With this trend, the once quiet laser projection products seem to be gaining momentum. Some even claim that laser TVs will replace traditional TVs as the centerpiece of entertainment in living rooms. However, I remain skeptical of this notion. Regardless of how advanced the laser technology may be, these products share a commonality with TVs in terms of functionality. Yet, proclaiming a "replacement" at this stage feels premature. Let's explore why this is the topic of our discussion today.
Xiaomi previously released a laser theater
Further reading: "Shocked by 9,999 Yuan! Xiaomi's 150-inch Laser TV Network First Test"
Projection products have surged in popularity this year. Thanks to their compact size, large projected screen sizes, and integration of advanced systems like those from Xiaomi, Micro Whale, and many internet TV manufacturers, this has become a bustling market. Looking at the recent releases of laser light source products, it’s clear that this field of smart projection is advancing rapidly. Interestingly, most of the current laser projection products on the market seem to be targeting TVs. Why is that?
Mimibear's previously released laser cinema (with a price close to 80,000 yuan!)
Why are laser projectors deliberately aiming for TVs when there are three distinct types of light sources—lasers, halogen bulbs, and LED lights—each with its own advantages?
The development of projection products has always been fascinatingly polarized, and this remains true today. The core of this technology lies in the evolutionary history of "light sources." I’ve roughly categorized the still-in-use projection products into three main types of light sources: lasers, traditional bulbs, and LED lights. Each type has its own unique advantages. At this stage, all three excel in different areas. Why does the "laser theater" stand out and challenge TVs? Let’s delve deeper.
A more concentrated laser beam
First, let’s examine the advantages of the three types of light sources. We all know that the most crucial feature of projection products is light efficiency, which refers to "the total luminous flux emitted by a light source and the electric power consumed by the light source." In the current phase of DLP projection (digital signal projectors), I believe the ideal system light efficiency from high to low should be: "laser > traditional bulbs > RGB LED." Here are three reasons why:
First, the laser light source is more focused and easier to collimate and reshape. Thus, the resources consumed in the overall equipment system are relatively minimal. That means, given the same electric flux, the laser light source has the highest light efficiency and potentially the highest brightness.
Traditional high-calorie bulb light source
Second, traditional bulbs can produce nearly point light (millimeter precision) and are relatively collimated. Coupled with color wheel split light and various RGBW, RGBYW light color combinations, the system efficiency is decent, although not as efficient as lasers, they excel in other areas (like color accuracy).
LED projection light source
Third, the LED light source, which is relatively affordable, struggles with creating a point light source characteristic (diode power is too concentrated and will quickly burn out), making it difficult to collimate its beam. In comparison, under long path lengths, the light source suffers significant dissipation losses, leading to relatively low projection light efficiency. However, LEDs have a lifespan advantage over traditional bulbs.
Hurricane cool laser projection technology—so magical?
The advantages of the laser light source and its high refractive index allow laser projection products to project the brightest screens among the three types of projection light sources. Additionally, the laser light source’s superior collimation and shaping capabilities enable its products to achieve a larger opening and closing angle of the light source, allowing for ultra-short focal projection. The point light source characteristic also enables laser projection technology to achieve 4K resolution compared to the other two light sources. This is the fundamental reason why laser cinema products dare to challenge TVs.
*However, the clamor remains just that. It might still be another 100 years before lasers truly compete with TVs! So, why is this the case?
Laser projection is great, but TV always stays ahead—by 100 years!
Let’s trace back to the origins. Throughout the development of projection technology, from the earliest "shadow play" to the current laser and RGB LED mainstream, the essence of "light imaging" in projection technology has remained unchanged.
In fact, we all know that the image quality of projection products isn’t great. But why is the image quality of projection products not good? Very few people investigate this deeply. Is the so-called 4K laser capable of delivering a real 4K experience? To me, it seems like just a form of self-indulgence.
TV and projection's "ancestors"
The reason is because the projection theory of "luminous imaging" had already appeared in the world before World War I. This predates the invention of television by more than 100 years. A generation of projection products, their biggest technological advancement may be the evolution of digital imaging, and the evolution of light sources. The ultimate goal of the evolution of light sources is the light efficiency and the "collimation" and "shaping ability" that I mentioned earlier.
When it comes to resolution, a simple understanding is that the light points constitute the pixel density of the picture, which involves the "collimation" and "shaping power" of the light source. Both directly affect the pixel density and arrangement of the projection screen. However, due to the diffuse reflection of light sources, halo interference occurs. This fundamentally affects the resolution of the picture. In short, the 4K effect that lasers can bring may not be as good as the paper data suggests.
This kind of 4K effect cannot be brought by projection products (the picture shows the Sony OLED A1)
· The product function has common technical principles but it moves differently
In summary, the advantage of TVs in terms of definition is something projection products cannot reach at this stage. Even though the two products have commonalities in terms of functions, they have great technical differences. In TV products, different display technologies have different characteristics, and their roots are still many features centered around the purpose of "imaging." On the other hand, the light source of projection products must follow the "light-through imaging" law to develop. If it can't break free from the physical characteristics of "reflection," it can't compete with TVs in terms of brightness or clarity.
Projection and TV never exist to complement each other
· While projection and TV look at each other, they can never be complementary
Some say that the advantage of projection lies in the larger picture. I completely agree with this point. The projection product can indeed obtain a bigger picture at a relatively low price. If we don't talk about brightness and picture quality, this is indeed something TVs can't expect. In terms of size, TVs look up to projection, and projection looks up to TVs in terms of picture quality. However, due to the difference in technical principles between the two, it seems that it will never be possible to complement each other.
Even the laser, the effect during the day is still severely affected by ambient light
· The intensity of laser projection on brightness and image quality
Previously, I mentioned that one of the factors that led to the birth of micro-projection products was the change of the light source. It's undeniable that lasers are truly excellent as a light source for projection technology, bringing smaller heat output and volume while also offering a longer lifespan. These are its advantages.
Data from Xiaomi's previous laser projection tests (a significant difference between day and night)
With traditional large-volume projections like high-pressure mercury lamps and other light sources, the official logo data can reach 3,000 lumens or more, and the actual projection screen brightness is also about 300-400 lumens. Even if the laser light efficiency is currently optimal, it can actually bring a screen brightness of 500 lumens. Thankfully, regarding official logo data, it's well known that manufacturers themselves dare not exaggerate. The brightness of the natural products in this value is also quite limited.
TV products and projection products have initially established two different lines of development at the current stage. Screen-supported TVs have the ultimate appeal of "bigger and clearer," while projections without screens aim for "smaller, larger picture, and higher brightness." Between the two sides, the two extremes of product development are set.
Besides the "mega picture," do you "spike" it?
· The so-called replacement of television is just a joke
The difference between laser projection and the essential product of TV is destined to place the two products in different service areas. If insisted upon by some people, it really plays an “alternative†effect. Based on the current laser projection technology, looking at the results, at this stage, it can only be a joke. In summary, if you need a bigger screen and have a dark light environment, laser projection will really bring you a great experience and it will be at a relatively low price compared to the same size TV. But if you pursue the ultimate picture quality experience, then honestly, buy a TV.
Smart TV/box information can focus on smart TV information network sofa butler (http://), China's influential TV box and smart TV website, providing information, communication, TV boxes, smart TVs, smart TV software, etc. Answering questions.Commercial Semi-hermetic Screw Compressor Sight Glass Sight Glass
Shenzhen Capitol Micro-Electronics Co.,LTD , https://www.capitolgtms.com