Matchbox-sized Laser Projector

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."

Comments

Cool Stuff

[Pizentios]

Now that's some cool stuff eh!

Missing spec

[jthayden]

Price?

Re:Missing spec

[JRGhaddar]

Actually I was wondering if it could project a holographic Princess Leia?

Re:Missing spec

[lbrandy]

Price?

The lasers run about 10k$, but the sharks are alot more expensive

Re:Missing spec

[ELProphet]

I've always been a little confused with that- is it the sharks that are expensive, or is it training the sharks to use the lasers?

Re:Missing spec

[eonlabs]

Green light, not blue. Still, you should be able to see the beams in mid air assuming there's enough power to them... I don't know how this compares to a standard green laser pointer.

Re:Missing spec

[famebait]

Never mind the price, can we actually see it project something?

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 beam without conventional optics and moving parts does seem like an interesting step forward. Hope they work it all out soon.

Re:Missing spec

[CoachS]

Seeing the beams in air is probably just a matter of giving it something to reflect off of. A tiny fog machine should do the trick. :-)

-Coach-

Re:Missing spec

[MCZapf]

Still, you should be able to see the beams in mid air assuming there's enough power to them... I don't know how this compares to a standard green laser pointer.

What?? Only if there's smoke/dust in the air, or the lasers are vaporizing the moisture or something.

Re:Missing spec

[Wierdy1024]

it's a very old slashdot post from a long time ago about marine animals that are trained to use weapond for millitary use. - couldn't find a link for you.

Re:Missing spec

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes but with a laser this small you would not need sharks. You really would just need something the size of a smaller fish... like a sea bass.

Re:Missing spec

[ELProphet]

Yes, I know... though (I thought) it was originally form Austin Powers.

Re:Missing spec

[ceoyoyo]

There's ALWAYS dust in the air. Go to a star party sometime. Chances are someone will have a green laser pointer for pointing out constellations and other features. You can see the beam quite clearly. It's impressive.

I wonder if that's a potential problem for this... you'll end up looking at the image through sparkles.

Re:Missing spec

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe i need to move somewhere smoggier. In northern Canada that doesn't work so well. :)

Re:Missing spec

[ceoyoyo]

Really? I've seen it done in the middle of nowhere (home town is about 600km away from the nearest major city). It doesn't work with red lasers though.

Re:Missing spec

[NATIK]

It is, it's Doctor Evil that wants "Sharks with freaking laser beams attached to their heads"...

Re:Missing spec

[jamesh]

If the moisture in the air already consisted of tiny droplets then it might work. If the lasers turned the water to steam then you wouldn't be able to see it anymore. Remember, steam is invisible. What you see coming out of your kettle is steam which has condensed into tiny drops of water.

+1 pedantic :)

Re:Missing spec

[DemingBuiltMyHotRod]

I've always been a little confused with that- is it the sharks that are expensive, or is it training the sharks to use the lasers?

It's absolutely training the sharks that is the major expense... On average, trainers lose an eyeball a week due to laser related injuries. (If you were in a tank with a shark wouldn't you look directly at it?) Keeping a single freaking shark with a laser on its head properly trained requires approximately 26 trainers a year! At $75K a year per trainer, a generous pension plan, plus some unbelievable medical and insurance bills, the costs add up quickly.

Don't pet the shark with your remaining hand!

Re:Missing spec

[Anonymous Coward]

During fire season you can see it. I've seen it both ways. Ain't reliable, though.

Re:Missing spec

[LoRdTAW]

Never mind price, how about pictures of it actually working?

LBO has developed unique laser-based projection technology, which uses computational algorithms and novel optical techniques to allow miniature lasers to display video images in real-time using the diffractive nature of laser light.

Right and my wife is Angelina Jolie. Besides less then real-time is too slow for me.

Understand that there is no glass, no prisms, NO MOVING PARTS, and no need for fans to provide heat dissipation.

I also understand that lasers come from a magical place where there is no physics and optics.

In addition, it runs on less than 1.5W at full power and less than 350mW while displaying typical video images (50% average pixel amplitude. There is also an infinite focus, meaning that no matter how close or far away, there are no optics to adjust for a clear picture.

It slices it dices it even makes you coffee! Seriously anyone with an optical engineering degree care to explain this to me? Last time I saw anything close to a laser projector it needed water cooled lasers, two rotating mirrors (one vertical and one horizontal) optics to focus it and it still looked like shit. This looks like nothing more then vapor technology to dupe unsuspecting investors out of there money. Like my dad used to say if it sounds too good to be true it probably is. I call bullshit on this one.

How this was invented...

[voice_of_all_reason]

Q: Now, Mr. Bond. For your mission, we have this keychain-sized laser projector that serves as a stun grenade when the red button is held.

M: Hey, that sounds cool. Why don't you take out the explosive and send one over to my office? Pip pip, cheerio.

Re:How this was invented...

[rufty_tufty]

Which M is this that says "Pip pip, cheerio"?
Dame Judy Dench has gone downhil...

Re:How this was invented...

[voice_of_all_reason]

Actually, all British people have to use both of those two phrases in conversation at least once an hour. It's the law.

Re:How this was invented...

[rufty_tufty]

Can you point me to this Britain on a map please?

Re:How this was invented...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the largest island of the United Kingdom, home to London.

You will find it east of the two regions called "Ireland" and North-west of the Dutch and the Deutche.

Re:Privacy?

[JesseL]

Uh huh. And why would this stop you from also having a more discrete display?

Miniature Office Supplies

[LiquidCoooled]

Now we have the mini projector, I want a mini red stapler.

and you know what, when it arrives - its mine not yours.

Re:Miniature Office Supplies

[Megane]

Now we have the mini projector, I want a mini red stapler.

Like this one?

I'm actually disappointed to find out they've changed the design. Here's what the classic Tot stapler looks like. And the classic Tot stapler is only available in red.

Re:Miniature Office Supplies

[boredofthesane]

I have one if you're interested in purchasing one =)

airplane advertisements

[0110011001110101]

So now when we're blinding pilots with our ground-based lasers, the passengers can read my annoying cellphone text messages while plummeting to the earth...

Yet another way I'm sure I will come to hate cellphones...

Re:airplane advertisements

[freeze128]

Well, you wouldn't plummet to earth if you had turned off your cell phone like you are supposed to....

Re:airplane advertisements

[Anonymous Coward]

well the joke wasn't funny, but at my own detriment I'll explain anyways...

A while back we had a couple isolated incidents here in the US where morons on the ground were shining their laser pens at planes... there was a big hubub about blinding the pilots and whatnot, and one guy I think even went to jail. My *poor* joke was attempting to say someone would shine one of these new laser projected screens at the plane, and while it was subsequently blinding the pilot, it would also be projecting my screen onto the plane, where the passengers could then read it while plummeting to earth (presumably because the pilot was blinded, not because someone on the plane was using a cell phone).

Anyhoo, apologies for the bad joke, and the resulting misunderstanding.

Re:airplane advertisements

[Kevin DeGraaf]

A while back we had a couple isolated incidents here in the US where morons on the ground were shining their laser pens at planes... there was a big hubub about blinding the pilots and whatnot, and one guy I think even went to jail.

According to this article in today's Detroit News, that douchebag is expected to be sentenced today. In addition, there were reports of the same thing happening a few days ago at the Detroit airport.

People are stupid.

Re:airplane advertisements

[NormalVisual]

Having worked with much bigger lasers than the pointer in question for a number of years, I still think the whole thing is ridiculous. An average green pointer with a divergence of 1.5 millirads will produce a spot about 9 feet across at a distance of 3000 feet (the distance at which the guy convicted was said to have been), and assuming an output power of 5 milliwatts and absolutely no scattering, that works out to around 550 nanowatts per square inch. It's nighttime, so let's assume the pilot's eyes are fully dilated to 6mm, which means that if the laser hits him directly, each pupil will receive around 30 nanowatts of power.

It might be a noticeable blip in your field of vision at night (certainly less than the airport beacon lamps), but no one can convince me that it's enough to even dazzle someone. It's definitely an immature thing to do, and I might even go along with it being a misdemeanor offense at the state level, but it's certainly not worthy of a 20 year sentence. I especially liked how the guy was charged with "lying to federal officers", while our government apparently feels no shame in doing the same to the citizenry.

Computer

[everphilski]

Once these come out in color, imagine having one of these babies inside your laptop. You can then set your laptop on any work surface 2-10' from a wall and have a big screen monitor. If we want to get fancy even we can slap some gyros and accelerometers into the computer and you can have the computer on your lap, and provided you don't wiggle too much ( no pr0n ) you could probably work fairly well from a sofa as well, the software would adjust the image and angle of the projector using servos, etc. Very cool.

Re:Computer

[AKAImBatman]

Once these come out in color, imagine having one of these babies inside your laptop.

I have a better idea. Imagine a portable LaserMAME console. You could project classic Asteroids or Gravitar games onto walls! OR, they could use it to bring back the Vectrex in all its "portable" glory! (Perhaps even Game Boy sized?) :)

Re:Computer

[ardle]

Not sure how well one of these would do 10 feet from the wall: the specs are here (pdf), I don't get them.

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?

Re:Computer

[0110011001110101]

I have an even better idea. Use this to project a fake doorway onto walls and watch your victims slam into walls, ala Bugs Bunny.

Hours of fun in my book, much more so than Asteroids or Gravitar. It's funny when it's not you.

Re:Computer

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, I can explain: It's not very bright.

