Originally Posted by xrox
The general LG and Panasonic driving waveforms I've seen in patents and papers do look very similar to each other but do have some differences.
Little differences in shapes and position of the pulses and I don't understand if LG is using selective reset or not for subfields 2-10. Below is a summary:Panasonic RBD
1st Subfield - All pixel reset (rise - fall)
2nd - 10th Subfields - Selective reset (fall only)LG
1st Subfield - All pixel reset (High voltage rise and fall)
2nd - 10th Subfields - Low voltage reset (looks like fall only)-not sure if selective
Regarding the specific paper quoted in the zero black thread: When I said "just like Panasonic" I was only referring to the concept
of periodic reset pulses once every few frames. However, the proposed way that LG would generate this periodic reset is dramatically different than Panasonic. So in this case there would be no infringement IMO.
Thanks xrox for putting my suspicion to rest.
Still doesn't explain why LG opted for higher MLLs on the 2011 sets, I'm sure their techs could have come up with a stable configuration for a much lower MLL, at least with the PZ950 flagship, especially when the lower MLLs we've achieved with the pots adjustments also more or less reduced/eliminated IR, LG's other accepted failing.
Reviewers and myself have given LG consistently high marks for color, grayscale, motion handling etc so I'm not too sure why they shot themselves in the foot.
There could be any number of technical reasons but as a major supplier and manufacturer it just does not sit right.
Anyway they appear to be keeping a low profile on this years offerings, maybe they got a sleeper in the works, maybe.