70'' 3D HDTV Doesn't Require Silly Glasses

[exfileme]

NewSight's parallax barrier technology could apply to any 2D LCD.

70'' 3D HDTV Doesn't Require Silly Glasses : Read more

 

[egidem]

This seems quite interesting...darn those Japanese guys and their awesomenessness of technology.
"The company claims that the 70-inch is currently the largest 3D display, however the technology's description may indicate that the barrier could be applied to any current 2D LCD, at any size"

If this is really as good as Nvidia's 3D technology or the new 3D TV with glasses, then this will be a huge finger up Nvidia and the 3DTV's a$$es...we'll wait and see. Once again, no idea of cost or how good this really is.

 

[logitic]

This type of tech is so cool! I know I will not be able to afford one until someone builds a Holodeck and lowers the prices on that bad boy(70") TV.

 

[N.Broekhuijsen]

drool....

nuff said!

 

[Glorian]

Now I could get behind this. Never like the idea of having expensive glasses just to view 3D, I would rather spend the money on a bigger 2D TV, but if there is no need for them then I would be more inclined to buy it.

 

[dextermat]

Wait a few years because the specialist say the technology is not there yet and companies tries to shove these down our throats at expensive prices

 

[shin0bi272]

Is it just me cause I dont see anything in 3d on that pic. If you really want true 3d tv why not have a tv with multiple screens? that seems easier than trying to play tricks on people's eyes.

 

[LORD_ORION]

I would settle for less 3D in 3D quality if I didn't have to wear any glasses.

 

[babybeluga]

Is anybody else touching themselves right now?

 

[lukeeu]

3D LCD with passive polarization glasses should be no more then 10-20% more expensive then current 2D LCD...

 

[N.Broekhuijsen]

[citation][nom]shin0bi272[/nom]Is it just me cause I dont see anything in 3d on that pic. If you really want true 3d tv why not have a tv with multiple screens? that seems easier than trying to play tricks on people's eyes.[/citation]
of course you cannot see anything 3D.... it is a flat image of a screen on your NON 3D CAPABLE desktop LCD screen.

*face-palm*

 

[psychotek71]

cool can i hook up my pc to the huge 3ddd tv

 

[dman3k]

There's no way that I will spend more than $50 for JUST Avatar.

We need more 3d movies worth buying.

 

[cj_online]

I thought all new 3DTVs are capable of 3D without any glasses... wow didn't know we had to wear freakin glasses to view it... it's sad how ppl actually bought that crap.

 

[Ehsan w]

[citation][nom]babybeluga[/nom]Is anybody else touching themselves right now?[/citation]

no.....

and, this could be pretty good, since I wouldn't ever want to get the tv's with glasses....
We have a lot of family and friends over, and if we have people it's not just one person. So buying like 13 glasses...no thanks.

 

[Anthelvar]

First of all, NONE of you have seems to have viewed a 3d TV. Awesome is not enough to describe it. Second The first wave of glasses are ugly and expensive, this will change shortly. I don't hear any of you complaining about sun glasses. Thats because we associate them with being cool and 3d glass with not being cool.
wait for the price drops and new models and this thing will take off. IT seems to me, keeping your head from moving to much while watching tv will be the bigger problem than glasses. when the glasses are $10-40 a pop and look decent everyone will be one over.

 

[aethm]

I'll believe it when I see it. Parallax barrier technology isn't that great. Unless they've come up with some new way to do it (which I don't see how) it's really not nearly as impressive as shutter-glasses or even polarized options.

 

[dreamphantom_1977]

Well, it sounds great, but I doubt they have fixed the problems with this technology. Bleeding overlapping images causing artifacts, only certain veiwpoints resulting in 3d, so you would have to keep perfectly still to watch it. If they fixed these problems, then right about now I would start worrying about invisibility cloaks. Think about it. Let me see, they have no bevel t.v.'s, 3d, flexible screens, ....... Yeah, invisibility cloaks.

 

[hellwig]

[citation][nom]Anthelvar[/nom]... when the glasses are $10-40 a pop and look decent everyone will be one over.[/citation]

Too short-sighted. I have a feeling a better technology will supplant glasses before they ever get to a decent price-point. Seriously, people are NOT jumping on the glasses-based in-home 3D technology. I have a feeling glasses will go the way of Laser-Disk and RDRAM (i.e. not enough improvement for the price increase, little buy-in, and eventually replaced by superior, cheaper technology (DVD & DDR in my examples)).

And no, I haven't seen 3D-TV either, but I do know its an initial buy-in of like $4000 and you can watch a total of maybe 12 movies currently, if that many. The technology will starve, heck, most people haven't even moved to Blu-Ray yet, if that doesn't get surpassed soon enough. If in 4 years companies are still selling glasses-based 3D TVs I'll be impressed, and I might even own one by then.

 

[Honis]

This tech is great for 3D gaming but I can't see it taking shape in the living room. Yes, 64 viewable spots are great, but there's little room for error so you need to keep your head within a certain plain for the entire movie. I'm not a fan of the glasses either since the only tech that avoids this problem is also the expensive kind.