What do you expect from a tiny box powered by a cellphone battery?

Re:Computer

[Anonymous Coward]

Not so fast --
From the article, it can project up to a "15 inch" display.

Re:Computer

[ivan256]

Hmm good clean fun....

What these will really be used for is actually more similar to what laser pointers are used for.

Now when you go to a concert, instead of seeing the laser dots of childish pranksters on various surfaces, you'll be treated to the Goatse pic, and your favorite rockstar getting boned by an enormous laser penis.

Yay technology!

Re:Computer

[Anonymous Coward]

...unless they switch this annoying yellow light in that large blue room on. Then a 1.4W Laser project exactly nothing. Heck, with 1.4W consumption it probably won't project anything at 10' even in the dark.

Oh, and I'd be surprised if they really had blue laser diodes.

color ?

[Arthur B.]

Well, that's easy for the green and red part, the blue laser is other business.. they don't come cheap nor small.

Re:color ?

[interiot]

Hopefully the proliferation of BluRay / HD-DVD drives will bring blue lasers' size and prices down.

Re:color ?

[darkitecture]

Well, that's easy for the green and red part, the blue laser is other business.. they don't come cheap nor small.

Yet another reason for Slashdot to hate Sony and Blu-Ray!

Re:color ?

[Arthur B.]

Naa, it's blue-violet... use it and you'll get some shity colors. For some reason, the human eye perceives some red in the violet (the sensitivity function of the red detecting cells is bimodal with a small bump in the violet)... so as long as there is some red in your image you could compensate it by lowering the amount of red but you won't get true-blue. Oh well, maybe not that much of a problem, after all, the brain perception of color is relative to the context rather than absolute, so in a dark room this would give good results, but not in a lighted environment with color references.

Re:color ?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Naa, it's blue-violet... use it and you'll get some shity colors.

Then you just place a blue filter sheet in front of the laser... no more red.

Re:color ?

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

I don't see why you can't get small blue lasers, as I'm guessing Blu-ray will be using them. But yeah, they don't come cheap, and I think there's also the lifespan issues. Maybe they're expecting a better blue laser to come out later in the year.

Re:color ?

[maxwell demon]

That won't work: There's no red light in the blue-violet laser. Indeed, the laser has just one exact wavelength, so a filter could not change its color (because the color change is done by absorbing different wavelengths). The "problem" is within our eyes, because our red-receptors don't just react to "red light" (longest visible waves), but also to "blue-violet light" (shortest visible waves). So unless you find a way to create "negative red" (i.e. a sort of light which suppresses the red receptors instead of activating them), there's no way to supress that "red".

Re:color ?

[KristoferP]

Blue is a overated color anyway.

Re:color ?

[Thud457]

Your anti-tetrachromat bigotry has no place on an enlightened plane such as slashdot. Be off with you, sir!

Re:color ?

[cbreaker]

The lasers in Blu-Ray players will likely be very small, very precise devices that would not translate directly into a laser projector system like this.

Re:color ?

[max99ted]

Perhaps the inventor of Blue Blockers could make a comeback with a new and improved Red Reducer?

http://www.tvproducts4less.com/blue-blockers.html

Re:color ?

[kcatpil]

This is not true, blue laser light specifically around the range of 473nm is becoming increasingly more advanced. Remember when red solid state lasers came around, a simple pen type red laser would cost upwards or $100. Then you could find a crappy keychain one in the 90's for 20 bucks. But at that point green pointers became popular, but the price tag when they were released was also extremely high, now this cost has become more manageable, I recently bought a standard 5mW 532nm laser pointer for $50 on ebay. Blue lasers are following the same patterns as red and green lasers, however, their progress is a bit slower since it uses less common materials, the ticket price on a 5mW is still around $900-1000. I am sure that soon enough we will find that blue lasers will also be selling at the dollar store, while yellow pointers are being sold for $100 (yellow lasers are currently being sold for ~$1200).

Re:color ?

[Anonymous Coward]

according to your lateral geniculate nucleus, "negative red" is green:

http://www.patmedia.net/marklevinson/cool/cool_ill usion.html

Re:color ?

[maxwell demon]

Good point. However, by mixing the complementary color, you get a "white component", that is, you don't get a pure blue, but a light blue ... wait, isn't that the name of the company? Now we know why! :-)

Re:color ?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can get red out of a blue laser with the proper form of filter. It just absorbs blue, and re-emits red.

Re:color ?

[Anonymous Coward]

$51. yellow = red + green

New gadget for class

[JJ the Moo]

Having a projector that size would make it so much easier to view all your converted, downloaded, mega-shrinked videos on the back of the student in front of you.

now.... can you make it detect the surface?

[way2trivial]

imagine if you could image the surface it's projecting on, likely take two imagers,
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.....

Re:now.... can you make it detect the surface?

[blincoln]

or put your head on one.....

I've seen this done years ago using a regular video projector. The effect is... unsettling.

News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Color

[Anonymous Coward]

The Fraunhofer Institute for Photonic Microsystems in Dresden, Germany actually had a similar Projector one year ago.
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

Did anyone else notice this?

[maxwell demon]

From the summary:

Light Blue Optics Ltd. have developed [...] Some specs: [...] Green monochrome [...]

If they make a monochrome projector, I'd at least expect a light blue one! :-)

Re:Did anyone else notice this?

[siriuskase]

Light Blue Optics Ltd. have developed [...] Some specs: [...] Green monochrome [...]

They will be recreating the experience of my first Compaq computer, but bigger than life.

Re:Did anyone else notice this?

[tjw]

Well, it also says full color by late 2006, so perhaps they're just working the kinks out of Red.

Re:Did anyone else notice this?

[operagost]

They're going for the old-school dumb terminal crowd.

Re:Did anyone else notice this?

[iabervon]

You can't direct light blue light with light blue optics; it obviously goes straight through. But light blue optics can bend green light perfectly well.

Re:Did anyone else notice this?

[owlstead]

Simple solution: They'll make the projector light blue instead.

pictures in use?

[Deathlizard]

Has anyone seen a picture of the projector in use?

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?

[rusty_razor]

After poking around on the site, I found a link to a press release containing a PowerPoint (yuck!) presentation. There were some images in there, which I've posted to my company's technology blog.

Action shot?

[Winterblink]

Ok, so there's pictures of it sitting next to a penny, and in the hands of some dude. How about a picture of it projecting something?

Re:Action shot?

[PatrickThomson]

That's actually a 2p coin, it's about 2.5cm in diameter.

Re:Action shot?

[DilbertLand]

Agreed, how can you not post an image demonstrating the display in operation? Is it that bad? Also, I'd say it's more "deck of cards size" instead of matchbook..

Re:Action shot?

[Anonymous Coward]

So then you could call it a money shot (ducks out of way of "projection").

Re:Action shot?

[Odin_Tiger]

That's matchbox. Clever little twist of words, too, since many people (like you) will read it as matchbook and assume it's smaller.

Re:Action shot?

[cnettel]

I think it's reasonable to assume that it's too dim to just point-and-shoot a picture. That can still be plenty enough if you can get a really dark room.

Re:Action shot?

[Winterblink]

It's also reasonable to assume that someone working there has a digital camera that allows you to defeat the flash, and control the exposure for shots in darkened environments. :)

Re:Action shot?

[zardor]

Because, at a disipation of 1.4W max, you'd probably have to do be in a dark room to see the projected image.
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?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, so there's pictures of it sitting next to a penny, and in the hands of some dude. How about a picture of it projecting something?

What you saw was the projection...

Re:Action shot?

[afidel]

The reason for that is that they use an emitting source which is blocked and filtered by the imaging element. The amount of light that actually escapes the projector isn't all that much. This would still be dimmer than your average conference room projector, but it might be on par with the current generation of less than 3 pound portables.

Re:Action shot?

[Plunky]

Because, at a disipation of 1.4W max, you'd probably have to do be in a dark room to see the projected image. This is going to be faint and low contrast.
Think penlight power.

Well, but penlights are a different kind of light source - if you look at a typical keychain laser pointer then the output is limited to 1mW over here in the UK.

If you get a good one, you can put a fairly bright dot on a building half a mile away..

and here is a cunning thing, if you close your eyes in a darkened room and shine a laser pointer into the back of your mouth, you can see the red glow quite clearly!

Re:Action shot?

[ceoyoyo]

Read the article. 15" image at 200 cd/m^2. Somebody noted that this is about equivalent to a notebook LCD display. Projectors use so much power because light bulbs are extremely inefficient. Which is also why they need fans.

I did the math and, if it's right, this thing puts out about half the light that a 1000 lumen home theatre projector does. I'd expect if you're willing to have a slightly bigger model and you give it 3-5 W instead of 1 you could have something every bit as bright as today's standard projectors.

Re:Action shot?

[Anonymous Coward]

How much is that in US dollars?

Re:Action shot?

[Random832]

what's relevant is the size of the coin - a 2p coin is the same size as the sacagawea/susan b anthony dollar coins

First up

[steveo777]

A portable version of the Phantom that ships with multiplayer Duke Nukem Forever.
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

[bangzilla]

...actually, cold fusion was the power source.....

Re:First up

[Anonymous Coward]

ya, i have to agree, vaporware all the way

Re:First up

[steveo777]

Cold fusion, you say?! Well, if I had known that... You wouldn't happen to have the pre-order website. I thought it was regular old fusion.

Re:First up

[Ekarderif]

Why would use ColdFusion when you can use Python?

