Abstract

Dual directional view (DDV) displays show different images to different viewers. For example, the driver of a car looking at a central DDV display could view navigation information, while the passenger, looking from a different angle, could be watching a movie. This technology, which has now established itself on the dashboards of high-end Jaguar, Mercedes, and Range Rover cars, is manufactured by Sharp Corporation using a well-known parallax barrier technique. Unfortunately parallax barriers are associated with an inevitable drop in brightness compared with a single view display. A parallax barrier-based DDV display typically has less than half the transmission of a single view display. Here we present a solution to these problems via the use of a combined microlens and parallax barrier system, which can not only boost the brightness by 55% from a parallax barrier-only system but increase the head freedom by 25% and reduce crosstalk also. However, the use of microlenses (which must be positioned between the polarizers of the LCD) can adversely affect the contrast ratio of the display. Careful choice of the LCD mode is therefore required in order to create a DDV display that is both high in brightness and contrast ratio. The use of a single-domain vertically aligned nematic (VAN) liquid crystal (LC) mode, together with a microlens plus parallax barrier system can achieve this with a contrast ratio of 17001 measured at 30° to normal incidence.

© 2014 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. Sharp press release, http://www.sharp-world.com/corporate/news/0507.html .
  2. K. Ono, Y. Hayasaki, Y. Nagai, Y. Shimizu, N. Nishida, H. Yamamoto, S. Muguruma, and T. Sato, “Optimum parameters and viewing areas of stereoscopic full colour LED display using parallax barrier,” IEICE Trans. Electron. E83-c, 1632–1639 (2000).
  3. J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Techniques to put a Barrier close to an LCD,” U.S. PatentNo. 11/223206 (August30, 2003).
  4. J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Multiple-view directional display,” U.S. PatentNo. US7813042 (October12, 2010).
  5. Z. D. Popovic, R. A. Sprague, and G. A. N. Connell, “Technique for monolithic fabrication of microlens arrays,” Appl. Opt. 27, 1281–1284 (1988).
    [CrossRef]
  6. J. Mather, “Development of dual view displays,” Ph.D. thesis (Exeter University, 2007).
  7. C. Gu and P. Yeh, “Extended Jones matric method and its application in the analysis of compensators for liquid crystal displays,” Displays 20, 237–257 (1999).
    [CrossRef]
  8. Lesley Parry-Jones, “High brightness and contrast multiple view display,” U.S. PatentNo. US20130050611 (February28, 2013.

2000 (1)

K. Ono, Y. Hayasaki, Y. Nagai, Y. Shimizu, N. Nishida, H. Yamamoto, S. Muguruma, and T. Sato, “Optimum parameters and viewing areas of stereoscopic full colour LED display using parallax barrier,” IEICE Trans. Electron. E83-c, 1632–1639 (2000).

1999 (1)

C. Gu and P. Yeh, “Extended Jones matric method and its application in the analysis of compensators for liquid crystal displays,” Displays 20, 237–257 (1999).
[CrossRef]

1988 (1)

Bourhill, G.

J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Techniques to put a Barrier close to an LCD,” U.S. PatentNo. 11/223206 (August30, 2003).

J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Multiple-view directional display,” U.S. PatentNo. US7813042 (October12, 2010).

Connell, G. A. N.

Gu, C.

C. Gu and P. Yeh, “Extended Jones matric method and its application in the analysis of compensators for liquid crystal displays,” Displays 20, 237–257 (1999).
[CrossRef]

Hayasaki, Y.

K. Ono, Y. Hayasaki, Y. Nagai, Y. Shimizu, N. Nishida, H. Yamamoto, S. Muguruma, and T. Sato, “Optimum parameters and viewing areas of stereoscopic full colour LED display using parallax barrier,” IEICE Trans. Electron. E83-c, 1632–1639 (2000).

Kean, D.

J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Techniques to put a Barrier close to an LCD,” U.S. PatentNo. 11/223206 (August30, 2003).

J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Multiple-view directional display,” U.S. PatentNo. US7813042 (October12, 2010).

Mather, J.

J. Mather, “Development of dual view displays,” Ph.D. thesis (Exeter University, 2007).

J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Multiple-view directional display,” U.S. PatentNo. US7813042 (October12, 2010).

J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Techniques to put a Barrier close to an LCD,” U.S. PatentNo. 11/223206 (August30, 2003).

Muguruma, S.

K. Ono, Y. Hayasaki, Y. Nagai, Y. Shimizu, N. Nishida, H. Yamamoto, S. Muguruma, and T. Sato, “Optimum parameters and viewing areas of stereoscopic full colour LED display using parallax barrier,” IEICE Trans. Electron. E83-c, 1632–1639 (2000).

Nagai, Y.

K. Ono, Y. Hayasaki, Y. Nagai, Y. Shimizu, N. Nishida, H. Yamamoto, S. Muguruma, and T. Sato, “Optimum parameters and viewing areas of stereoscopic full colour LED display using parallax barrier,” IEICE Trans. Electron. E83-c, 1632–1639 (2000).

Nakagawa, A.

J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Techniques to put a Barrier close to an LCD,” U.S. PatentNo. 11/223206 (August30, 2003).

J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Multiple-view directional display,” U.S. PatentNo. US7813042 (October12, 2010).

Nishida, N.

K. Ono, Y. Hayasaki, Y. Nagai, Y. Shimizu, N. Nishida, H. Yamamoto, S. Muguruma, and T. Sato, “Optimum parameters and viewing areas of stereoscopic full colour LED display using parallax barrier,” IEICE Trans. Electron. E83-c, 1632–1639 (2000).

Ono, K.

