Template talk:Display technology

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Film: Filmmaking

	Film portal This template is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Filmmaking task force.

Since when has film been "video-capable"? Girolamo Savonarola 09:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LED Displays - Why not "video capable"?

Why isn't LED display technology "video capable"? For small displays, maybe not, but large LED displays can for sure display video. LED video billboards are making widespread appearances. Andros 1337 02:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LEDs are entirely video capable. I think the confusion lies in the fact that LED video displays scale down very poorly. Changing --Codeczero 22:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Holography?

There is no such thing as a moving hologram. The data transfer rate required for an hypothetical moving holographic display is probably beyond current computer technology. The article describes reusable holograms and some digital applications, but this doesn't fit in with the rest of the list so I'm removing it. Potatoswatter 00:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with the removing of holography from this template. You can even display moving holograms quite easily, using the same technique as movie projectors. See for example http://www.holocinema.com --danh 23:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In that case it belongs under static with the other projectors, since it's not a general-purpose display device... This is such a broad subject for a navigation template... Potatoswatter 00:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Holography definitely belongs to 3D rather than static media. The movie projector technique is by no means the only one, interactive displays are no problem. Try searching for "holographic display", it already gives impressive results. --Danh 14:44, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. I just found product pages for other kinds of volumetric displays, and references to possible future technology. The first hit on Wikipedia was hogel. Potatoswatter 15:21, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, these are all volumetric displays. --Danh 00:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Free-space display?

It only seems there are two types of free-space display: laser light shows and rear projection into mist. The first is non-imaging. The second is not distinct from DLP. Does either belong here? I'm leaving in because I'm partial to laser light shows. Potatoswatter 01:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VFD & nixie... and scope?

Hmm... only VFD and nixie here are mere alphanumeric displays. So I'm removing them...

This is part of Wikiproject Movies... so it would seem that non-imaging technologies don't belong. There are so many technologies *not* listed, and the only really interesting or nearly complete part of this list seems to be flat television-type displays. Which are reduced to a list of acronyms which are confusing even though I know what they stand for. A look at category:display technology gives an idea of what's not covered.

In particular stereoscopy is an odd one out here.

Anyway... hope this "clean-up" helped :v) .

Potatoswatter 02:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A film template, huh, I always thought it was more of an electronics template. If it were an electronics template I'd be tempted to break it down into electromechanical, high-voltage, and low voltage.--Dispenser 03:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incandescent matrix display

"Incandescent matrix display" links to "Incandescent light bulb", where the matrix display isn't explained at all. I would like an article about it. I've requested one in Electronics components. I'm changing the link to be a link to the non-existant article to reflect that. 85.211.141.70 18:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you really want to know? Light bulbs are cheap and if you want to pay someone to replace burnt out ones, you can use a large number to display graphics. I'm almost curious whether there's a history of the first time someone built an array of digital drivers big enough to power a roadside sign... or whether it's ever been the most practical solution to any application. Potatoswatter 22:00, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A description of what it is and how it works. 81.6.242.110 16:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I assume it's a grid of light bulbs controlled by a computer, and I suspect the name was made up by the person who added it to the template. Potatoswatter 00:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify for editors who visit this talk page in the future: I think "eggcrate display" is the established name for this, under which it is now covered in the template. The redirect Incandescent matrix display has been retargeted to point there. I agree that the neologism should not be used. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 20:54, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Transparency"

Can someone fix the link to "transparency" on this template so that it points at the article intended instead of a dab page? I would do it myself, but I can't figure it out--which might be an indication that the link isn't helping many people as it stands. Dekimasuよ! 06:27, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only article on that dab page that belongs on this template is Transparency (projection), but that belongs in the "Static media" section with Slide projector, not in the "Non-video" section with other electronically controlled devices. I have thusly disambiguated and moved the entry. The Transparency entry was added last month by an IP user; I added a note on its talk page just in case of return. -- Thinking of England (talk) 10:19, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eggcrate display

Why is it classified as non-video? I'm guessing that the reasons are, in decreasing order of importance:

Slower response time (compared to, for example, LEDs)
Power consumption
Cost (including bulb replacement)

However, I don't see a fundamental reason that a large array of incandescent bulbs could not be used for video purposes. (I am not sure that any of the above reasons are "fundamental" enough.) Indeed, I recall a few car dealerships and casinos that seem to have done exactly that until a few years ago — yes, I'm aware that that's original research...

Anyway, what should we do about this? SoledadKabocha (talk) 17:09, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dot-matrix display

Surely a dot-matrix display should go in the template too, as it is a type of display. SAS1998―Talk 23:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Like a lot of lists-of-articles templates that are organized by category, this one has some issues. The template is organized by "how the display makes light and dark places in the display area", hence for non-video we have electromech vs. electronic paper vs. eggcrate, etc. I'm not sure why LED and LCD and incandescent and VFD and Panaplex and multiplane and others aren't there, but never mind that for now. (Yes, LEDs are under "video" but they should be under "Non-video" as well.) My point here is that dot-matrix vs. seven segment vs. fully-formed characters, etc., are a "geometry type" rather than "how to light up" type. Maybe they all do belong under "non-video". Or maybe "Non-video display technology organized by element geometry" is another template entirely. Jeh (talk) 22:21, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Non-video" group

The "Non-video" group appears to be intended to cover display technologies that show individually changeable characters while being unable to display video. It currently contains two different classification methods intermixed: the actual display technology (e.g. electromechanical) and how the character is formed (e.g. 7-segment). Since this is the "Display technology" navbox, and since the other three primary groups contain only actual display technologies, I think that the character formation entries should be removed. This category should probably consist of Electromechanical, Eggcrate, LCD, LED, Lightguide, Nixie, and VFD. That said, there are some problems with this proposal: there's no main electromechanical display page (and the currently linked Electromechanics page doesn't mention using the principle for displays at all), only the subtypes (flip-dot, split-flap, and vane); and the LCD page barely mentions dot matrix and segmented character LCDs and doesn't have a subsection about them to directly link to.

An alternate grouping would be to create three subgroups for this Character Display group: "Full character", "Segmented", and "Dot Matrix". This would work well with the three types of electromechanical displays, Eggcrate, Nixie, and Lightguide. It's suboptimal for LCD (belongs in the latter two categories, but no pages or sections of pages to link to), LED (the "Alphanumeric" section on the main LED page mentions both segmented and dot matrix in the same sentence, though the X-segmented pages are heavily biased towards LED implementations), and VFD (VFD page mostly focuses on segmented, only mentioning dot matrix VFDs in a single sentence buried in the "Use" section). Esoteric bearcat (talk) 04:11, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

new section on touch screen

can we please add a new section to this template, for touchscreen technology? --Sm8900 (talk) 19:18, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recategorize SED?

With the apparent end of research into Surface-conduction electron-emitter display technology, should this display be moved into Past Generation, or removed altogether? 2601:540:C700:42DF:76C8:5F43:53F1:5C95 (talk) 21:28, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]