Slashdot Mirror
LG Cinema 3D TV Get Full HD Certification From VDE
i4u writes "LG announced today that the German VDE, one of the largest technical and scientific associations in Europe, has certified the LG Cinema 3D TVs to be full HD in 3D-mode. LG's Film Patterned Retarder (FPR) technology, used on the CINEMA 3D TVs, creates the perception of 3D depth by delivering two 540 line images, one for each eye, that are then combined via the glasses to create a unified 1080p image. The ruling from the VDE lets LG carry the full HD badge. There is no explanation one how the VDE arrives at this ruling. My personal experience shows a rather big resolution difference between FPR and shutter glass based 3D TVs."
LG announced today that the German VDE, one of the largest technical and scientific associations in Europe, has certified the LG Cinema 3D TVs to be full HD in 3D-mode. LG's Film Patterned Retarder (FPR) technology, used on the CINEMA 3D TVs, creates the perception of 3D depth by delivering two 540 line images, one for each eye, that are then combined via the glasses to create a unified 1080p image. The ruling from the VDE lets LG carry the full HD badge. There is no explanation one how the VDE arrives at this ruling. My personal experience shows a rather big resolution difference between FPR and shutter glass based 3D TVs
It might not be stargazer; it might be pew pew along the lines of magazine.
Sorry I came to the garbage of this place and realized it, fellow Slashdotters.
a Beowulf cluster of those?
... just not at the same time
You know those old people who complain about a commie plot where technological is just a smokescreen to get them to buy "the white album" for the 20th different media format?
The first thing that comes to mind when I hear about "3D" or "smell-o-vision" or whatever other useless frippery of the week, is "I'm gonna have to download Star Wars ... again?"
I mean really, the scene in the Death Star's garbage compactor or the Bar Scene on Tattoine isn't really going to be any better, its just... again.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Taking self promotion and Press Releases to a new and integrated level!
Three Squirrels
It kind of works for the old CRTs since the phosphors remain excited long enough that both scans of the electron beam leave a single image with that many lines as far as our slow to respond eyes are concerned.
On the other hand, if showing 540 lines to one eye, and 540 lines to the other eye is the same as 1080, then the ones that show 1080 lines to one eye, and 1080 lines to the other eye will have to be labeled 2160p.
The obvious problem those idiots didn't think about is that it's NOT showing you 540 + 540 lines, it's showing 540 lines from the left eyes viewpoint + the SAME 540 lines from the right eyes viewpoint. (morons)
Ever since I discovered that the "THX Certified" sticker had fallen off my cheap and nasty set of speakers and stuck it back on, I've been simply astonished at how much more delightsome to the senses a product is when it has a paper cert from some once-authoritative body that is now cashing in on its reputation.
I suspect that LG's new system will experience similar benefits.
The certification process is simple;
1. Did check clear?
2. Profit!
3. Certification granted
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Whoever in marketing came up with the name "Film Patterned Retarder" is a film patterned retard for thinking the public wouldn't discover "retard" in the name.
that are then combined via the glasses to create a unified 1080p image
No! They're combined by the brain, not the glasses! Sheesh.
Shutter glasses based 3D TVs deliver the better 3D image.
Great. Can they work on not giving me a headache within 30 seconds of putting on the glasses now, please?
I don't think they will be a fad. The reason is that 3D for gaming works. Field depth isn't an issue, temporal aliasing isn't an issue. The need to be able to walk around the house while playing isn't an issue. The ability to flatten the game to 2D isn't an issue. Making the game in 3D isn't an issue. This means that a good many people will already have the equipment in their home.
For movies and TV programing, it is a slightly different story. The reason I don't think it will go away comes down to price and the ability to watch in 2D. In the past if you bought a program in 3D, that is all it would ever be. You couldn't simply press a button to convert it back to 2D in real time. Now it is trivial. There is no reason that a TV should not be able to take a 3D stream and display it in 2D. All the current 3D TVs would need to do is drop every other frame, or for SBS just show half the stream stretched onto the whole screen. So from a consumer perspective, their media is backward compatible, and there is no loss for getting the 3D version.
