Laser TV

[potshot]

I didn't know where to put this, there used to be a thread.

Here is a laser tv in action.


http://www.laser-tvs.co.uk/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS6wsJRGqnQ


Its is still being said xmas for america and mid 2008 uk.

Saying that has anybody else heard anything more about laser TV, most of the google search's bring up articles back to 2006.

[Mr_Fantastic]

Sounds great if you have the space necessary but for the majority of UK homes I doubt it will be much use. It does sound like it is a form of projection technology so I would imagine it will require room for the laser projector some distance from the screen. No one and nothing in the way = large space.

Something more compact is needed IMO.

[Otto J]

Sounds great if you have the space necessary but for the majority of UK homes I doubt it will be much use. It does sound like it is a form of projection technology so I would imagine it will require room for the laser projector some distance from the screen. No one and nothing in the way = large space.

Something more compact is needed IMO.

Actually, in the long term Laser projection has the capability of projection onto a surface from any angle. This means that it's possible to create not only better projection (front or rear), but to make rear projection tv's as flat as LCD or plasma's (at least in theory). I suspect it will still have the disadvantages of any other rear projection regarding viewing angle etc, at least the prototypes I've seen did. Re: Front projection, laser projection has the capability of mounting the projector on a wall, projecting the picture up on the same wall it's being mounted on! Imagine a wall mounted 32 inch LCD for TV viewing, with a projector on top which will project a 100" picture on the wall for movie viewing. Lasers will revolutionize the projection business, opening up new ways to think about projection. If it will actually mean that we get better picture quality remains to be seen... No technology will producen high quality pictures, if the manufacturer don't care about displaying pictures accurately. High contrast and wide color gamut doesn't do it alone - Pioneer already has this, on top of the possibility of a fairly accurate picture. Without accuracy, no new technology will touch Pioneer's position.

[Phantoma]

What about viewing angle?

Will it be as good as a plasma's viewing angle?

[Otto J]

What about viewing angle?

Will it be as good as a plasma's viewing angle?

I would believe that viewing angle would depend on the projection screen, not the technology behind it. So, if the same screen is used, you'll have the same viewing angle as a DLP or DILA rear-projection set (which means nowhere near as good as plasma). However, laser may introduce new ways of thinking about rear projection, so perhaps we will see new and improved rear-projection screen technology with better viewing angles, as the laser technology evolves.

[joshua_bond]

More general info here....

http://lsrtv.com/lasertv/wordpress/about/

I wonder if I should wait. :god: before forking out.

[buccaneer]

Wouldn't hold your breath over seeing it anytime soon. If it was as good and as cheap as they say I would of thought they'd be far much more noise made about it. Any new technology has its initial bugs to, so i'm not sure i'd even want a 1st gen model. I still haven't got an LCD or plasma yet and they still have their drawbacks.

[Peter Galbavy]

This article:

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/11/27/laser-tv-plasma-killer-delayed

refers to this one:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/laser-tv-plasma-killer-launch-delayed/2007/11/27/1196036860110.html

which says:

"Laser TV was supposed to debut this Christmas and relegate the humble plasma to the scrap heap, but now it is unlikely that Australians will be able to buy one before at least 2009.

The technology's main proponent, Mitsubishi Digital Electronics, has told the television industry to expect a major laser TV announcement at a US trade show in January, but it is not yet clear how long after that they will go on sale there.

..."

[NicolasB]

Sounds great if you have the space necessary but for the majority of UK homes I doubt it will be much use. It does sound like it is a form of projection technology so I would imagine it will require room for the laser projector some distance from the screen. No one and nothing in the way = large space.Laser TVs will be very much like current rear-projection TVs. In fact they will be exactly like them, except that they will use three lasers as a light source rather than a single bulb with coloured filters.

This provides a number of advantages, including better contrast and more accurate colours.

What about viewing angle?

Will it be as good as a plasma's viewing angle?No.

[Otto J]

This provides a number of advantages, including better contrast and more accurate colours.



Accurate colors? Only if the design of the tv allows it. Most available technologies have reached the HD color space by now, there is no need to extend it further, unless we start seeing X.V.Color source material soon (which I seriously doubt that we will)

[welwynnick]

The Samsung LED RPTVs have a reputation for the best colours around when properly calibrated, and laser should be slightly better. The advantage is that the output of the light source is engineered rather than adapted.

