Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Stretching Crystals Promise Bendy, Full-Color Displays

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the less-eye-stress dept.

NewScientist is reporting that a new approach to crystal formation could help create power-efficient, flexible color displays. These new photonic crystals, structured similar to opals, can be tuned by adjusting the gaps between the crystals. "The beauty of the device is that it can produce the whole spectrum of colors, even ultraviolet and infrared light, using only incident light. As a result, the expensive color filters used in every other color display on the market today, are no longer needed. And because the displays use only reflected ambient light, no power is wasted on back-lighting, as in today's mobile phones, for example. 'They can be viewed just as well in bright sunlight as in indoor light,' team member André Arsenault of the University of Toronto told New Scientist."

117 comments

  1. Ha! by gardyloo · · Score: 0

    "The beauty of the device is that it can produce the whole spectrum of colors, even ultraviolet and infrared light, using only incident light. As a result, the expensive color filters used in every other color display on the market today, are no longer needed." I'm not convinced. All I got was "Nothing to see here. Please move along."
    1. Re:Ha! by Ed+Avis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The article says that if you can produce light of any frequency you don't need colour filters. But this can't be the case, because a computer display needs to mix different frequencies (to produce white light, for example). That said, if they can control the proportion of incident white light that is reflected as white rather than coloured to a single frequency (or narrow band of frequencies), and with a simple light/dark filter (such as a black and white liquid crystal display), it could make a display that works on hue-saturation-value rather than red-green-blue. That would be interesting for the computer world, which has used boring RGB values to store image data for so long. I know that JPEG stores chrominance and luminance separately but I'm not aware of any file format (let alone graphics hardware) which works using HSV.

      (BTW, does anyone know how to post a comment to an article using the new discussion system?)

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    2. Re:Ha! by WhyDoYouWantToKnow · · Score: 1

      Click Reply on the grey bar with the slider. It's next to More and Prefs on the right side.

      --
      "Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex. I could pinch them."
      Marvin the Martian
    3. Re:Ha! by jimstapleton · · Score: 2, Informative

      except don't computer display all their colors by limiting any given spot to one frequency, and then altering the brightness of that spot. Specifically there are static spots for each pixel - one red, green and blue. Their frequencies remain, only their brightnesses change - and we get a lot of colors from them.

      --
      34486853790
      Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
    4. Re:Ha! by somersault · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Presumably the only reason that we have to use pixels, are because we didn't have any material (or any cost effective method of manipulating a meterial) that could produce colours of any desired frequency (until now). So they just used single coloured phosphors that could be adjusted to different brightnesses of a single colour, and when mixed with 2 other colours, can fool the eye into seeing any colour. If you can just set the colour directly, why bother using 3 separate colours to fake it instead.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    5. Re:Ha! by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Which doesn't appear properly in IE6, btw.

      --
      My blog
    6. Re:Ha! by somersault · · Score: 2, Informative

      After thinking about it more, I see what you mean. Black, white and greys aren't colours in the visual spectrum, rather white needs to be made from a mix of other colours, and black is the absence of colour.. so simply being able to set a colour isn't enough, you need to control the brightness and still need to be able to mix different frequencies. So if you didn't have some kind of filter then you'd have a pretty weird looking display. Should have known better than to think a low /. id'er needed me to explain things :P

      --
      which is totally what she said
    7. Re:Ha! by kebes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      These photonic crystals are being built into arrays of pixels, where each pixel can, effectively, control its reflection color. So, a pixel can set itself to 'black' by adjusting its reflection to be outside the visible range (in the IR or UV), or can set itself to 'red' by tuning itself to have a reflection in the red region of the spectrum. So each pixel can take on a continum of color values:

      (Black), Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo, Violet, (Black)

      To generate a white reflection (or non-spectral colors, like brown), adjacent pixels would still have to do what we do in modern displays: one would be Red, the other Blue, the other Green, and your eye would see reflected white light. So in a certain sense it has the same pixel-clustering limitation of current displays.

      However it's better than current displays in some ways. First of all, if your image happens to be monochromatic (or parts of the display are monochromatic) then you don't have to be using three display pixels for a single image pixel... so in essence you can triple your display resolution. No doubt if such displays become common, algorithms will be developed that allow the display to maximize resolution when possible.

      Perhaps more importantly, however, is that the color range is greater. A typical display mixes Red, Green and Blue. But the wavelength of the Red, Green, and Blue that are available are inherently limited. This means that although the display can generate many colors, it doesn't actually cover the full color range of colors that your eye can see. With this proposed display, you can adjust the Red, Green, and Blue wavelengths themselves. This provides access to a wider color range. For instance, when this display sets itself to 'orange' it will be a pure spectral orange, rather than an approximation generated by mixing the right amount of red, green, and blue.

      And, of course, an obvious advantage is that this system is reflection-mode. Like paper, it doesn't generate light, merely reflects ambient light. This makes it ideal for reading outdoors, in natural light, etc.

