HOLOGRAPHY
Chew Guang Wei HT093271W
Ho Seow Yan HT093116E
Lim Su Ru HT093278B
Ong Lip Sin HT093131U
Wee Chong Liang Justin HT093290B
MT5009
Content2
• Introduction• Evolution of Displays• Value Proposition
• Holographic System SetupHolographic System Setup• Technology & Cost of Holographic System• Limitations of Holographic System
• Components of Holographic SystemF t O t iti• Future Opportunities
• Entrepreneurial Opportunities
Holographyg p y3
Timeline of Holographyg p y
1960:Pulsed ruby laser
4
ywas developed
1962:White light reflection hologram
2010: Development of 2010: Development of moving 3D holograms
2009: Interactive holographic
1983:Mastercard first credit card to use holograms
g pdisplays developed
1947: Dennis Gabor developed the theory of holography
g
Evolution of Displays5
p y
1940 1964 1972 1997 2004 201019801940 1964
Plasma Display invented
1972 1997 2004
LCD enters market
20101980
3D movies enter market Next generation: 3D
Holographic Display
Type Advantages Disadvantages
Cathode Ray Tube (CRT)
enters market
Liquid Crystal Display (LCD)
invented
Plasma enters market
3D TV enters market
Type Advantages DisadvantagesHigh Definition High resolution 2D images
3D Display High resolution Narrow viewing anglescom
/
3D Display High resolutionStereoscopic
Narrow viewing anglesRequire viewing glasses
Not true 3D imagery3D Holographic “Life-like” images Require large amount ofdm
arke
ttren
ds.c
3D Holographic Display
Life like imagesVolumetric 3D display
Interactivity
Require large amount of processing
Constraint by size of holographic materialht
tp://
ww
w.3d
Value Propositionp6
1. High Definition: . g e o : Images projected are full coloured, high resolution and life-like
E f t i ti 2. Ease of customization: Ability to project hologram anywhere
3 Ease of delivery and transmission: 3. Ease of delivery and transmission: Real time transmission to multiple locations
4 Volumetric View: 4. Volumetric View: 360 degree view with different perspectives
5. Interactivity: 5. Interactivity: Ability to interact directly with image
Holographic System Setupg p y p7
Satellite
Object 3D Hologram
Light SourceTransmission
Medium
CameraHolographic
MediaCamera System
Computer SystemComputer System
Media
Technology for Holographic System8
gy g p y
Key Prototype Technology expected by ySub-System
yp gy p y2016
Light Source 200mWDiode Pumped Solid
500mW Diode Pumped Solid Diode-Pumped Solid
State (DPSS) Pulsed LaserDiode-Pumped Solid
State (DPSS) Pulsed Laser
Holographic 17” At least 42” Holographic Media
17” Photorefractive Polymer2-second refresh rate
At least 42” Advanced Photorefractive Polymer
6 to 24 fps refresh rate
Transmission Media
100Mbps Up to 40GbpsFiber Optics
Computer System 4-core 16-core and beyond
Projected Cost of Holographic System9
j g p y
42" Holographic S stem200,000
42" Holographic SystemEstimated Cost Breakdown
Computer
150,000
$)
SystemHolographic MediaLight Source
100,000
Cos
t ($ Light Source
Transmission
0
50,000
02011 2016 2021 2030
Year
Limitations of Holographic Systemg p y10
Laser System Laser System Performance trade off with cost and safety
Microprocessor Large amount of processing required g p g q Multiple complex algorithms and calculations
Photorefractive Polymer Size of hologram dependent on size of material Refresh rate
Photorefractive Polymer
11
Polymer
Fiber Optics
Light Source: Evolutiong12
Mercury arc lamp
Semiconductor l di d
Solid-state larc lamp
(1948)laser diodes
(1980s) laser
(1960s)
Dr. Theodore Maimanstudies a ruby crystal in the shape of a
[1]
cube in a laser.