UHP bulbs produce a spectrum of light from violet through red. It's generally low on red, and it has to be filtered to get what you want. The filters are pretty broad, and transmit a range of colour, rather than a specific wavelength.

The colours available to generate the end colour are therefore mixed from three "splodges" of what are already mixtures of primaries, rather than the specific colours that the camera originally captured. With "point source" primaries, the TV will be able to generate precisely what the video signal calls for. Nothing to do with the gamut (though that can pretty much be whatever you want it to be with lasers - the points can be anywhere around the periphery of the usual CIE chromaticity chart, so anywhere inside can be accurately re-created).

Nick

[Tyler Durden]

Sounds great if you have the space necessary but for the majority of UK homes I doubt it will be much use. It does sound like it is a form of projection technology so I would imagine it will require room for the laser projector some distance from the screen. No one and nothing in the way = large space.

Something more compact is needed IMO.


In the video by the OP, it says they will be the same thickness as current flat panel TV's :confused:

[Otto J]

In the video by the OP, it says they will be the same thickness as current flat panel TV's :confused:

Laser has infinite focus. As I understand it, this means that it is possible to project the image from a very steep angle, so you can make a rear-pro as flat as current LCD's. I'd guess the first ones coming to market would be based on more current technologies, so they won't be as flat yet, but that's pure speculation. In any case, it's not something that'll hit the shelves next month anyway.

[nomadd]

I still haven't got an LCD or plasma yet and they still have their drawbacks.

I felt the same way until I purchased my Pio Kuro 42" about 2 months ago. No drawbacks that I've noticed. Blows my old Sony CRT out of the water.

Remember, you've gotta buy sometime! :-)

Nomadd

[erikaustria1974]

Company Outsources “Necsel” Wafer Processing to Ramp-Up for High-Volume Consumer Display Applications.

Novalux, Inc., developer of Necsel™ laser technology, has sold its Sunnyvale wafer fabrication facility to an undisclosed Silicon Valley company in a transaction that closed November 21, 2007. Novalux is now outsourcing Necsel wafer processing to large-capacity contract manufacturers in Taiwan. This is a key step in the company’s transition from low-volume prototype manufacturing to mass-producing lasers for high-volume consumer electronics applications.

http://www.oled-display.info/novalux-sells-silicon-valley-wafer-fab

[MrWTF]

I didn't know where to put this, there used to be a thread.

Here is a laser tv in action.

Its is still being said xmas for america and mid 2008 uk.

Saying that has anybody else heard anything more about laser TV, most of the google search's bring up articles back to 2006.

Having just sold a 61" rear projector I have to say there is no way I'd ever buy one again. Power consumption was ~350w - I had to remember to switch it off at the wall because even in standby it ate 160w and my electricity bills were astronomical.

Rear projection is a last-gen technology IMO. Too big and consume too much power.

[MrWTF]

Personally, I would be more interested in having a laser projector than a rear projection TV.

[joshua_bond]

Hopefully we should see a demo at the electronics show in Vegas later on this month:clap:

[NicolasB]

Having just sold a 61" rear projector I have to say there is no way I'd ever buy one again. Power consumption was ~350w - I had to remember to switch it off at the wall because even in standby it ate 160w and my electricity bills were astronomical.

Rear projection is a last-gen technology IMO. Too big and consume too much power.My SXRD rear pro burns 0.5W in stand-by mode, and uses less power than any plasma or LCD when running. Laser- or LED-powered devices would be even more efficient. Power consumption really is not an issue.

If you're the sort of person who cares far more about a TV being thin than about the quality of the picture, that's your prerogative; but not everyone agrees with you. (Sadly enough people do agree with you that rear pro is rapidly dying out in this country :( ).

[plague1392]

Rear projection is a last-gen technology IMO. Too big and consume too much power.

Neither of your criticisms are valid. As is stated in many of the laser TV articles and as Otto J has already pointed out laser TVs will be as thin as LCD or plasma sets so size is not an issue.