    8. Re:Ha! by Cryolithic · · Score: 5, Funny

      Doesn't use of IE6 lead to automatic revocation of Slashdot privileges? Just sayin'...

    9. Re:Ha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      jpeg can be used to store YMCK, RGB, HSV, just plain B&W, or it can be extended to use just about any scheme you come up with.

    10. Re:Ha! by Speare · · Score: 1

      But you see, we can't just create any color we want using only one wavelength. That's why all the color spaces seem to need at least three parameters: RGB, CMY, Lab, HSV, etc.

      For example, say you can pick any single wavelength you want, and you pick, oh, that bright "green laser" green #00FF00. How do you make it less saturated? How can it be a shade like celadon #FEFFFE (green but damn near white) or a shade like canned spinach #112211 (green but pretty dark)? Maybe you think you can do it by attenuation: you can get "green laser" green and you can get "spinach green" by dialing down the intensity, but that still won't give you celadon.

      In RGB, the difference between Red and Blue versus Green drives the saturation while the average drives the value. In HSV the saturation is a direct component distinct from value. You need at least three parameters for a color, just as much as you need three parameters to describe a location in 3space.

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
    11. Re:Ha! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Informative
      It's worth pointing out that RGB is an artefact of our retina, not our display technology. We have three different kinds of wavelength-specific sensors in our eyes which detect three fixed wavelengths (with some leakage to the sides). This is entirely a human thing; it is conceivable that a creature with a different evolutionary heritage might only have two wavelength sensors, or more than two.

      To accurately represent any given colour, you need an infinite number of values, not just three, since a colour is the sum of an arbitrary number of wavelengths of light. The red cones in our eyes, for example, detect light at around 580nm. If a photon with a wavelength of 590nm hits the red cone, then it is perceived as being a slightly weaker 580nm signal, rather than a different colour. This lets us fool our eyes into thinking they are seeing the full range of colours when they are only seeing three in a different wavelengths with different amplitudes. A species which saw colours properly would find it much harder to design a colour display.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    12. Re:Ha! by SC-James · · Score: 1

      Not when you are at work on a Govt. computer which you can't install another browser on.

    13. Re:Ha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GET BACK TO WORK!

      Mgmt

    14. Re:Ha! by WhyDoYouWantToKnow · · Score: 1

      I never noticed because I don't use IE. I just brought up an article in IE6 and, while it doesn't look exactly the same as it does in Firefox, the bar is there as are the More | Prefs | Reply links. I notice the bar doesn't follow me as I scroll down the page and the slider doesn't show up unless I scroll down the page a bit. It doesn't work right but the reply is there and works (for me at least).

      --
      "Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex. I could pinch them."
      Marvin the Martian
    15. Re:Ha! by eggnoglatte · · Score: 1

      Actually, you can create any color with a mixture of 2 (not 3) fully saturated (i.e. pure spectral) colors. For any given color, find its location in the CIE horseshoe diagram, and then draw any line through that point. The intersections of this line with the boundaries of the horseshoe diagram represent the spectral colors that you need to blend, and the distance of your target color to these point sgives you the weighting ratio. The reason why current displays have to use 3 primaries is because the primaries are fixed, so you cannot create just ANY spectral wavelength.

    16. Re:Ha! by Shinglor · · Score: 1

      Maybe it could sell to the audio/videophile crowd but it's biologically unnecessary to use more than three primaries. Our retinas have only three kinds of cone cells - roughly red, green and blue. Apparently some people have a fourth type of cone cell but it's extremely rare.

    17. Re:Ha! by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2, Interesting
      it is conceivable that a creature with a different evolutionary heritage might only have two wavelength sensors

      Like Cows (or, I think, hooved animals in general). See either this week's episode of Mythbusters, or this paper, Principles of Cow Comfort, Animal Handling, and Movement:

      Cows can see color; however they have dichromatic vision which means they see only a limited spectrum of colors. This makes a cow more sensitive to seeing sudden movement, but means they do not like situations with a high contrast of light and dark.
      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    18. Re:Ha! by hercubus · · Score: 1
      i think you may be making an incorrect assumption

      my Windows box at work is "locked down" (i also work for Govt - paranoid, sissy wankers) and Firefox does a good job of installing itself and running despite supposed controls. just make sure you change the install folder to something you can write to - try "My Documents" if all else fails

      btw, my condolences re: your employer ;^)

      --
      -- How I want a drink, alcoholic of course, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.
    19. Re:Ha! by somersault · · Score: 1

      Didn't know about the 4th. I knew about the rods and cones in the eye, but I guess I didn't really think exactly how that has to influence any displays that we create, I thought that you only needed one wavelength per colour.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    20. Re:Ha! by amchugh · · Score: 1

      Tetrachromats can perceive four colors.

      Also, browns require more than one color to be displayed (although presumably one can dither).

