fox news
13th September 2006 - 09:42 AM
QUOTE (Gideon+Sep 13 2006, 09:33 AM)
Did you look at the picture? It IS the size of a sugar cube. the 7 cm long one mentioned in the article is in reference to the minimum size of an RGB projector at today's state of the art. By inference we can conclude the featured projector is most likely monochrome. Still a fantastic achievement, I wonder how it actually works with just one mirror...I want one for a keychain!
It is not the size of a sugar cube because they don't have all of the components yet - they only have the mirror the size of a cube. Thus they don't have a projector the size of a sugar cube.
nothing
13th September 2006 - 06:39 PM
Please reread the article Fox, as it clearly states that they HAVE created a projected the size of a suger cube!
QUOTE
The result is a projector the size of a sugar cube. “We use just one single mirror,” reveals Andreas Bräuer, director of the Microoptic Systems division at IOF. “This mirror can be tilted around two axes.”
Cunning Linguist
13th September 2006 - 07:26 PM
The communication problem here lies in the fact that the researcher's in question seem to think that a device labeled a "projector" need not include the source of the light which it "projects". The sugar-cube sized object in the picture does not contain any light source at all, just a mirror and the means to control it's movement. While it may have the ability to project light which it receives from some external source (such as the 10x7x3cm example mentioned), but it is certainly not a "projector" in the mainstream sense of the term. Please read more carefully.
TastySheriff
13th September 2006 - 07:56 PM
The article doesnt actually say they have built a projector of sugar-cube magnitude, it only says they have "come up with" a way to make one.
Pay close attention to the words they use, articles like this are always all over the news, because no one wants to read an article about a theorhetical design for something that we still cant build.
steward
13th September 2006 - 08:35 PM
"The next obstacle in the miniaturization process is the light source. The customary high-pressure lamp will have to give way to small diode lasers if the projector is to shrink to the size of a sugar cube. "
Note how that sentence ends: if the projector is to shrink to the size of a sugar cube.
A projector the size of a sugar cube does not yet exist. They're hoping to do it, but it depends on the light source, a problem not yet solved.
ubado
13th September 2006 - 09:08 PM
Nah it's the way the article is written that is misleading. After mentioning a projector the size of a sugar cube it goes on to say...
"The next obstacle in the miniaturization process is the light source. The customary high-pressure lamp will have to give way to small diode lasers if the projector is to shrink to the size of a sugar cube. While red and blue diode lasers are already small enough, green lasers are still too bulky. "
So the paragraph above should mention the projector LENS is the size of a sugar cube.
just passing through
13th September 2006 - 11:30 PM
"The customary high-pressure lamp will have to give way to small diode lasers if the projector is to shrink to the size of a sugar cube." ...is it the size of a sugar cube, or not?
noone
14th September 2006 - 12:12 AM
*** does it matter how big it is if it looks like garbage!? Where is footage of it working?
dwk
14th September 2006 - 02:10 PM
I for one don't care if it's the size of a sugar cube or not. Just reading the description of how it works, with R-G-B lasers pulsing on an off to project
each pixel in a mirror trace; is simply breathtaking in its simplicity.
It makes DLP projectors seem primitive indeed, not to mention unnecessarily complex
DaMan
14th September 2006 - 02:28 PM
Um, I re-read the article and it states....
"The next obstacle in the miniaturization process is the light source."
If they had actually completed the projector there wouldn't be a NEXT obstacle...
and
"The customary high-pressure lamp will have to give way to small diode lasers if the projector is to shrink to the size of a sugar cube."
This statement and especially the underlined portion implies they have yet to finish the project.
From what I read, this new micro-array of 1 mirror will ALLOW them to create a sugar cube size projector but still have OBSTACLES to overcome.
lengould
17th September 2006 - 03:54 AM
It appears they can presently build a projector "the size of a sugar cube + whatever light source you want".
My question is, what light source would I want? Since in this design, a single mirror must do the job of a million mirrors in a DLP system, that implies that this mirror can only spen 1 millionth of the time illuminating each pixel vs. a DLP, so therefore it will need a light source 1 million times as intense on it's mirror surface. Molten sugar cubes anyone?
Semantics
26th September 2006 - 04:42 PM
Never read such whining about nothing on this forum before. More information is available on this technology from a company in Washington state, Microvision (MVIS). They've been working on the single mirror idea for some years now. They recently showed a prototype though they also need the green laser to advance. www.microvision.com
Now stop the quibbling about things that don't matter. Is it the size of a sugar cube or not? Get a clue.
Rob
25th January 2007 - 04:23 PM
The technology that this article describes as not available, is now available. Microvision out of Seattle Washington has recently developed the green lazer diode and has a projector called PicoP that can be installed in cell phone and other small devices. www.microvision.com
resuccess
30th January 2007 - 05:03 PM
Wow that was rely good info thanks