Download the
Tom's Guide App from the AppsStore
News and trends on internet
/ mobile / "sound & picture" / IT
Yes No

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

- By - Source : Tom's Guide US

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

Digitimes reports that Newsight demonstrated 3D displays at the Finetech Japan 2010 expo in Tokyo that didn't require special glasses. Apparently the displays use NewSight's parallax barrier technology that subdivides the image into complex repeating segments. The company told the site that the special barrier is attached to commercial-grade LCDs "in a precision assembly process."

Included in the presentation was a huge 70-inch display sporting the glasses-free 3D technology, however it was unclear if viewers were forced to remain in one exact location, or if allowed to see the 3D imagery from 64 spots as seen with Sunny Ocean Studios' 3D technology (via DVICE). 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.

Unfortunately, the report doesn't go into any additional details such as pricing or availability. Still, will parallax barrier technology provide a better 3D image than what's available via shutter glasses? That remains to be seen.

Share:
33
Comments
X

Comments

egidem 04/20/2010 8:36 PM
Hide
-7+

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 04/20/2010 8:40 PM
Hide
-0+

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.

Glorian 04/20/2010 8:42 PM
Hide
-4+

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.

xbeater 04/20/2010 8:41 PM
Hide
-6+

drool....

nuff said!

dextermat 04/20/2010 8:51 PM
Hide
-2+

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 04/20/2010 9:08 PM
Show
LORD_ORION 04/20/2010 9:10 PM
Hide
-0+

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

babybeluga 04/20/2010 9:17 PM
Show
lukeeu 04/20/2010 9:27 PM
Hide
-2+

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

xbeater 04/20/2010 9:28 PM
Hide
-19+

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.


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 04/20/2010 9:29 PM
Hide
--3+

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

dman3k 04/20/2010 9:30 PM
Hide
-3+

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

We need more 3d movies worth buying.

cj_online 04/20/2010 9:37 PM
Show
Ehsan w 04/20/2010 9:41 PM
Hide
-0+

babybeluga :
Is anybody else touching themselves right now?



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 04/20/2010 10:03 PM
Hide
-2+

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 04/20/2010 10:05 PM
Hide
-1+

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 04/20/2010 10:34 PM
Hide
-1+

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 04/20/2010 10:44 PM
Hide
-0+

Anthelvar :
... when the glasses are $10-40 a pop and look decent everyone will be one over.



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 04/20/2010 10:50 PM
Hide
-0+

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.

joebob2000 04/20/2010 10:55 PM
Hide
-0+

dman3k :
There's no way that I will spend more than $50 for JUST Avatar.We need more 3d movies worth buying.



LOL, so $50 is worth it for one lousy movie? P.T. Barnum is rolling over in his grave (with delight).

drutort 04/20/2010 11:02 PM
Hide
-0+

i have to admit 3d tvs are cool, saw the 3d tv with glasses at best buy, i was glued there for a good 15min+ whatever demo they had on there its just amazing, they had a pair of glasses it was awesome... even though i have done the 3d cross eyed thing back in the day playing quake 3 it was pretty cool though nothing like this LOL

Gin Fushicho 04/21/2010 1:24 AM
Hide
-0+

If it can be viewed at any angle then that's progress.

pinkfloydminnesota 04/21/2010 2:17 AM
Hide
-0+

xbeater :
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*


Er? Got amine, tart rate?

stevo777 04/21/2010 2:19 AM
Hide
-0+

You had me at "Doesn't Require Silly Glasses".

derstarke 04/21/2010 2:42 AM
Hide
-0+

I don't think they're silly

descendency 04/21/2010 3:49 AM
Hide
-0+

It'll make you sick on it's very own! No glasses required.

I've seen quite a few 3D movies and TVs. I can't see the effects. I don't know if I am the only one. It just doesn't seem 3D to me.

requiemsallure 04/21/2010 6:24 AM
Hide
-0+

you cant really see it well on a 2d monitor, but its very intriguing

bogcotton 04/21/2010 1:45 PM
Hide
-0+

This is much more futuristic.

Seriously, people will look back on 3d with glasses as we do to the movie theatres in the 50's who had the cardboard red and blue glasses, and a random man walking about with a skeleton dummy trying to scare people.

Anonymous 04/21/2010 2:26 PM
Hide
-0+

Just a note the Mitsubishi DLP tv's cost way below the LCD's and support 3d. I bought a 60 inch one this year for about $800.

lumpy 04/21/2010 6:09 PM
Hide
-0+

descendency :
It'll make you sick on it's very own! No glasses required.I've seen quite a few 3D movies and TVs. I can't see the effects. I don't know if I am the only one. It just doesn't seem 3D to me.



Time to see the eye doctor. My friend discovered He had eye problems as after seeing avatar and not being able to see the 3d.

victomofreality 04/21/2010 6:56 PM
Hide
-0+

What I wonder about is how this will affect viewing angle.