      The only problem I can see with this material is that one color will require the shortest distance between crystals, and another will require the longest distance (Red vs. Indigo). When displaying all of one color on a billboard display, will the difference in size actually rip the display out of the frame?

    21. Re:Ha! by gfody · · Score: 1

      It may be possible for one pixel to cover the gamut via pulse width modulation if they can change color quickly enough.

      --

      bite my glorious golden ass.
    22. Re:Ha! by Solra+Bizna · · Score: 1

      I actually did some research into this.

      The reason no image format directly supports HSV or HSL is that in order to have a decent perceptual precision you have to have a LOT of actual precision. (8+8+8 bits is not enough.) In addition, if you lossily compress the H, S, and V/L channels separately, the result looks worse than for YCbCr, or even RGB.

      -:sigma.SB

      --
      WARN
      THERE IS ANOTHER SYSTEM
    23. Re:Ha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and indeed, some have four: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromat

  2. Uhh... by SighKoPath · · Score: 4, Funny

    They can be viewed just as well in bright sunlight as in indoor light
    What about in complete darkness? Gotta keep the basement-dwellers happy...
    1. Re:Uhh... by maino82 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is a very good point and I think it would be interesting if you integrate a photocell into the devices. When the photocell detects enough ambient light, you can turn the backlight off, but when there is no light, or very low light, you turn the backlight on, or possibly even dim it up and down. This way it can function in varying degrees of ambient light, but can also save a significant amount of energy.

    2. Re:Uhh... by cosmocain · · Score: 1

      yah, no more horror-movie-sessions in totally darkened rooms. a lil' bit of a atmosphere-killer in that case. but in alsmost every other, it could be what many people waited for - laptops without relfections usable in bright sunlight. and it's energy saving, too. so this really could be the future technology for all laptop displays.

    3. Re:Uhh... by timeOday · · Score: 4, Insightful
      That's why these paper "books" will never catch on. No backlighting!

      From the blurb, this sounds like the holy grail: reflective, full color gamut, and flexible to boot. Of course we all know what happens to 99% of breakthrough technologies that should be ready for the market in 2-4 years...

    4. Re:Uhh... by hypermanng · · Score: 1

      Lack of backlighting on paper books is actually one reason I worked out a way to prop my laptop so I could read in bed. Plus, after I pass out, the screen turns itself off automatically!

      Now if they could just make ebooks suck less...

      --
      I am the one true god. However, as an atheist, I don't believe in myself. I guess I have a self-esteem problem.
    5. Re:Uhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NO! no no no no no NO! A device should not tell me how much light I need to be able to read something. My laptop, palm pilot etc. all have a feature where they can adjust the light according to whatever ambient light there might be, its piss poor and bloody annoying so I always turn the "feature" off.

    6. Re:Uhh... by maino82 · · Score: 1

      Photocells are easy to adjust though, so if you wanted more light or less light, it would be a fairly simple thing to adjust the photocell and say, "hey, I need more light than that!" Then the photocell would respond accordingly. While your concerns are valid, when you have the ability to fine tune the settings it should not be a problem. Just for reference, I'm an electrical engineer and we deal with daylighting controls on a regular basis. The biggest complaint we've received in the past is exactly what you describe and so now we build the ability for the user to easily fine tune the photocell into our designs now and the complaints have almost disappeared.

    7. Re:Uhh... by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1
      If you only mean visible light then this breakthrough has you covered!

      The beauty of the device is that it can produce the whole spectrum of colours, even ultraviolet and infrared light
      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    8. Re:Uhh... by *weasel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sure there'll be an 'illuminator' ring built into the bezel by at least the second wave of backlight-free screens.
      There are just too many practical situations where it's convenient to be able to see your mobile screen in low-to-no ambient light situations.

      meetings/classes with a projector in use
      at the pub or theatre
      in bed
      outside at night
      in a car/plane/train at night
      etc.

      --
      // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
    9. Re:Uhh... by somersault · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wouldn't it create even more atmosphere if you had to shine torches at the display to be able to see it? And anyone wanting to read an e-book under their covers with a torch could still do it

      --
      which is totally what she said
    10. Re:Uhh... by ThosLives · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it create even more atmosphere if you had to shine torches at the display to be able to see it? And anyone wanting to read an e-book under their covers with a torch could still do it

      Is that an English torch or an American torch?

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    11. Re:Uhh... by nickname225 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure that backlighting will work - since this is a reflective technology.

    12. Re:Uhh... by somersault · · Score: 1

      Oh, my apologies.. flashlight.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    13. Re:Uhh... by ThosLives · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's what I figured, but it's much more fun to visualize the version of torch which relies on highly exothermic chemical reactions :-)

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    14. Re:Uhh... by kebes · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm not sure that backlighting will work - since this is a reflective technology.
      It is indeed a reflective technology... but the non-reflective state is transparent rather than black (in the scientific paper they actual show an image in the off/transparent state). The most obvious way to use such a technology is against a black backing. In the 'off' state the entire display looks black, but you can then adjust pixels to be any bright color you want. By mixing the state of adjacent pixels you can presumably get a white color, or anything else.