Re:First up

[operagost]

Lasers have theoretically perfect focus, but they do tend to blur after a relatively long distance compared to conventional optics. So claiming an infinite focus is certainly plausible.

About time!

[bangzilla]

I hate getting ripped off by projector manufacturers who charge me in the hundreds of dollars for projector bulbs that (a) cost a fraction to make and (b) burn out in much less time than advertised. Sure, this built-in to a cell phone could be fun/useful, however my immediate need is a projector for my laptop that is small, robust, doesn't consume *very* expensive bulbs, full color and high resolution. This device may not be there just yet -- but it appears to be within spitting distance. If this company can't get there -- someone else will. All this I applaud.

Re:About time!

[Solder Fumes]

I built my own projector, and the bulbs are only $40. Plus they last about 10,000 hours. Granted, the projector is about as small as an end table. And it's not as bright as what's on the market today. But I still love it.

Re:About time!

[Dr. Evil]

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!

[spinozaq]

Mecury arc lamps have much _lower_ profit margins then other consumer electronic parts. So do projectors in general. The lamps have very exotic materials in them, like very very pure tungsten and specially manufactured quartz casings. You're not getting ripped off. The prices would come down some if more projectors were out there in people's living rooms, but not by much. If there were really a racket on mecury arc lamps, we could do something about it. Hopefully laser tech will eliminate the need for these expensive ( and very polluting, in manufacture and waste ) mecury arc lamps.

Re:About time!

[greg_barton]

I'm waiting for something like this to go 1024x768, then I'll probably get one. LED lamp. No heat, long life. Not terribly bright, though.

Re:About time!

[Alzheimers]

You mean, like the Infocus LP120?

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.

Re:About time!

[drinkypoo]

No, not like the Infocus LP120, which has a lamp. The previous comment specifically said that they wanted something without one. Therefore your suggestion was 100% useless. Nice projector, though. Too bad they're $1500, which is even more than their former 1000 lumens XGA-res projector. And take a lamp that probably costs $250 every 1000-2000 hours. That's a lot of time if you only use it occasionally; if you're sitting in front of it for long periods of time it's not very long at all.

Re:About time!

[Alzheimers]

Considering the topic was as much about the size of the new projector as it was the fact it's not a lamp, I made my suggestion is based on the portability factor. I've never seen an LED projector in action so I can't compare color warmth or pixel accuracy, but I can tell you from experience that the lamps generally last 2500 hours (at 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, that's 62 weeks) and paying for the 1 year lamp warranty "just in case" is much cheaper than investing in a replacement.

After a year you'll probably want a new projector anyway, especially if you're trying to impress a client with the latest and greatest.

Re:About time!

[adrianmonk]

Mecury arc lamps have much _lower_ profit margins then other consumer electronic parts. So do projectors in general. The lamps have very exotic materials in them, like very very pure tungsten and specially manufactured quartz casings. You're not getting ripped off. The prices would come down some if more projectors were out there in people's living rooms, but not by much.

While I see your point, the same thing can be said about microchips: they're made in an extremely pure environment, built by advanced robotic machines in factories that are so expensive that most companies would go broke just thinking about building one, and the process uses a wide variety of highly toxic chemicals.

And yet, unless it's the very fanciest, latest technology (like a current-generation CPU), most microchips are made for at most a dollar or two, if not as low as pennies. It seems like it should be possible to do the same with projector lamps if the industry really gears up to focus on that one day.

Re:About time!

[drinkypoo]

Now I'm trying to interpret someone else's ASCII but AFAICT the comment was not as much about the size as about the lamp. The lamp is usually the thing that stops people from getting projectors - I've had this conversation with literally dozens of people when they're talking about buying a big screen (most of them never did, though.) "Only a thousand dollars? How much is the bulb? Three hundred bucks? Fuck that." The size is not nearly as big a deal. Right now my projector is this antique sharp unit, it's a 640x480 LCD. Very odd brightness specs, they say it's 100 lumens, but then, it goes up to 20' and I'm using it at ~7' on a sheet and it's at least as bright as my old Sony 640x480 500 lumens unit. But anyway, it's huge - and no one cares. Sure, portable is better, but many people who want a projector don't even want to lug it that much. They want something that won't have a high recurring cost. That's also what the previous commenter discussed at the most length, although it's a small distinction...

Re:News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Co

[MrPeavs]

I heard about laser based home projectors some time ago. This is the first time I have heard of them since, granted, I haven't exactly kept up with them.

This is good news, as from what I read about laser based projectors. They were suppose to be they projector technology. I am getting close to being in the market for a projector for my home theater system, I hope to see laser based projectors soon so they will be an option and I won't have to upgrade in a year or two.

Not very bright

[hcdejong]

From the PDF:
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

[bobstay]

What good is all that resolution when you can't get the viewing area above 15" without going to a dark room?

What good is it? How about: 15" monitor on your cellphone that you can carry anywhere?

Re:Not very bright

[hcdejong]

I meant that at 15", 1920x1200 is overkill, certainly for current operating systems that still assume ~72 dpi in various ways [1].

1: Yes, I know you can set font sizes etc., but at least the Windows implementation is far from seamless.

Why mobile?

[RingDev]

I have a 48" projection TV and a 21" CRT monitor, running both at the same time sucks massive amounts of power. Replacing them both with a laser projection system that takes less then a watt and a half to run would be fine by me!

-Rick

Re:Why mobile?

[jfengel]

I think that by the time you spread that 1.5 watt image over a 48" diagonal, you'd better have the room pretty dark if you want to see it.

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.

Re:Why mobile?

[smoker2]

I saw a program about a lighthouse last night. The bulb used is a massive 35w - but due to the excellent lenses, the light can be seen from 25 miles away.

So I guess we need better lenses for these projectors.

My Infocus X2 lamp is 200w and I need a darkened room for an 84" diagonal screen at a 15 foot distance. It can be seen in daylight, but it is pretty washed out.

Green Monochrome?

[Quince alPillan]

Supports resolutions up to 2048x1280; No moving parts; Infinite focus; Green monochrome, with a colour version expected late 2006...

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?

[iggymanz]

if "slow phosphur" effect can be configured we can do a wicked cool IBM 3270 emulation with one of these, I just need a 4 foot wide RPG-II spacing template and I'm bleeding edge, baby!

from the world of facts department

[Arthur B.]

To display the image they use diffraction, that means that they place a mask in front of the laser which is the fourrier transform of the image they want to display...

Re:from the world of facts department

[Stripe7]

They need to get color and up the refresh rate to show video and they will have the makings of a really cool video projection system.

Re:from the world of facts department

[MS-06FZ]

Ah, so that's it...

Here I was all excited becuase I thought traditional vector-style laser projectors were somehow being made cheaper and more compact. Laser projectors are just about the only piece of new hardware you could buy to provide a vector display for Asteroids. (It's slow and doesn't have the phosphor effect, but at least it's still a vector display... Plus you could play the game hugely.)

Cellphone?

[HaydnH]

Small enough to fit in a cell phone?? Did you see the image from tfa? It may be small but it's about the size of a small cell phone - where's the actual phone electronics gonna go???

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?

[Chandon Seldon]

So what you're saying is they'll need to remove the casing and shrink the electronics by like 15% to fit it in a cellphone. I'd guess they employ at least one engineer...

Re:Cellphone?

[edumacator]

My guess is they are looking for more funding to miniaturize further. They only need a prototype to show potential partners the potential. The technology is such that to get it to work at that size, means it can easily get smaller.

It's all fun and games....

[2Dumb2B4Gotten]

until someone gets their eye put out by Junior's laser-based micro projector.

Sweet

[Pxtl]

No moving parts is neat - the galvanometers they use for laser-light shows are a colossal PITA.

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

[acomj]

Warning! Don't look directly at projector when giving a presentation!

Given our current litigeous society I wonder if they'll be able to sell it.

Re:Warning! Don't look directly

[mrjb]

Warning! Don't look directly at projector with remaining eye!

Re:Warning! Don't look directly

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems like there's plenty of companies selling the little red laser pointers. Not sure why they couldn't just slap the same warning on this thing.

Re:Warning! Don't look directly

[ceoyoyo]

If not I'll open up a laser projector stand on the border and all you Americans can come and buy one. Bonus, prices in Canadian dollars! Smuggling it across the border and liability from that point on are your problems though.

Frickin' Guppies with Laserbeams attached to their

[supertsaar]

Evil!

Now we can strap lasers to guppies heads as well....

Pictures

[pete-classic]

Two pictures of the device, zero pictures of its output. I'm skeptical.

-Peter

Re:Pictures

[edenapple]

Their website does have faked ouput in full color - does that count?

Heads Up Displays?

[Iphtashu Fitz]

Is this the sort of thing that could be used in HUD's in cars? Or what about high-resolution wearable displays? It's probalby now just a matter of time before you see people walking around with their video ipods completely oblivious to everything going on around them (as if they're not now) as they watch porn on the subway while going to/from work.

Re:Heads Up Displays?

[SoCalDissident]

This is modded as funny, but I personally know of two accounts where guys have been in car crashes while watching "movies" on their in-dash video... HUDs are one possible use, as is projecting things outside the car; for example, nav directions on the road in front of you. BMW has done some experiemtns of that sort with steerable LED headlights. Which makes me wonder how this would compare to an LED based projector, or if this type of technology could be used in larger projectors for home use. Even withthe cost of bulbs included, projectors offer far more value over most other TV systems, with the biggest drawback being the ambient light requirements. A laser might have the potential to remove that drawback and really push projectors more mainstream.

