Matchbox-sized Laser Projector 291
soupisgoodfood writes "Light Blue Optics Ltd. have developed a laser-based projector called the PVPro. It's small enough to fit into a cellphone or PDA.
Some specs: Supports resolutions up to 2048x1280; No moving parts; Infinite focus; Green monochrome, with a colour version expected late 2006; Max consumption of 1.4W with an average of <350mW.
Looks a like a good solution to the increasing problem of smaller devices trying to display more information."
Missing spec (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Missing spec (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Missing spec (Score:5, Funny)
The lasers run about 10k$, but the sharks are alot more expensive
Re:Missing spec (Score:3, Insightful)
I've been waiting for laser projectors arrive for a good while now; it's sort of obvious that it's got to be the solution at some point, and this heading made me jump in my seat. But as long as they can't even show a picture of it working, I'm still not holding my breath.
For something as obviously a far from ready for commercialisation as this, noone could know the price of a consumer-ready unit yet.
That said, using holography to direct the bea
How this was invented... (Score:2, Funny)
M: Hey, that sounds cool. Why don't you take out the explosive and send one over to my office? Pip pip, cheerio.
Miniature Office Supplies (Score:3, Funny)
and you know what, when it arrives - its mine not yours.
Re:Miniature Office Supplies (Score:2)
Like this one? [swingline.com]
I'm actually disappointed to find out they've changed the design. Here's what the classic Tot stapler looks like. [ardenwebsales.com] And the classic Tot stapler is only available in red.
airplane advertisements (Score:2, Funny)
Yet another way I'm sure I will come to hate cellphones...
Re:airplane advertisements (Score:2)
Re:airplane advertisements (Score:3, Insightful)
Computer (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Computer (Score:4, Interesting)
I have a better idea. Imagine a portable LaserMAME [nightlase.com.au] console. You could project classic Asteroids or Gravitar games onto walls! OR, they could use it to bring back the Vectrex [wikipedia.org] in all its "portable" glory! (Perhaps even Game Boy sized?)
Re:Computer (Score:5, Funny)
Hours of fun in my book, much more so than Asteroids or Gravitar. It's funny when it's not you.
Roadrunner is more like it (Score:4, Informative)
Use this to project a fake doorway onto walls and watch your victims slam into walls, ala Bugs Bunny.
Bugs Bunny cartoons do not feature advanced technology whereas Roadrunner cartoons do. So what really would happen is that you would project a fake doorway onto the wall, your intended victim would walk up to the wall, open the door, walk through the doorway and close the door behind. Astounded, you'd run to the door only to slam into the brick wall, a la Wile E. Coyote.
Combine this with a virtual keyboard (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Combine this with a virtual keyboard (Score:2)
Re:Combine this with a virtual keyboard (Score:2, Interesting)
Both aspects (I and O) are close to being solved of late. For example, a virtual keyboard could also take the form of a virtual tablet and combine with voice and/or handwriting recognition for a sort of hybrid application interface. Whether or not you like that particula
Re:Combine this with a virtual keyboard (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Computer (Score:2, Interesting)
Can't copy-n-paste from the PDF but the figures I read included the following: Video-style images, typical image diagonal and brightness, for a 16:9 aspect ratio image: 15" @ 200 candles/m squared (equivalent brightness to typical laptop screen).
They have a "full brightness" figure but this seems to be less bright than the "laptop" value! Can anyone explain?
Screw that (Score:2)
Re:Yes, Really (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Yes, Really (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, let's say we want a 64" flat panel display. At 16:9 that would be about 55"x31", or an area of 1.13 m^2. Our little projector will only do about 11 cd/m^2 on that. Not good.
BUT... if the technology can be scaled to higher powers:
to get back to our 200 cd/m^2 for the big screen experience we need about 18 times more power. That is, between 6.4W and 25W, assuming no extra losses when scaling up.
Just for fun, I checked out home theatre projectors. I found one at 750 lumens, another at 1200. Let's say 1000. That's 25 candela. SO, to get equal performance to the standard projector we need to put out twice what we are. We might expect a power drain of 700 mW - 2.8 W. Not bad!
Surely they can make this thing put out twice as much light as it does... in fact, we might expect the full colour version to put out three times as much light, which (unless I made a mistake) should make it brighter than most home theatre projectors. Presumably they can do that in something that's not much bigger than, say, a cell phone. Provided this thing works, it should be pretty cool.
color ? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:color ? (Score:2)
Re:color ? (Score:4, Insightful)
Blue lasers really still so hard to come by? (Score:3, Informative)
Moreover, years have gone by already since Schneider/Jenoptik demonstrated their "laser display technology" (albeit "diode-pumped solid-state" [jenoptik-laserdisplay.de], i.e. not quite as tiny...) and announced to have "developed the heart of this technology, the Red-Green-Blue laser (RGB laser), ready for mass production." [ [manufacturingtalk.com]
Re:color ? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:color ? (Score:2)
Yet another reason for Slashdot to hate Sony and Blu-Ray!