      However the reflection effectively acts like an absorption if viewed transmissively. So if you had a backlight, you could tune the effective absorption band of each individual pixel. By cutting out a band of colors (and using adjacent pixels), you effectively have full color control.

      So it's possible to imagine a future version of this tech where the display is normally reflective (black backing) but when required switches to emissive display (which would require a backlight turning on, and inverting the logic of the display pixels so that the colors don't come out inverted). Thus you'd have the "best of both worlds."
    15. Re:Uhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've already patented that invention. Sucker.

    16. Re:Uhh... by DynaSoar · · Score: 1

      > meetings/classes with a projector in use
      > at the pub or theatre
      > in bed
      > outside at night
      > in a car/plane/train at night
      > etc.

      How often in each of those places do you presently use a backlit or emitting display?

      --
      "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
    17. Re:Uhh... by Arathon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you might have been modded funny, but that was my first thought as well.

      Cavemen are people too!

    18. Re:Uhh... by DynaSoar · · Score: 1

      > That's why these paper "books" will never catch on. No backlighting!

      "Ah. Humor. Ahrrr! Ahrrr!" -- Mork

      If you backlit this thing, the display image would be on the back side, doing you as much good as an LCD from the rear.

      Another limitation: angle of incidence. The spacing between the little balls makes the colors. The apparent spacing changes as the angle changes. Color straight on would be a different color off center. What makes opals so pretty is that the color changes as it or you move.

      Same goes for them being flexible. If you bend it, the color would change according to how much it was bent.

      And how would they make black?

      And if it can make infrared, it will according to some angles of incidence. Will it melt itself?

      --
      "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
    19. Re:Uhh... by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 1

      Oh, it's you bloody peasants with the torches again? All right. Take the right fork to Frankenstein, the left fork to Dracula, now get off my land and you - YOU! - that's my ram, not a female, and he doesn't like what you're trying to do! Now pull up your britches and go AWAY, you sodding bastards.

    20. Re:Uhh... by ryanov · · Score: 1

      Mobile screen covers all of the above. I took/take notes on my laptop, I use my phone (well, don't talk on it, but look at it) at the pub or theatre, outside at night, and use my laptop on the train or a plane at night... so... rather often?

    21. Re:Uhh... by Maltheus · · Score: 1

      Oh come on, I've been using flexible organic paper LCDs in my flying car ever since the 50s. This is old news.

    22. Re:Uhh... by Hawke666 · · Score: 1

      And if it can make infrared, it will according to some angles of incidence. Will it melt itself? Apparently you missed the bit where they mentioned that it's a reflective display. It doesn't produce light, only reflect it. So yes, if you shine an infrared light on it, it can reflect it. But it doesn't "make" infrared, and thus won't melt itself.
    23. Re:Uhh... by suggsjc · · Score: 1

      Neither, he actually meant a real torch. Yet again, pissing off the cavemen!

      Its amazing how "PC" we think we are/try to be, but somehow neanderthals still don't get the treatment they deserve.

      --
      When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
    24. Re:Uhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I'm not sure that backlighting will work - since this is a reflective technology.

      Then try frontlighting, aka a Maglite!

      It works for books and magazines...

    25. Re:Uhh... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      But could it become fully reflective, and thus make things like mirrors?

    26. Re:Uhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used my mobile in all of those situations but the theatre (and maybe "etc.") in the past week.

    27. Re:Uhh... by Original+Replica · · Score: 1

      Photocells are easy to adjust though, so if you wanted more light or less light, it would be a fairly simple thing to adjust the photocell and say, "hey, I need more light than that!"

      ...or you could turn on a lamp. That's what I do when I'm reading a book and it's too dark. The passive aspect of this tech is the most appealing part, backlit displays are about as classy and relaxing as neon signs. The era of sitting in the dark looking into a glowing box maybe passing.

      --
      We are all just people.
    28. Re:Uhh... by DynaSoar · · Score: 1

      > Apparently you missed the bit where they mentioned that it's a reflective display. It doesn't produce light, only reflect it. So yes, if you shine an infrared light on it, it can reflect it. But it doesn't "make" infrared, and thus won't melt itself.

      I didn't miss that at all, though "make" was a poor choice.

      It'll reflect different frequencies according to the nodule spacing. It can reflect IR as well as other frequencies, so it can NOT reflect IR, or reflect it at a particular angle according to incidence of incoming. They said it can work in sunlight which is fairly IR rich (or it wouldn't be warm). If it's tuned to reflect everything but IR, it's absorbing the IR. Same if it's tuned so that IR is reflected very close to the plane of the display. If efficient enough it'd heat up. The question is, how much?