[1] http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/269607/holography/92904/Pulsed-laser-holography
Laser System: Performancey
1) The lower the laser power the longer the exposure time
13
1) The lower the laser power, the longer the exposure time A second to few minutes for CW lasers vs. “nanoseconds” for Pulsed lasers
2) Laser power requirementi) Increases with Size of holograms
T i l l l H N l 1 20 W Di d l 5 50 W Typical power levels: HeNe lasers: 1-20mW, Diode lasers: 5-50mW, DPSS lasers: 20-200mW, Ar lasers with etalon: 100-500mW
For large holograms, on the order of 10-sq m, laser powers on the order f 1 W i f d if t i t i [1] lid t t A i of 1-W is preferred if cost is not an issue [1] solid-state or Ar ion gas
lasers as candidates
ii) Increases with Distance of hologram set-up Min. power output for laser light shows: ~400mW
[1] http://www.loreti.it/chaptersPDF/Ch11_Non-Laser_Illum.pdf[3] h // i ll i /P d /D /CVIMG H l h Whi df
Laser System: Performance vs. Costy
3) Higher laser power systems translate to higher costs
14
3) Higher laser power systems translate to higher costs (several thousand to tens of thousand dollars) [1]
Laser System Costing
25000
30000
35000 CW Pulsed
15000
20000
25000
Cos
t ($)
0
5000
10000
[1] Diode pumped SSL Costs: http://www.amazing1.com, 2011
* Modulator & optic system costs not included [1]
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 14000
Power (mW)
Laser System: Cost Projectiony j15
Projected Laser Cost Trend
70,000.00
80,000.00
j
200 mW
500 mW
1000 W
Generally decreasing trend for the past five
50,000.00
60,000.00($
)
1000 mW
1500 mW
for the past five years (~15%) Laser prices
20 000 00
30,000.00
40,000.00
Cos
t projected to continuedropping in
0.00
10,000.00
20,000.00pp g
similar fashion in the next 5 years
Source: OptoIQ, 2008
0.002008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Year
years
Holographic Mediag p16
Comparison in Key Performance Metrics in Holographic Recording M t i l [1 2]
Recording medium should have25,000
30,000
100%
120%
)
Materials [1,2]
1) High diffraction efficiency
2) Wide resolution range
15,000
20,000
60%
80%
Resolution Lim
ion E
ffic
ienc
y (%
)
g
5,000
10,000
20%
40%
it (um)
Diff
ract
i
Max. Resolution limit [mm−1]
Min. Resolution limit [mm−1]
Max. Resolution limit [um]
Min. Resolution limit [um]
M Diff i Effi i
00%
phic
em
ulsio
ns
mpl
itude
)
phic
em
ulsio
ns
e, b
leac
hed)
mat
ed g
elat
in
Phot
ores
ists
herm
opla
stic
s
Phot
opol
ymer
s
Phot
ochr
omic
s
otor
efra
ctiv
es
Elas
tom
ers
Max. efficiencyMax. Diffraction Efficiency
Phot
ogra (Am
Phot
ogra
(Pha
s e
Dic
hro
Phot
ot P P
Pho
[1] Lecture Holography and optical phase conjugation held at ETH Zürich by Prof. G. Montemezzani in 2002 [2] Ablation of nanoparticles for holographic recordings in elastomers: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/la102693m
Holographic Media
1) Silver Halide Emulsion
g p17
High exposure sensitivity over a wide range of spectral regions
High resolving power
Suitable for transmission/reflection holograms (amplitude and phase type) / g ( p p yp )
2) Dichromated Gelatin Material Record multicolour reflection holograms
Suitable for very high efficiency and low noise holograms
5) Photorefractive polymer [1]
Used for 3D dynamic holograms, enables the 3D telepresence
N d f i l l Suitable for very high efficiency and low noise holograms
3) Photorefractive Crystals Material use for real-time holography
l bl h h l l b l d l h d d d
No need for special glasses
Refreshes images every 2 seconds; quasi real-time
Good for large-area and dynamically updatable holographic recording media
Recyclable! Photothermoplastics can also be recycled several hundred times and are most suitable for holographic interferometry
4) Photoresist Material Suitable for producing surface relief holograms
Most sensitive to ultraviolet/blue light only.[1] P.-A. Blanche et al, Holographic three-dimensional telepresence using large-area photorefractive polymer, Nature Volume:
468, Pages: 80–83, 04 November 2010, DOI 10.1038/nature09521
Photorefractive Polymer: Performance
1) Refresh Rate
18
y
University of Arizona (UA) took 2 s to write & erase a full-colour dynamic holographic image in 2010 vs. 4 mins in 2008 [1,2]
marked improvement of ~100x in 2 years!