Re:color ? (Score:2)
Re:color ? (Score:3, Informative)
New gadget for class (Score:2, Funny)
Re: Screens have rights, too ;-) (Score:4, Funny)
now.... can you make it detect the surface? (Score:2)
then you project based on the 3-d specs of the head..
why? remember how annoying laser pointers are? imagine getting mannequins to wink at people at macys...
or put your head on one.....
News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Color (Score:5, Informative)
It works at 640x480 in Full Color (3*8 bit).
It's even smaller at the size of "2 sugar cubes".
See here for yourself [ipms.fhg.de]
Re:News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Co (Score:5, Funny)
Damned europeans and their metric units. Hrumph.
Re:News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Co (Score:2)
Did anyone else notice this? (Score:5, Funny)
If they make a monochrome projector, I'd at least expect a light blue one!
Re:Did anyone else notice this? (Score:2)
They will be recreating the experience of my first Compaq computer, but bigger than life.
Re:Did anyone else notice this? (Score:2)
pictures in use? (Score:3, Insightful)
Definetly has me interested, Especially a color model. If they can replace all of our LCD based projectors with a laser one thats absoletly quiet and virtually maintience free for not much more than an current LCD/DLP projector, then they definetly got my attention.
Re:pictures in use? (Score:2, Informative)
Action shot? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Action shot? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Action shot? (Score:2)
Re:Action shot? (Score:2)
Well it needs wires (Score:2)
Neither the article picture nor the one on the web site have the little plastic box attached to anything... Not much room for a battery. No FM tuner.
Lame.
Re:Action shot? (Score:2)
This is going to be faint and low contrast.
Think penlight power.
Most standard "conference room" style projectors are several hundred watts.
Re:Action shot? (Score:2)
First up (Score:2)
I didn't read the article, but I did check out the company's website. It reminds me of all the other young, upstart 'labs.' The only real red flag on this is that whole, infinite focus deal. It's going to get blurry after a few hundred feet...
Hmm... I'm sure there's more vaporware I could mention. Wasn't there some "mircle chip laptop" or something that ran at 6GHz and had fusion as a powersource?
Re:First up (Score:2)
Re:First up (Score:2, Funny)
About time! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:About time! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:About time! (Score:2)
As an ad-hoc projector which can be built-in, I'd gladly sacrifice the colour. For big presentations, the big projector can be used.
False-colour, like red and green would be ok too. I think you could get a much more reasonable amber from that.
Re:About time! (Score:5, Informative)
light sources (Score:3, Interesting)
So, then, do they have to use such high-priced [buylighting.com] light sources? The lamps for old-school overhead projectors or slide projectors are well under $50 [buylighting.com].
Is there some inherent requirement in projecting a digital image that requires so much more lamp, versus projecting a film/transparency/analog source?
Re:light sources (Score:2)
if you don't mind only using it in the dark a cheaper white bulb will also work
they are hard to make because they are both very high output and carefully balanced.
Re:light sources (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:About time! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:About time! (Score:2)
At 2" x 3.6" x 9.75" and less than two pounds, it's the most portable 1024x768 native XGA projector I've ever used. Sorry it's a regular lamp, and the 1000 Lumens isn't the brightest in a well lit room, but the only thing holding it back from being a multimedia powerhouse is the lack of Component video inputs. But for that I'd recommend the LP640 with component adapter. It does native 1080i at 2000 lumens.
Not very bright (Score:3, Informative)
Typical Diagonal Image & Brightness: 7" @ 800 cd/m^2 - 15" @ 200cd/m^2 (50% max average pixel amplitude)
What good is all that resolution when you can't get the viewing area above 15" without going to a dark room?
Not that it's not a brilliant (hah!) achievement, anyway. Bring on the fanless projectors!
Re:Not very bright (Score:2)
1: Yes, I know you can set font sizes etc., but at least the Windows implementation is far from seamless.
Why mobile? (Score:3, Interesting)
-Rick
Re:Why mobile? (Score:3, Interesting)
They give figures for a 15" screen; a 48" image is going to require 9 times as much power. I'm sure you'd be content with 13 watts, too, compared to the vast amounts of juice your 48" projector puts out.
Green Monochrome? (Score:2, Funny)
Hey! I remember that. The computer lab's Apple IIes had those (though admittedly, not 2048x1280). I wonder if you can play Oregon trail or lemonade stand on this thing...
