Qubic Light's LED Projector Looks Good - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 254 Old 05-10-2004, 01:06 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Rogo, you have to be at less then 1 screen width away

you can also put 1000 of those screens together to get a big screen
AnthonyP is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 254 Old 05-10-2004, 04:18 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,419
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked: 642
That would be a serious, serious pixel count... For all those looking for 4K x 2K, it'd offer that in spades. Of course, the "inter-screen screendoor" (i.e. the gap between those 2.3" panels) would be brutal.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #93 of 254 Old 05-11-2004, 07:34 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
, I know we are talking more like 50-100 screens wide, and not a 4x4 or something like that Plasma wall. But how much border must be there (i.e. cannot get rid of it) right now it would be around 1" (half an inch per side)

Active Area (HxV) ------------------- 43.806 x 32.92 mm
External Dimensions (HxVxD) ---- 52.0 x 45.4x 1.72 mm

but I am sure with time that the border could be decreased a bit, especially if built to be "puzzle" pieces

on the other hand
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/display/sanyoFlat.jhtml using 15" panels
if they have the same border limits, 100 of these panels in a 10X10 screen might not be bad
AnthonyP is offline  
post #94 of 254 Old 05-11-2004, 07:40 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
we can always call it the pane glass window effect
AnthonyP is offline  
post #95 of 254 Old 05-11-2004, 02:38 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,419
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked: 642
On a semi-serious note, I do believe a tiled OLED array with zero borders will evventually be possible and that it is truly the path to mega displays with potentially giga-pixel resolution (certainly dozens of megapixels).

If you build it with joining connectors on the back of the substrate and can seal the OLED array with a <1 pixel seal (OLEDs need to block out air very carefully), it could be done because there doesn't need to be an inter-pixel grid that is fed from the display edge... The inherent panel is so thin, you can locate everything behind it.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #96 of 254 Old 05-11-2004, 10:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kelliot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
Posts: 3,945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Originally posted by rogo
On a semi-serious note, I do believe a tiled OLED array with zero borders will evventually be possible and that it is truly the path to mega displays with potentially giga-pixel resolution (certainly dozens of megapixels).

If you build it with joining connectors on the back of the substrate and can seal the OLED array with a <1 pixel seal (OLEDs need to block out air very carefully), it could be done because there doesn't need to be an inter-pixel grid that is fed from the display edge... The inherent panel is so thin, you can locate everything behind it.

Many are claiming that OLED will be the way of the future, the main issue is the size of the panel that can be realized cost effectively in the short term.

Ken Elliott
kelliot is offline  
post #97 of 254 Old 05-12-2004, 08:06 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I don't know if zero border would be possible, but I think if they bring it down to 1/8 of an inch (so that it is 1/4 of an inch in total it would not be too bad. An other idea (don't know if it would be possible) is to make the borders so that they overlap.

red=OLED
yellow= border of OLED#1,
blue= border of OLED#2

also since it is a light producer, there might be leakage at the borders so actual size might not be the same as perceived size (not sure of this)
LL
AnthonyP is offline  
post #98 of 254 Old 05-12-2004, 05:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,419
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked: 642
I think a zero border is possible. And without it, I don't believe the "tiled idea" has a chance of working.

The problem with LCD is that the panel needs to be sealed across a relatively thick area and also there is a need for there to be wiring along the edge of the display.

OLED displays are much, much thinner so the big seal isn't required. And OLEDs are emissive, not tranmissive (like TFT LCDs). So there is no reason the "edge pixel" needs any electronics beside it. It can be driven from the back solely. And the overall panel thinness allows for a "wiring layer" to sit behind the array of emitters without making the panel too thick overall.

Finally, with "printable OLEDs" being the grail that everyone in the industry is seeking to move toward, you are looking at an array on a flexible substrate that is theoretical printed like an ink-jet would make a photo. Unless there is something inherent I'm missing there, I don't see why you would need anything outside the "edge pixel".

Mark

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #99 of 254 Old 05-12-2004, 11:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kelliot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
Posts: 3,945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
One issue with large OLED arrays may be refresh rate due to charging time. A large panel might have a considerable RC delay from wiring capacitance.

Ken Elliott
kelliot is offline  
post #100 of 254 Old 05-13-2004, 09:30 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Mark, I agree with the holy grail. But there are many plasma walls today and those end up having much more then an inch in between them. I am also looking at it in shorter term. Obviously if you could print OLEDs on roll up screen then that is a totally different subject.

