Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

140" Monitor Demonstration At Purdue

Posted by timothy on from the living-room-or-war-room dept.

michaelpapet.com writes "Edward J. Delp, a researcher at Purdue University is working with Philips to make a monster 140" monitor using 4 projectors on a single screen. Article claims it would be good for National Security... I dunno, I see this being the only way to satisfy 'big screen envy.'"

6 of 238 comments (clear)

  1. National Security is an overused buzzword... by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This tech is only being billed for a national security use because that's where the government wasteful spending is these days. If everybody was concerned about hurricanes for some strange reason, then this tech would be sold for its weather uses.

    This monitor can only display a super-high-res security camera image if a super-high-res camera was installed too... and that resolution on a map would be wasted if they don't have a different datapoint for each pixel. I'm putting this one under "cool tech without any real use".

  2. National Security by Daniel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Article claims it would be good for National Security... I dunno

    What you fail to realize is that it's spelled "National Security", but it's pronounced "GRANT FUNDING".

    Daniel

    --
    Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
  3. And since current desktops are not vector based... by deragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And since current desktops are not vector based, desktop icons are ridiculously minuscules and increasing the fonts up to 1000% causes text to fail fitting within the widgets boundaries.

    I want a fully vector based desktop, on Linux, and I want it adopted by the major distributions as the default. I know that their are some vector based desktop, but they are not usefull since they are not widely deployed and apps are not coded for them.

    I want to be able to program and specify that Widget B is 70% the size of Widget a, and the window is by default 12 cm wide or 50% of the width of the desktop (user configurable).

    I hate specifying in pixels. They are not the same on different display devices.

    --
    Remember the year 2000? They promised us flying cars. They delivered the PT Cruiser...
  4. Re:DPI by Methuseus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There's a problem there. The story seems to say that the projectors used are regular, off the shelf products. In that case the likely resolution each would have would be 1024x768, or even as low as 800x600. The 1920x1024 that you are quoting is an extremely high resolution for the average projector.

    They also state that it has "higher resolution than a TV". That merely means that the image, as a whole, is at least 800x600. That's not very high res. Also, the pictures they display are reminiscent of a projector I used at 1024x768 to create an 11 foot diagonal screen, so it could be made up of 4 800x600 displays rather easily and still have good resolution.

    --
    Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
  5. one small problem... by Daniel+Ellard · · Score: 2, Insightful
    ... there's no door in the house large enough to squeeze it through.

    I guess I'll have to play life-sized doom3 in the garage...

    --
    Disclaimer: I work for a company, but I don't speak for them.
  6. Re:Standard Multi-Image Trick by cirby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Modern video projectors are much, much brighter than 35 mm slide projectors ever were. You can get a couple of thousand lumens out of a box you can fit in your briefcase, and the large venue projectors toss out 17,000 lumens or so. Even a "medium" projector will embarrass any normal slide projector you can name, and gives the monster transparency machines a run for their money (think overhead projector films with a honking big light source and a large lens).

    As others have mentioned, the Dataton system makes it reasonably easy to put arbitrarily high resolutions on a screen (I've heard of 8000+ pixel wide setups). The big technical hurdle is now the screens themselves. It's a pain in the ass to make a seamless screen much bigger than 20 feet or so wide (the biggest rear projection screen I've worked on was in the 36 foot range, trust me on this),

    By the way - with a projector designed for large venues, aligning two or more projectors to within a pixel or so isn't that hard (almost all LCD and DLP type projectors have worse misalignments between R/G/B in their optical system anyway). At the scales we're discussing, you just have to be able to accurately shift the projector itself by 1/8" or so (a 1920 pixel wide image on a 20 foot wide screen gives pixels about that size). We usually spend more time doing color balance between machines than we do in the geometry tweaks.