Apple's commercial success of their touch interface has spawned a bunch of companies doing their best to top the Apple's Touch experience. Here's a notable one, which can actually be installed on a Windows machine, given you have a correctly enabled touch panel.
Microsoft's new media player the Zune HD has many new cool features: an all you can eat music license, a touch UI, 720p video and an HD radio. Coolest thing though is the OLED display. This teardown shows it's a mere 1mm thick. That's about what your hair grows in two and a half days.
Sony released a new Walkman with an OLED touch screen. OLEDs don't have a back light, so this player should last a lot longer than players with back-lit LCDs. LCDs typically consume half of the energy of a portable device.
Out of the blue, my friend Jonah sent me this picture taken from a kite.
1. It's a beautiful picture, taken on a beautiful island, on a beautiful day, at high tide.
2. I spent two summers in the home "De Wokkel" in this picture. Now a few years later a friend of mine who lives a continent away sends me a great aerial photo of the place. Does chance exist?
3. This very sharp picture is taken from a kite, apparently something very hard to do. Were any special techniques like super resolution used? Will we see image stabilization and super resolution techniques become standard features on our cameras soon?
4. There's an interactive panoramic version of this photo available from the author here. It takes a while to load but it's worth the wait.
5. Bonus points if you spot a car in this picture. Visitors can't bring their cars to the Schiermonnikoog island, and most of the locals don't have one either.
IMEC just announced a new 11 megapixel CMOS-manufactured micro mirror array. Texas Instruments is quite successful with its DLP micro mirrors frequently used in projectors. IMEC now claims twice the pixel density of competing technologies.
Sigma Designs acquires Gennum, ST acquires Genesis, Zoran acquires Let It Wave and now IDT acquires Silicon Optix. Silicon Optix was another company that focused on developing the highest quality video format converters. This acquisition is a bit different from the others since IDT doesn't have any digital media application processors for set top boxes or Blu-ray players that need integrated post-processing functionality. Instead, IDT is likely to get synergy out of this acquisition by combining the post-processing products with their mixed signal consumer video products.
Every engineer loves Adam and Jamie from the Mythbusters, and now we video engineering guys have a reason to love them even more. Here's a clip showing a display Adam and Jamie built that uses 1100 paintball guns to draw a reproduction of Leonardo's Mona Lisa with a refresh rate of 80ms. They only refresh once, though.
Liquid lenses have been around for some time. Varioptic applies a voltage to a lens made of water and oil to change the optical properties and achieve focus or zoom. The Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute created a new optical system using a liquid lens and a small speaker. Instead of applying a voltage, they apply sound to move the water droplets to achieve a focusing effect.
Varioptic hasn't really made an impact on the camera module market yet. Will Rensselaer's technique finally bring liquid lenses into mass production?
Some time ago I wrote about post-processing companies being acquired by larger multimedia companies such that they can address the whole video pipeline, from image capture to display. It's a bit late, but for completeness sake I should really mention that another post-processing company was bought by a bigger multimedia company: Zoran buys Letitwave for $27M. Let it wave had Prof. Stephane Mallat on its staff, a world renowned expert on using wavelets for signal processing.
In Canal City, a big mall in Japan, they built a cool new display that drops water in such a pattern that it displays images.
We've now seen wooden pixels, ping pong pixels and watery pixels here. What's next?
Today I was at the popular Mediamarkt electronics store in Eindhoven, the Netherlands, where I saw the "largest TV in the world"; a Panasonic 103 inch plasma display. That's well over 2.5 meters diagonal for us metric-centric people. It's got 1920x1080 spatial resolution with 12-bit per color channel resolution. The price tag was also quite hefty at 79,999 Euros ($120,000 dollars). For such an amount you can buy 200 22" flat screen TVs instead. If my math serves me right, that makes for a 580 inch (14.4 meter) diagonal TV. Quite a bit bigger and with a much higher spatial resolution.
I was surprised that the display didn't look more grainy though, even when standing relatively close by. In displays the Megapixel race doesn't follow the same pace as in the image sensor world. Still, with such large screen sizes, will we soon need to capture, store and transmit video with bigger than 1920x1080 resolutions?