Your second point is a bit like saying all cars use too much fuel because your Dodge Ram only gets 14mpg. Just because one model of RPTV used 160w on standby it doesn't mean that all RPTVs are energy inefficient; it just means the model you had was either very poorly designed or possibly faulty. Besides, laser based RPTVs are considerably more energy efficient than lamp based sets since the light is finely focused so most of it ends up on the screen instead of being lost. As a result much less light is required to be genreated than in lamp sets to produce an image of the same brightness.

It sounds like you've written it off before reading anything about it as to me this sounds extremely promising, with a greater colour gamut, more accurate colours, energy efficiency and (when combined with a DLP chip) instant response times and less likelihood of imperfections such as dead pixels and vertical banding. I'm really looking forward to seeing what Mitsubishi announce. I just hope TI get their act together and stop selling those wobbulated chips.

[NicolasB]

I just hope TI get their act together and stop selling those wobbulated chips.What exactly do you have against wobulation?

[plague1392]

What exactly do you have against wobulation?

Wobulation is a technology developed by HP to cut down the size, and thus cust, of DLP chips. All current 1080p DLP RPTVs use a chip with a physical resolution of 960x1080 mirrors and each mirror addresses for two pixels. I'm not completely clear on how this is done but I think it's something to do with "wobbling" the chip side to side once for each frame so each mirror can project the two pixels it's responsible for.

You may know it as SmoothPicture since that's what TI called it after they licneced the technology of HP.

[NicolasB]

Wobulation is a technology developed by HP to cut down the size, and thus cust, of DLP chips. All current 1080p DLP RPTVs use a chip with a physical resolution of 960x1080 mirrors and each mirror addresses for two pixels. I'm not completely clear on how this is done but I think it's something to do with "wobbling" the chip side to side once for each frame so each mirror can project the two pixels it's responsible for.I know perfectly well what it is, thank you very much. :rolleyes:

(The way it works, incidentally, is that each mirror has three possible positions rather than two: instead of "reflecting light to pixel" and "off", there is "reflecting light to pixel 1", "reflecting light to pixel 2" and "off").

My question was: why do you have a problem with it?

[plague1392]

My question was: why do you have a problem with it?

Sorry, I misread your earlier post. What I have against it is if you compare a wobbulated and non-wobbulated 720p DLP set the non-wobbulated version will have a clearer, more focused image. If, as I assume you believe, there's no degradation of the image from wobbulation then why would TI have bothered to release a non-wobbulated 720p chip? Clearly if there was no disadvantage they would have stuck with wobbulated chips to keep production costs down.

Anyway, I think that's going a bit off topic. Has anyone found any news related to the laser TVs yet?

[NicolasB]

Sorry, I misread your earlier post. What I have against it is if you compare a wobbulated and non-wobbulated 720p DLP set the non-wobbulated version will have a clearer, more focused image.Yes, but that's only true of the first-generation 720p devices. They are fairly cr*p in a number of ways: the contrast ratio is pretty dismal too. But 1080p wobulated sets don't suffer from any of those issues. I suspect your objection to wobulated 1080p systems is based more on prejudice than observation - and I bring it up only because you were giving MrWTF such a hard time for doing pretty much exactly the same thing about RP in general. :)

If, as I assume you believe, there's no degradation of the image from wobbulation then why would TI have bothered to release a non-wobbulated 720p chip? Clearly if there was no disadvantage they would have stuck with wobbulated chips to keep production costs down.I think it took them a while to get wobulation working; IIRC the non-wobulated 720p chips came out before the wobulated ones, not after; wobulation is a way to achieve similar quality at a lower cost.

Probably a better question would be, why do they use non-wobulated 1080p chips in front projection systems? I suspect the answer to that is at least partly "because they can"; 3-chip DLP projectors still sell for 5-figure sums, while 1080p DLP televisions (in the US) sell for less than comparable plasma screens do.

If there is a difference in quality it's something that will only show up when you blow up the picture to the sort of size used in high-end front-projection systems: 1080p DLP RPTVs get very good reviews, and certainly don't exhibit any of the problems associated with wobulated 720p.

