A Video Projector That Fits In Your Pocket 187
Sven-Erik writes "Video projectors able to project high-quality images will be embedded in your cellphones and laptops within two years. This is the promise of a new technology developed at Cambridge University. These pocket projectors will have no lenses and no light bulbs. Instead, these future battery-powered tiny projectors will rely on holographic technology and special algorithms. In 'Holograms enable pocket projectors,' Technology Research News explains that a 2D hologram will be created on a microdisplay and projected by using a laser beam. This has been possible because the researchers have written special algorithms which generates the holograms a million times faster than standard ones." Update: 07/03 21:21 GMT by T : Note that this text belongs to Roland Piquepaille and comes from his weblog; submitters, please strive to make your sources clear.
Is that a video projector in your pocket (Score:5, Funny)
Oblig Star Wars Ref (Score:5, Funny)
"Help me Obi Wan Kenobi, You're my only hope."
Re:Oblig Star Wars Ref (Score:5, Insightful)
And now it seems incredibly prescient lol, given the millionfold increase in processing speed using the noise variance method described in the article, the trade off between graininess and speed actually becomes quite rational.
Re:Oblig Star Wars Ref (Score:1)
Of course, even a broken clock is right twice a day. I'll chalk this shit up to coincidence.
Hmm (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Informative)
1: Plasmas look perfect in bright light, allowing you to use them without blanketing the room in darkness.
2: Plasmas are rated to last around a decade, give or take. Bulbs in projectors need to be replaced (after a comprarable amount of use) in about 1-2 years.
3: Plasmas are almost without exception higher resolution and clarity than projectors.
4: Plasmas are almost without exception better at displaying pure black and pure white, and thus at displaying all colors in between, than projectors.
5: Plasms dont require an unobstructed path between the projector at the screen, i.e. they're easier to position in a potentially crowded room.
There are more, but I'll leave it at that.
Re:Hmm (Score:3, Interesting)
It will be interesting to see how the new prototype Sony technology (the black screen thing) works out. It would be amazing to have a high quality projected image without needing great control of the ambient light.
There are also people doing reverse projection setups u
Plasma Burn-IN? (Score:2)
I believe projectors to be superior, but unless you really have a theatre to use them in, between ambient lighting, seating position and all of the rest of it, you will suffer.
Re:Hmm (Score:3, Informative)
1. 160" plasmas are rather more expensive than a projector (which can give you that size, easily)
2. You can't pick a plasma screen up in one hand and move it out on the veranda to watch movies outside
3. Cheap plasma screens have horrific quality, as the built-in processing is limited
4. Projectors cost 1/4 of the price of a plasma 5. Replacement bulbs for projectors cost about $100
6. Sony's new projector screens mean perfect viewing in light environments
I know where y
Re:Hmm (Score:2, Informative)
Projectors are just as clear if not clearer. In fact they are sometimes TOO clear, ie. the square pixels become visible. So recent projectors soften it slightly to get back to a more natural looking projectors.
But, all this is irrelevant for me. Projectors generally give 2-5x as large a screen at 1/2 to 1/4 the cost. That's a no b
Re:Hmm (Score:2)
brightness cuts in half in 2-3 years.
Watch for Apple (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Watch for Apple (Score:3, Interesting)
Kinda strange though, that when I think of those three items I don't think of Apple....
Re:Watch for Apple (Score:1)
2. 17" screen: Probably referring to the Powerbook being the first 17" notebook.
3. PDA: Newton.
Re:Watch for Apple (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Watch for Apple (Score:3, Insightful)
In the case of Newton, they made it big news. There were PDAs before, mostly industrial, but Apple were making a big fanfare about being the first mainstream PDA.
As it happened, all the publicity backfired big time.
Re:Watch for Apple (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Watch for Apple (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Watch for Apple (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Watch for Apple (Score:2)
Re:Watch for Apple (Score:2)
What do they say? "The proof is in the pudding."
I love pudding. Do you?
Naah, you probably hate it,
prefering to eat dry, old, stale bread.
Blech!!!