Screw projectors, I want this for my HUD!

[alispguru]

Let's see, drop the output power by a factor of 20 or so, and project the image on the inside of my glasses...

Yep, that ought to do it!

Demo?

[Odin_Tiger]

Where's the action shot? The front page has a nice graphic and all, but I wanna see what this actually looks like on a normal projector screen / whiteboard / lightly colored wall / co-worker's retina.

Output? Nobody said anything about output!

[NotQuiteReal]

Actual output will be about as bright as a cheap LED flashlight, I'm guessing.

Better wait a few versions...

Re:News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Co

[Gerald]

It's even smaller at the size of "2 sugar cubes".

My initial reaction to this was: Bjork is a petite gal, but she's not that small...

Human Judgement

[Dareth]

People are not always the most considerate. Can you imagine people arguing over "projection space" on a crowded bus. Every flat surface will have a displayed screen.

Re:Human Judgement

[JesseL]

Isn't every place in a bus that could possibly serve as a projection surface already covered in advertisements, graffiti, old chewing gum, and god only knows what else?

Re:Human Judgement

[DerWulf]

Who gives two shits? In 10 years I want my all-in-one device (TV, PC, Cell, xbox) to be no larger than any of my keys. The only way for this to happen is if the screen does not need to be physical (ie. through projection). I could not care less about what dorks do in public transport, I got a car, you know ;)

Re:Human Judgement

[Anonymous Coward]

You, Sir, Are An Idiot.

Re:Human Judgement

[Anonymous Coward]

You might have a car, but I have money!

Re:Human Judgement

[Anonymous Coward]

Or projecting onto the seat in front of them in a dark movie theater.

Too deep

[darthservo]

The river is too deep to ford. You lose:

• 173 bullets
• 8 sets of clothing
• 2 wagon axles
• 3 wagon wheels
• 3 oxen
• 352 lbs of food
• STUPID (drowned)
• FART (drowned)
• BOOGER (drowned)
• 1 keychain laser projector

Goes well with a "projection keyboard"

[Idou]

Though this press release is like 4 years old.

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?

[eander315]

I find it interesting that Googling Light Blue Optics yields not one picture of this device in action. They have a photoshopped mock-up image showing a full-color display that's misleading at best, but that's it. It's nice that it's the size of a matchbox, but if you can't take a single picture of it in action, what's the use.

Wow. You really don't know what a laser is.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you put a blue filter sheet in front of a violet laser, you'll get... a dimmer, still violet laser.

Lasers are monochromatic. Filters don't shift wavelengths, they just remove some wavelengths from a mixed-colour source.

On the other hand, violet is a little further out than blue, so you could probably create a colour space with a violet laser that was decent. It wouldn't be the *same* as the traditional screen space, but it wouldn't necessarily be "shitty."

Re:Wow. You really don't know what a laser is.

[Anonymous Coward]

But the eye's sensitivity to ~405nm is pretty poor. http://www.photo.net/photo/edscott/vis00010.htm

420-440nm I could see. But 405nm, no...

You need ALOT (!!!) of laser light to make a decent sized raster scanned image with RGB wavelengths. Having a near-UV source as the blue is really going to burn some cash, and dust (anyone that's been around ~1W+ (per-channel) scanning laser projection displays knows what I'm taking about... Smells like burning hair/skin, yuck).

Re:Wow. You really don't know what a laser is.

[Mycroft_VIII]

I read somewhere that over 80% of the dust in a typical household is shed skin cells, if so this would tend to explain the smell.

Mycroft

Re:Privacy?

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Simple solution: Project the image on to a small display, or even a peice of card. It would be like looking at a clamshell phone.

Now Even Baby Sharks

[gurutc]

Can have lasers!

kewl

[mgabrys_sf]

Excellent. Now we can project porn on people's foreheads at broadway shows and the ballet.

Technology - doing things - not because we'd want to - but because we can (tm)

Blue lasers really still so hard to come by?

[D4C5CE]

There some two million hits for a blue fiber laser (at least some of them genuine, one should expect, and at a usable wavelength?), and that's not even counting yet another half a million in British spelling...

Moreover, years have gone by already since Schneider/Jenoptik demonstrated their "laser display technology" (albeit "diode-pumped solid-state", 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." [sic!]

Re:Blue lasers really still so hard to come by?

[Koiu Lpoi]

British spelling? Would that be "blue fiber lasour"?

Now they just need blue and red

[DaveV1.0]

I want this thing in color!

RGB baby.

Oh, and yes I know it is more complicated than that.

projector in a cell phone?

[lxs]

That's just great! Not only will our cinemas be infested by annoying ringtones and loud talkers, but now we'll get pictures of Justin Timberlake projected all over the screen, on the walls and the ceiling.

And I used to think innovation was a good thing...

Re:projector in a cell phone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to mention Goatse..

Re:projector in a cell phone?

[ceoyoyo]

No no, this is fine. The green laser will show a visible beam in the air so it should be easy to follow back to it's source, then you can pound said Timberlake-lover for interrupting the movie.

Anyone thought of the idea that...

[AsbestosRush]

They want to be picked up by Apple for use in their next gen v-pod?

Been done already

[Anonymous Coward]

It's been done already, used as a fancy toy for the military, or as a neat tool by the motor industry (look at a car engine and see instant annotation overlays).

Breaking News!

[GoMMiX]

Tiny projector now to be included in the Phantom Console!

Yeah really, no pictures?

[TheSkepticalOptimist]

Some news stories don't need them, but anytime a press release comes out about some new visual technology (eInk, laser projectors, etc), I get annoyed that they can't show the technology being demonstrated. Sounds more like vaporware and a company trying to get investors excited to dump millions into them before finding out the technology isn't feasible and walk away with those millions leaving the company bankrupt.

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?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not vapourware; the hardware is being demonstrated to people. The story isn't as a result of a press release. It was just submitted by someone who was interested. The hardware is only in green laser at the moment, colour is a way off and that's one reason why investment is needed.

Re:Yeah really, no pictures?

[nic_from_LBO]

Hi there I work for LBO and I can confirm that the projector really does work and is currently being shown to interested parties at 3GSM in Barcelona. We will also be demonstrating the projector in action at the big displays conference and exhibition in San Francisco in June (http://www.sid.org/conf/sid2006/sid2006.html). Look forward to seeing you there. ;-)

Re:Yeah really, no pictures?

[Rich0]

I doubt it is pulsed - the laser is probably on continuously at variable amplitude. So, the pixels will just blur into each other. This is how a regular TV works as far as I understand. If you look at a TV you see lots of dots, but the reality is that the bandwidth on a standard TV is not sufficient to go from black to full RGB in one pixel - which is why small-fonts on TVs look horrible (it is also why analog TV is described in terms of lines of resolution and not columns - only the lines are discrete). A computer monitor is more expensive than a TV because it actually achives high bandwidth and consequently truly high resolution.

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.

Re:Yeah really, no pictures?

[Anonymous Coward]

Gee. So why don't you just take a damn picture with a digital camera and show it in action!? I mean, how hard can it be...

There is also NO information on how the device works. Just some marketroid bullshit about "computational algorithms" and "no moving parts"... afraid someone will still your ideas? ;)

Re:Yeah really, no pictures?

[Panaflex]

Found this article with a picture.

It's really old though.. probably advanced beyond the basic "it works" stage.

Re:Yeah really, no pictures?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

(it is also why analog TV is described in terms of lines of resolution and not columns - only the lines are discrete).

False.

Lines of resolution, without a horizontal or vertical modifier refers to columns, not scan lines.

Re:Yeah really, no pictures?

[ceoyoyo]

Take your laser pointer and shine it at something... not exactly a dimensionless point, right? It should be no problem to match the spot size and divergence on this thing so that the spread is nicely in synch with the divergence of the image as a whole. Note that this should give you NO spacing between pixels, unlike current LCD projectors that have visible (if you stand close) gaps.

Re:Yeah really, no pictures?

[Rich0]

Uh, that website confirms my statement. Your statement is only true when referring to digital TV. My statement contained the words "analog TV". Anybody talking about lines of resolution 20 years ago would be thinking vertical lines.

The website warns about horizontal lines much in the same way that one might warn somebody about viewable area on a monitor. Manufacturers don't advertise viewable area - not because that isn't want the customers want, but rather because the number is smaller than the tube size. Ditto for hard drive sizes in "megabytes" of 1E6 bytes each...

Re:Yeah really, no pictures?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Uh, that website confirms my statement. Your statement is only true when referring to digital TV.

Dude? How false can you get? That website, and hundreds of others like it, talk about analog TV when talking about TV lines of resolution.

He even makes it explicit when he says:

"Lines of resolution" is not the same as the number of pixels (either horizontal or vertical) found on a camera's CCD, or on a digital monitor or other display like a video projector, and so forth. And it is also not the same as the number of scanning lines used in an analog camera or television system such as PAL or NTSC or SECAM etc.

PAL, SECAM and NTSC are all ANALOG ONLY.

Combine this with a virtual keyboard

[PIPBoy3000]

They also have a virtual keyboard for sale. Imagine setting your cell phone on a table, pushing a button, and getting an instant monitor and keyboard. No one will need PCs for surfing the web and common functionality. Give it ten years or so to become widespread.

