LG med ny 3DTV-teknologi

Sponsorer:
Takk Takk:  0
Like Like:  0
Viser resultater 1 til 4 av 4
  1. #1
    Intermediate
    Medlem siden
    Jul 2006
    Poster
    1,495
    Takk & like
    Nevnt
    0 post(er)
    AVtorget feedback
    0
    (0% positive tilbakemeldinger)

    LG med ny 3DTV-teknologi

    Overraskende nyhet fra LG:

    Ny panel-teknologi. Full-HD 3D med passive briller. Teknologi som eliminerer flimring og crosstalk ifølge LG. Høyere lysstyrke og mer behagelige briller...

    LG display unveils a 84" FPR polarized-3D panel, to be LG's technology-of-choice
    Framtiden er 3D! Dagens modeller er allerede utdaterte!-hd-3d-med-passive-briller-jpg
    LG Display is showing a new kind of polarized 3D panel - the Film-Type Patterned Retarter (or FPR). LG claims that the new technology eliminates flicker and crosstalk, supports Full-HD, enables cheap polarized glasses and is also cheap compared to earlier polarized 3D panels because they are using a film substrate instead of glass.

    LG says that from now on they will focus on FPR 3D products as they believe the offer the best experience out of all 3D technologies.
    LG Display introduce next generation 84 inch 3D FPR Panel

    LG Display unveiled its FPR (film-type patterned retarder, polarized glasses) 3D panel at a launch ceremony held on December 15 in Beijing, China.

    LG Display CEO Mr. Young Soo Kwon noted in his welcoming speech, “It is a pleasure for LG Display to announce the opening of the ‘FPR 3D era’ in China which is emerging as the center of the worldwide TV market. LG Display will focus on FPR 3D products as we believe that FPR is superior in all aspects and represents genuine 3D technology better suited to consumers.”

    The product not only delivers full HD picture quality, but also eliminates flicker and crosstalk which are problems associated with SG (shutter glasses) 3D displays. It also resolves the issue of high costs linked to the existing PR (patterned retarder) type panel by using film instead of glass substrate.

    Moreover, lightweight and comfortable polarized glasses that emit no electromagnetic waves allow consumers to enjoy long hours of viewing without any discomfort in their homes.

    An analysis of the flicker effect that occurs during 3D viewing showed the FPR panel is less tiring on the eyes compared to the SG type.

    Dr. James Sheedy, director of Optometry Research Center at Pacific University in the US, delivered a lecture titled “Vision and 3D Display” at the event. Dr. Sheedy noted, “Problems with the SG type panel included the weight of the glasses, power consumption and reduced brightness. However, LG Display’s FPR 3D panel has no flickering, produces minimal cross talk and delivers a bright screen. Also, the glasses can be made with curved lenses, like regular glasses, so it is superior in terms of protecting eyesight.”

    Vice President of Suning, Mr. Wang Zhe, said, “The launch of FPR which resolves these technical issues is expected to boost sales of 3D TV.”

    Conquering the 3D market through global alliance

    Among those present at the launch ceremony were top executives from China’s six largest LCD TV makers, namely Skyworth, Konka, Hisense, Haier, Changhong and TCL, as well as global LCD TV companies LG Electronics, Vizio and Toshiba. They agreed to cooperate for FPR 3D promotion based on shared recognition of its outstanding features.

    Mr.Yang Dong Wen, Vice President of China’s LCD TV market leader Skyworth, said, “The launch of FPR 3D TV products, which are clearly different from the existing 3D TVs, should expand China’s 3D LCD market to over 8 million units next year.”

    LG Displays OLED plans for 2011? Introduce the 31 inch OLED-TV showcased at IFA-2010.

  2. #2
    Active
    Medlem siden
    Aug 2010
    Poster
    412
    Takk & like
    Nevnt
    0 post(er)
    AVtorget feedback
    0
    (0% positive tilbakemeldinger)
    Eh, 3D ved hjelp av polariseringsfiltre er ikke akkurat en ny 3D-teknologi? Fordelen er som det står billigere briller og ingen crosstalk, ulempen er halvert oppløsning og dårligere 3D-effekt, særlig dersom en ikke sitter rett foran skjermen.

  3. #3
    Intermediate
    Medlem siden
    Jul 2006
    Poster
    1,495
    Takk & like
    Nevnt
    0 post(er)
    AVtorget feedback
    0
    (0% positive tilbakemeldinger)
    Hvis de har funnet ut en måte å få full-hd til hvert øye med polariseringsfiltre så er det en overraskende nyhet. (når det gjelder 3D-TVer)

    Men hvis det er samme polariseringsteknik som tidligere, så er det ingen stor nyhet, betyr bare at det blir billigere å produsere(film istedenfor glass).

    Er vel sansynligvis halvert oppløsning ja, trengs 4K for full-hd med polarisering\passive briller(som Sony\RealD kino)

    "delivers full HD picture quality" misforsto det som full-hd til hvert øye.

    OLED 3D-TV har full-hd til begge øyne med passive briller, men det jo 2-3 år til 50"

  4. #4
    Intermediate
    Medlem siden
    Jul 2006
    Poster
    1,495
    Takk & like
    Nevnt
    0 post(er)
    AVtorget feedback
    0
    (0% positive tilbakemeldinger)
    LG says that from now on they will focus on FPR 3D products as they believe the offer the best experience out of all 3D technologies.