I think phase1 would be the equivalent of a plasma wall. You would buy 100 screens ( with each screen being a display in it's own rite) that will be in a box (not exposed circuitry) and then you bring them home place the cables on the wall to form a grid, then you install screen #1,1 and plug the cable in the back, put the second screen and attach #2,1 then you bring all those cables and attach them to a driver/scalar device. Obviously the one I described is the easiest to manufacture, but in theory the installer might not even need to use cables because it could be part of the screens casing (i.e. the two screens overlap where the connection happens (kind of click and connect) then electronics take care of the rest. If they are enclosed to begin with then the plastic must have some thickness and that will be shown in the display


Now when you get an OLED screen that can be rolled up, then yes, all the rest is moot, but until then I think I could be happy with an OLED screen that has a 1/4 or 1/8 of an inch line every couple of feet because moving an 8', for an example, screen that is rigid would be a pain.
AnthonyP is offline  
post #101 of 254 Old 05-13-2004, 03:46 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,419
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked: 642
Right, now we are on a very similar page. Let's start building it ASAP.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #102 of 254 Old 05-13-2004, 10:08 PM
Newbie
 
OLEDman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
A beautiful tiled OLED display was shown in May of last year by Sony at the Society for Information Display (SID) Conference. Here is the link to pictures of many of the OLEDs on display. The 20"D Sony was made of four smaller displays with a nearly invisible seam. It looked great.

However, the best OLED that I have seen is from Samsung SDI. The picture is #5 on the same page. 15.5" diagonal WXGA. Fantastic.

I will be at this years conference in Seattle at the end of the month and expect to see a lot more OLEDs on display.

OLEDman
OLEDman is offline  
post #103 of 254 Old 05-13-2004, 10:09 PM
Newbie
 
OLEDman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
OLEDman is offline  
post #104 of 254 Old 05-13-2004, 10:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Peter M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,357
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 38
What's "aperture ratio" ?
Peter M is online now  
post #105 of 254 Old 05-14-2004, 12:06 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,419
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked: 642
Aperture ratio = fill factor = the percent of each pixel that is active / illuminated vs. the percentage that is inter-pixel "stuff". 33% is bad. But on emmissive displays, it might be tolerable, at least initally.

Mark

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #106 of 254 Old 05-14-2004, 09:34 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I guess this is the Sony that you are talking about



we are actually talking displays that can be hooked together, and not OLED panels that are hooked together in one device (i.e. if that screen was 6'-10' wide it would be impossible to move)

does anyone know what this is all about?



this is cool
AnthonyP is offline  
post #107 of 254 Old 05-14-2004, 10:13 AM
Senior Member
 
dcottle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
AnthonyP

The Japanese term in the middle picture (kagami) means mirror.

Does that explain it better?

Dave
dcottle is offline  
post #108 of 254 Old 05-14-2004, 10:20 AM
Member
 
Davandron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Anthnony & Dcottle

They are showing a display which emmits on BOTH sides. This has to do with cell phones, where they are working towards double sided displays to reduce costs.
Davandron is offline  
post #109 of 254 Old 05-14-2004, 11:29 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,419
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked: 642
The inherent OLED panels are a fraction the thickness of LCD. In fact, some of the prototype monitors have been thinner than the top of a laptop lid, even at 15" or so.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #110 of 254 Old 05-14-2004, 12:32 PM
Member
 
Davandron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Found a GREAT application note on pulsed operation vs continuous operation of LEDs

http://www.stockeryale.com/i/leds/lit/app001.htm

Also I've been continuing to update the Advantages post, those interested might want to check it out. I've got a quick link in my signature.
Davandron is offline  
post #111 of 254 Old 05-14-2004, 01:38 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
dcottle- Davandron thanks, that did help, I did not realize the smaller picture was the reflection (almost looked like the smaller pic was producing the larger one.

Davandron: cannot see how that would work (except for icons or if the screen gets flipped L/R when open ) if there is writing that is readable from the front it will be written the wrong way on the back.
AnthonyP is offline  
post #112 of 254 Old 05-14-2004, 02:10 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,419
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked: 642
The screen gets flipped when it's opened. It's not perfect, of course, but given the way cell phones are used, it's kind of brilliant. Not only will it save several dollars per phone, it will save several millimeters in thickness and also several milliamp hours in battery use.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #113 of 254 Old 05-14-2004, 02:35 PM
Member
 
Davandron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Anthnony,

Trust me on it, what they are planning works. ;^)

It's for the flip phones that currently have two displays. When its closed you see the outside display, when open the inside display. They want to make it one display that you can see from both sides and then they will mirror and flip the text/images based on whether its open or closed.

Guess its easier to understand if you can hold one...
Davandron is offline  
post #114 of 254 Old 05-14-2004, 02:53 PM
Member
 
Davandron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
More than one way to skin a cat

There is something I've been trying to figure out how to add to the Advantages post, that could be understood by most people why LEDs are an advantage. I'm going to try it here and hopefully work it out before it goes into the other post. If you all understand it then maybe you can help me rephrase it appropriately.

In all systems, the goal is to control the energy reaching the screen at one point relative to another point on the screen. But the energy levels must be more varied than simply full on vs full off. This could be called an analog function; a system that contains significantly more than two states.

But a digital system only knows two states, so for a digital system to produce an analog output it takes advantage of averaging over time and is called Pulse Width Modulation.

So a Full On for 1/9th of the time, then Full Off for the remaining 8/9ths of the time would average out to 11% of Full On (a mostly Off system).

A system like I just described could have 10 analog states (0%, 11%, 22%,... up to 100%) and makes use of a single variable.