Re:Combine this with a virtual keyboard

[Shag]

Totally. I'd buy it even if it weren't a phone. Oh, it'll also need a projected "tablet" off to one side of the keyboard (and let the user choose which side, okay?) for mouse-type actions.

Re:Combine this with a virtual keyboard

[Alpelopa]

Whether or not the example the writer cites has been mentioned before, I think his comment should be modded up as interesting because it is a reminder that the main barrier to shrinking general purpose computing devices is I/O to the user.

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 particular suggestion, it would seem that potential improvements to the current (physical) thumb keyboard and tiny screen for small devices abound.

Re:Combine this with a virtual keyboard

[HTH NE1]

Nice, but then again, think of all the cosplayers dressed up as little Washuuu and using them in public!

Re:Combine this with a virtual keyboard

[Punboy]

Pfft, put this on the Video Ipod. Revert it back to the old non-video display, then when needed use the projector to do video.

Oh, and um, the color version would do well in a projection TV. 2048x1600 from that small of a box? You could probably manage to get 100 times that res on a projection TV using one of these suckers. Or, a gigantic display wall. 2048x1600 @ 100DPI = 20.48 in x 16 in... a 26" diagonal display. do a 10*10 square of these babies and get a 260" (21ft) display. 100*100 and get 2600" (210ft)!

Say they cost $10k each, thats "only" $100m for a 210ft high-res display wall.

Whee.

Oh, and for laughs, imagine watching porn on one of these. Lol

What is "infinite focus"?

[hubie]

Infinite focus to me sounds like a collimator. Does this mean that you need another lens somewhere to form the image?

Re:What is "infinite focus"?

[Anonymous Coward]

It means because it uses coherent light as the light source, it's always in focus. You can even project on curved objects and it'll be in focus.

Re:What is "infinite focus"?

[hubie]

Now I am entirely confused. I cannot make the connection between depth-of-focus and coherent light; especially this always being in focus. Coherent light usually causes problems because of diffraction; again, if this is just a collimator, then I can understand it (and why you'd need a lens down the line to form an image).

Can anybody give me the 5-dollar summary of the physics behind this?

Re:What is "infinite focus"?

[ivan256]

Take a look at this image: http://mas450.syntheticholography.org/reading/othe r_handouts/astigmatism/schematic/sym-focus.gif

That's almost certainly what you're thinking of when you are picturing using a lens to focus. Now, because the source is a laser, imagine that the light originating from the source is just a single ray rather than the cone shown in the image. Now there's no need for a lens in the middle to achieve a tightly focused point on the target surface.

Re:What is "infinite focus"?

[hubie]

That makes sense to me if there are 2048x1280 laser sources, i.e., one for each pixel. If that is the case here, which would presumably be done via a fiber bundle, how do you get around the diffraction problem where the light from one pixel gets spread out over the other pixels? Even a nice, collimated laser beam gives you a narrow waist only in a certain region, then spreads out from there.

Re:What is "infinite focus"?

[ivan256]

That makes sense to me if there are 2048x1280 laser sources, i.e., one for each pixel.

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 sounds like they have some dynamic "holographic" film that allows the beam, which is larger than a single pixel, to be filtered such that it displays multiple pixels within the beam, all while remaining cohesive. Think like the little lenses that they have to cover the ends of cheapy laser pointers, but can be changed on the fly with electronics.

Even a nice, collimated laser beam gives you a narrow waist only in a certain region, then spreads out from there.

That's why you have to put "infinite" in quotes. It would be infinite in a vacuum, in real life in an atmosphere it will actually only be in focus from zero to the point where diffusion due to the medium the beam is passing through becomes too great. It's still infinite in that there are an infinite number of distances within the finite range, but it's not infinite in that it'll still be in focus some rediculous distance away from the projector.

Re:What is "infinite focus"?

[p3d0]

Wow, you're being awfully dense for such an apparently smart person.

I haven't RTFA but I imagine they scan that laser to produce the image, just like a TV. No focus required.

Re:What is "infinite focus"?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you are dense.

They most certainly are not scanning with the laser beam. The device works by utilizingy a diffraction grating composed of small LCD elements. The projector simply calculates the needed diffraction grating and sets the LCD accordingly, for the desired output of the diffracted light. The visible image is simply a carefully crafted Fraunhofer diffraction pattern, which doesn't need a focus point when using a laser.

Re:help me obi-wan kenobi,

[rcs1000]

Funny, I presume, because it should be "you're", as in "you are".

Re:Sweet - Imaging on the Retina

[Anonymous Coward]

Right here: http://www.microvision.com./

It's not quite what was elaborated upon in SnowCrash, but it's getting there.

Not so tiny.

[ZombieRoboNinja]

This thing may be about the size of a matchbox, but remember that it's monochrome. I would assume you need to add red and blue lasers for the full-color support they hope to implement. Wouldn't that make the projector up to three times as big?

Don't get me wrong, this is still a really cool thing. The size, weight, temperature, lack of fan noise, and infinite focus all sound like excellent benefits for a no-hassle projector. But it sounds a little too big to be built in to laptops, let alone cell phones.

Re:Not so tiny.

[ceoyoyo]

I'd like mine portable anyway, so I can plug it into OTHER people's laptops. Three matchboxes stuck together... know what, make it twice as big as that and give me double power. Now you're got a DLP/LCD equivalent brightness projector that uses 2-3 W of power, is silent, doesn't need bulbs and is about the size of a 3.5" firewire hard drive. Yes please.

Re:Not so tiny.

[thaWhat]

I don't think that you understand the engineering required. with one source of light, the only obstacle is focus and they seem to have overcome that. when you you three discrete sources of light you need to overlay them correctly, or you get errors in the display. I think that anyone with a rear-projection tv or one of the three-gun units will understand.

I suspect that what they'll need is three projection sources (r,g,b) and a fourth single distance measuring i.r. laser to determine the projection distance which will select the convergence map for the measured distance. Hmmm... pricey

Re:Not so tiny.

[ceoyoyo]

I didn't make any comment on the engineering required to make a colour version. The company promises that one is forthcoming. As I said elsewhere, if it works, it'll be cool. Now, in the post you replied to I said I'd prefer not to have a little tiny unit integrated into a cell phone, but would be perfectly happy with one that was quite a bit larger, self contained and double the power. Making things larger? No engineering challenge. Self contained? Not a challenge, the current version is already. Double the power? If you can make a 1W laser I don't see why a 2W laser would tax your engineers that much. So... no tough engineering required to make what I want over and above what the company is already promising.

As for the engineering required to make a colour version, I suspect you're considerably overestimating the problems involved. There are considerable differences between this and your rear projection TV example. This is more like a DLP projector which, you'll note, work just fine, distance measuring lasers not required.

Re:Not so tiny.

[thaWhat]

My bad, I responded to the wrong comment. I stand behind what I said 'though, in that regardless of the system involved, the increase in complexity required to go from monochrome to full colour involves an order of magnitude of additional additional hardware.

I admit that going to colour would provide 3 times the intensity (for three, or more times the power consumption) but only for a white display. As for the overlaying of three images, the process is the same as is performed by your eyes as they move from focussing on a distant object to a near one. In saying so, I have to allow that that is an over-simplification. (haiychest) I have worked with a variety of large screen display systems, crt projectors, lcd/dlp and led outdoor screens for the last 20 years...(/hairychest) which doesn't necessarily mean that I am the full bottle either...

We're all in search of knowledge...

Re:Not so tiny.

[ceoyoyo]

That makes more sense.

As for colour, I think other people pointed out other companies that have successfully demonstrated colour laser projectors. Note that laser projectors don't need lenses and with monochromatic light you can do some interesting tricks using the different refractive and diffractive indicies at different frequencies. I expect it would be possible to actually mix the beams into a single beam. Worst case though you could have the projector initialize itself -- shine a spot in the centre of the screen, make the beams converge perfectly, do the corners, done.

When they give an intensity measure for a standard projector it's pure white, isn't it? A red-only image would only be a third as bright as the spec? That's the same as this projector would be.

Re: Screens have rights, too ;-)

[D4C5CE]

Having a projector that size would make it so much easier to view all your converted, downloaded, mega-shrinked videos on the back of the student in front of you.

Just be sure to limit the brightness and keep the image moving to prevent burn-in on that poor guy... for most self-respecting technology companies (outside Redmond at least, but maybe even they run Linux in private) probably wouldn't want to recruit anyone with a Windows desktop and Start bar tattooed on his back! ;-/ What is more, nobody likes to hear yells of "Alt-F4" on the beach or [censored] anywhere else...

more useful applications of technology

[spditner]

I don't know if I'll be running out to buy a cellphone with a projector in it to show of my family photos -- but I could see this being much more useful in developing countries where the cost and power consumption of LCD/CRT/OLED will be a significant factor for a long time to come. It looks perfect for something like the projects Inveneo is doing in Uganda with their bycicle powered thin client and phone service.

I'd be curious to know what the build of materials is for something like this.

My new patent application

[camusflage]

A method for displaying the caller on a telephone by use of a projection system that is either a peripheral to or integrated with the telephone.

Prior art, BEY-OTCHES!

Well it needs wires

[ColdWetDog]

Unless they have it hooked into bluetooth or similar (but it's a green laser).

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.

Old news

[emilv]

This was shown on /. about half a year ago or more and they still haven't made a consumer version.

Nothing new to see here.

Help me, Oxford English Dictionary.