K. Ono, Y. Hayasaki, Y. Nagai, Y. Shimizu, N. Nishida, H. Yamamoto, S. Muguruma, and T. Sato, “Optimum parameters and viewing areas of stereoscopic full colour LED display using parallax barrier,” IEICE Trans. Electron. E83-c, 1632–1639 (2000).

Popovic, Z. D.

Sato, T.

K. Ono, Y. Hayasaki, Y. Nagai, Y. Shimizu, N. Nishida, H. Yamamoto, S. Muguruma, and T. Sato, “Optimum parameters and viewing areas of stereoscopic full colour LED display using parallax barrier,” IEICE Trans. Electron. E83-c, 1632–1639 (2000).

Shimizu, Y.

K. Ono, Y. Hayasaki, Y. Nagai, Y. Shimizu, N. Nishida, H. Yamamoto, S. Muguruma, and T. Sato, “Optimum parameters and viewing areas of stereoscopic full colour LED display using parallax barrier,” IEICE Trans. Electron. E83-c, 1632–1639 (2000).

Sprague, R. A.

Winlow, R.

J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Multiple-view directional display,” U.S. PatentNo. US7813042 (October12, 2010).

J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Techniques to put a Barrier close to an LCD,” U.S. PatentNo. 11/223206 (August30, 2003).

Yamamoto, H.

K. Ono, Y. Hayasaki, Y. Nagai, Y. Shimizu, N. Nishida, H. Yamamoto, S. Muguruma, and T. Sato, “Optimum parameters and viewing areas of stereoscopic full colour LED display using parallax barrier,” IEICE Trans. Electron. E83-c, 1632–1639 (2000).

Yeh, P.

C. Gu and P. Yeh, “Extended Jones matric method and its application in the analysis of compensators for liquid crystal displays,” Displays 20, 237–257 (1999).
[CrossRef]

Appl. Opt. (1)

Displays (1)

C. Gu and P. Yeh, “Extended Jones matric method and its application in the analysis of compensators for liquid crystal displays,” Displays 20, 237–257 (1999).
[CrossRef]

IEICE Trans. Electron. (1)

K. Ono, Y. Hayasaki, Y. Nagai, Y. Shimizu, N. Nishida, H. Yamamoto, S. Muguruma, and T. Sato, “Optimum parameters and viewing areas of stereoscopic full colour LED display using parallax barrier,” IEICE Trans. Electron. E83-c, 1632–1639 (2000).

Other (5)

J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Techniques to put a Barrier close to an LCD,” U.S. PatentNo. 11/223206 (August30, 2003).

J. Mather, R. Winlow, A. Nakagawa, D. Kean, and G. Bourhill, “Multiple-view directional display,” U.S. PatentNo. US7813042 (October12, 2010).

J. Mather, “Development of dual view displays,” Ph.D. thesis (Exeter University, 2007).

Lesley Parry-Jones, “High brightness and contrast multiple view display,” U.S. PatentNo. US20130050611 (February28, 2013.

Sharp press release, http://www.sharp-world.com/corporate/news/0507.html .

Cited By

OSA participates in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (12)

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

DDV displays can show different images to the driver and passenger.

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

How the parallax barrier in a conventional dual view display creates different views for the different viewers.

Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.

(a) Lenticulars in a 3D system direct light to the viewer’s left and right eyes. (b) Applying the 3D lenticular design to a dual view display requires the lenses to be positioned closer to the pixels to increase the angular separation between the left and right views. The f-number of the lens needs to be low and so the air gap is essential, making the structure mechanically weak. In addition scattering from the regions between the lenses could cause crosstalk. (c) The new design of lens system for dual view in which small lenses are used on top of a parallax barrier. The lenses are smaller so the optical power of the lens can be higher. This means that the lenses may be adhered to the panel using low index glue making a mechanically robust design. In addition the barrier between the lenses prevents crosstalk from the lens joins.

Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.

Simulated performance of the lens-barrier design in comparison to the parallax barrier system. In the parallax barrier system there is an undesirable 20° image mixing region on axis. The same is true for angles greater than 56°. In the lens system the image mixing region is reduced and the transmission of the panel is increased.

Fig. 5.
Fig. 5.

How resist lenses can be made using an extra lithographic step on a conventional parallax barrier design.

Fig. 6.
Fig. 6.

Experimental performance of the lens-barrier design compared with a parallax barrier system. The dotted line shows the performance expected from our simulation.

Fig. 7.
Fig. 7.

Illustration to show that light emerging from a dual view display at a particular angle is the sum of many rays that have traveled through the LC layer at a range of different angles.

Fig. 8.
Fig. 8.

Graphs showing the effect of lenses on the contrast ratio of a TN display: (a) shows theoretical results and (b) shows measured data.

Fig. 9.
Fig. 9.

Graph showing the asymmetry between the differently oriented VAN domains of an MVA display when viewed from off-axis.

Fig. 10.
Fig. 10.

Measured data for the contrast ratio of the single domain VAN panel combined with a lens and barrier parallax optic, as a function of viewing angle.

Fig. 11.
Fig. 11.

Experimental comparison of crosstalk and head freedom between a parallax barrier and microlens DDV display system. Note that the minimum crosstalk is lower in the microlens system and in fact substantially invisible when viewed at that angle. Note also that the angular region where low crosstalk exists is larger for the microlens system, meaning that the viewer has more freedom to move their head before the other view is seen.

Fig. 12.
Fig. 12.

Photograph of Panel 4 (a DDV display with microlenses and a single domain VAN LC mode) viewed from 30° to normal incidence. The panel provides the same resolution as a conventional parallax barrier system, without the addition of any undesirable effects on image quality.

Tables (1)

Tables Icon

Table 1. Comparison of the Key Specifications of the Different Dual Directional Display Designsa

Metrics