From a hardware perspective, 3DTVs are noticeably more expensive, but I believe that is do to the "because we can" situation. Given time, the 3D functionality will likely be a standard feature because the cost of including it is negligible. Kind of like contrast controls. Almost nobody plays with the contrast controls on their TV, but they are there all the same for those that do want to use it.
Finally, 3DTV functionality will make a big splash for regular TV when units start shipping that will interlace from two different sources. When one person can play video games, and another can watch a TV show on the same TV at the same time, people who you never expected to have an interest will buy the product. This will lead to everyone having a 3DTV. As filming equipment gets replaced, the cost of filming in 3D will become negligible, and thus the cost from creation to consumption will be so small that you might as well supply it that way. Even in a worst case scenario, it will be trivial to supply computer animated movies in 3D since they are already made in 3D and flattened to 2D for distribution. It is pretty much just a matter of running the renderer to a second file. Once TVs start shipping where they will frame drop 3D streams into 2D, it wont even take a second render.
A very simple way would be to just have the shutter glasses operate at a much higher frequency - say, 96Hz. Then each frame can be shown to the left eye, right eye, left eye, right eye... and then on to the next frame. Simple, elegant... but also very expensive to manufacture TFT panels capable of operating properly at a 96Hz refresh.
ive had a look at that polarised display in the shop. the ghosting was pretty bad. if they can fix that, and maybe double the horizonal resolution to compensate for using alternate lines, they got a winner. i could use flipdowns on my prescription glasses instead of wearing another full set of expensive specs over the top.
I don't know enough about the technology - and the linked article wasn't informative - but do the right/left eye lines differ by more than just the depth? If they also contain additional detail, then this sort of like 1080i with your brain doing the interleaving, right?
The article doesn't mention that LG modified how the TVs display 3D recently to increase the resolution. "Before the Cinema 3D technology worked like this: During a time period of 1/200 seconds the TV showed 2 frames; 540 lines for the left eye and 540 lines for the right eye. The new algorithm shows 4 frames instead of 2 during the 1/200 second time frame. It shows 1080i for the left eye and 1080i for the right eye." from http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1304582822
Burns its reputation and ensures that will remain true.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
First, I feel the need to call out the article as a failure. They couldn't even get us the most elementary information about the TV - that is, what kind of TV is it? They tell us it does 3D HD; great. But is it an LCD? An LED? Plasma? CRT? Something else? Come on, it would have taken a minute fraction of a line to get that information into the article and they couldn't do it.
Second, fail to the manufacturer themselves. Someone there thought that calling their fancy 3D technology "Film Patterned Retarder". Really, why the hell would you voluntarily put the word "retard" into your own description of your technology?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Wake me when there's 3D tv without the glasses. Until then, it seems to me just as much as a fad as the red and blue '3d' effects in kids books.
I tested a few 3d tv's and liked the LG best. The polarization technique makes for a much more relaxing viewing compared to shutter glasses.
In Europe incandescent lighting is being phased out. The fluorescent lights that replace them tend to flicker when viewed trough shutter glasses.
Being a pendant - this isn't true.
It's the use of screen-field polarisation that halves the resolution (having a filter infront of the LCD that polarises even pixels one way, odd pixels the other).
There is nothing stopping for example two full resolution polarised screen images over the same screen real estate having full resolution.
TL;DR - it's not the glasses that halve the resolution - it's the choice of the screen / projection technology.
That is pretty much it.
A loop, by its nature, continues. If that didn't make sense, start reading this sentence again.
Interlaced video should have gone the way of the Dodo long ago. In its day, it was a neat hack to get temporal compression with all analog hardware, but that day is long passed.
You are factually wrong and off-topic! I'm wondering if you can find a way for a trifecta of time-wasting?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.