Anyway, I think that's going a bit off topic. Has anyone found any news related to the laser TVs yet?I'm still too depressed to look because of Sony's announcement that they're abandoning RPTVs entirely. I was really looking forward to seeing what a laser-driven SXRD rear pro TV would be like, and they had previously said that next year's model was going to be laser-powered. Now there won't even be a next year's model at all. :(

[plague1392]

I bring it up only because you were giving MrWTF such a hard time for doing pretty much exactly the same thing about RP in general. :)

My prejudiced is based on seeing a wobulated 720p set next to a non-wobulated 720p set since the non-wobulated set definitely gave a sharper image. I this is because the pixels on wobulated sets overlap which was apparently an intentional decision made to eliminate the screen door (is that the right term for DLP) but for me it made the image look a little too soft.

As you say things have probably improved, the problem is I have never had the oppertunity to compare a wobulated and non-wobulated 1080p RPTV and neither has anyone else. Until that oppertunity arises I can only continue to base my decision on what I saw with the older 720p TI chips.

That said, if I'm completely honest you are correct and the fact that the chip has only half the physical pixels of the image it's projecting isn't something that makes me particularly enthusaistic :)

I'm still too depressed to look because of Sony's announcement that they're abandoning RPTVs entirely. I was really looking forward to seeing what a laser-driven SXRD rear pro TV would be like, and they had previously said that next year's model was going to be laser-powered. Now there won't even be a next year's model at all. :(

I haven't owned an SXRD set but I'm rather put off by all the pictures I've seeon of sets with terrible colour uniformity, sets with misaligned pixels and sets with vertical banding and have read too many reports about the colours being over saturated. DLP doesn't suffer from these problems and with a laser light engine doesn't need a colour wheel and eliminates rainbows so seems to be the ideal technology for laser lighting.

Saldy I've seen no news of Mitsubishi's rumoured laser lit DLP TV announement yet. In fact the closest news I've seen is this (http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/07/dlp-evolving-with-new-light-sources/) which contains no news at all. The thread on AVS (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=969371) is also equally devoid of information. Most CES news is about displays which are extremely thin which I really don't care about becuase I don't tend to watch a television from the side.

[LV426]

Moderator's Comment

Here endeth the off-topic discussion about the benefits or otherwise of DLP wobbulation, thanks.

[stevenmu]

Quick impression of a mitsubishie demo from engadget
http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/08/mitsubishi-laser-tv-unveiled/

Summary: "At first glance the colors were sensational and the contrast was extremely intense; and although we were hard pressed to see anything that struck us as groundbreaking, we'll need to see this side by side with a traditional set to really know what we're looking at."

No price or firm release date, just "aiming for 2008".

[[nothing]]

Anyway, I think that's going a bit off topic. Has anyone found any news related to the laser TVs yet?

Indeedy, here it is:

Looks nice (http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/08/mitsubishi-laser-tv-unveiled/), although they didn't give away any information about it at all. It was also seen here (http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/07/mitsubishis-65-inch-laser-tv-prototype-spotted/) looking all shiny before the Mitsubishi conference.

[joshua_bond]

Mits is scre**** with our heads. I have any eye on this technology for some time now; but info is a bit thin on the ground. They really need to flog this one given that other new tech is not really evident for mass market appeal.

[joshua_bond]

***UPDATE***

http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/006226.html

[Fred Flintstone4]

Laser projectors are not new. I used to sell them in 1985. They had fantastic picture quality, an infinite depth of field and used two lasers which managed to turn 28 kilowatts into 270 ANSI lumens of light. It also took 10 - 15 gallons of water a minute to keep it cool. It was made by Dwight Cavendish Displays in Little Paxton near St Neots. It was used in "Cue Gary" starring Gary Wilmot, Martin Beaumont and Nicky Boughton, which was a TV show made at Central Television in Nottingham. It was also used in a Horizon programme, a futuristic one off docudrama about communications called "In the Light of New Information" which was made in a warehouse opposite the BBC in Wood Lane, Shepherd's Bush, starring Gary Shail and Dawn Archibald, directed by Geoff Harris. I remember it very well because it was really sunny outside and freezing inside the warehouse. The central theme of the programme was lasers and fibre optics. It was shown on telly last year in The Open University (I think). It was also used in Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Detroit, Paris, Cologne (Photokina 1986), Amsterdam, Monaco, Milan, Tokyo and London for various shows and exhibitions.