Quoting UA lead author of the study Blanche, “In two years we improved the speed by a factor of 100. If we can improve the speed by the same factor, we will be over video rate. It will be done.” [2]
Next step: 6 fps (~0.2s); to progress towards a refresh rate of 24-30 fps
2) Display Size) p y 17” (current largest)
Have to scale up the display size to 85” for outdoor billboard advertising & 6–8 ft (life-size) for telepresencing to be truly possible( ) p g y p
[1] http://news.inventhelp.com/Articles/Electronics/Inventions/three-dimensional-dynamic-holography-12521.aspx[2] http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/11/holographic-video/
Photorefractive Polymer: Cost Projection
Sony's Display Cost based on Display Size & Technology (as of Dec 2010) [1-3]
Sony's Display Cost per Inch based on Display Technology (as of Dec 2010) [1-3]
19
P r o je c t e d C o s t o f P h o t o r e f r a c t iv e P o ly m e r b a s e d o n S c r e e n S iz e
y j
3500
4000
4500
5000 XEL-1 OLED TV Bravia XBR10 Series LED 3D TV Bravia XBR9 Series LCD TV
Technology (as of Dec 2010)
160180200220240260
XEL-1 OLED TV Bravia XBR10 Series LED 3D TV Bravia XBR9 Series LCD TV
Display Technology (as of Dec 2010)
nch)2 5 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0
3 5 0 0 0
b a s e d o n S c r e e n S iz e D y n a m ic p h o to r e f r a c t iv e p o ly m e r ( P r o je c te d ) D y n a m ic p h o to p o ly m e r ( E x t r a p o la te f r o m Z e b r a Im a g in g ) S ta t ic p h o to p o ly m e r ( Z e b r a Im a g in g )
2000
2500
3000
3500
Cos
t ($)
6080
100120140160
Cos
t/inc
h ($
/in
1 0 0 0 0
1 5 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0
Cos
t ($)
Photorefractive polymer is projected to cost ~4x more than
10 20 30 40 50 60
1500
Display Size (inches)
10 20 30 40 50 60
40
Display Size (inches)1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 00
5 0 0 0
S c r e e n S iz e ( in c h e s )
Photorefractive polymer is projected to cost 4x more than static photopolymer $1500 for 12”x18” & $3500 & 2 ft by 3 ft static 3D holograms by Zebra
I i [4]Imaging [4]
[1] Sony XEL-1 OLED TV pricing: http://reviews.cnet.com/oled/sony-xel-1-oled/4505-13948_7-32815284.html[2] Sony Bravia XBR10 Series LED 3D TV pricing: http://www.best-led-tv.net/46%E2%80%B3-sony-bravia-xbr10.html[3] Sony Bravia XBR9 Series LCD TV pricing: http://www.practical-home-theater-guide.com/sony-lcd-tv-1.html[4] Zebra Imaging Print Cost: http://www.3d-display-info.com/zebra-imaging-prints-large-3d-holograms
Transmission Media20
Transmission rate projected to increase by about tenfold over a decade
Current transmission capacity of fibre is in the region of ~ 2.5 to10 Gbps
Has the potential to go up to 40 or even 160 Gbps
Capable of supporting a very large
Capable of supporting a prototype hologram (17”)
size hologram (~500”)
http://www.telebyteusa.com/foprimer/foch1.htmhttp://www.rp-photonics.com/optical_fiber_communications.htmlhttp://www.belden.com/pdfs/Techpprs/10_Gbps_LAN_Segment_WP.pdf
Transmission Media: Cost Projection 21
Transmission Media: Cost Projection Relative cost trends comparing 10 Gbps vs 4GbpsGbps vs. 4Gbps
Transmission cost projected to drop by ~75% in a decade By 2016, 10Gbps is expected to cost ~$225 By 2016, 10Gbps is expected to cost $225
www.corning.com/docs/opticalfiber/CM00000004.pdf
Microprocessorp
Currently, a processor is capable of supporting up to 42” hologram Currently, a processor is capable of supporting up to 42 hologram
Estimated that 23 processors (16-core) in 2016 will be able to support a large billboard size hologram
Intel’s E7 Xeon 10-core
Microprocessor: Cost Projectionp j23
Average transistor price expected b 10 10 i 2016to be 10-10 in 2016
Estimated cost trend for microprocessor
Currently, 6-core processor with 109 transistors costs ~$300
In 2016, 16-core processor with ~ 5*1010 transistors is expected to cost ~$300
http://www.singularity.com/charts/page62.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor_count
FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES
Future Opportunitiespp25
Advertising Gaming Education Training Richard Branson Hologram – Virgin Digital Launch
Communication Medical Forensic Science
Entrepreneurial Opportunitiesp pp26
Lasers or alternative light sources Optics
(e.g. diffusers, filters, diffraction gratings) Software developer p
(e.g. algorithms) Photorefractive materials Photorefractive materials Silicon photonics
Conclusion
With a trend of moving towards 3D and virtual
27
With a trend of moving towards 3D and virtual reality, Holographic System will dominate the display, advertising and entertainment industriesp y, g
This is largely attributed to: This is largely attributed to: Lowering of cost of key componentsAdvancement in holographic technologyAdvancement in holographic technologyAdvancement in technologies of key components
THANK YOU(Q&A)