Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×
Displays Sony Toys Technology

Sony Demo'ing 360 Degree 3-D Tabletop Display 102

JoshuaInNippon writes "Sony announced via a Japanese press release that they will be showing off a prototype of a tabletop 360 degree 3-D display that can be seen in any direction without special glasses at the Digital Content Expo 2009 in Tokyo, from October 22-25. The device is quite small, at just over 10 inches tall and 5 inches in diameter. The display, using LEDs, currently supports an image that is 96 pixels wide by 128 pixels tall, with 24-bit full color. Sony also says it could have a number of applications, such as a digital sign, a digital frame, a medical display, or a virtual pet. Looking at the product image, who else wants to bet on the latter?)"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Demo'ing 360 Degree 3-D Tabletop Display

Comments Filter:
  • by oldspewey ( 1303305 ) on Monday October 19, 2009 @01:57PM (#29796985)

    96 pixels wide by 128 pixels tall

    If this thing is a 3D display, shouldn't there be another pixel dimension quoted here?

  • by spun ( 1352 ) <loverevolutionar ... minus pi> on Monday October 19, 2009 @02:02PM (#29797063) Journal

    96 pixels wide by 128 pixels tall

    If this thing is a 3D display, shouldn't there be another pixel dimension quoted here?

    I'd settle for an explanation of how the thing works.

  • by OzPeter ( 195038 ) on Monday October 19, 2009 @02:05PM (#29797117)

    96 pixels wide by 128 pixels tall

    If this thing is a 3D display, shouldn't there be another pixel dimension quoted here?

    It is probably one of the spinning mirror type displays. They project different 96 x 128 pixel images onto a spinning mirror depending on the angular position of the mirror. So the 3rd dimension that is probably missing is the minimum angular feature within the 360 degrees.

  • by fyngyrz ( 762201 ) * on Monday October 19, 2009 @02:08PM (#29797171) Homepage Journal

    This, or something else truly 3D (as opposed to stereo tech), will no doubt be scalable. The problem we have, really, is there is no 3D media. No movies, TV shows, etc. Only computer generated imagery is readily available in 3D at this point.

    Making stereo media is almost trivial. 3D is a whole nuther ball of wax. Highly desirable, but no less difficult for that.

  • Not a new idea (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bussdriver ( 620565 ) on Monday October 19, 2009 @03:19PM (#29798337)

    Its clearly the rotation screen idea. Those clocks and other gimic 2D displays where a line of LEDs are moved quickly to create a virtual flat surface and a synchronized micro controller figures out what to flash on the LEDs when they "scan" past a point in space. The concept is similar to the old tube TV with electron scans-- but in a way, it is more primitive in that a physical scanning process is involved.

    The 3D version is the same concept but has a flat surface screen that rotates on the Z axis. Their photo is a cylinder tube which implies its a rotating screen like all the others of this kind. What is odd, is why they didn't leave the top open-- the earlier designs made the top clear-- and could use a hemisphere to cover it.. I suppose its easier on the bearings and RPM to be supported on both sides of the shaft...

    It has serious physical limitations. rotational velocity means screen size must be small and it has to be STRONG (so LED not LCD.) Probably needs 2 screens on the 2D surface to get a good frame rate at a lower RPM. I'm guessing they went for higher RPM in a tube with screens on both sides using surface mount LEDs. (they could have wanted the top just to keep vibration and noise down so it could be made with lower tolerances.)

    The reason I do not think it is a mirror like other people is the low resolution of the image-- if they are going to reflect a screen they may as well enlarge it and place a higher quality screen near the center of the shaft where the forces are minimized. Say they do some clever optics with a stationary screen-- the why not use an even better screen?

The price one pays for pursuing any profession, or calling, is an intimate knowledge of its ugly side. -- James Baldwin