Oh, btw, you should check your Wikipedia again, since it's an ever changing document. You should probably copy and paste from it instead of just putting up a link, since you never know what it might say next. Then again, you could always write something for yourself.
won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:5, Informative)
If the size of the lens makes a difference in CCDs in camcorders (moreso than digital cameras) - won't the small size also affect image quality from these devices?
Also, will these devices be ANOTHER cost INCREASE? - because projectors (affordable units) are JUST now appearing on the market.
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:5, Insightful)
"No lenses are required -- the projected image is formed entirely by diffraction," said Cable.
Believe it or not, the cost is not likely to be that much higher, because there's no need for precision optics, just a tiny screen and a laser.
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, the cost is likely to be quite a lot lower than anything involving optics. Making lenses is hard work. Making lasers is easy. And from what they say in the article, I gather that the hardware for the image production bit is pretty easy to make too. What's complicated are the algorithms they use in the background.
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:2)
I suspect there is a reason that it has taken this long. I've heard about the possibility a few years ago, but not this method.
Now the only question is whether the laser colors conform to existing video standards or if they will look a little off, because how good it will look will depend on a reasonable level of color accuracy on the primaries.
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:2)
Thet said the big problem was generating the holo pattern quick enough - and this is where they say they outsmarted the previous methods. The rest of the problems are probably technical. Let's hope they wi
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:2)
Well, they mention in the article that they're not even trying to get colours with a single projector. Instead, they're investiating using two in parallel for that. I'm not quite sure how two would work though - would it try to use interference to create colour or what? Wouldn't you need three projectors for colour schemes?
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:2)
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:2)
That's what I was thinking too, but I could've sworn that it sounded like they were talking about getting full-colour with just two projectors. I don't know enough about the physics involved to even guess if that's possible.
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:1)
However, I'll be interested in the quality anyway... The article goes on to say that coming up with the hologram in real-time is accomplished by minimizing noise variance, and not noise. My guess though is that initial units will be "good enough". After that, incremental improvement of the technology should bring the quality up to HDTV levels.
P.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:2)
"Key to the device's diminutive size is the lack of lenses and high-power light bulbs. Conventional digital video projectors form images by generating a small picture on a transparent microdisplay inside the projector, then shining a high-power light through the microdisplay to a large magnifying lens.
In the researchers' design, a two-dimensional hologram is shown on the microdisplay rather than an image, and the projected image is formed by shining a laser beam
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:2)
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:3, Insightful)
The reason is that Holograms *use* diffraction as a means of creating the image. Diffraction is the phenomenon where if a light wave passes through a hole that is approximately the size of its wave length, it gets 'garbled' - or diffracted into unrecognizalbe patterns.
That's why you have a practical limit to the miniaturisation of lenses.
But aside from that, you have optical artifacts that occur even with normal SLR lenses. And that is because lenses are not perfectly 'stygmatic
Re:won't the small size also affect image quality? (Score:2)
Minor nitpick. Stigmatic--or more commonly anastigmatic--lenses don't have an infinite depth of field. Rather, an ideal anastigmatic lens properly focuses light all the way across the focal plane. Astigmatic lenses (lenses with astigmatism) will produce images that are blurry as you move further from the primary axis of the lens. That is, even if you focus your camera corr
New killer teleconference app? (Score:4, Interesting)
Pr0n? (Score:1)
Re:Pr0n? (Score:1)
Damn. I was hoping bathroom teleconferencing would predate portable holograms...although President Scroob probably thinks differently about that.
Re:New killer teleconference app? (Score:1)
Well, getting the pr0n industry to start using a new technology is a sure thing to get it to take of! ;-) Just think of Super-8, vcr's, Internet, DVD's...
Re:New killer teleconference app? (Score:3, Informative)
True, but they did the same thing to Super8 film and VCR's. But maybe that was before your time...
sign of the times (Score:5, Funny)
Take it anywhere (Score:5, Funny)
PHBs beware, do not approve a purchase of one of these projectors for use by Debbie from Sales.
Well.. (Score:4, Interesting)
The Laptop projectors on the other hand, if they are built in, would eliminate the need for bulky projectors when a worker needs to give a presentation to his boss or co workers.. they could even make mini tv's use this technology, and project onto any free space of wall.