It was said in a report in 1985 that the future for projection was either LCD or laser. The bulk and cost of lasers (the laser projector weighed 700 lbs and cost US$200,000) in 1985 meant that for most applications, the laser projector was just too inefficient. The major problem with most projection devices is that in front projection there is a problem if there is ambient light. This can be reduced by using polarising filters on the screen as the laser projector outputs polarised light. Da-lite had a screen about 10 years ago which had this system to exploit the polarised light from early LCD projectors. There was such a screen on display in China about four years ago. I posted pictures on the screen forum. This system had a polarising filter on the projector and another covering the whole surface of the screen. You could see the difference in contrast as in the demo there was only a filter on half the screen. The other problem with rear projection is that although it is better than front projection (because you can handle the ambient light much more easily) there is always the problem with the throw distance. This can be helped by folding the beam path with front surface mirrors but you will lose light output.

I was told that the original idea behind the LVP was to address individual pixels of a much more potent display, like the Jumbotron or the Diamondvision. These massive outdoor displays had miles of cabling to each pixel. The idea of the LVP was to use it to hit a sensor on the back of each pixel thus switching it on and off. This would reduce the cabling cost. This requirement is no longer present because of the system now used on LED displays, which use a small fibre optic daisy chained across the back of the individual LED tiles.

If there is a future with LVP it may lie with spectrally selective screens with the LVP sitting at the bottom of the screen pointing vertically upward. The screen would have a slight curve so that the LVP could see all of the surface. A good example of this type of display is the front projection CRT display used in door entry systems. This is a CRT display where the electron gun is in front of the phosphors not behind as in a conventional CRT display. I think it only works in monochrome because there is nowhere to place a shadow mask.

Personally I think that the OLED is the future.

[Reiner]

Neither of your criticisms are valid. As is stated in many of the laser TV articles and as Otto J has already pointed out laser TVs will be as thin as LCD or plasma sets so size is not an issue.
Pictures of the Mitsubishi show otherwise (see joshua_bond's link). As of now the so-called laser TVs are merely RPTVs with laser diodes as light source but still rely on DLP technology to project the image.

Personally, I would be more interested in having a laser projector than a rear projection TV.
No problem: http://www.microvision.com/

[joshua_bond]

Direkt2u,

Would u not say that things have moved on since water cooling and the like?It is difficult to see OLED as the future when current at home consumer products (i.e TVs) are for large living-room settings. Certainly for mobile products (mobile phones, in-car entertainment, medical devices etc), then I see your point of view. I think there is room for laser TV but I think it is all down to marketing. I see that Sony has abandon RPTV and really only the USA has an affinity for RPTV. But if Mits et al gets things right I suspect plasma TVs might feel the pinch given that LCDs really do not have any place in large format TVs.

[Fred Flintstone4]

Of course things have moved on with laser projection but it's still projection from a single light source and there are still issues with ambient light and the throw distances required. What would be interesting is to see a refractive curved glass screen with a row of laser projectors along the bottom. The projectors could vibrate side to side thus increasing resolution and eliminating speckle whilst reducing vignetting at the same time. I never thought that moving parts in anything electronic were a good idea until I saw DMD.

As you rightly say - it's all down to the marketing - just look at VHS v Betamax. I think that a lot of manufacturers are looking for new technologies which they can churn otherwise they will be limited to a very small replacement market. How many displays do we need? At home I have 10 screens - 6 tv sets (1 RPTV, 1 plasma and 4 crt), 2 PC monitors (1 crt and 1 LCD) and 5 projectors (1 DLP, 1 LCD and 3 CRT). Their average age is 6 years. The only time the average Joe replaces anything is when a new technology or format comes along. But the marketing can go wrong - just look at what's happening in DAB. It's not compulsory so the market is failing. I think that a lot of consumers are waking up to the fact that "new" technologies are being developed to keep them spending. Personally I think that's it's all very well coming up with new ways of displaying images but we're still watching the same old recycled rubbish.

[onkeh]

So what advantages would Laser TV have over something like OLED?