      Having replied, it occurred to me that heat would also change the spacing of the nodules by heating the crystals holding them, changing the absorbed and reflected frequencies. If increased spacing = increased reflection of lower frequencies, it'd reflect more IR as it heated. If the opposite, it could heat itself up in a run away cycle. I didn't follow which way it worked. In any case, any outdoor application (they mentioned billboards) would probably need to measure and react to temperature changes to display the colors the driver intends. Maybe not in smaller displays, but a billboard collects a lot of insolation (1 kW / m^2). OTOH, I suppose such a display could be set to reflect IR broadband and at various angles around on-axis, and thus keep itself from heating over much. That'd also heat the air in front of it, which might make for some nifty special effects.

      --
      "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
    29. Re:Uhh... by dargaud · · Score: 1

      That's why these paper "books" will never catch on. No backlighting! And it's exactly what I've been waiting for forever. I'm sick of having a light shining in my face all the time, be it a screen or a cop with an interogation lamp !!! I want a passive screen with the same quality of reflexion as a book or magazine. Much more confortable for the eyes. Why exactly do you want backlighting ?!?
      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
  3. As usual by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1, Insightful

    As usual, tell us when it has reached the market/got by the politicans/satisfy some patent/pleased some lawyers.

    1. Re:As usual by Henneshoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I see you have a +5 insightful, so this is for you and everyone who agrees with you. Get out of the /. science section if you do not want to hear about this stuff till it hits market. Two years from now if this display is good enough to be sold, you can read about it in /. hardware. Many of us enjoy hearing of new discoveries even if they may never make it to market.

    2. Re:As usual by kebes · · Score: 2, Informative

      I appreciate your desire for real technology rather than vaporware. However this recent publication is interesting scientifically even if it doesn't pan out into useful technology.

      Having said that, I would like to point out that this design idea is further along than many (most?) of the "display tech of the week" articles we read. In particular, in the actual scientific paper they show working prototype systems with multi-pixel displays. Their devices, while prototypes, have realistic parameters: 0.3 mm pixel size; 25 micron pixel resolution; 0-3 V switching requirement; stable over hundreds of switching cycles; etc.

      Furthermore, they have started a company to begin building real technology: Opalux. Now, I acknowledge that many startups fail... however this technology seems relatively workable, and is further along than many other ideas I've seen.

    3. Re:As usual by dashslotter · · Score: 1

      By then you can read about it on MSN.... Shouldn't we at least hear about stuff early on /., even if it never pans out?

      --
      I was flipping bits on an abacus, newb.
    4. Re:As usual by virgil_disgr4ce · · Score: 1

      Thank you. I get so tired of those same comments all the time. Whatever happened to a slashdotter's sense of wonder and imagination? Have years and years of scifi not left some kind of impression, some ability to be excited by the possibilities, instead of just whining about one thing or another? Sheesh.

      --
      Limina.Log
  4. e-Ink can now realize its full potential. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was getting tired of looking at Penthouse in B&W.

  5. Dang by hypermanng · · Score: 1

    But I like the monitor being the only source of light in the room. How am I going to see the screen when I'm sitting like a mushroom in my dungeon/office with the lights off? This technology is a bummer.

    Unless we could make suits/coverings out of it that would display a video feed of what's behind you: active camouflage!

    --
    I am the one true god. However, as an atheist, I don't believe in myself. I guess I have a self-esteem problem.
    1. Re:Dang by aicrules · · Score: 1

      Just put a few 100W bulbs behind it in a box that you tape to the back.

    2. Re:Dang by hypermanng · · Score: 1

      Sounds elegant. I'll do it with duct tape!

      --
      I am the one true god. However, as an atheist, I don't believe in myself. I guess I have a self-esteem problem.
  6. 1000 words by Verteiron · · Score: 3, Informative

    This story is worthless without pictures.

    There are none here, although there's no shortage of sales brochure style summaries:
    http://www.opalux.com/technologies.php

    --
    End of lesson. You may press the button.
  7. Poor product naming... by BiloxiGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who else looked at their Technologies page and saw:

    Ela STINK

    --
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, For you are crunchy and go well with ketchup.
    1. Re:Poor product naming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they should change from "Elastink" to "Stretchink".

  8. Sunblock required for computer users by LurkerXXX · · Score: 4, Funny

    "The beauty of the device is that it can produce the whole spectrum of colors, even ultraviolet and infrared light"

    Sweet, now we can get a virus on our computers that gives us sunburn.

    I wonder if Hawaiian Tropic will hire me as a blackhat to ensure they get increased sales from computer users. Maybe they'll introduce me to the girls.

    1. Re:Sunblock required for computer users by bchernicoff · · Score: 1

      I wonder if Hawaiian Tropic will hire me as a blackhat to ensure they get increased sales from computer users. Maybe they'll introduce me to the girls.

      Yes, then you can try to court the lasses!

      LOL, the captcha for this post was "condom".

    2. Re:Sunblock required for computer users by kebes · · Score: 1

      I know it was a joke... but I'd just like to point out that the technology is a reflective display. When they say that they can tune it into the UV, this means that the pixels can be tuned so that they are highly reflective in the UV (and don't reflect any visible light).