The below video shows a new intuitive and simple way of browsing through video material. Instead of browsing through time, by dragging the scrollbar or time bar, you can simply drag objects in the video. The video says it all. Funny side note: first author of the publication is Pierre Dragicevic. More videos and information here. You can even download their free "DimP" player.
I've spotted the first real SVC product announcement. At NAB, MainConcept, a DivX daughter, presented their SVC implementation. SVC is the new video coding extension to H.264 that doesn't bring higher coding efficiency, but actually worsens it. I wrote about it earlier. The big benefit though is that you can decode parts of the bit stream in case you only need a smaller resolution picture. MainConcept writes "creating an SVC file only causes an approximate 10% file size increase compared to a regular H.264/AVC file".
10% is a lot in video compression.
In a recent post I briefly wrote about Sony's new OLED display. One of the main hindrances of market adoption of this technology is cost. But now DuPont and Dainippon have announced they're working together to develop equipment specifically to manufacture OLED displays. The plan is to make machines that basically print the display, using techniques similar to ink jet printers. The ultimate goal is for the OLED displays to achieve LCD price points. My prediction is that within 10 years OLED will have displaced LCD.
A little while ago I reported about the new IMOD display technology from Qualcomm, which should yield high quality displays that consume very low power. I saw the displays in action at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, but was unimpressed. The displays shown there were small, and perhaps similar to the LCDs that displayed the time on my watch about 30 years ago. Very few graphics and no moving pictures were shown. Still, LCDs have come a long way since the seventies, so perhaps the new IMOD displays will have a bright (no pun intended) future also.
What's the next step? High volume, low cost production facilities. Yesterday Qualcomm and Foxlink announced just that. They will jointly build a new dedicated IMOD fab in -- where else -- Taiwan. The fab is expected to be operational in 2009. There's no mention of how many units the fab can produce.
Can Qualcomm, the CDMA wireless communications company, be successful at entering such a new market? Will IMOD take off?
Sony Mobile Display showed a 0.2mm-thick 3.5inch OLED display the other day in Tokyo. The resolution is 320x220, and since it is OLED I expect the picture quality to be quite striking. In contrast to LCD, OLED doesn't need a backlight, which means it looks like color-printed paper and is very readable in sunlight.
The other day my dad -- who speaks English okay -- thought "lossless" meant "loose less". That's what prompted me to write this entry. There are two different ways of compressing video (and this holds for audio too). Lossless and lossy.
When compressing a video sequence with a lossy method, then decompressing it again, the decompressed images will be close to the original, but not quite the same. Even when using a low compression factor, where the decompressed images can't be distinguished from the original simply by looking at them, there is a difference, which can be computed. Almost all of the video compression methods we use today use such a lossy method, where the least important image data is thrown away.
In the lossless case there's no data lost. The compressed/decompressed images are exactly the same as the original. There's a big penalty though: lossless compression methods don't compress very well. The resulting files take up much more space or bandwidth. Lossless image or video compression methods are still used though, for instance in the medical field, and when storing fingerprint information.
Researchers at Stanford University are developing a multi-aperture image sensor which groups arrays of 16x16 pixels, then puts a tiny lens on each group. Their 3Mpixel image sensor in this way includes a total of 12,616 lenses, compared to a shabby single lens commonly found in cameras. The benefits are plentiful. The simpler electronic design means the pixels can be 0.7um, much smaller than Kodak's 1.4um pixels that I posted about earlier. Camera modules incorporating this technique can be made even smaller, cheaper, more robust, and, most importantly, grab better pictures. Instead of taking a single snapshot, the camera actually takes 12,616 pictures, which can be combined with digital image processing techniques to capture 3D image data, to accurately control depth of field, focus, etc. With enough image processing power available in the camera, this opens up a whole world of new possibilities.
A high level overview of the work can be found here and their technical ISSCC paper can be found here.
According to this survey by Motorola, Americans would rather watch the Superbowl on an HDTV than in person. “The survey results really speak to the popularity of high-definition programming,” said Doug Means from Motorola.
That's a lame study and a lame statement. The results of the survey don't say anything about the quality of HD video and how close it gets to being there. Yes, quite a few people would rather sit in their homes than take a plane and sit on a plastic seat for hours watching the game. Yes, a big screen TV presents a much better picture than an old Philco Predicta. But no, nothing compares to being there. And I can say that without having ever been to a superbowl game.
