Epson concocts world's first 4K HTPS panel, 4K 3LCD projectors closer to reality
By Darren Murph 
posted November 9th 2009 9:09AM
posted November 9th 2009 9:09AM
Oh, the beauty of progress. Just a few months back, Epson seemed fairly content showing off an HTPS panel with a WUXGA (1,920 x 1,200) resolution, though today that very product just seems lackluster. Up until now, 4K x 2K projectors were reserved strictly for cinemas, businesses and consumers with a) more money than sense and b) room for a 200-pound beamer in their basement. The planet's first 4K-compatible high-temperature polysilicon (HTPS) TFT liquid crystal panel for 3LCD projectors measures just 1.64-inches and supports displays with resolutions as high as 4,096 x 2,160. Your guess is as good as ours as to when this stuff will actually hit the market in a functioning product, but yesterday is as good a day as any to start saving up.
when will someone shove it into a PMP? ;)
When there will be mobile hardware powerful enough to drive it without stuttering.
Never, there's no point in having a 2800 DPI display...you wouldn't be able to make out the smallest details. They already make handheld displays around 300 DPI, and the pixels are already minuscule on those. I can't imagine any good reason to go much higher DPI than that.
Isn't 4K on a 1.64 inch screen better than real life?
Depends how far you are from it.
This is the resolution REQUIRED for using a computer with an LCD monitor and a wireless keyboard as practical. First off, reading text on my 50" 1080p was difficult.. it was small, because 50" is small to be 10ft from to read on.. and the resolution of the fonts were low. At 10tf, a 65" TV on 4000x2000 will be entirely readable and usable. Nice!
Higher resolution would result in greater pixel density, meaning your fonts would look even smaller on 4k on a screen that was the same size. In order for things to look the same as they do on your current 50" 1080p screen (and not smaller), a 4k image would need to be a little under twice the size (diagonal).
In the projectors this would go in, 10 feet from the screen you'd only see a large difference in the image quality with somewhere around a 100" or greater image.
All that said, I think I'll wait for the price to come down a ways before I replace my current projector. 106" diagonal at 1080p looks just fine.
I see your point but i think you're ignoring that you can change the font size... while having a tighter pixel resolution, 1. And 2., you're confusing a diagonal as being the only telling number. You need to multiply the LxW to get the surface area, which changes non-linearly.
Imagine 2 of these in those virtual reality glasses... much better than the usual 640x480 or whatever they have now...
Would it be good enough to heal the pain of paying about $12000 for your VR glasses?
I was playing with 4K rear projection the other day. I had to stand up almost next to the screen to really see the difference. Sure, you really can't see the pixels, but from about 10 feet away, the difference (HD/4K) was all but unnoticeable. The screen was about 8 feet high. I don't see a lot of use for this in the home, unless you're dealing with Photoshop or 4K video files
Why not just use a handfull of those $10 1080p RGB laser diodes with some mirrors / prisms. to create a projector that could also be 3D capable. I reckon this could even cost less than the lamp required for this panel.
Do blu-ray players do greater than 1080p anyway ?
An electric tapeworm attached to a screen.... GENIUS!
Err, bit misleading. 1k is typically 1080p so this is actually 2k.
Still shiny though