    Vice President of Suning, Mr. Wang Zhe, said, “The launch of FPR which resolves these technical issues is expected to boost sales of 3D TV.”
    Da bør jo teknologien være bra.

    Fant mere informasjon om teknologien her: LG « FPD Market Research

    Må vente på OLED for full-hd med passive briller.
    Kan ikke se FPR-tver selge bra neste år, når de ikke er egnet for 2D...
    New 3D TV Technology Coming in 2011 – How Will Consumers Respond?

    December 9th, 2010 3D ticket box office results show consumers love 3D movies. However, 3D TV sales have disappointed. Why is this? One major difference is the 3D glasses. US theaters use polarized or passive glasses. They are light, comfortable and inexpensive. However, 3D TVs on the market use active shutter glasses which are expensive, bulky and heavy due to the internal batteries necessary to control the switching liquid crystal. I believe if it wasn’t for the glasses, 3D TVs would be doing much better as it is hard to justify $500+ in glasses costs for limited 3D content.

    In a recent Nielsen survey, 45% of survey respondents indicated the glasses were not comfortable. What if the low cost, light and comfortable glasses were available with your 3D TV?

    Starting in 2011, 3D LCD TVs based on film patterned retarders (FPRs) will be available. Expect these TVs from LG, Philips, Vizio and a host of Chinese brands as well using panels from LG Display and AUO.

    What may cause confusion is that performance is better in some areas than others compared with active shutter glasses 3D. In the active shutter glass approach, time multiplexing is used where the left and right images are shown in different frames within one frame time. The shutter glasses and their switching liquid crystal are opened alternately in each left and right frame in sync with the images on the TV. In addition, in the case of LCDs, a black frame is inserted in between the left and right frames. So, 240 Hz frame rates correspond to 60Hz for each of the left, black, right and black frames. This approach requires very fast liquid crystal switching and frame rates. Because LCDs don’t switch as fast as plasma or OLEDs, they tend to show more double images or ghosting than plasma or OLEDs. Furthermore, because of the black frame insertions and the shutter glasses, significant brightness is lost. Most 450-nit 3D LCD panels are actually perceived through the glasses at less than 100 nits. More than 80% of the brightness is lost. Brightness must improve to achieve a more acceptable 3D experience.

    In the spatial multiplexing approach, the FPR is applied to the top of the screen. It corresponds to the odd and even lines of the LCD and converts light to either left or right circular polarization which are seen by the polarized glasses as left and right images producing 3D images. Unlike time multiplexing, the entire frame time can be used for generating one frame. As a result, the slower liquid crystal response rates are less likely to produce ghosting or double images. The panel supplier can also use slower refresh rates if desired. 120Hz is sufficient for FPR 3D as flicker is less of an issue and there is no black frame insertion. The FPR clearly separates the left and right images, producing a more stable image. Furthermore, brightness is significantly improved as there is no black frame insertion required. Brightness should be at least 2X higher than time multiplexing approaches.

    However, the FPR sacrifices resolution for these other improvements. Every other line is used for each eye. Thus, 1920 x 540 is being observed by each eye rather than 1920 x 1080. Higher resolutions have gained significant share in the TV market, although only Blu-ray movies are shown at 1920 x 1080p. Will consumers notice the difference? Will they care?

    In addition, the FPR 3D approach suffers from a lower vertical viewing angle than shutter glasses 3D due to the FPR. Will this be observed in retail? When I saw numerous FPR 3D demos at FPD International last month, I didn’t perceive this, but wasn’t looking for it in particular.

    Due to the differences in resolution and viewing angle, in 2D mode, the shutter glass approach should be better as you can’t turn off the FPR in 2D mode.

    In terms of cost, the FPR does cost more, but FPR panel suppliers claim that they can match conventional shutter glass panel costs. This may be because of vertical integration, lower cost approaches or reducing the refresh rate. However, if the glasses costs are factored in, the FPR 3D solution should be at least 20% less costly than shutter glasses 3D TVs. So, the total purchasing cost will be less.

    The advantages of each approach are summarized in the table below. I would expect the brands offering this new approach to heavily promote its advantages, while the brands not offering this approach such as Samsung, Sony and Panasonic, may actively promote its disadvantages.

    It could get even more confusing for 3D if active retarder technology which does not sacrifice resolution and maintains passive glasses use is introduced. At FPD International last month, both LG and CMI were showing prototypes with this technology which looked great. However, it should be the most expensive panel solution as it requires additional an additional liquid crystal layer and an additional pair of glass substrates. OLEDs have also been shown with this approach and plasma should be able to use it as well.

    In my case, I want to experience 3D in the home, but I can’t justify the glasses prices, so I am looking forward to the passive glasses 3D solutions. One of my coworkers’ objections was until he could buy a bag of 3D glasses in the supermarket or liquor store for entertaining during the Super Bowl, Final Four, etc., he is on the sidelines. Well, don’t be surprised to see bags of 3D glasses in supermarkets for Super Bowl 2012.
    LG med ny 3DTV-teknologi-passiv-3d-jpg

Stikkord for denne tråden

Regler for innlegg

  • Du kan ikke starte nye tråder
  • Du kan ikke svare på innlegg / tråder
  • Du kan ikke laste opp vedlegg
  • Du kan ikke redigere meldingene dine
  •