A single wavelength can't reproduce all visible colors. These pixels are variable wavelength, but can only produce one at a time, so you'd still need at least 2 of these pixels to reproduce any visible color. The fundamental problem is that color space is 2D[1] (color + brightness is 3D, hence 3 subpixel on traditional displays), but monochromatic light has only 1 dimension to vary for color. [1]: https://en.wikipedi…
There are plenty of monochromatic cases. Right now hw has a lot of orange.
Dynamic resolution / subpixel rendering. Retina looks really good already, not sure if the effect would be relevant or interesting but it might open up something new
A single wavelength can't reproduce all visible colors. These pixels are variable wavelength, but can only produce one at a time, so you'd still need at least 2 of these pixels to reproduce any visible color. The fundamental problem is that color space is 2D[1] (color + brightness is 3D, hence 3 subpixel on traditional displays), but monochromatic light has only 1 dimension to vary for color. [1]: https://en.wikipedi…
A single wavelength can't reproduce all visible colors. These pixels are variable wavelength, but can only produce one at a time, so you'd still need at least 2 of these pixels to reproduce any visible color. The fundamental problem is that color space is 2D[1] (color + brightness is 3D, hence 3 subpixel on traditional displays), but monochromatic light has only 1 dimension to vary for color. [1]: https://en.wikipedi…
There are plenty of monochromatic cases. Right now hw has a lot of orange. Dynamic resolution / subpixel rendering. Retina looks really good already, not sure if the effect would be relevant or interesting but it might open up something new
What Apple sells as "retina" still doesn't match common print densities, there's definitely room for improvement.
You can dither not just in print but also on illuminated screens. For example: http://caca.zoy.org/study/out/lena6-1-2.png This picture has only pixels of the aforementioned eight colors.
Emissive means additive, not averaging. Cyan, magenta and yellow are not primaries here. Red and green light adds up to perceptual yellow. Red, green and blue adds up to perceptual white (or grey, at very low luminance). Treating each of these pixels like subpixels (which is arguably a form of dithering) will produce a full color image (at a lower resolution), but given that they did not demonstrate it, color reprodu…
That's not true. Dithering can be used in emissive screens, but dithering is not additive. If you mix red and green with color blending (e.g. by dithering), you get less red and less green in your mix, and therefore the resulting mix (a sort of ochre) is different from additive color mixing (yellow), where the amount of red and green stays the same. Or when you mix black and white, you get white with additive color mixing, but grey with blending. You also get grey when blending (dithering) red, green and blue. You can test this in software like Gimp, you won't be able to dither a full color image without at least the eight colors I mentioned.
I'm not sure why saturation couldn't be controlled. I probably missed something in the article, though I do see ex. desaturated yellow in the photographs so I'm not sure this is accurate. If you can't control saturation, I'm not sure dithering won't help, I don't see how you'd approximate a less saturated color from a more saturated color. HSL is extremely misleading, it's a crude approximation for 1970s computing co…
Saturation can't be controlled on a per-pixel basis because, per the article, they're tuned to a specific wavelength at any given time. You're right though, there appear to be yellows on display. Maybe they're doing temporal dithering. Edit: Oh wait, yellow doesn't need dithering in any case. Yellow can be represented as a single wavelength. Magenta on the other hand, would (and there does seem to be a lack of magent…
> Saturation can't be controlled on a per-pixel basis because, per the article, they're tuned to a specific wavelength at any given time.
Where does the article say this? I couldn't find it.
I understand that one of the big issues with microLED is huge brightness variation between pixels. Due to some kind of uncontrollable (so far) variations in the manufacturing process, some pixels output 1/10 the light (or less) as others. Ultimately the brightness of the whole display is constrained by the least bright pixels because the rest have to be dimmed to match. Judging by their pictures they have not solved…
> I understand that one of the big issues with microLED is huge brightness variation between pixels. Due to some kind of uncontrollable (so far) variations in the manufacturing process, some pixels output 1/10 the light (or less) as others.
I instead understand that this is false. Available MicroLED screens (TVs) are in fact brighter than normal screens.
The issue with MicroLED is instead that they are extremely expensive to produce, as the article points out, due to the required mass transfer. Polychromatic LEDs would simplify this process greatly.
> color space is 2D Human eyes have three different color receptors, each tuned for it's own frequency, so it's already 3d. However, apart from human perception, color, just like sound, can have any combinations of frequencies (when you split the signal with Fourier transform), and may animals do have more receptors than us.
Humans perceive all stimulation in the same raito of the L, M, and S cones to be the same color, but with different brightnesses. So only two dimensions are nessesary to represent human visible colors, hence HSV or L*a*b* space.
According the opponent process model of colour perception you need three axes to represent all colours: luminosity [L+M+S+rods], red-green [L-M] and blue-yellow [S - (L+M)].
Ha, yea, in particular these monochromatic pixels can't simply be white. Notably ctrl-f'ing for "white" gives zero results on this page. Relatedly, the page talks a lot about pixel density, but this confused me: if you swap each R, G, or B LED with an adjustable LED, you naively get a one-time 3x boost in pixel area density, which is a one-time sqrt(3)=1.73x boost in linear resolution. So I think density is really a…
It would be interesting to plot all of the achievable colors of this LED on the chromaticity diagram. Presumably it'd be some sort of circle/ellipse around white but might have some dropouts in certain parts of the spectrum?
> color space is 2D Human eyes have three different color receptors, each tuned for it's own frequency, so it's already 3d. However, apart from human perception, color, just like sound, can have any combinations of frequencies (when you split the signal with Fourier transform), and may animals do have more receptors than us.
Humans perceive all stimulation in the same raito of the L, M, and S cones to be the same color, but with different brightnesses. So only two dimensions are nessesary to represent human visible colors, hence HSV or L*a*b* space.
There is a fair point there, but a few things - HSV and Lab are only models, they don’t necessarily capture all visible colors (esp. when it comes to tetrachromats). Brightness is a dimension, and can affect the perception of a color, esp. as you get very bright - HSV and Lab are 3D spaces. Arguing that brightness should be ignored or factored out is problematic and only a small step from arguing that saturation should be factored out too and that color is mostly one dimensional.