[NicolasB]

So what advantages would Laser TV have over something like OLED?The same sort of advantages existing rear-pro TVs have over direct-view LCD: much larger screen for less money.

[joshua_bond]

It seems that LaserVue will be the new buzz word for laser TV:smashin:

[JJTye]

Sorry, I misread your earlier post. What I have against it is if you compare a wobbulated and non-wobbulated 720p DLP set the non-wobbulated version will have a clearer, more focused image. If, as I assume you believe, there's no degradation of the image from wobbulation then why would TI have bothered to release a non-wobbulated 720p chip? Clearly if there was no disadvantage they would have stuck with wobbulated chips to keep production costs down.

Anyway, I think that's going a bit off topic. Has anyone found any news related to the laser TVs yet?

http://www.believingisseeing.tv/

Thats Mitsubishi's official Laser TV page.

[cheaptelevision]

Shame the laser television site doesn't actually do anything lol.

[joshua_bond]

What we really what to know is will we be crippled with the price for these sets:devil:

[Suave]

Hi,

Just read that Mitsubishi will be launching these Laser TV's in the US in May - they will be called LaserVue - Mitsubishi claims that the sets 'Give a True 3D Viewing Experience"....

http://www.current.com.au/2008/04/08/article/TSAJGJIXXM.html

Suave!

[korelem]

Some new information on Mitsubishis LaserVue Laser TVs:
http://www.engadget.com/2008/06/25/mitsubishis-laservue-65-inch-and-75-inchers-due-this-fall/

I am very interested about this tech, since OLED technology is still a long way off, at least in the sizes one would consider Home Cinema worthy...:grin:

[mystieus]

Some new information on Mitsubishis LaserVue Laser TVs:
http://www.engadget.com/2008/06/25/mitsubishis-laservue-65-inch-and-75-inchers-due-this-fall/

I am very interested about this tech, since OLED technology is still a long way off, at least in the sizes one would consider Home Cinema worthy...:grin:
Sounds like it isn't living up to promises.
We were promised DLP cheap because the technology was cheap.
We were promised a clear difference between LCD and PLASMA and it sounds like the only difference is color, and that it can be a bad thing with red levels.

[Jonstone]

Sounds like it isn't living up to promises.
We were promised DLP cheap because the technology was cheap.
We were promised a clear difference between LCD and PLASMA and it sounds like the only difference is color, and that it can be a bad thing with red levels.

The problem with new display technologies is that when we first see the prototypes or pre production models they are being compared to plasma/lcd available at that time.

By the time they get them into production lcd and plasma screens have moved on in quality and dropped in price so the potential benefits of the new technology are no longer much of a progression, if at all.

The same goes for OLED, by the time they can get a large size screen to market current technologies will have progressed even further and the price differential will be unjustified

[davidhunter]

but with that thinking then why did we ever move away from CRT as originally LCD and Plasma were rediculously expensive? I think a big selling point is that its very low energy consumption thats a seller for me as some plasmas are now hitting 500W for 46 and 50" thats a security light constantly on and around 8p and hour at the rate electricity costs are going up. Laser is supposed to be around 1/3 of a plasma TV in energy consumption.

If you consider a TV is on for maybe 6+ hours a day, 365 days thats around £175 in electricity if a laser only costs £50 a year to run then the technology/ overall costs start to drop dramatically and the margin narrows, don't you think?

[lowscore]

...By the time they get them into production lcd and plasma screens have moved on in quality and dropped in price so the potential benefits of the new technology are no longer much of a progression, if at all.

Perhaps. I still would like to see it for myself as I've noticed most TV reviewers and news editors don't really know good quality displays themselves. I mean, no matter how you put it, LCD still has pixel smearing even with 100/120Hz technology and bad color reproduction in dark area's. Plasma still struggles with phosphor trails. Both technologies still can not display black as truly black. etc. No matter the progression LCD's and Plasma's have made, there are still a lot of drawbacks/issues (inherent to the tech) that have not been completely resolved.

If LaserTV can give me better color & black reproduction without any visual side effects comparable to smearing or trailing I will consider this a HUGE step forward.

[JohnWH]

Aren't these actually just DLP based TV's that are using lasers as the light source?

