At next week's Consumer Electronics Show, LG Electronics will unveil its biggest, bestest, baddest (the street definition of "bad", that is) 3D TV: the 72-inch LZ9700. LG Electronics LX9700 3D TV not catching on? How about a really, really big 3D TV, then? Although 3D TV has not become the must-have tech that its champions …
just what is going on with TV producers?
seriously, for the last 5 years we've been barking up the 1080/720 tree and now we're at 3dTV?
If I can buy a specialist WUXGA screen, why cant I have a WUXGA TV? If I can get a decent monitor with a high refresh rate, wide view angles, good response times, and incredible contrast, why is it whenever you ask for a TV with the properties of even a decent off-the-shelf plasma or LCD monitor people look at you like you've grown an extra head, and then tell you to "find a specialist supplier"
its nice that they're going for new tech and innovation and whatnot, but christ, can they get the stuff done right for whats already out there first?
OTOH, maybe Im just raging because I already wear specs and have no desire to wear another dorky set over the pair I already own just to watch TV (I suffer it for the movies sometimes, but Ive yet to see a single '3D' Flick that would justify buying a 3D TV.)
3d content allows providers to sell you the same films again to grab a few quid more, and they believe it will make it more difficult to pirate if everyone desires/needs 3d equipment
Is anyone dumb enough to buy this?
I have observed that intellect is inversely proportional to the size of installed TV, but there must be limits!
Simple really, if they can drum up excitement about new technology X, they'll get more impulse buys than if they were to just carry on improving the existing technology.
Me thinks, however, that in the case of 3D this may have backfired on them.
HD failed to garner excitement because it doesn't actually offer anything over SD. Yes the picture's better defined, but only slightly. There's only certain content which really benefits from HD (clue: StepUp isn't one of these).
3D's going to suffer from the same issues, especially whilst the glasses are required.
I was all ready to go and see the new Tron. Then I found out it's only being shown in 3D. So, I'm not going. I don't want to spend an hour n a half balancing some cheap ass glasses, and I certainly don't want to encourage these tools that think every film needs to be in 3D.
I'll wait for Tron to come out on DVD/BluRay in 2D. If it never does, well I probably won't bother.
If they'd just put some effort into the existing tech (and for that matter into plots rather than gimmicks) then we'd have much better equipment right now. In some ways, I miss the days of CRT TV's, because they were stuck on that tech for so long that it actually matured. My last CRT was far, far, better than my (very) expensive flatscreen. If the CRT hadn't died, I'd still be using it now.
The glasses problem is easy to solve, if only manufacturers would do it.
All it needs is a place to mount a prescription lens in the 3D specs. The cost of popping them down to specsavers wouldn't be much compared to the tele itself.
"I have observed that intellect is inversely proportional to the size of installed TV"
My Hyper-dimensional, Omni-cognate, Neutron-wrangling Super-brain cannot think down to the level of the mere "3D TV" let alone it's more geometrically challenged predecessor.
Therefore your observations would seem to be correct.
go see Tron in an Imax
the glasses are like Oakley ski sunglasses, they're very funky and don't fall off your face
plus, the film is frikken awesome on the huge Imax screen
that said, I'm also going to be getting it in 2D when it comes out of blu-ray/dvd
there's no need for 3D that requires expensive glasses in the home - I'll wait until they make it work without the need for glasses
Oh I do love a snob
"I have observed that intellect is inversely proportional to the size of installed TV, but there must be limits!"
I assume you watch everything on your iPhone? Swarovski edition, of course.
good to know that journalism school paid off
"With 3D content being as rare as African-American lesbian socialists at a Tea Party convention..."
Where shall I send the monitor/dry-cleaning bill?
I'd have 3D TV...
... if it was built in to my TV without bulking the cost, i.e. it was a standard edition. I wear specs but am not bothered putting on extra ones for a film, TBH.
I'm sure that's the only reason HDTV has had such a 'good' uptake. Try buying a TV brand new that isn't HD ready.
When 3D goes the same way (should probably be if) they'll be crowing victory once again!
As rare as African-American lesbian socialists at a Tea Party convention
Wordy analogy, but I like it :)
Indeed, that is what is needed to sell it: A "life size" TV and plenty of African-American lesbian socialists, maybe upsetting the Tea Party, but in any case having fun.
But realistically, I won't be getting a 3D TV any time soon. A few of the 3D films have been worth watching, but at least the cinema has the scale and justification for putting on the silly glasses. Home 3D TV, unless its no-glasses operation, is going to be a hard sell.
I live in an unspoilt rural area which is going to become a hideous industrial wind farm if the subsidy scammers get their way.
All so that numpties in the big cities can watch crap on massive power hungry screens.
Let them try putting a wind farm on Hampstead Heath instead.
It would make more sense to restrict the size of TVs to 36" or less.
For those who want to watch soaps all day I propose riveting LCD goggles to their heads! They are living in an alternate reality already so they would not even notice.
I don't own a TV. Happy New Year.....?
Really? TVs are the evilest thing?
So I'm guessing you didn't realize that this TV probably uses considerably less power than a 32 inch CRT display. It's already a huge savings in cost. Sorry about the wind-farm but you sound a bit like Don Quixote finding windmills.
