Laser TV, available in Australia in 2007, boasts double the clarity of its predecessors for less money.
Maybe it's got a time travel feature?Australia should see its first Laser TVs in 2008.
LCD and plasmas can produce about half the colour gamut, which is the amount of colour which can be viewed by the human eye, whereas Laser TV can produce up to 90 per cent
Australia should see its first Laser TVs in 2008.
AFAIK, Canon's had problems with the printing process, so low manufacturing cost is no longer in it's favour. With falling PDP/LCD prices, Toshiba is in a price squeeze & has delayed availability until at least Q407.Wasn't the SED displays by Canon supposed to revolutionize the display market with more affordable big flat displays, but still there's no firm date or price of any set.
Reading about this, i keep seeing the comment that the colour is so vivid that "it looks like wet paint"...
Is that actually a good thing?? I mean wet paint is all... wet...? I don't get it.
Are "wet paint" colours more vivid than real colours? Isn't the point of these TVs, trying to reproduce real colour anyway? Who cares about wet paint!
Are "wet paint" colours more vivid than real colours?
The color of light produced by a laser is, by definition, spectrally narrow, varying less than one nanometer on either side of the peak wavelength. The filters used for lamp-based projection systems aren't as spectrally pure, varying as much as 20 nanometers, he says. Our eyes can detect this difference, and when the colors are more spectrally pure, they appear more vivid
Wet paint tends to be significantly more vivid than dry paint.
For example:
Wet:
Dry
But I still think the analogy is nuts.