      It's not emitting UV at you, it's just reflecting ambient UV. If you are outdoors, then some UV from the sun would be reflected off the display. If you take the display indoors, essentially no UV at all would be reflected since most light bulbs don't emit much in the UV. So, it won't be able to give you a sunburn unless you are already standing in full view of the sun!

      On the other hand, it should be obvious that this ability means this display technology may find numerous other applications, since it can control the reflectivity not just in the visible but also in the UV and IR bands.

    3. Re:Sunblock required for computer users by Phat_Tony · · Score: 1

      Yes, I know you're joking. But this is a reflective device, not emissive, so they can't make it any more dangerous to you than a mirror. Probably not any more dangerous than a sheet of paper.

      --
      Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
    4. Re:Sunblock required for computer users by WillDraven · · Score: 1

      One thought that comes to mind is if this could be tuned to maximize reflection of UV in a relatively tight beam (mirror reflecting sunlight tight, not magnifying glass frying ants) it could be used to prank somebody sitting in the shade thinking thier relatively safe from sunburn by angling the display to point the reflection at thier face.

      Not exactly a sunburning virus but a similar concept.

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
  9. I knew it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://images.google.com/images?q=stretching+cryst al

    Stretching....

    Crystal...

    Display...

    1. Re:I knew it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have Google SafeSearch set to off, although why it would be off at a work computer is a whole different question, this is definitely NSFW.

  10. hmm "infrared light based laptops!" by JustASlashDotGuy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder if this would allow a soldier to use his laptop in the dead of night, viewing his screen via night-vision goggles? Anyone out there that's ever used night-vision goggles know if this even possible in the slightest?

    1. Re:hmm "infrared light based laptops!" by somersault · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Might be better just to use bluetooth or a short cabled connection to hook into the goggles.. unless night vision can amplify the screen in enough detail when it's getting so little ambient light on it.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:hmm "infrared light based laptops!" by xeromist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to mention I'd prefer not to be emiting any more light than necessary, even in the infrared spectrum. All you'd need is an enemy with infrared vision and you might as well be using a regular laptop.

      --
      This sig is exactly seventy characters long and a real waste of space!
    3. Re:hmm "infrared light based laptops!" by somersault · · Score: 1

      Yep that's what I was thinking too, but I think that army spec nightvision just amplifies light a lot rather than using a little IR flashlight type thing like you get on camcorders.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    4. Re:hmm "infrared light based laptops!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was that you in the basement in "Silence of the Lambs"?

    5. Re:hmm "infrared light based laptops!" by Zero_DgZ · · Score: 1

      In complete darkness, "army spec" night vision requires an illuminator (which is nearly always infrared). Generation three (current mil. issue, insofar as I'm aware) gear requires considerably less onboard illumination than old generation one stuff does, but it still requires some form of light to amplify in the first place. Standing outside in the desert with decent mil. spec night vision equipment with a partial moon showing means you'll probably be able to at least spot a man standing a considerable distance away with no IR illumination (though probably not identify him) but in a closed room with no light source you wouldn't be able to see spit.

      By the way, playing with gen. one night vision is a pretty cheap game if you want to try it, as simple monoculars can be bought for less than a hundred bucks from Harbor Freight, Sportsman's Guide, et. all these days. The illuminators on this gear are exactly the same dull-red-glow technology as consumer camcorders, though usually with something resembling variable focus and a little more power.

  11. What is it? by __aagmrb7289 · · Score: 1

    That's stopping this from reaching my home, anyway? This is the fifth year running that I've heard of "bendable displays", etc. - and I've yet to see a commercial product.

    1. Re:What is it? by Cragen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed. We need some sort of "Popular Science Magazine" factor for this stuff. Say, rate it a PSM2 for "got a patent and looking for investors", or PSFx50 for, say, anything "recently discovered" anywhere or, perhaps, PS-BS=2^132 for anything with the words "fusion" or "nanotechnology" in the title. (Or perhaps a YARP or NARP factor ...with apologies to "Hot Fuzz")

    2. Re:What is it? by KE1LR · · Score: 1
      Agreed. My first reaction when reading this was "oh great, another cool display idea that isn't coming to market.

      I'm still waiting for an OLED display that's bigger than the screen on my iPod.

      How about that projector that could work from a cellphone? (Or even my laptop!)

  12. Best. Idea. Ever. by Fophillips · · Score: 1

    Two infrared pixels == built-in Wiimote sensor bar!

  13. Two very obvious questions... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    1) What is the resolution of the device?

    2) What is the power consumption of the device? While I can already see there's no energy wasted on unnecessary back-lighting, how long could such a display be run off of, for example, a typical rechargeable battery?

    --
    File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
  14. Slow switching speed... by danpat · · Score: 1

    From the product website (http://www.opalux.com/p-ink.php): ...
    5. Sub-second switching speed. ...