[Anonymous Coward]

You're my only hope! ;)

Re:Infinite Focus

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, I worked an MCI Shareholder event in the mid '90s alongside a Texas-based company that had an enormous water-cooled laser video projector with an optical turret that could fly video images around the room.

Because the light is coherent, it really IS in focus at every point, and the clarity of images on the spherical screen, the walls, the set at the Kennedy Center Opera House, and simultaneously on my hand held in the beam indicate to me that "infinite focus" is certainly not a marketing gimmick.

Coherency is not a property of the light that will degrade over a few hundred feet. The picture (from that mid-90s unit) did have the strange specular quality that we associate with laser pointers (and other visible-spectrum lasers), though.

If you wanna look for the smoke-and-mirrors in the announcement, maybe think about power consumption, or the delivery date for full-color instead.

Portable Computer

[jerryyyyyyy]

This would work great with the projectable keyboards they have. Imagine projecting your screen on the wall and your keyboard on the desk. Voila instant desktop computer. Of course we now just need to get a decent computer in the size of a phone or pda and this would be my next purchase!

Re:help me obi-wan kenobi,

[Anonymous Coward]

ur my 0n1y höp3z!!!!!!11

Re:News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Co

[CheeseyDJ]

See here for yourself

If this is a real photo, I'm Father Christmas.

Sweet

[wolff000]

I looked right past it's current application and immediately applied it to all kinds of really cool hacks. Like putting one inside a pc and displaying an inversed image on the window. Inversed so you could see the image from the outside for all you non geek people out there. Sad that /. has non tech folks but oh well things change. Or instead of led built buckles you could have projector belt buckles. Wow I'm such a super geek. these are good ideas though they are all very geek. So what other cool hacks could be done with this?

The Perfect Merger

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple buys Palm annd Light Blue.

iPalm treo 900... with video projection, virtual laser keyboard, and wireless stereo headset.

Virtual conferencing will never be the same.

yup, I'd be happy. Almost as happy as having direct eye projection. And Perl for Palm. and an RFID cannon... and...

5 years tops. no more PC's, just iPalms....

Re:News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Co

[thelonestranger]

Hmmmm yessss, because that image doesn't look mocked up at all does it?

Great! I'll take one of the green ones...

[jpellino]

Just the thing for my Apple //c

What about the "sparkle" or "dazzle" effect?

[Goldenhawk]

If this device uses a laser to project its image, it makes me concerned about the dazzle or sparkle you see when looking at a truly monochromatic, coherent point of light. Shine a laser pointer at the wall, and it looks like the dot sparkles. I believe this is a function of the coherency of the light plus the way our eyes perceive the light.

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?

[dozer]

It's called "laser speckle". It shows up when a coherent beam is held fairly stationary on an irregular surface. I imagine that if the beam is scanning fast, it won't be much of a problem because the specks will be too brief for your eye to see. POV will take care of the problem. But, of course, I haven't actually tried this myself.

Re:What about the "sparkle" or "dazzle" effect?

[An dochasac]

I don't think so, the POV won't have much bearing,nor would the focus of the eye. One weird property of speckle is that because it is a standing wave, you can take off your glasses or focus your eyes on something much nearer or farthert and the speckle will still be sharp. Most laser diodes have a short coherence length so speckle isn't as bad as it would be with HeNe. Scanning the beam wont help much either but it is possible to reduce/elminate speckle by rotating a diffuser in front of the beam to break up its space/time coherence.

Green Monochrome

[philos]

Am I the only one that would actually prefer the green monochrome version over the full color? What great way to make some wicked Matrix-style old school PowerPoint presentations. How much does color really contribute to getting your point across, anyway?

light sources

[kent_eh]

The lamps have very exotic materials in them, like very very pure tungsten and specially manufactured quartz casings.

So, then, do they have to use such high-priced light sources? The lamps for old-school overhead projectors or slide projectors are well under $50.

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

[Lehk228]

if you don't mind your "white" being old-school-projector-piss-yellow a cheap projector bulb will do just fine

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

[spinozaq]

Old school projector bulbs do get bright enough do use with modern projectors. There are still two problems with them though. First, the light is not white at all, it tends a lot toward yellow, which is unacceptable for a color projection. Second, to deliver that much light, they draw anywhere from 600-900 watts. That hurts in two ways, heat, which puts a strain on size and cooling methods. People don't want that much noise in their living room. It also cuts into the only advantage, which is cost. 600 watts vs 200 watts will cost an extra $180 in electricity over 3000 hours at .15 cents per KiloWatt Hour. So there really is no advantage at all. They are the best technology for the purpose. Don't you think if there was something better in an up and comming market like this someone would be selling it? The world is not out to get you.

Re:light sources

[Overzeetop]

The other thing to consider as that your $50 lamps, aside from poor color rendition and high power consumption, will only last 50-100 hours of operation, with some new ones pushing the 120-130 hour range.

Re:light sources

[rahrens]

"The world is not out to get you."

No, just your money! LOL!

Re:light sources

[kent_eh]

It sounds like you have thought about this more than I have, so I've got a couple of follow-ups for you:

Colour: What about slide projector bulbs? I assume that they'd be acceptably white. (yeah, heat is still a problem)
$$$: Ok, if the old tech bulbs won't cut it for power/heat reasons, I'm still a bit surprised that there isn't anything between the $50 range, and the $500+ range.
Isn't there anything that falls in the middle, in terms of performance (and cost)?

The world is not out to get you
No, but I still don't trust marketers to price stuff honestly, especially when there aren't a lot of manufacturers in the game (lots of brands, sure, but how many actually make the stuff?)

Maybe I can't get past the cost of 2-3 replacement lamps being more than the cost of a new projector. In my gut, it feels like the printer/ink or razor/blade buisiness model all over again.

How does this box work?

[Thagg]

I can find little information on the companies website. They claim that it has "no moving parts", and that it uses "Computer Generated Holograms" and that it uses some kind of micropixel display.

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

Re:How does this box work?

[schlick]

You know those filters that you can put over a laser pointer to project a shape? I think those are some sort of hologram. Now if you could make this a dynamically generated hologram then you could project a dynamic image through it. I'm just guessing, but I doubt there are mirrors involved at all.

Re:How does this box work?

[drinkypoo]

It almost certainly has moving parts, those little MEMS-driven mirrors on a chip. Because it's on a chip, people tend to try to claim that it has no moving parts... But then again, I could be wrong. Still, you can get them very cheaply and of course, they are extremely tiny.

Re:How does this box work?

[nameer]

Here is the closest I could find to an explination . This is the abstract of the paper that they preseted at SID in '04. Nick Lawrence is the CEO of Light Blue Optics and they are based in Cambridge, so I figure N. Lawrence (one of the authors) from the Photonics and Sensors Group at Cambridge University is one and the same.

Now if you can figure out what "Binary-Phase Holography" is, your golden.

Re:How does this box work?

[Thagg]

Well, that would be interesting. Basically you would be doing the exact equivalent of a phased-array radar, but with light.

The way that those filters-over-laser-pointers work is exactly holography -- you compute (or photograph) an image that diffracts the light of a particular frequency into the pattern you want.

What they may be doing here (and it's really quite cool if they are) is using a very small LCD array to build a rapidly-changing hologram. The LCD elements would have to really quite small, though, somewhat less than the wavelength of light -- but the whole array could be pretty small too -- perhaps on the order of 1mm by 1mm.

I'd be surprised, though, if you could really calculate a whole hologram of a display in that amount of time. Note that the little filters-over-laser-pointer images are quite simple; the ones that I've seen are just arrays of hundreds of dots. These are computationally tractable. The image of the Slashdot page right in front of your eyes now has a million or so dots, it would not be computational feasable to compute a hologram to create that -- at least not in 1/60th of a second.

What they might be doing is computing a hologram that would display a scanline. The hologram would do two things -- it would modulate the intensity of the points on the scanline, and it would bend the light to point in the right direction. For this to work, you'd have to scan the image quickly; and your light modulator array would have to run at some 60 KHz -- way beyond what LCDs can do. There are other technologies that could work though. Fortunately, you probably can get away with binary modulators, either ON or OFF cells.

This would be awesomely cool if it really does work this way!

Thad Beier

Re:How does this box work?

[nameer]

Found the patent! This should give all the gory details.

Re:How does this box work?

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't have moving parts. It uses an LCD microdisplay to show a pattern of dots. The pattern is the holographic pattern of the flat image. The laser is bounced off the LCD (though I'd imagine that you could shine through too) and then the image is spread by diffraction. No moving parts.

Re:How does this box work?

[Anonymous Coward]

>equivalent of a phased-array radar, but with light.

Rriiiight.

Vaporware ..

[robpoe]

Looks like vaporware to me.

recruiting info all over their website. a photoshopped render of what they say it'll look like. no action shots?

ill wait before i invest my pennies.

And dont you think that Panasonic, et all, wouldn't snap this guy up in a second if he REALLY had something?

This LED projector is a bit dim

[PhilipOfOregon]

It looks like it's about CRT-equivalent brightness at 15 inches (30cm) diagonal display.

So... this prototype is *maybe* a laptop computer screen replacement, but won't give you a portable home theater. Unless your room is really really dark.

It's still impressive -- it won't have a bulb to burn out, and it won't get dimmer as it ages.

This is great

[RandomPrecision]

If there's a small projector of this sort, it could be used with mini-ITX systems. The whiskey-bottle server would be even better with this. With a roll-up keyboard (ThinkGeek), a port for my wireless mouse, and a small projector like this, something on the level of that bottled server could serve as a laptop, but with much more character.

