From Broadcast Engineering: TV set manufacturers declare war over 3-D technologies - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 16 Old 03-22-2011, 07:42 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 45,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
By Michael Grotticelli
Quote:


In a major ad campaign about to launch around the world, LG claims that its FPR technology allows viewers to lie down on a sofa and still get the full 3-D experience, while shuttle-glass displays require the viewer to sit upright.

In a major ad campaign about to launch around the world, LG claims that its FPR technology allows viewers to lie down on a sofa and still get the full 3-D experience, while shuttle-glass displays require the viewer to sit upright.

Samsung Electronics, with a 60 percent share of the global 3-D TV set market, and LG Electronics are engaged in a growing feud over which 3-D technology is best for home use. At stake is millions of dollars from a wide range of manufacturers who build 3-D TV sets.

During the CES show in January, LG-owned LG Display came to market with a revamped 3-D technology called film patterned retarder (FPR). It is now challenging Samsung’s de facto industry-standard shuttle-glass (SG) display, now used by Sony, Panasonic, Sharp and others.

LG is currently demonstrating its technology for Sony and other manufacturers.

“We’ve explained FPR technology to our major customers. Sony is one of them, and they are reviewing it,” LG Display CEO Kwon Young-soo told reporters recently. LG is also quietly forming its own group of TV manufacturers to embrace the technology that includes Vizio, Toshiba and a roster of Chinese TV makers.

LG said its FPR technology addresses consumer concerns over blurry and flickering images. It uses glasses two to three times lighter than the previous bulky eyewear required for 3-D viewing. FPR viewing can also be done lying down on a sofa, whereas SG requires the viewer to sit upright, LG claimed in an ad.

Samsung held a news conference where its executive described LG engineers as “stupid” and LG’s technology as outdated. And, as to the ad about viewing 3-D while lying down, Samsung responded, “3-D just doesn’t work when you lie down sideways. It only makes you feel all the more dizzy,” said Kim Hyun-suk, senior vice president of Samsung Electronics’ visual display division. “Even renowned international organizations advised viewers to watch the 3-D TV horizontally.”

Kim said that because all 3-D pictures are being captured and saved horizontally by two sets of cameras, the human brain can’t properly figure out the image when watching the screen vertically. LG continues to dispute that.

Samsung’s technology shows 1080 pixels to the right eye while blocking signals to the left eye; it then repeats this process for the left eye. Using special battery-charged glasses, this creates a 3-D image.

LG’s FPR technology, by contrast, sends 540 pixels to both eyes simultaneously with different images for the right and left eye, which are recognized as 1080-pixel 3-D images by the human brain. This technique requires much lighter glasses.

LG recently angered Samsung by claiming that FPR was second-generation 3-D technology that the market was evolving toward. Samsung countered, describing FPR as passive-type technology that dated back to 1935.

Samsung also ran an ad campaign in which it described the technological difference between its product and its competitor’s as one of “night and day.”

The feud between the manufacturers comes during a period of razor-thin margins and growing price competition on 3-D sets in a commodity-driven market. Samsung predicts that the world market for 3-D TV to grow more than fivefold this year to 17 million. That would be up from 3 million 3-D sets sold in 2010.

http://blog.broadcastengineering.com...-technologies/

'Better Living Through Modern, Expensive, Electronic Devices'

Ken H is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 16 Old 04-03-2011, 04:30 AM
 
icester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,175
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken H View Post

By Michael Grotticelli

http://blog.broadcastengineering.com...-technologies/

False claim:
Regardless of viewing method tilting ones head create vertical disparities which brain cannot handle resulting in split 2D images. At 90 deg tilt there is zero depth.

Mathew Orman
icester is offline  
post #3 of 16 Old 04-05-2011, 01:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
8:13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
FPR by LG or Vizio is flawed due to half vertical resolution destroying the 3D nature of the video when compared to full vertical resolution.

Active Polarized by Samsung is flawed due to it using sequential not parallel technology, so the 3D doesn't look right. The framerate is too low in Samsung 3D; a higher framerate would fix the problem seen when comparing parallel to sequential technology though. What framerate? Ask icester, I think he said 480Hz instead of 240Hz.

So currently they both fail in the 3D TV scheme, and this isn't even considering crosstalk, only considering the technology they use, and the way they use it.


There is new, and then you are new.
This is a moral of the bears and their cereal.
8:13 is offline  
post #4 of 16 Old 04-05-2011, 06:39 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
walford's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 16,789
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
AFAIK the Mits 3D RP DLP models use a wobulated 960x1080 microdisplay chip and therefore display 960x1080@60fps per eye which matches up with the Checkerboard format they used to receive 3D video content.
Does this mean that their 3D image should also be considered as "flawed"?
walford is offline  
post #5 of 16 Old 04-05-2011, 07:02 AM
 
icester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,175
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by walford View Post
AFAIK the Mits 3D RP DLP models use a wobulated 960x1080 microdisplay chip and therefore display 960x1080@60fps per eye which matches up with the Checkerboard format they used to receive 3D video content.
Does this mean that their 3D image should also be considered as "flawed"?
Yes,
system fonts are unreadable and discreet stereoscopic specular effects are killed.