Re:Well.. (Score:1)
Re:Well.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Well.. (Score:2)
Re:Well.. (Score:2)
Re:Well.. (Score:2)
Once upon a time we were all waiting for all cameras to have dot matrix screens which greatly improves interfaces. Now the things are in color and have games and web
queue the same jokes (Score:4, Funny)
--
Re:queue the same jokes (Score:2)
There are already a few cases involving people displaying porn on the headrest displays in their car (I dont have a link handy, but I could swear I saw one or more mentioned here at
How long after these are developed do you think it will be before someone is arrested for seruptitiously displaying pornography in public? What about if you flash it quickly so only oner person sees it, and stop before they realize who caused it?
Re:queue the same jokes (Score:2)
I think it's pretty clear what the movie theater owners think about their customers.
holograms in phones? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:holograms in phones? (Score:2)
* I use that to make the point, I'm not entirely sure how you would make a Jar Jar Binks ring tone but it's too horrible to contemplate anyway;
Sounds expensive. (Score:1)
Re:Sounds expensive. (Score:2)
Cell phones in theaters (Score:1)
Thank Buddha for technology... (Score:1)
Imagine trying to use a PDA with built in projector using todays bulb technology, not only would the PDA be the size of a large book but it would cook your hand too. Don't set it down too hard or you'll break the filament in the bulb.
The difference in power consumption between the laser and bulb is probably pretty similar. While the bulb only needs the power to glow and
Re:Thank Buddha for technology... (Score:1)
What, it's got extra toes or something?
Students (Score:2, Interesting)
I welcome our new pocket-sized projector overloards.
What's the light source? (Score:4, Interesting)
The actual imaging component of a projector isn't that big. Look at the TI DLP chip. [dlp.com] Their projectors are already down to 2.2 pounds.
Color is a problem. Currently, you need either a color wheel for field-sequential color or three imaging chips, which looks better. This new "holographic" display has the same problem. Note that their demo image is greyscale.
What's really needed are powerful LED arrays as the light source. If you could change the light source color at a few KHz, which LEDs can easily do, a one-chip DLP projector without a color wheel would work. With an LED light source, you could do some other obvious power-saving tricks, too. You need no more light output than the brightest pixel in that color in that frame. With sectional lighting, maybe less.
LEDs with enough light output for this are not far off. LEDs have taken over automotive taillights, and white LED automotive headlamps are expected in 2006. Toyota showed a car with LED headlamps in 2003.
That direction is more likely to result in smaller projectors than this "holographic" thing.
Re:What's the light source? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What's the light source? (Score:4, Informative)
The home page of one of the coauthors of the cited paper is here [cam.ac.uk]. It shows a hologram that takes a few seconds to generate on a 2 GHz PC. Pretty low quality, and presumably specialized hardware (which could probably be implemented as an FPGA) will be required to get it to video rates. But for static text type presentations, for the Powerpoint warriors who are the main market for projectors, speed is less important.
Re:What's the light source? (Score:3, Funny)
*replaces LCD headlight in car with holographic projector projecting image of oncoming truck to the car ahead*
Re:What's the light source? (Score:2)
I hate one chip DLPs. The rainbowing is ass until you get the 6x or better color wheels. The MMD chips are pretty small, but probably still too big for "pocket" projectors.
Re:What's the light source? (Score:2)
Re:What's the light source? (Score:2)
This particular company made a bad partnering decision, though; their LCD panel vendor didn't get funding and tanked. (Venture capitalists refer to this as a deal with "too many moving parts").
Great (Score:1, Funny)
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.
Cool, but potential for weird/annoying uses. (Score:1, Interesting)
Heh - good point (Score:2)
Now picture that, but only with a 24-bit high resolution image of someone's ass.
Re:Cool, but potential for weird/annoying uses. (Score:2)
If I may be so bold... (Score:2)
Seriously? In cellphones? WTF?
