Paper Capable Of Playing Videos Developed

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Paper Capable Of Playing Videos Developed

Posted by simoniker on Wednesday September 24, 2003 @07:01PM from the crumple-up-tonight's-daily-show dept.

Makarand writes "Nature has posted an article describing paper capable of displaying video using rearrangeable electronic ink, being produced by Philips Research Labs (in the Netherlands). The paper-display draws power from a lightweight battery, and displays data stored in a portable chip. The display consists of pixels containing a drop of colored ink that can spread over a reflective white background under electrical control to create colors. With fast switching times and lower switching voltages, these paper-displays are capable of displaying video images."

18 of 332 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Marketing madness! by Empiric · 2003-09-24 19:04 · Score: 4, Interesting

Okay, it might be way too late at night for me to be posting, but...

I wonder if the advent of multimedia paper, as it were, will create a sea-change in the nature of all types of advertising.

As it stands now, most every box/can/available-surface of products is in some way branded advertising for the product, like, your coke can says, naturally, "Coca-Cola". This advertising must translate into some approximately-calculable value for the Coca-Cola company, in terms of more coke sales.

But... is there an inflection point at which an ad for something else (say, Porsche cars) would be more valuable than the advertisement for coke? If so, might companies sell space on all manner of products wrapped in this multimedia-paper like banner ads?

It might be interesting to open my refrigerator and see a few-dozen multimedia presentations on various consumer goods, changing every morning, but... well, maybe a final trip in that Porsche to some Amish community might be more sanity-preserving.

--
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
1. Re:Marketing madness! by jestill · 2003-09-24 19:11 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I am afraid that as costs come down you may be right. Combine this with low cost sound systems and you have a recipe for complete madness. This sort of thing has been explored in the Minority Report Movie, and to some extend in Neal Stephenson's 'The Diamond Age'.
  
  --
  "Asleep at the switch? I wasn't asleep, I was drunk!" -- Homer
2. Re:Marketing madness! by Simon · 2003-09-24 22:04 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  It's not all bad news. These things will contain computers. Imagine hacking your wheaties box to show something more interesting. You could directly recycle and reuse all of the 'paper' you receive.
  If annoying animation gets out of hand, a few seconds in a microwave oven will probably fix the problem. ;-)
  --
  Simon
3. Re:Marketing madness! by shokk · 2003-09-25 02:18 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Think of how quickly a marketing campaign gets old. I've seen cases of Coke lately with Star Wars Episode 1 (not 2!) on the side. What if this could be kept in sync with the latest marketing campaign so that cases on the display shelves all showed the latest logo or ad? RFID can keep track of what the product is and only display the ad for that particular brand out of the thousands that might be playing on shelves that day. Imagine a stack of sode cubes on the shelf displaying ads and leasing time to the supermarket to show promos. Little subtleties like an old trademark character occasionally winking at the customers as they pass by. Imagine the Trojan condoms horse dancing around on the box. Then hook that up to some sort of RFID for people and the shelves can recognize you a la Minority Report. Fantastic reminders like "Say Mr. Jones, isn't it time you refilled that gonorreah medication?" follow you around the store.
  
  --
  "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
Impressive. Now, when does it ship? by silentbozo · 2003-09-24 19:06 · Score: 4, Interesting

Color e-paper, great for display devices, able to replace LCDs, etc. Now when do these things go into mass production? I'd love to have flexible solar cells at pennies per yard, but I can't get those yet either.
"Great" frequency? by WegianWarrior · 2003-09-24 19:15 · Score: 4, Interesting

The frequency would be great, would hurt your eyes after a couple minutes I would guess...

I guess that depends on what you mean by a "great" frequency. In Europe, television has a frequency of 50Hz (it's 60Hz in the US) - even if I've heard that two and two frames are alike, in other words that the frequency is 25 or 30Hz. Movies in theaters are usually run at 24 frames per second, in other words a frequency of 24Hz.

There is no real need to have frequencies running much higher than that to watch a movie - since a frequency of 72Hz would just mean that the same picture would be drawn three times over, and thats a waste on a device like this.

In addition, there might not make much sence in talking about frequeny at all on a device like this; if they want to save on power, they only alter the state of the pixels that actually changes between each frame.

--
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
1. Re:"Great" frequency? by AlecC · 2003-09-24 20:57 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I guess that depends on what you mean by a "great" frequency. In Europe, television has a frequency of 50Hz (it's 60Hz in the US) - even if I've heard that two and two frames are alike, in other words that the frequency is 25 or 30Hz. Movies in theaters are usually run at 24 frames per second, in other words a frequency of 24Hz.
  
  TV has a field rate of 50/50 hz. Fields are alternately the odd and even lines of the picture, so the frame rate is 25/30 hz. The two fields are spatially slightly separated, so even on a still picture they are not the same; the second field gives you more information than the first. But if the original capture mechanism was a video camera, the two fields are captured at different times as well as different places, so it gives better motion display.
  
  There is no real need to have frequencies running much higher than that to watch a movie - since a frequency of 72Hz would just mean that the same picture would be drawn three times over, and thats a waste on a device like this.
  