Re:Green Monochrome? (Score:2)
from the world of facts department (Score:2)
Re:from the world of facts department (Score:2)
Cellphone? (Score:2)
It might be a cool as a PDA sled though so that you don't have to have the bulk all of the time.
Re:Cellphone? (Score:2)
It's all fun and games.... (Score:2, Funny)
Sweet (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm expecting to see game consoles that don't need a TV anymore - would be super-portable.
Now, the question is when we can couple this with pupil-tracking to draw the images directly onto the retina. I want my metaverse.
Warning! Don't look directly (Score:2)
Given our current litigeous society I wonder if they'll be able to sell it.
Re:Warning! Don't look directly (Score:2)
Frickin' Guppies with Laserbeams attached to their (Score:2, Funny)
Now we can strap lasers to guppies heads as well....
Heads Up Displays? (Score:5, Funny)
Screw projectors, I want this for my HUD! (Score:2)
Yep, that ought to do it!
Goes well with a "projection keyboard" (Score:2)
I would like a cellphone with a built in projector screen, projection keyboard, wifi, that runs on a fuel cell.
I think that would _complete_ me.
No Photos? (Score:2)
Now they just need blue and red (Score:2)
RGB baby.
Oh, and yes I know it is more complicated than that.
projector in a cell phone? (Score:2)
And I used to think innovation was a good thing...
Anyone thought of the idea that... (Score:2)
Breaking News! (Score:2)
Yeah really, no pictures? (Score:5, Insightful)
Rant aside, if this technology DOES exist, it is very cool. Integrating a projector into mobile devices or notebooks is great, but considering the resolution, it would a great Home Theater projector as well. Laser light remains strong and bright over long distances, so in theory, you should be able to get big screens in the home without worrying about dimming the image.
The only thing I worry about is that while having a high resolution, laser is such a highly focused light that will these "pixels" be too separated to offer a decent image? Even at 2000+ points across, if those points are spread out too far apart, then you won't get a decent projected image. Chances are, mobile applications where you can shine the image a few inches or feet away is probably all that laser projectors are good for. Throwing the image across 20 feet, while still bright, might separate the pixels too much and make for a poor image.
So far, it looks like this company is just looking for investors, and as such, I would consider this vaporware. They are definitely looking to bank off the success of iPod video devices as well as the current fad of displaying television on Cell phones.
Re:Yeah really, no pictures? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Yeah really, no pictures? (Score:4, Interesting)
My guess is that with the laser projector each pixel will really be a horizontal dash. The only place you might get separation would be in the vertical direction, but you get that even with normal TVs and it isn't very noticable. If you fired it against a screen that would scatter the light somewhat then it might help in this regard.
What is "infinite focus"? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What is "infinite focus"? (Score:2)
Can anybody give me the 5-dollar summary of the physics behind this?
Re:What is "infinite focus"? (Score:3, Informative)
No need. Think about how a CRT works. You aim the laser at each of those pixels for a fraction of a second, scanning the entire surface, and repeat fast enough for it to look to your eye like all the pixels are lit at once. In theory... But then there's more to it, which brings us to:
how do you get around the diffraction problem where the light from one pixel gets spread out over the other pixels?
From their release, it sou
Great! I'll take one of the green ones... (Score:2)
What about the "sparkle" or "dazzle" effect? (Score:3, Interesting)
I have a hard time imagining watching an entire wall full of sparkle effect across the entire picture. Do they somehow make the light non-coherent, so your eye doesn't have this problem?
Re:What about the "sparkle" or "dazzle" effect? (Score:3, Informative)
How does this box work? (Score:3, Insightful)
They say that because they can focus the laser so well, the computer generated hologram can be very small.
They say that the system works by "steering light" instead of blocking it (an LCD array blocks light to modulate it).
Anyway, none of this tells me very much. Are they using a piezoelectric mirror to scan a laser across a hologram, that bends the light to scan the image? Are they using a 1D mirror or LED array and then scanning that with a piezoelectric mirror/hologram? I assume that a piezoelectric mirror moves so little and so robustly that it's not considered a "moving part".
What is the particular brand of magic that these people are using?
Thad Beier
Dang laws of science again! Article BS (Score:3, Insightful)
Three Hundred Fifty Milliwatts is 0.35 of one Watt. Most lasers are under 50% efficient. The deflection and modulation and optics are unlikely to be more than 50% efficient.
So imagine spreading 0.090 watts of light over a screen-sized area. Pretty dang dim! Like you'll need dark adapted eyes to even see the picture.
Still a neat device, but you're not going to run your own Drive-in movie theater with it.
Roaming advertisements (Score:2)
Re:Privacy? (Score:3, Insightful)
Human Judgement (Score:2)
Re:Human Judgement (Score:2)
Re:Privacy? (Score:2)
At this resolution (Score:2)