Dang laws of science again! Article BS

[Ancient_Hacker]

"It uses 350 mw."

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.

Vaporware

[Anonymous Coward]

This will be vaporware, mark my words. It all looks very fishy, like a possible investment scam. Like cars that run on compressed air... http://www.theaircar.com/

Monitors?

[onwardknave]

Does this mean I'll be able to replace the 35 pound CRT on my desk with one of these, or at least have a paper-thin projector screen in its place? Full color by the end of 2006 (FTFA) doesn't mean "In Best Buy by the end of 2006," I'm guessing.

Re:Frickin' Guppies with Laserbeams attached to th

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you listening the collective? the latest Borg model already have it... old news

Re:News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Co

[afidel]

Well, they have one that is either a better fake or an actual picture of the technology here.

A little more technical information here...

[castor_acer]

After a little digging, here is a link that has a bit more information on how it works. I'd say the breakthrough technologies would be the LCOS microdisplay and the proprietary Hologram chip.

http://www.holdsworth-associates.co.uk/Light_Blue_ Optics.162.0.html

Screw that

[WindBourne]

This may kill off the LCD/plasma sets. This is low energy, very small size. The companies that have invested billions in trying to build large tv sets are about to be screwed big. Even if this costs $600 -$1000, this will sell for home sets.

Re:Screw that

[Anonymous Coward]

"This may kill off the LCD/plasma sets. This is low energy, very small size."

I kinda doubt it. Most consumer electronics get more expensive, not less, when shoehorned into a smaller form-factor. It takes a lot of engineering and expensive parts to make that happen. Look at the price of laptops vs. desktops -- equivalent performance is much cheaper in the desktop.

Besides, they haven't announced any prices yet. This could be hideously expensive.

Re:Screw that

[Dashing Leech]

"Most consumer electronics get more expensive, not less, when shoehorned into a smaller form-factor."

Over the short-term, absolutely. But a $200 Pocket PC nowadays can outperform my 486 that cost $2000 12 years ago. The break-even timeframe is probably on the order of 3-5 years I'm guessing on most of these types of technologies. So, yes, it could kill off LCD/Plasma sets, but probably not for about 7-10 years (adding in a few years to get a colour version of comparable performance to market). I suspect other technologies will be in play by then.

Not the same technology

[fbonnet]

Fraunhofer's use micromirrors. LBO's use no moving parts but "computational algorithms and novel optical techniques to allow miniature lasers to display video images in real-time using the diffractive nature of laser light".

At this resolution

[Marxist Hacker 42]

HDTV compatible mobile drive-in theaters....

Roaming advertisements

[RyoShin]

I don't know why I thought of this (I can assure you that if I hadn't, someone else will,) but this could be shifted to make Portable Outdoor Projector. Program a cellphone to automatically accept/answer a call/image from a certain number, and attach it and one of these thingers to a remote-controlled car (either by Duct Tape or actually affixing it, depending on how quick you want to throw this together.) Then you can drive it around a convention center or park, and have it throw an advertisement for your booth or some random image/video on a wall (or someone's back side, or on another booth...). When you feel that enough people have seen it, or those in the area start staring at it too much, simply drive it to another area to project in.

Two main worries:
1) Leg movements and bodies getting in the way of projection
2) Someone stealing it.

You can take care of 1 by getting one of those new "wall climber" remote control cars (uses suction to hold on to the wall- not so sure about ceiling use) to get above the crowd, assuming it can handle the extra weight/modifications.

You can take care of two with a taser. (Just hook it up to go off when you press a certain button on your cell phone! I suggest the pound key.)

Grrr.. Now movies are ruined forever

[ThePopeLayton]

Now instead of having a laser pointer showing up during your favorite movie, teenage kids are going to be able to project the latest 'pic' they took with their cell phone! Movies are ruined forever!

No, not really

[everphilski]

Low energy, small size = low brightness. You won't get a big screen with a bright picture. That is why this is ideal for a laptop where you sit it on your desk a few feet from a wall and get a decent sized screen. For a home entertainment center you'd have a much longer focal length, meaning you'd need a much higher power projector. This thing couldn't handle it, no match for a good DLP or projector even when the color models come out. But at a few feet range it would work well.

Re:News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Co

[Overzeetop]

It's even smaller at the size of "2 sugar cubes".


Damned europeans and their metric units. Hrumph.

Next-gen laser pointer

[Anonymous Coward]

With infinite focus, I hate to think what students and such will do with these in classes/meetings if they ever get cheap.

Why project on a wall?

[smithmc]

Why bother projecting the image on a wall? Doesn't anyone remember Snow Crash? Just stick that projector in front of your eye...

Re:News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Co

[hempalicious]

It's a fake. The shot was staged.

The picture was taken from a camera non-perpendicular to the wall being projected onto. Since the "mini projector" looks to be in the same line as the camera, the image should be keystoning. But it's not, it's perfectly squared. No doubt there's a standard LCD or DLP projector sitting in the room projecting that image.

Bye bye flat panel

[Nom du Keyboard]

Be great to have this shipped with your computer, and the white wall behind your work area becomes your display.

Yes, Really

[TWX]

I own two projectors, and I'd consider buying this if it looked good enough. The leap forward that their emission technology uses could explain the low power use.

The only reason why I own two projectors is that the second one came along at a very good deal ($300) and was higher res (1024x768) compared to my older one, which was 800x600. The old one is only 300 lumens, but it's still perfectly adequate in a dark room. If this thing delivers the resolution that it sounds like and is comparable to my older projector in brightness then I'd get one in a heartbeat. It'd be great to have something that tiny to mount to the ceiling or integrate, rather than having something that's better described as one cubit by one cubit...

Re:Yes, Really

[everphilski]

You didn't read the spec sheet. The brightness at 15" is 200 candela - aproximately the brightness of a LCD screen. The brightness at 7" - half the distance - is 880 candela. Now do a curvefit and tell me how bright it is going to be at a comfortable viewing distance - 120"++ for a home theater (~50 candela). (answer: not very.)

Re:Yes, Really

[ceoyoyo]

Let's do the math. The screen is 15" diagonal (NOT 15" viewing distance). At an aspect ratio of 16:9 that's a screen that's about 13"x7" (I'm using exact values in the calculations). So, calculating area and switching to sane units, that's a display area of 0.062 m^2. If this thing does 200 cd/m^2 at that distance then it's putting out a total of 12.4 cd, at a power consumption of between 0.35W and 1.4W.

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.

Re:Yes, Really

[zeet]

On top of that, once a home theater projector has been actually set up to show video instead of full-torch-on data, it's often more around 300 or 400 lumens of projected image.

main problem

[Anonymous Coward]

What prevents typical projectors from using common (cheap) light bulbs?
Are the projector bulbs significantly brigher than what can be had at Walmart, etc.?
Or are they just conveniently made to be the only ones that fit?

Roadrunner is more like it

[MisterSquid]

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.

Re:About time! (This is close to what you want)

[ttroutma]

http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?EDC= 895872

          250 lux
          1 lbs.
          SVGA

Introducing a portable projector so small, it can fit in the palm of your hand. Weighing about a single pound, this portable battery operated DLP (TM) projector supports native 800x600 SVGA resolution, and is powered by a sequential LED light source with support for RCA video, S-video and VGA inputs.

- Unbeatable convenience through extreme portability in both size and weight

- Long life-lamp, with quick-on, quick-off, no warm up period

- A projector at practically the cost of less than two regular projector lamp

- Can be battery operated

Included Accessories:

Protective slip cover.

Camera

[ackthpt]

Once these come out in color, imagine having one of these babies inside your laptop.

Rather have one hooked up to my Nikon D70s. I could then display pictures I've just taken, against a wall or other surface.

new form factor?

[rahrens]

Imagine projected screens and keyboards. What would a laptop look like? How small would it get?

Combine this with the new and up and coming larger flash memory, and you get a whole new product...

Who needs a better battery when the screen and hard drive (the two largest power drains) are no longer so power hungry?

Imagine what Ives could do with that!

This sounds nice, but...

[Paralizer]

I hope it doesn't turn into an advertisers dream. Think of it, you're driving down a city street minding your own business and bam, out of no where a flashing advertisement appears on that wall over to the left! Emitted from one of these little projectors hidden in that inconspicuous looking street lamp, you can't take your eyes off it. Ahh, you're blinded by the horrendous virtual billboard and crash into the back of another car. I swear your honor, that's exactly how it happened.

I don't need all that

[n-baxley]

All I want is a small projector that doesn't require a laptop to run powerpoints. Just let me stick in a thumb drive and choose the one I want on-screen. Give me that in a decent form factor and I'll be happy enough.

Re:I don't need all that

[narcc]

Close enough...

http://www.sony.com.my/about/cretech_presentwithme mory.asp?param=2

Re:I don't need all that

[n-baxley]

Well, I appreciate the suggestion, but why why why can't Sony just use that standards? Even if it's not a USB, just an SD or CF card would be great. Thanks anyway.

Nate Baxley

Really, now.

[chihowa]

You're berating somebody called Alzheimers about his inability to grasp events that just occured.

Missing from Exhibitor List

[KalvinB]

http://www.audioholics.com/news/editorials/laserpr ojectorscellphones.php

"Light Blue Optics will be demonstrating the miniature PVPro evaluation kit at the 3GSM World Congress in Barcelona, February 13-16 2006."

http://www.3gsmworldcongress.com/page.cfm/action=E xhibList/Letter=L

Their press releases say they'll be there. The official site of the 3GSM World Congress doesn't list them.