  You are correct that film is at 24 hz. However, cinema projectors deliberatly flicker the light at 48 hz to give an impression of better movement. Once you get the trick of it, it is quite easy to spot 24-frame film material on TV, and it can become annoying.
  
  50/60 hz field rate, and making a frame out of two fields, are both in fact economy measures. When TV was first invented, high rates were difficult and expensive, and there was a tradeoff between picture quality and cost. In fact, percieved movement quality increases up to frame rates in the low 70s of Hz - hence 80Hz being "as good as you will ever need".
  
  A frame will be displayed 3 times at 72 hz only if it is sourced from a traditional film camers - a breed which is slowly dying out. All news cameras are now electronic, and Lucas is filming the Star Wars series electronically - othere will follow, slowly. Some of the new HDTV standards have 60 true frames, not 60 fields, per second.
  
  As I say, existing TV standards are a compromise for the tradeoffs of an earlier day. We will eventially get newer standards, and hence better pictures. But once a set of standards are embedded in the comsumer marketplace, there is a massive lag in the adoption of new standards.
  
  --
  Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
2. Re:"Great" frequency? by phliar · 2003-09-25 06:05 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Not exactly. With CRTs, the dot has to be refreshed every so often i.e. refresh rate so the image doesn't flicker. If the pixel stays the same colour i.e. doesn't fade, then it only needs to be refreshed at 24 Hz, the movie's frame rate. If you only care about showing a cine movie, you don't really need a refresh rate any better than 24 Hz. This is why LCD screens can get by with lower refresh rates. This is also why digital graphics can show much nicer movement, your refresh rate is not limited to 24 fps.
  On the other hand, I find movement in movies very distracting because the image flashes painfully. Widescreen movies are the worst because your peripheral vision is more sensitive to movement. I think 24 fps for movies is too low, we should have a new cine standard with a higher frame rate. Maybe 36 fps.
  Well, I can dream, can't I?
  
  --
  Unlimited growth == Cancer.
Not e-books, perhaps, but... by achurch · 2003-09-24 19:22 · Score: 4, Interesting

I'll still take real dead trees over electronic paper for my leisure reading, I think, but how about the opposite application: writing? "Print" a document to the paper, mark it up in a meeting, and have the changes all saved without having to go back and mark it up again on your PC. Alternatively, take the paper to your favorite country getaway, write up a story, and (assuming your handwriting is decently legible) have it automatically OCR'd into text for later editing, without needing to lug a laptop around and all the associated annoyances.
I dunno, sounds good to me . . .
1. Re:Not e-books, perhaps, but... by lipi · 2003-09-24 20:56 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  ...but how about the opposite application: writing?
  
  Xerox has been there, done that:
  
  "Through a chemical process that Xerox is holding as a trade secret, "each ball is given an electric charge, with more on one side than on the other," Sheridon explains. So when an electric field is applied to the surface of the sheet, the balls are lifted in their oil-filled cells, rotated like the needles of tiny compasses to point either their black or their white hemispheres eyeward, and then slammed against the far wall of the cell. There they stick, holding the image, until they are dislodged by another field. At high voltages, the balls stick before completing their rotation, thus producing various shades of gray. Sheridon's group has also produced red-and-white displays and is working on combining balls of various hues to produce full-color ones.
  (...)
  But the real goal, Sheridon says, is also the most distant: an electronic surrogate for paper. Engineer Matt Howard hands me a wooden pencil that is plugged into a weak power supply. As I write on the sheet, the tiny electric field conducted through the pencil's graphite core darkens the screen wherever the tip touches. Howard is working on a handheld wand that will receive text and images from a computer and scan them onto a Gyricon page, which would then be annotated, photocopied, erased--but not discarded."
  
  Copy of the Scientific American article is here , but you may find other references.
Re:I welcome our new e-paper overloads... by stuffman64 · 2003-09-24 19:44 · Score: 2, Interesting

I was at a gas station in the Southside (a part of Pittsburgh) the other day to get some crappy coffee, and there was a monitor at the cash register playing ads for various car-related products and other crap. Since there was a line, and I have a short attention span, I just kept watching the ads when I was waiting. Apparently, the cashiers hate the thing because it repeats every few minutes or so (I would imagine this would be the only thing worse than listening to a pop or hip-hop radio station for an hour). It will only be a matter of time before these are everywhere.

--
--- At my sig, unleash hell.
Re:But how do you get color? by ejito · 2003-09-24 19:46 · Score: 1, Interesting

RGB is meant for emission of colors, like from a glowing monitor. CMYK is meant for reflection fo colors, like from a piece of paper.

The poster is trying to allude to the fact that a combination of colors creates whites and grays, not color. I do however disagree that the cots must be stacked to create visible color.

If the dots were tiny enough, it would be possible to use CMYK by dropping uneeded colors to white, and using all of the colors together to create a very dark black, while still keep fairly vibrant colors.

For example, a book with only the cyan and yellow colors highlighted would create a nice dark teal color. Now say if every other yellow was highlighted, it would make an even darker color.