Yo, dude, you like behind the curve ... (Score:3, Funny)
And (Score:2, Redundant)
Can it be used as a computer display? (Score:3, Insightful)
The images were the same but contained different levels of noise. The researchers found that variation in noise levels affected people's perception of video quality more than the actual level of the noise.
I'm not familiar with holography, but doesn't the presence of noise mean that individual pixels won't be very clear? I suppose that would be okay for video, but what about using the projection as a computer display? Would it be good enough for text and fonts?
pr0n (Score:1)
Re:pr0n (Score:1, Offtopic)
The power (Score:3, Funny)
errr.. batteries? (Score:4, Insightful)
Kind of defeats the purpose, huh? Already when I start using my video camera is limits my cell phone usage. Imagine the energy requirements for a hologram projector.
Let's forget about putting all this stuff in cell phones... let's concentrate on actually getting this in a real projector of some sort before we start making high-faluting promises of having everything in our freaking cell phones.
This micro projector saves laptops. (Score:1, Interesting)
Low power, lighter, and when you need to wash the "screen" you just throw it in the laundry and thereafter dry and remove the lint.
And those of us that like to browse slashdot with *ahhem* one hand on their joystick and one hand on their *uhm* mouse, you won't regreat losing controll onto your monitor.
Help us Sony, Pioneer or Fujitsu! (Score:3, Funny)
Focus group's of American electronic companys say no one is interested in such things!
Help us Sony, Pioneer or Fujitsu! You're our only hope!
Can't access the algorithm description (Score:3, Informative)
I dont't know Sven-Erik, but he didn't wrote this (Score:5, Interesting)
just the next step (Score:2, Interesting)
Am I missing something ? (Score:4, Interesting)
Therefore what you need, past the circuitry, is a good compression algorithm for the holographic data. This is unlikely to follow the precepts of the JPEG/MPEG compression (more oppotunity for patents methinks). Together with the display technology you then have a viable system.
Interesting technology, maybe, but not a complete solution yet.
? 2-D hologram ? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:? 2-D hologram ? (Score:2)
Re:? 2-D hologram ? (Score:2)
Re:? 2-D hologram ? (Score:2)
Unfortunate (Score:2)
I believe the real solution will be when they can display that screen hovering in the air wherever you want.
You see, the problem is that people don't want to have to worry about projecting something onto somewhere, they want to just have the screen in front of them, and a holographic screen that hovers where they want would do the trick.
Special Algorithms (Score:4, Funny)
The answer to this and most of life's other thorny problems, I expect...
Re:Special Algorithms (Score:2)
Some really exciting possibilities (Score:2, Insightful)
This could be bad. (Score:2)
I'm sure I'm not the only one who's been in a movie theatre with the annoying jerk and the laser pointer.
Software patents (Score:2)
I hate to say it, but this algorithm is exactly the kind of thing that should be patentable. It's innovative (as far as I know; I'm not an optics guy) and I think it's reasonable to say that the inventors deserve a temporary monopoly so that they can profit from their invention. Unfortunately, in this case that means a software patent.
I'm pretty strongly against software being patentable (as most /.ers seem to be), but it's still worth noting that in some cases it might be reasonable.
Are these really holograms... (Score:3, Interesting)
Or maybe - are diffraction gratings a form of a hologram?
What I am trying to get at, is that they appear to have used a microdisplay to generate a diffraction grating pattern that generates the resultant image - similar to how the el-cheapo laser pointer keychain devices use small diffraction gratings to "project" words and drawings on walls.
Is there more to this? Am I missing something? Whatever the case, it looks like very interesting and promising technology...
5 years is optimistic (Score:2)
Unless a large amount of money gets dumped on this idea look for it in 10 years' time or thereabouts.
Moore's law (Score:2)
In less than 5 years, and even if Moore's law applies to kinda-RISC processors, they can accomplish 60x P4 speeds at making specialized calculations. Cost would be an issue, but probably, not even power consumption will be. Anyway, it's a drawback, but not a major drawback, to r
They should be patented (Score:1, Insightful)
Of course, and they should be. 'Novel' applications like this one are completely non-obvious. That's what patents are for. All I'm saying is that I don't think anything is wrong with this company getting patents for it's work.