CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

Nashou66 · Joined: 12 Jan 2007 Posts: 16171 Location: West Seneca NY

too bad they COLOR lasers system cost way over 100,000 $$$$ but they say once production buidls up they'll go under 100,000$$$ Shocked

Athanasios

Leo · Joined: 02 Oct 2006 Posts: 55

I sound like a choir boy for Microvision, but the possibilities are endless. Microvision wants these in cellphones, cameras, laptops, keyboards, heads up display in automobiles (imagine a transparent gps overlay on your windshield that matches the road/turns you see in front of you) eyewear (military applications and also personal use). Imagine eyewear that scans a transparent laser image directly over your retina, creating an information/internet overlay of the real world as you walk around. Say you're standing outside looking at a mall or restaurant, the eye wear can show you what stores are in a mall, and the menu/reviews of the restaurant.

The actual laser projector is also small enough (about the size of a cigarette lighter) you could easily design incredibly lightweight rear projection tvs around it with very large screen sizes. And then of course you have the home theater market, where for the first time we have a projector that equals and even exceeds CRT in most areas (only lumen output and resolution being it's initial handicap).

Very Happy

Leo · Joined: 02 Oct 2006 Posts: 55

perisoft · Joined: 29 Aug 2007 Posts: 2920 Location: Ithaca, NY

I'm still wondering how - or if - they're getting around the laser sparkle. If they can't fix that it's a nix for anything but data projection. If they can... whooo, boy!

Of course, whether the CRT crew will be able to stand a projector with perfect colors out of the box, perfect geometry, and perfect focus at any distance is another issue entirely. Think about it - NOTHING TO TWEAK! We might have to start watching movies...

Nashou66 · Joined: 12 Jan 2007 Posts: 16171 Location: West Seneca NY

I read somewhere that Mitsubishi is working on a rear and front laser based system that will have the same black levels as crt !! But i wonder how that system will do with moving objects that is what i cant stand about digital right now.

Athanasios

Leo · Joined: 02 Oct 2006 Posts: 55

perisoft · Joined: 29 Aug 2007 Posts: 2920 Location: Ithaca, NY

Athanasios, there isn't any magic. A display device doesn't know the difference between 'moving objects' and non-moving ones - in fact, it doesn't know about objects at all. All it does is, at some update rate, alter the contents of its display system to match the frame buffer. In some cases, it can fail to do this completely each frame - sometimes because the optics or other hardware involved can't change its state quickly enough, sometimes because of desynchronization between the input source and the output.

There's a tendency among HT people to 'anthropomorphize' display systems as if they know what's being displayed (see the constant talk about how different projectors have different amounts of detail in the foreground or background - voodoo). In this case, a laser projector is as close to a CRT projector as you're going to get - in fact, because of the way it's scanning, it actually IS an analog device.

Perceived problems with digital projectors - lack of depth of field, problems with moving objects, etc - are likely a kind of pareidolia: As humans we mistakenly transfer our understanding of the real world into what we're seeing in a device which doesn't 'know' anything about the real world. (Also see: audio people talking about 'airiness' and 'imaging' and other nonsense terms regarding speakers and amps.)

Are there problems with certain systems in terms of accurately representing, in sequence, each frame of an input data stream? Sure. Does it make sense to assume a display system using novel technology will suffer from any of the same defects as existing ones, or that it's somehow amazing that it has some of the same benefits? Nope.

Leo · Joined: 02 Oct 2006 Posts: 55

garyfritz · Joined: 08 Apr 2006 Posts: 12088 Location: Fort Collins, CO

They'll need more oomph before they can do a projector. The PicoP only throws about 20 lumens. For the ~12 ftL we shoot for, that means it's limited to about a 15"-wide 4:3 screen. (Though the demo footage did show it being used in bright light, hmmm)

Perisoft, I think there *are* some issues with motion with some digital display technologies. E.g. LCD direct-view monitors have a response time, and I assume LCD projectors do too. If an object moves faster than the display pixels can keep up with, you'll end up with smearing or other artifacts.

perisoft · Joined: 29 Aug 2007 Posts: 2920 Location: Ithaca, NY

Leo · Joined: 02 Oct 2006 Posts: 55

garyfritz · Joined: 08 Apr 2006 Posts: 12088 Location: Fort Collins, CO

I'd have to see some documentation of that. Offhand I can't see why a "pure" red would look that much brighter than a mixture of wavelengths in the red region.

Person99 · Joined: 09 Mar 2006 Posts: 4899 Location: Flower Mound, TX

perisoft · Joined: 29 Aug 2007 Posts: 2920 Location: Ithaca, NY

garyfritz · Joined: 08 Apr 2006 Posts: 12088 Location: Fort Collins, CO

And in addition to that, "real life" doesn't happen in a darkened room... which has a major impact on how your eyes perceive whatever light is in the room.

Leo · Joined: 02 Oct 2006 Posts: 55

ecrabb · Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:03 pm Post subject:

You're both right but sort of skirting or missing Dave's point.

Gary, the room is dark to create a non-distracting "window" into the environment the writer wrote and the directors shot.

I think what Dave is getting it is how much illumination it takes to make a picture that's believable - or realistic. How bright to we "expect" the image to be. What's the minimum difference between light and dark that it takes to create dynamic, colorful, "realistic" looking images? We can probably all agree that 12fL looks great and 4fL would looks like ass. I know 12fL looks great in my room. But, what Dave is saying is people prefer something closer to 14fL. I can see how that would be true. 12-14fL is what it takes to create a great visual dynamic range.

To use an audio analogy, we don't need to actually play a soundtrack at 175dB to make it feel like a jet fighter is passing overhead with afterburners on. In fact, 105dB will do just fine to give us the very realistic impression of the jet fighter flying overhead. Just as in the picture, it's the contrast between soft and loud (dark and light) that makes it believable. We need some loudness though to be able to recreate the dynamic range we hear in our real world.

SC

ThomasW · Joined: 22 Jan 2008 Posts: 16 Location: Uppsala, Sweden

That is kind of amazing ! If Microvision is able to to put out a model capable of 480p for late 2008, at 300 USD, I wonder how far off they are to build a model for highdef à 1080p ? My bet is maybe late 2010 ? I'll have it in mind for an upgrade from my NEC6PGextra in a couple of years, if the price is within reason, for me about <7000 USD.

David_Web · Joined: 02 May 2007 Posts: 418 Location: Sweden

garyfritz · Joined: 08 Apr 2006 Posts: 12088 Location: Fort Collins, CO

That Brightside tech sounds awesome, but -- that review was written 2.5 yrs ago. After drooling all over the display, they said "we could see this technology incorporated into enthusiast-level displays by the end of 2006 or sometime in 2007." I dunno about you, but I haven't seen any HDR displays on the market yet... Dolby bought out Brightside a year ago. Where are the products?