this system for several years to make "appearances" at conferences so that he can present even when he's unable to travel there due to scheduling conflicts. I believe he is the only private owner of such a system so far. Why do people find this spooky? -- if nothing else, it lowers his carbon footprint.

I saw this, and I was really unimpressed. For one thing, the interview became far less about what Ms. Yellin was actually "there" to talk about, and more about the gee-whiz technology itself. And even if Wolf had managed to focus on the topic of the evening, was there anything whatsoever gained by having Yellin "holographically" present? Why couldn't they have just put her face on an ordinary camera? This pseudo-holography seems to be a solution in search of a problem.

This was in this morning's Kurzweil newsletter:

http://gizmodo.com/5076663/how-the-cnn-holographic-interview-system-works

Who cares where a talking head is in terms of physical location? These creatures are hardly worthy of notice, much less concern for their physical proximity to one another.

....was there's probably some high level executive at Time Warner who typed "Fire whoever approved that project" into his blackberry as soon as they showed it for the first time. I don't think I want to know how much that thing cost.

Well, that and I wondered how long until they get Lieberman on that thing. He looks just like the emperor from the Star Wars prequel movies.

... was the first headline of the night to get the people at my party hooting and laughing, and yelling "help me, Obi-Wan!"

Many more network/technology giggles were to come, of course.

...they mean "green screen."

Money well spent, clearly.

The technology stuff on these shows always comes off so absurdly.

The anchors trying to use it are always befuddled and undermining it. "Look at me trying to use this bewildering techno thingy foisted on me by some egghead!" they seem to shriek.

Perhaps someday it will really work and then they'll be able to create convincing virtual rooms were the talent is really in studios all around the world. Who knows?

CNN! For its holographic interviews on election night.

What a butt-stupid display of senseless pyrotechnics.

Jessica Yellin about?

Her image was inserted digitally. Wolf could not see her, and this was no hologram. This technology has potential, although it was a bit ham handedly introduced.

The glow surrounding the virtual image was deliberate.

Was it CG'd in a post, or was the image somehow beamed into real life, real time. The former is a bit ho hum, the latter is kind of scary.