John.

[NicolasB]

Aren't these actually just DLP based TV's that are using lasers as the light source?I would quibble with your use of the word "just". You're talking about significantly reducing power consumption, a rear pro TV where you never have to replace the bulb, improved colour gamut, dramatically reduced rainbows, better contrast ratios and (possibly) a reduction in the complexity of the focusing system and/or the size of the cabinet. These are not insignificant changes.

[JohnWH]

I would quibble with your use of the word "just". You're talking about significantly reducing power consumption, a rear pro TV where you never have to replace the bulb, improved colour gamut, dramatically reduced rainbows, better contrast ratios and (possibly) a reduction in the complexity of the focusing system and/or the size of the cabinet. These are not insignificant changes.

Not questioning the benifits, just pointing out that these are not really laser projection TV's they are DLP TV's with laser illumination. A true raster scanning laser projection system would likely have further benifits over DLP...

An additional question would be, is there any tangible benifit of a laser light source over an LED light source? Or are they in fact one in the same and this is just a buit of marketing BS?

John.

[NicolasB]

An additional question would be, is there any tangible benifit of a laser light source over an LED light source? Or are they in fact one in the same and this is just a buit of marketing BS?Conventional LEDs and diode lasers are certainly not the same. And I seem to remember that the lasers in laser-DLP sets are frequency-doubled infra-red diode lasers rather than lasers that directly emit red, green and blue light: I doubt frequency-doubling would be possible with a conventional LED source.

The ability to use frequency doubling keeps the costs down, because you don't have to manufacture expensive blue LEDs.

[JohnWH]

Conventional LEDs and diode lasers are certainly not the same. And I seem to remember that the lasers in laser-DLP sets are frequency-doubled infra-red diode lasers rather than lasers that directly emit red, green and blue light: I doubt frequency-doubling would be possible with a conventional LED source.

The ability to use frequency doubling keeps the costs down, because you don't have to manufacture expensive blue LEDs.

I'm aware of the differences between an LED and a laser, but I have seen LED's incorrectly described as lasers in marketing bumph in the past.

Not sure about the relative production costs of laser vs blue LED's, also haven't seen efficiency numbers for the latest variants of either and aren't there problems with "noise" on laser sources, but don't really know enough to argue for one or the other to be honest.

At the end of the day I'm happy that we're getting to the point where we can get rid of lamps, but I also hate dodgey marketing ;)

Cheers,
John.

[NicolasB]

and aren't there problems with "noise" on laser sourcesSingle laser sources suffer from an effect that is sometimes called "speckle", where the thing being illuminated looks "grainy" with alternate fine light and dark spots. This is an interference effect. But laser-DLP TVs use 30 or so separate laser sources at slightly different frequencies all illuminating the same target, which eliminates that.

[davidhunter]

I thought thre were only 3 lasers in the laservue ie RG and B? although I also read somewhere its only 1 source. Anyone know which is true? like it matters if we are not getting them.

David

[erikaustria1974]

QPC lasers" a world leader in the design and manufacture of high brightness, high power semiconductor chip-based lasers for the consumer electronics, industrial, defense, and medical markets, today announced that the customer in recently announced $12 Million Laser TV Contract is Asia Optical (Taiwan Stock Exchange: 3019) "AOCI," Taiwan's leading optical consumer electronics manufacturer; AOCI has successfully demonstrated a sixty inch image based on RPTV Laser TV technology at QPC's headquarters in Los Angeles, CA. QPC initially announced the Laser TV development and production contract in November 2007, and completed the development just last month, marking an important milestone in the path to consumer available Laser TV.
Source:http://www.oled-display.info/qpc-lasers-and-customer-asia-optical-introduce-60-inch-laser-tv (http://http://www.oled-display.info/qpc-lasers-and-customer-asia-optical-introduce-60-inch-laser-tv)

[joshua_bond]

Hello?

Where does that leave mitsubishi? I thought Mits were the sole producer of these "new generation" TVs.

[davidhunter]

That is strange as I thought mitsubishi were supposed to be filling their trucks around now to actually put laservue 65" into the shops as it is the third quarter of 2008 is there another delay about to be anounced?

David