LED projectors would have TWO variables to control the amount of energy reaching the screen; they can modulate the mirror and they can modulate the LIGHT iteself!

Why is this a big deal? Well, when combined it allows for some strange timing conbinations.

Lets go back to our 1/9th example and add something else; lets say that during the 1/9th we have the light at 50% intensity and then during the other 8/9ths we have it at Full Off (0% intensity). Our average is 5.5%, not 11%

So if we wanted 11%, how would we do that? There are now two methods:
1.) 1/9th Full On, 8/9ths Full Off
2.) 2/9ths 50% On, 7/9ths Full Off

Lets apply this concept to the 8-bit red channel of a projector. Normally, to display the very dim color of 1/255 red, we would need to flip the mirror on for (1/30 of a second) x (1/3 of that time for red) x (1/255) = ~43.6 microseconds (or uS) of 100% light.

This means that our system has be be able to flip the mirror on and then off again in 44uS to display that 1/255 shade of red (the 1/255 is also called the Least Significant Bit, or LSB, time)

But with the LED, we can use approach number two from above! We know that by halving the Light during the LSB, we are able to double its duration and still get the same amount of energy... with one small kink; since we don't gain any time, we have to make up for that doubled LSB by increasing the length of the system:

(50% light) x (1/30) x (1/3) x (2/256) = 86.8 uS of 50% light (equal to 43.4 uS of 100% light)

Ah-ha! will yell the critics, you've got less energy and now your system isn't accurate! Well, not entirely...

To increase the duration of the LSB I redivided the rest of the time, and this creates a shift. The next bit would be 2/256 at 100% instead of 2/255, then 4/256 at 100% instead of 4/255, and so on until you got to the MSB of 128/256 instead of 128/255

What this means is that Full On (255/255) becomes 255/256 of the maximum energy possible in 256 of 256 periods... but the light is never off in all of that time... we lose 1/256th of the maximum energy possible in that doubled-LSB, because theoretically we could have had 100% instead 50%. But the system runs at our 100% light level definition.

The linearity problem's root is that we were at first saying 1/255th of the energy but then applied that to a 1/256th system (the LSB+1 was 2/256)
To solve the linearity problem on the LSB, the light source is run at 50.195% or (1/255) / (2/256)

......

OK so I'm trying to point out that there are now two variables and that allows for either relaxed timing or enhancing grayscaling... should I just talk about dynamic range instead? Its difficult for me to teach because the concept is so new to me....
Davandron is offline  
post #115 of 254 Old 05-14-2004, 02:56 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I understand, all I said is that it would need to flip the info depending on if the phone is closed or open assuming that when it is closed you are reading the outside and when open the inside.
AnthonyP is offline  
post #116 of 254 Old 05-14-2004, 05:38 PM
Newbie
 
OLEDman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
To answer Andrikos, OLEDs can be very thin. The organic layers are on the order of 100nm. What accounts for the bulk of the thickness is the glass (or plastic) substrate and the glass or metal encapsulant. OLEDs must be hermetically sealed, so they are typically fit with a metal or glass cap.

As far as the mechanical durability of the OLED, it is entirely dependent upon the substrate and the encapulating layer. The OLED layers are extremely delicate.

OLEDman
OLEDman is offline  
post #117 of 254 Old 05-15-2004, 09:31 AM
Newbie
 
OLEDman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Contrast ratios are very good, >1000:1. Peak brightness can be exceptionally high, but running an OLED at high brightness is currently an issue across the industry. For this and other reason,s I don't imagine OLEDs will be appearing in RP or FP applications anytime soon (unfortunate for readers of this forum). They are really ideal for high definition video because of the very short response time (unlike LCDs), their excellent color gamut, and their wide viewing angle.

Aperture ratio isn't as big deal in emissive displays as it is for transmissive displays. For OLEDs, it determines how hard a pixel has to be driven to achieve an overall display brightness. Today's OLEDs have limited aperture ratios because the emission occurs through the transistor layers on the substrate. The pixel circuitry takes up a portion of the display real estate. This does not scale with display size, so it could be a problem for small, high resolution devices.

Tomorrow's OLEDs are more like LCOS chips. They emit upward, away from the substrate, so apertures can approach 100%.

OLEDman
OLEDman is offline  
post #118 of 254 Old 05-15-2004, 01:54 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Can you poke the screen with your finger or a pen?

yes, have you seen the Chameleon remote?
AnthonyP is offline  
post #119 of 254 Old 05-17-2004, 06:40 AM
Advanced Member
 
Huckster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 872
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


Contrast ratios are very good, >1000:1.

Is this on/off or ANSI? If ANSI, this is breakthrough. If on/off, this is troubling.

This technology emits light, right? It should have an extremely high on/off CR (like CRTs) since it shouldn't emit anything when showing black.

Huck
Huckster is offline  
post #120 of 254 Old 06-16-2004, 09:11 AM - Thread Starter
vsv
Advanced Member
 
vsv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 645
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
vsv is offline  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off