RETROSPECTIVE RECORD · PREPARED 16 SEPTEMBER 2026The archive · 100 retrospective records ↗
Presence Atlas
← The archive

A desktop light-field display trades resolution for angle

Looking Glass's own documentation describes up to 100 views across a viewing cone, not two views duplicated.

Historical event
January 1, 2018
Site publication
September 18, 2026
Visual for this record: A desktop light-field display trades resolution for angle
Visual published by cdn.prod.website-files.com, shown for identification of the record. Credit: cdn.prod.website-files.com · source page ↗ Rights: owner-review-pending. Source

What the record documents

Looking Glass Factory's own company history page, headed 'Hello, we're Looking Glass', states the company was founded in 2014 and that in 2018 it released what it calls 'the world's first desktop holographic dev kit', the original Looking Glass. That page is current documentation rather than a dated announcement and gives no specific launch day; the company's original 2018 crowdfunding campaign page could not be opened for this entry, so what follows rests on the company's present-day technical documentation rather than on the campaign copy itself. That distinction matters in a field where marketing language and a specification sheet do not always describe the same figure the same way.

What creates the image

The display is a lenticular light-field panel: a sheet of fine cylindrical lenses sits over an LCD so each lens sends light from a strip of pixels beneath it in a slightly different direction. Render enough different strips and a viewer moving side to side sees a continuously changing perspective rather than one flat photograph. The company's developer documentation, in a page titled 'How does Looking Glass Work?', states the display 'provides up to 100 discrete views of a 3D scene' across 'a view cone roughly 58° wide'. Inside that cone, each eye samples a different rendered view and perceives stereo depth with genuine, if limited, head-motion parallax; the documentation does not state what a viewer standing outside the cone sees, though a lenticular design of this kind typically keeps showing its outermost views rather than going blank.

What the quilt format actually is

Content is delivered as a 'quilt': one image or video tiling every rendered view into a grid, read left to right and bottom to top so that, per the documentation page 'Quilts', 'the bottom-left tile...is the leftmost view of the scene, and the top-right tile is the rightmost'. The Looking Glass Portrait model arranges its quilt as an 8-by-6 grid of 48 tiles, fewer than the 'up to 100' views quoted for the wider display family, showing that the exact view count is model-specific rather than one fixed number across the product line. The display's own processing slices the grid apart again and routes each tile to its matching lenticular strip.

Questions to bring to a demo

The mechanism here is a genuine light-field display in the narrow sense: many real rendered views, not two views duplicated. The precise view count and cone width, though, are figures the company states about its product family in general, not measurements independently taken from a unit for this entry.

Sources & reading trail

States the company's 2014 founding and the 2018 release of its first desktop light-field development kit.

Source published: Not established · Retrieved: 16 September 2026

States the display shows up to 100 views across a roughly 58-degree viewing cone.

Source published: Not established · Retrieved: 16 September 2026

Describes the quilt image format's grid layout and gives the Looking Glass Portrait's 48-tile arrangement.

Source published: Not established · Retrieved: 16 September 2026

Primary documents establish the record; the mechanism reading and the demo questions are Presence Atlas editorial analysis. This retrospective draft does not imply the site published on the event date.

Continue reading

Sources & reading trail

The documents above establish the record. The reading and the questions are this publication’s editorial analysis, written after the fact.

Published September 18, 2026, not on the date of the event described.