h a l f b a k e r y
Results not typical.

meta:

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

 user: pass:
register,

# Mechanically Interlaced Display

 (+4) [vote for, against]

This is an idea to increase the number of apparent pixels displayed on a computer screen, by using a vibrating device to physically relocate the actual pixels.

Imagine shaking one's computer display, at very high speed, horizontally, with an amplitude of one half of the distance between pixel widths.

We time this vibration such that the display shows one image in it's leftmost position, and another image in it's rightmost position.

This effectively doubles the horizontal resolution.

Obviously, we would want to vibrate a display vertically as well as horizontally, probably phased to produce a circular motion, with a radius selected so that if we take N equally timed samples, they will have a distance between them of the inter-pixel distance / N. Or something like that.

This idea could be thought of the image display analog of the microscanning image capture method.

 — goldbb, Jul 15 2012

I like this, but the display would hum at something around middle C, would it not?
 — MaxwellBuchanan, Jul 15 2012

I like this idea, but as an alternative, perhaps a vibrating helmet would accomplish the same thing?
 — tumblewit, Jul 15 2012

Or create a layer of LCD windows in front of the main screen, where each pixel of the window is 1/4 the size of a pixel on the main screen. Then just "open" alternate sets of windows and sync this with the pixels underneath...
 — MaxwellBuchanan, Jul 15 2012

I think the native refresh rate of the monitor would need to be increased sufficiently so that the mechanical vibration could be fast enough not to cause a flickering effect. The refresh rate would need to be a multiple of the vibration rate.
 — tumblewit, Jul 15 2012

There are going to be all sorts of image artefacts to somehow overcome ...
 — 8th of 7, Jul 15 2012

 My thesis advisor taught me to perform a "raspberry" - i.e to blow through one's lips in order to vibrate one's eyes vertically to differentiate various time - related traces on an oscilloscope.

Works very well at audio frequencies. I suppose it could work in this application by turning one's head sideways.
 — csea, Jul 16 2012

 Keep the display static and vibrate the head. Hum up display.

Ahem.
 — imagin8or, Jul 16 2012

Interesting; I think a similar approach was taken on early digital cameras to try and double the res of the sensor.
 — penguin42, Jul 16 2012

 //early digital cameras//

 Believe it or not, the first digital camera was built in 1813, by Thomas von Soemmering. It had 64 "pixels", each consisting of a six-inch square of silver iodide overlayed with a fine mesh of silver wires, and was mounted on a wooden frame which could be moved around, and also raised and lowered.

 Soemmering set his apparatus up in a disused barrel factory, and blanked out all the windows except for a large circular aperture which turned the room into a giant camera obscura. Over the course of four days, repositioning the pixel array several hundred times and writing down the voltages of each pixel each time, he managed to record the very first digital photograph on squared paper. The resolution was 640 x 320 pixels, which is not that far short of the early modern digital cameras.

[Edit - I forgot to mention that, although his pixels were six inches on a side, he took his image as four superimposed images, offset by three inches. So, depending on how he deconvoluted the data, is actual resolution could have been 1280 x 640 pixes, or almost a megapixel.]
 — MaxwellBuchanan, Jul 16 2012

God knows I've wanted to shake the daylights out of my computer from time to time...
 — elhigh, Jul 20 2012

[+] I don't quite understand it but it sounds cool!
 — Jscotty, Jul 22 2012

 [annotate]

back: main index