    So, it might be a while before this is useful for fast-changing displays, like TVs and computer displays.
    Might be ok for picture frames, outdoor signage and stuff.

  15. This probably won't be used for monitors by MojoRilla · · Score: 1

    From the company that is actually producing the technology, they list the technology as only having sub-second switching speed. That is not fast enough for monitors. Also, they only target the technology for large billboards or other outdoor displays, where the content is more static, and switching time might not be as critical.

    1. Re:This probably won't be used for monitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Large billboards or other outdoor displays - hmm, the whole "IR / UV" thing is seeming a lot less useful now. ;)

    2. Re:This probably won't be used for monitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe not at first, but, someone might figure out how to make such work!

  16. Great, but now... by Overzeetop · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...we all need to have calibrated room lighting in order to get the proper colors to show up. No blue with that 60w incandescent!

    Which brings me to...how does this work with fluorescent lighting? If you're using partial reflectivity, human eyes get the proper fractions of the constituents of the phosphors. If you're using interferometry, wouldn't you end up with huge dropouts in the visible spectrum?

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  17. Watch this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My display tech is an LED flashlight..

  18. Mind the switching speed by *weasel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    From the blurb, this sounds like the holy grail
    and from the pamphlet we find the rub: "Sub-second switching speed"

    So unless you're in the digital billboard industry, there's still alot more than 2-4 years of work to be done before it matters - if ever.
    --
    // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
    1. Re:Mind the switching speed by Kreigaffe · · Score: 1

      Ok, no gaming on this display.

      Frankly, depending on power consumption / size / etc, it does sound like it might be clutch for displaying a book, or photographs, or heck, even maps/GPS would work. Sub-second is fast enough for images that only change very infrequently.

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    2. Re:Mind the switching speed by timeOday · · Score: 1

      and from the pamphlet we find the rub: "Sub-second switching speed"
      So much for the holy grail :(
  19. Is this the last we'll hear of it??? by Twinbee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is there anyone, anywhere on the web who ever tracks these technologies that are supposed to 'make it to the market soon'? I mean how about it. A site that finds out whether these new techs die, simmer down, or flourish.

    There are a billion and one news sites out there, each reporting thousands of 'just in' stories each day. To have just one that actually tracks the progress of each technology would be amazing. Give each tech their own special page, and then add to them as further news comes in about the SAME tech. Perhaps add a progress bar in the form of a percentage of expected market release too. Pretty please? I'm just getting sick and tired of hearing about these amazing new futuristic gadgets, and then never hearing about them again.

    --
    Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    1. Re:Is this the last we'll hear of it??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Popular Science just started a prediction exchange - you can go there and see where various technologies are tracking, probabilities of events occuring and whatnot.

    2. Re:Is this the last we'll hear of it??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds good to me. I'd mod you up if I had points...

    3. Re:Is this the last we'll hear of it??? by kryliss · · Score: 1

      Sounds to me like you've got yourself a project. :)

      --
      --- If the bible proves the existence of God, then Superman comics prove the existence of Superman.
    4. Re:Is this the last we'll hear of it??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a good idea, why don't you make one?

  20. Talk about getting things backward by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    This problem is nothing new, did you know that when they first introduced the 4 color cga monitors (well 16) they had to rescan all the porn from the green/amber version into the new 16 color format?

    There was even a time in the VGA era when you had black&white monitors (I had one), every porn website I visited I had to append B&W to the url (?monitorowner=cheapbastard), so I would get the black&white scans and not the colors ones. Once I forgot and my monitor blew up.

    What are you? STUPID?

    What you seem to be talking about is the RGB method of storing color information. Simple put, a bmp stores for each pixel the intensity of red, green and blue. Keep two of them at zero and raise the other and you will create that color, zero all of them and you got black and raise them all and you get white. Pretty simple.

    BUT this is just a way to do it, and it just so happens that most tech does it this way, scanners are RGB, the imageformat is RGB and the display tech is RGB, but that is just coincedence. It doesn't have to be that way and in fact in for instance the printing industry it isn't.

    If you suddenly attached a monitor that no longer needed three seperate color values but one, then all you would need to do is get a new graphics card that could output the new signal. If you are lazy, it would be trivial to put this tech into the monitor itself.

    Offcourse it would be best if the whole chain of color information dropped the RGB but that would take time.

    But the idea that this tech faces a barrier because the current method of displaying color is RGB is so silly I am at a loss to explain just how idiotic your idea is.

    You really should look into proffesional image handling. They had to deal with the limits of RGB for far longer and have come up with plenty of solutions. Even humble photoshop allows you to store images in richer formats.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Talk about getting things backward by The_Wilschon · · Score: 1

      You didn't get it. White light is not any one frequency, but rather, all visible frequencies at equal intensity. The GP was not claiming that the entrenched RGB *ware was an obstacle to this new technology, but that either the article wasn't entirely clear on all the details (most likely) or that simple physics was an obstacle to this new technology.

