# LCD Shutter



## superhornet59 (Apr 28, 2006)

okay we've seen those LCD shutter lenses for 3d glasses. so why aren't we seeing LCD shutters in cameras? I believe still a bit slow... but nevertheless i say if we speed them up sometime we can make some cool stuff... no parts to wear out (remember you can have a second one act like an aperature).


----------



## Meysha (Apr 29, 2006)

> LCD shutter lenses for 3d glasses.


What are these?


----------



## AluminumStudios (May 2, 2006)

It's an interesting idea, but probably not needed. For shutter times of 1/90th of a second and faster (if I remember my facts correctly) the Nikon D50 (and probably others) actually only turns the CCD on then off for the exposure time while the mechanical shutter stays open longer - it's not purely a mechanical function. The camera still needs a mechanism in it to move the mirror so you can look through the lense when using the viewfinder, so even if it didn't have a shutter, it wouldn't be more reliable.

Just my quick thoughts on an interesting idea ...


----------



## Unimaxium (May 2, 2006)

Meysha said:
			
		

> What are these?



I believe it's a piece of glass that will turn opaque as an electrical current is passed through it due to LCD crystals embedded in the glass. They make glasses made of this stuff that will turn one eye opaque at a time and flicker between them really quickly. When used in conjunction with a synchronized display to flicker between two images as the glasses flicker, this can create the illusion of 3D. Many 3D movie theaters work this way.


The problems I could imagine in using them is that perhaps the LCD isn't totally opaque when closed, which could yield a light leak. This would be quite a problem with film cameras, at least. Also, this would mean you would be shooting through another piece of glass when taking a picture which can potentially worsen things like aberrations and lens flare.


----------



## superhornet59 (May 2, 2006)

naw, it can turn quite opaqe. my only issue is it being too slow, or light degradation. but digital SLR's use the shutter for exposure dont they? i mean if the sensor turns on and off for the exposure then why is there a mirror to begin with? and yes this is only feasable for digital cameras cause it needs a current. theres not that many benefits, other then no parts ot wreck... but its just an intruing possibility.

oh and you remember the old 3D movies, where you had glasses with blue and red, then you had a film with overlapping blue and red images. well when you wore the glasses, the 'blue eye' would see one (blue) image, and the 'red eye' would see the other (red) image, giving a feeling of 3D. now we have LCD glasses where at any point in time, only one of the glasses is transparent while one is opaque. meaning, when the 'left image' is on, the left part of the glasses is trasparent, and the right opaque. then it switches to the left, and so forth so fast that you dont see it, and it ends up looking 3D. the cool thing about this now is that you can watch colour 3D movies.


----------



## Unimaxium (May 2, 2006)

superhornet59 said:
			
		

> naw, it can turn quite opaqe. my only issue is it being too slow, or light degradation. but digital SLR's use the shutter for exposure dont they? i mean if the sensor turns on and off for the exposure then *why is there a mirror to begin with*?



Well, the mirror is there so that you can see the image through the viewfinder. You would need a mirror on an SLR regardless of what kind of shutter you used.

I have heard that at least some DSLRs simply turn the sensor on and off to control the exposure. I don't know if this means that they don't have shutters at all or if they still have a shutter but just control the sensor for accuracy. (I shoot film, so I don't have a digital camera to look into). I also don't know whether most / all DLRs work this way, or just higher-end ones (or lower-end ones?). Perhaps someone else can shed light about this feature.



> and yes this is only feasable for digital cameras cause *it needs a current*. theres not that many benefits, other then no parts ot wreck... but its just an intruing possibility.



Film cameras can provide a current as well ;-)


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 4, 2006)

Most all modern film camera do produce a current.... 

What I find interesting about that statement is that it is getting into the area of: there may be a whole generation soon that has no idea what a film camera was.

Not to mention vinyl records, coke in glass bottles, and real hot dogs....Hard to find a hot dog that is still made from left over pig parts...


----------