Mathew Orman

FTL evidence is coming up...
icester is offline  
post #6 of 16 Old 04-06-2011, 11:24 AM
Member
 
jbolt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I lay down on my futon sometimes while watching 3D movies on my JVC DLA-RS40 projector with the JVC active shutter glasses and the 3D effect still works just as well as it does when I sit upright.
jbolt is offline  
post #7 of 16 Old 04-06-2011, 03:28 PM
 
icester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,175
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbolt View Post

I lay down on my futon sometimes while watching 3D movies on my JVC DLA-RS40 projector with the JVC active shutter glasses and the 3D effect still works just as well as it does when I sit upright.

It is not the body orientation that matters but only your eyes.
If you glasses are rotated by 90 from level position then you will see zero depth.

Mathew Orman
icester is offline  
post #8 of 16 Old 04-06-2011, 05:43 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
walford's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 16,789
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
If you are wearing sealed googles instead glasses which prevent you from having any visual reference to "level" position does the problem still occur? I didn't think that the human mind and body know what level is without a visual reference since when on a boat one if the ways to keep from getting seasick is to make sure that you can see the horizon.
walford is offline  
post #9 of 16 Old 04-07-2011, 03:33 PM
Senior Member
 
Brian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by icester View Post

Yes,
system fonts are unreadable and discreet stereoscopic specular effects are killed.

I'd say unreadable is an overstatement. Fonts are certainly visibly affected, but I have no problem reading them.
Brian is offline  
post #10 of 16 Old 04-08-2011, 12:55 AM
vsv
Advanced Member
 
vsv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 645
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
To each is own. I prefer (for 1000$ only!!!) DLP projector and big screen with shutter glasses, but for 55-65" LCD displays better to have polarized glasses. At 2-3 meters from 55-65" display no matter fullhd or halfhd resolution (in case if these 55-65" LCD display cost me ~$1000
vsv is offline  
post #11 of 16 Old 04-08-2011, 04:53 AM
 
icester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,175
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian View Post
I'd say unreadable is an overstatement. Fonts are certainly visibly affected, but I have no problem reading them.
Yes, only some small sizes of pixel width system fonts will be unreadable.

And you are right, some people will have no problem reading fonts which are distorted in such way.

Mathew Orman
icester is offline  
post #12 of 16 Old 04-20-2011, 03:04 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
JOHNnDENVER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,377
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by icester View Post

It is not the body orientation that matters but only your eyes.
If you glasses are rotated by 90 from level position then you will see zero depth.

Mathew Orman

This does not seem to be true at all in my experiences. I lay down a fair amount, all seems well. I have tried a lot of glasses that do not seem to work once the head is at 90 degree to the screen, but the X102's seem fine when / if I do it.
JOHNnDENVER is offline  
post #13 of 16 Old 05-01-2011, 04:20 PM
Member
 
scionracing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 185
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I would like to hear a technical explanation of why polarized technology and FPR cannot be applied to plasma display tech, only LCD? All the polarized mfrs. are applying the tech exclusively to AM-LCD.

Is it because the (inside of the) screens must be coated with a polarizer and this conflicts in some way with the emissive nature of PDP?

Secondly, I've found that both polarized and active shutter eyewear cut light output significantly (as much as 70%). Is it true that AS reduces luminance MORE than passive glasses?
scionracing is offline  
post #14 of 16 Old 05-08-2011, 12:04 AM
Member
 
PepticBurrito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by scionracing View Post

I would like to hear a technical explanation of why polarized technology and FPR cannot be applied to plasma display tech, only LCD? All the polarized mfrs. are applying the tech exclusively to AM-LCD.

Is it because the (inside of the) screens must be coated with a polarizer and this conflicts in some way with the emissive nature of PDP?

Secondly, I've found that both polarized and active shutter eyewear cut light output significantly (as much as 70%). Is it true that AS reduces luminance MORE than passive glasses?

Behind an LCD screen is a polarizing filiment. The individual LCD pixels allow light through by changing thier polorization alignment relative to the light hitting the back of the LCD screen.

In other words, the LCDs used in modern displays already work because of polarization, even without the FPR layer added on. Which means, the FPR does have to be very aggressive to alternate how each scan line is written.

You COULD treat the plasma as a back light, then polarize it, then add an FPR layer on it. I suspect you won't like the results. Lumenosity and contrast will be adversely affected.
PepticBurrito is offline  
post #15 of 16 Old 05-09-2011, 10:39 PM
Senior Member
 
HokeySmoke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOHNnDENVER View Post

This does not seem to be true at all in my experiences. I lay down a fair amount, all seems well. I have tried a lot of glasses that do not seem to work once the head is at 90 degree to the screen, but the X102's seem fine when / if I do it.

Despite the fact that the glasses still work, you will see zero depth at 90 degrees. At that point the left eye and right eye views become top and bottom to your perspective, and that would be meaningless to your brain. If not then someone please explain how your eyes can possibly converge on two images presented in purely vertical displacement.
HokeySmoke is offline  
post #16 of 16 Old 05-26-2011, 08:21 PM
GXM
Member
 
GXM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Santa Clarita, CA.
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The main reason the shutter glasses do not work at 90 degrees is due the LCD tv's being linear polarized a d so are the glasses.

Doing a show in Dolby 3D I was actually quite surprised when I tilted my head90 degrees and the 3D depth still worked. I woe say it might not have been as accurate but my brain figured it out. But when you turn past 90, you end up with the same effect as flipping the eyes and then my brain gave up and I lost most of the depth. I totally expected a loss of 3D when sideways so it was a big surprise to clearly see coating embers off of a fire out in the room.
GXM is offline  
Reply 3D Tech Talk

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off