      --
      SIGSEGV caught, terminating

      wait... not that kind of sig.
  21. Two years == vaporware by mark-t · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Okay, I admit it... I was suckered in at first... I actually thought "woah, what a cool idea!" But then I reread the article and there it was.... "available ... in as little as two years" (emphasis mine). Two years, it seems, is a small enough time to get people hyped up about something, but still far enough away that by the time two years is up most people will have forgotten about it. In other words, it's a great way to get funding for that's for a "product" that nobody will ever see.

    --
    File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
  22. Flexible color displays by danlock4 · · Score: 0

    Mooom! Johnny twisted my display again!

    --
    To .sig or not to .sig, that is the question.
  23. sounds like an improvement to me... by Arathon · · Score: 1

    ...that's a mite better than "Mom, Johnny broke my rigid and inflexible LCD display again!", doncha think? ;-)

  24. http://blog.modernmechanix.com/ by bigtrike · · Score: 2, Interesting

    http://blog.modernmechanix.com/ has quite a few. A lot of them didn't quite make it.

  25. Wow. by rantingkitten · · Score: 1

    A highly-reflective screen that can be viewed in ambient light, but has no backlight of its own. Because that worked out ever so well for the original Gameboy Advance.

    --
    mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
  26. More like print by Bombula · · Score: 2, Informative
    You raise a good point about HSV. I was going to mention that a passive display which only reflects ambient like is going to be aesthetically much more pleasing to the eye: it will be like looking at a magazine instead of a TV screen. HSV also points to a greater similarity to printed imagery.

    I posted a comment to slashdot more than ten years ago about the potential of passive displays that only reflect ambient light, suggesting that there would be potential for display development. Glad to see my prognostication turned out to be true.

    --
    A-Bomb
  27. I want my Predator suit! by styzygy · · Score: 1

    If this flexible-reflective light display stuff really works, it could be developed into a wearable display that uses optical sensors to display the environment around you, like a primative forerunner of the camoflage technology in the "Predator" movies. How much fun would THAT be?

    Wouldn't surprise me at all if the US military already has a whole team of researchers working on this.

    --
    "I drive way too fast to worry about cholesterol."
  28. Sounds like a fire hazard to me... by ascendant · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't it create even more atmosphere if you had to shine torches at the display to be able to see it? And anyone wanting to read an e-book under their covers with a torch could still do it I personally would rather not have any torches under my covers, whether to read an e-book or anything else.
    --
    Do not attribute to malice that which can be easily explained by incompetence.
    1. Re:Sounds like a fire hazard to me... by somersault · · Score: 1

      Eh, you've just been watching too much Mrs Doubtfire. A backlit display is more handy anyway.

      --
      which is totally what she said
  29. In the pale moonlight... by magarity · · Score: 1

    it can produce the whole spectrum of colors, even ultraviolet and infrared light, using only incident light
     
    So if you use it outside on a moonlit night, is it greyscale?

    1. Re:In the pale moonlight... by rtboyce · · Score: 1

      Moonlight is reflected sunlight. It only looks grey because our colour vision fails at low light levels.

  30. Elves and gnomes everywhere rejoice! by vrmlguy · · Score: 1

    Finally, their computers will have useful displays.

    --
    Nothing for 6-digit uids?
  31. One anonymous word... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Vaporware.

  32. woosh by ascendant · · Score: 1

    goes another torch-flashlight joke over a poor British person's head! I see you did catch one earlier though...

    --
    Do not attribute to malice that which can be easily explained by incompetence.
  33. Sub-second response time not fatal by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

    If used as a substitute for a printed page, the response time of 1s should be perfectly adequate -- that's faster than most people will turn a page, especially with a big, glossy magazine. If this could be permanently applied to curved surfaces, you could also have a car that changes color at the touch of a button. It could be Tom Green's pornmobile as you roll across town, and convert back into an innocent slate gray as you pull up to your date's house. You could flash messages at tailgaters (I've always wanted to install a big rear-facing "WTF" sign but this would be far better), and haven't you always wanted to display a reversed "HANG UP AND DRIVE" on your hood when someone is yapping and weaving in front of you?

    Mal-2

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  34. Won't fly, here's why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "And because the displays use only reflected ambient light, no power is wasted on back-lighting, as in today's mobile phones, for example. 'They can be viewed just as well in bright sunlight as in indoor light,'"

    Nice spin. Paraphrase: we don't have backlighting. You will be REQUIRED to use an external light source. This kills the usefulness in so many ways, I won't even bother explaining. Bye

  35. Small World by GenJox · · Score: 1

    Andre Arsenault is married to my sister. So I've got some first hand information. - Companies have been lining up to invest in this technology since he wrote his dissertation on it. (INCLUDING the US Military) - All the problems people are pointing out with it, are all on Andre's list of things to fix - It's still in its prototype stage (but its damn fun to play with) PS: C'mon guys, buy a pair of infrared goggles and viola! Invisible Porn!