One interesting thing to note: in the picture of their array, it looks like K (blacK) is a very dark blue. I'm sure it looks black to the naked eye, though
A one page book? by MacFury · 2003-09-24 20:16 · Score: 2, Interesting

Since the "paper" can be refreshed with any content...would there be any practical reason for an eBook to have multiple pages? The only reasons I can think of are; to save power by refreshing multiple pages only one time, thus longer battery life, and to transition between the habit of turning pages of a dead tree book.
Often time I like the tactile feedback of holding a book in my hands. I like that it doesn't make a noise unless I ruffled the pages, no humming fan or whining battery...but, I don't like turning pages and diverting my eyes from the left to right sides, especially when reading in bed.
All jokes aside, I like to read with one hand curling the left side underneath the back of the book which makes reading the right side of the book great, and the left side a pain.
Re:I welcome our new e-paper overloads... by Jace+of+Fuse! · 2003-09-24 20:46 · Score: 5, Interesting

Your point almost makes sense, until you consider the fact that all people are in fact suffering from more stress and enduring more psychological problems than previous generations.

You can blame better diagnosis (or misdiagnosis) if you want, but really I'm not sure the typical human is really meant to be as smart as society now days expects it to be. A natural human living off of the land really needs to know nothing more than how to make a spear, run from big beasts, and keep out of the rain.

Technology (be it tending crops or inventing holodecks for wild endless regret-free sexual encounters), builds on technology. Each generation has tools and knowledge that previous generations didn't have. At what point will it reach a level where few people can cope? Even now days most poeple haven't got a clue what's going on inside a computer. Most people haven't got any idea how a telephone, automobile, or television works.

How many times have you heard someone say "I don't need that many features on my TV/VCR/Microwave/etc"?

Some people evolve with the times, others just learn to cope, but more and more I think we're going to see people who simply can't hack it all. As more and more people become unable to deal with it, I can honestly see us finding a name for whatever disorder they supposedly have, fiding some medication for it, and then sending them on along their way.

We'll think they're slow, or stupid, or have no common sense, but in reality, these people could probably make a spear and hide in a cave as well (maybe even better) than the other overly cereberal upright hairless apes.

--

"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
Voila! by rwaldin · 2003-09-24 20:58 · Score: 5, Interesting

Print one of these and you'll have all the magic animated paper you need without electronics or drugs!
Re:guess what: by ColaMan · 2003-09-24 21:06 · Score: 4, Interesting

Just wait until someone develops a proxy filter for your downloadable newspaper content.

Ads? What Ads? :-)

--

You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
Re:I welcome our new e-paper overloads... by ZackSchil · 2003-09-25 01:21 · Score: 2, Interesting

Scott Adams, author of Dilbert, addresses this in one of his books. He calls it the competancy line. It's rising every day. He realized that he'd been overtaken it when a trip to the airport to sign up for a flight, use free airline miles, and run through the whole process got so complex that he couldn't do it all by himself. The problem is, it's a pretty scary truth. People these days have to remeber how to do so many things just to get through everyday life!

Most of us are so used to all the things we need to know by now but many people out there, my parents for example, are afraid of ATM machines, TiVo, computers, cell phones, fax machines, digital answering machines, call waiting, cd players, DVD players (why do you need a menu, I want to push in the tape and press play!). They just simply can't deal with much modern technology. My mother doesn't want to have to remeber how to do anything. If she can't figure it out on intuition, then she won't be bothered. That said, many Slashdotters may be aware of the sudden loss of literacy many people suffer from wjile in front of a computer :^D

(I get a call in my room at school. It's my mother. It's [I assume the computer] asking me: "Do you wish to save this document," what should I do? Well, do you want to save it? Yes. Then press Save. Oh, ok, that took care of it, thanks, click)

I end up being goaded into doing all her typing because she simply doesn't want to learn how to use a word processor. They can't cope for some reason.

I, however seem to maybe force a bit too much of it on them because I'm a huge technophile. Gotta go, my mother is in the next room screaming: "What is this TiVo central thing. WHERE IS MY TELEVISION!"
Re:Impressive. Now, when does it ship? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-25 02:16 · Score: 1, Interesting

Well the article says that: High-resolution monochrome electronic paper is already on the verge of commercialization, produced by Massachusetts-based company

High resolution monochrome electronic paper has been on the verge of commercialization for years now, ans I expect it to stay on the verge for years to come.

This material may actually become useful in the near term for billboards and other signs where high resolution is not needed. (though in the samples I have seen they still have a significant problem with the contrast being too low. But I'll believe in commercially viable high resolution electronic paper when I can buy it at Fry's

The killer app that I would like this stuff to enable is a compact, lightweight, high battery life e-book reader that doesn't make you want to pluck your eyeballs out after reading a couple of paragraphs. If they could get the resolution up (Yes, I know I'm dreaming, but I want 1200 dpi) and resolve all issues with contrast and glare AND deliver to market at a reasonable price this could be exciting stuff. At least that's my take when I started watching for its imminent commercialzation (4 years ago)