Re:Missing from Exhibitor List

[RenderSeven]

Not everyone rents full booths. When you have one product and a strategic partner (which they say they have) you piggyback in their booth. We have plenty of products in our booth by companies not on the roster. They have development kits; I'm buying one instead of second-guessing why they can't possibly exist!

Matchbox?

[DrVomact]

FTFA:

...similar in size and shape to a typical matchbox.

Now when is the last time you saw a matchbox, let alone a "typical" one? Seems to me they're getting pretty rare in the US these days. Perhaps it's time to shift to a different paradigm. But then again, I've heard people ask "Bigger than a breadbox?" when playing Twenty Questions, and I only saw a breadbox maybe once in my life when I was a kid.

Re:Dang laws of science again! Article BS

[mrgreen4242]

In the article it seems to indicate that is probably .35W for a 7" screen. THen take into account that it is probably inverting the colors from how we normally view them (dark background, light text). The average page of printed text has just 5% of black text on it (at least according to printer manufacturers). Let's say 10% to be safe.

A 7" screen has an area less than 25"^2, leaving only 2.5"^2 are splitting the .35W of light. Seems like it could be reasonably bright.

No moving parts?!?

[noidentity]

"Some specs: [...] No moving parts [...] "

That I doubt. How does the beam get scanned across the image rectangle?

Remember that most portable mp3 players do have moving parts that wear out: the buttons.

Re:No moving parts?!?

[The Cisco Kid]

Perhaps the laser is magnetically aimed?

Re:No moving parts?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Photons don't care about magnetic fields

Link: diffraction synthesized hologram

[glzrt]

See Splotch for what 3D diffraction synthesis looks like. In '95 it took 3.0 seconds to synthesize a 36MB fringe-buffer - apparently a throughput of 200MFLOPS. Given that the '360 and ps3 are 5x and 10x that speed, I'm hopeful to see a piece of their hardware dangling off my console sometime soon. :)

Low Power = Low Power

[jollygreengiantlikes]

Looking at the pdf linked from their site:
http://www.lightblueoptics.com/Light_Blue_Optics_P VPro.pdf
I see that they only claim 50cd/m^2 with a projection diagonal length (16x9) of 15"! For only using 1-2W of energy, it's no wonder. However, I don't think this dim of a display will be all that useful.
One can hope that this continues to spur development for them so that we could see higher power devices in the future.
JGG

Just one problem...

[Locke2005]

You won't be able to see the output in bright sunlight. Yeah, as long as you're in a dark room, this projector should be great.

Re:News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Co

[rastan]

Hmm. their press release says monochrome.

Keystone should be easy on this!

[An Ominous Cow Erred]

Since you don't have to mess with lenses at all... ...just vary the sweep length of each scanline. =)

Light output at 1.4 watts

[ba_hiker]

I wonder how bright a 1.4 watt laser will be when spread over a wall from 30 ft. Or does this only project a monitor sized immage at 2 ft??

Re:News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Co

[EnderGT]

Never mind the part about the mini projector being monochrome... (RTFA)

Novel optical techniques?

[Kadin2048]

What the hell is a "novel optical technique" and how do we know whether it has moving parts in it or not?

That doesn't say a thing about how it actually works. For all we know, there could be leprechauns in there, sorting out the different colored photons.

Re:Novel optical techniques?

[fbonnet]

how do we know whether it has moving parts in it or not?

RTFA:

LBO has developed unique laser-based projection technology, which uses computational algorithms and novel optical techniques to allow miniature lasers to display video images in real-time using the diffractive nature of laser light. This overcomes the size limitation of conventional projection techniques, allowing projectors to be smaller than ever before. Understand that there is no glass, no prisms, NO MOVING PARTS, and no need for fans to provide heat dissipation. In addition, it runs on less than 1.5W at full power and less than 350mW while displaying typical video images (50% average pixel amplitude. There is also an infinite focus, meaning that no matter how close or far away, there are no optics to adjust for a clear picture.

Remember how a laser light diffract when passing through a pinhole? Infos here and here (in french). FYI, the latter university is named after the 19h century french scientist who gave his name to the Fourier transform we all know.

I guess by superimposing many diffraction patterns they are able to generate the picture. This should imply Fourier-like transforms of the source image.

Re:Dang laws of science again! Article BS

[ceoyoyo]

The article says 200cd/m^2 at average 50% intensity.

Using On The Train

[MrSteveSD]

Very useful on the train to work if you happen to be sitting opposite a big fat guy in a white T-Shirt.

Projecting into the Eye

[MrSteveSD]

I think the true potential of this is not projecting onto surfaces, but the possibility of projection directly into the eye.

I've been waiting for the VRD (Virtual Retinal Display) for 10 years. I first heard about it on Tomorrow World (UK Science Program) and it has been in development by MVIS (http://www.mvis.com/) ever since. Sadly in all this time, all they seem to have developed is a red monochrome display for car mechanics.

Apart from being a lot more private, projecting directly into the eye cuts down on the power requirements (since the projection area is so small).

The potential uses for direct eye projection are huge. From flip up projectors on mobiles to augmented reality and full immersion Virtual Reality displays.

A number of manufacturers are already moving into the consumer head mounted display market. e.g. check out the Scopo by Mitsubishi. http://global.mitsubishielectric.com/company/r_and _d/innovations/inn_02.html

Whoever can make a low cost full colour HMD is going to make a killing.

Wikipedia Knows!

[Nirvelli]

Wikipedia says:
Very high intensity beams of shorter green and blue wavelengths can be visible in air due to Rayleigh scattering or Raman scattering.

Now picture this...

[MeatNoodle]

Imagine a computer the size of a paperback, with one of these projectors in it. Add one of those laser projected keyboards with a virtual touch-pad, a 60GB HD like the ones found in iPods, a WebCam, and WiFi. Talk about one cool computer! Powerful as a desktop, more transportable than a laptop, plays games and music, browses the web, can do VOIP and video conferencing, and can also act as a large-screen TV for streaming movies or as presentation projector.

So Long expensive Video Projectors.
Bye-Bye Plasma, LCD, CRT TVs/Monitors.
See Ya Desktops, Laptops, PDAs, iPods.
Sayonara Pocket Game Consoles with tiny screens.

Wow. I want one.

P.

Great....

[MetaRiko]

As if those kids with regular laser pointers in theaters weren't bad enough.

Soon they will be able to project text and......images..... from their cellphones.
Yet another reason to abandon movie theaters all together! :)

No moving parts?

[nurb432]

How does it 'scan' then? Variable density crystals? Magic?

It's the optics

[thaWhat]

That is precisely the point. The optics are the limiting factor. I used to work with the old CRT projectors with an f-rating of 0.9 - 1.2 on their lenses. Yeah, I know, you shouldn't be able to achieve better than 1.0 but it's the ratio of diameter to length, as far as i understand (hey i fixed the electronics not the optics - I'm STILL trying to get my head around scheimphlug correction...).

Anyway, to the point. In a lens-based system, there are losses. With an F rating of 1.0, theoretically, there is no light lost through the optical path (third law notwithstanding) my grasp of optics isn't perfect but i think that an f3 lens means that half the light is lost within the lens. Now, typically, to provide the convenience of being able to place the projector wherever-you-damn-like(tm) they provide zoom lenses (f4.5 and up) and digital auto keystone correction (which drops your effective resolution). The aforementioned CRT machines couldn't afford to lose any light. The solution? Position the projector correctly, and spend a s**tload on glass lenses, as against plastic.

So look for a projector with fixed-length lenses. Why spend extra for a zoom lens that will be adjusted exactly once.

Diffraction doesn't suffer from the losses of optics and is brighter as a result, however diffraction involves phase cancellation of the light source in order to achieve ... ... whatever it is that they are trying to achieve. In case there are those among us who don't appreciate what phase cancellation is, it means taking a signal source of equal and opposite power and using it to cancel out the original source (presumably) to achieve black. Or focus. Or both. IMHO there are better ways to achieve both, such as velocity modulation.

Re:News From The Past:Similar Projector in Full Co

[Random832]

First of all, neither of your statements are true. It's being pointed to the left and the image is taller at the left than at the right. Furthermore, if it _was_ in the same line as the camera, the effects would cancel out.

Uh, wow

[p3d0]

Ok, I stand corrected. (Both on the operation of the device, and on who is dense.)

maybe so

[subtropolis]

I felt the same way immediately. But, what the heck - they (supposedly) have got an evaluation kit available. And from the article:

Light Blue Optics will be demonstrating the miniature PVPro evaluation kit at the 3GSM World Congress in Barcelona, February 13-16 2006.

So, if you're interested, here's the link to the 3gsm conference website. Maybe with some digging around, we might find a lead on more objective info (and maybe some pics) somewhere.

pffft...

[subtropolis]

Well, not a great start: they're not even listed as an exhibitor.

Still, i'd like to see what it really can do.

WHAT?

[Legion303]

Oh no, I haven't survived 30 years of computing advances just to go back to a green mono display. I can feel the retinal burn-in already...

We all KNOW what is this going to be used for...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Yes, Miss Othmar? What is THAT on my desk? Oh, just my new pencil sharpener."

Re^2:Blue lasers really still so hard to come by?

[D4C5CE]

Would that be "...lasour"?

You've gotta be kiddin'... but I guess that would rather be "fibre".