Hideous industrial wind farm?
Perhaps you'd prefer a nuclear power station there instead? Until people start conserving power, I'll take a wind farm over most other generation methods any day.
Not the TVs
You had it in the first line, its the subsidy scammers who are responsible. A wind farm produces a very good return over 10 or 20 years even if it never generates any significant amount of power, the subsidies are set so high.
This means that the developers will put up a farm anywhere they manage to force through planning permission. If that place happens to be windy, so much the better, but anywhere will do.
I live in Cornwall and have wind farms next to me. They are beautiful. They are a symbol of how we can one day live from 100% renewable energy because fossil fuels wont last forever and oil is needed for a huge range of medicines.
If I was in charge I would just build a nuclear power station 10 yards from your house and see if you preferred that.
I hate NOMBD
"I'll take a wind farm over most other generation methods any day"
Please, won't somebody think of the bats... and UFOs?
"It would make more sense to restrict the size of TVs to 36" or less."
Sure, sure, and while we're about saving the planet, let's get all those backward rural tits that are always moaning about having to be involved in the 21st Century to get rid of their Land Rovers and jig around the countryside in a G-Whizz.
And all those "would you rather have a nuclear plant?" posters - yeah, I fecking would! Far as I'm concerned, you can install a nuclear plant in our beautiful valley over a wind farm any day of the week. Not because a wind farm is "hideous" or any such 1700s shite, but because a nuclear plant is a better bloody solution! The difference between a nuclear plant and a wind farm is that a nuclear plant actually works.
I don't own a hatred of human advancement, so it will indeed be a Happy New Year. To the pub, my friends!
the point the wind stops and your TV goes off
Actually , looking at whats on TV, that could be a big plus point for selling wind farms.
Next week , the new ultimate 74" LCD TV ....
We need a 'shush I'm sleeping' icon
Will it have the 'advanced feature', that every TV sold in the analogue days had: The ability to rearrange the channels the way YOU want them?
What (or who) is this TV you speak of?
How Deep and Far into the Rabbit Hole do you wish to Travel?
"As The Reg reported from this January's CES, even Avatar's 3D tech wizard and RealD honcho Josh Greer warned: "There's so much misinformation and misunderstanding out there about what [is required] for a 3D display. It's a little bit of Wild West right now.""
And and little bit * Oscars Wilde and Wild Bunch v2.0 too, Josh Greer . And what of 3DTVProgramming Content. .........Virulent Viral Display of Champion Knights with Seductively Simple and Powerful Plays with Loves Passionate Surrender to Satisfying Insatiable Carnal Desire?
Or would that be a Private Pirate Programming Process with Special Access to Privileged Information and SMART Virtually Advanced IntelAIgent Operator Systems.
Heap Powerful Virtual Non State Actors/CyberIntelAIgent Memes in Live Operational Virtual Environment Fields of AIR&dD. Work, Rest and Play at the Binary Digital Core Rock Face ..... Mining Raw MetaData for Beta Future Core Source ...... Pure Lode Ore.
* the bigger those bits, the bigger the bytes, and whenever those bits are also qubits, does a bewildering chaos reign in the guise of order. It is quite a Grand and Laudable Deception but to imagine that no one sees that there is no master plan to follow, is to fail to see that such is the failing and the problem to be solved with a proposal requiring action/movement/Intellectual Property Transfer
That is all.
Keep the 3D!
Amusing thing also is 3D doesn't sell. Ok the TV's are, but not for 3D capability. The issue is simple, users don't want head ornaments to watch the box. It's stupid, it means you have to spend a fortune to kit out all the family, and means that's something else to get busted with the kids around.
As for HD, sheesh that's been bad enough. Sky and it's piss poor HD system of 720p is just dire. Lack of content, lack of picture quality. We have 1080p hardware, so why they should be using it. The only time these TV's are using full 1080p is when they have a console stuck into them. And frankly that's missing half of the use of them.
Quit with the worthless 3D marketting hype and give us the content!
NEws from Ivory Coast
I find myself in a troubled situation as the treasury of Ivory Coast is in trouble thiese days.
As you know there has been some politician dissention in our country and w find ourselves in a difficult situation : we ordered for our new convention center a LZ9700 and we cannot issue the last payment for delivery... Would it be possible for you to intervene as an intermediary in hte situation and assure for us the last payment ? We would of course largely compensate you for taking this financial step in our favor :According to the rules usually found in such a situation, you will receive a 14" 3dLCD as soon as I receive the 72"...
Lauren...(DUH) Your friendly at the minister of spending
(/Note, yes, the spelling is intentional, as we respect all international conventions for such things)
It's really Steroscopy
I can't be doing with it all, I really can't.
Its really hard to justify HD, let alone 3D.
Pubs are full of Giant 625 line screens showing footie to halfwits. I've never once heard a knuckle-dragger complain that there weren't enough pixels on that.
The more pixels there are the worse the compression artifacts get. You know those amazing shots of the start of the London Marathon? or of flocks of barnacle geese all changing direction at once? I've seen those block-and-freeze on ordinary dtv. 3D must have twice the pixels. No thanks.
HD is like black
Once you go there, you'll never go back.
3D, not so much.
Saw the new resident evil in 3D a while back. There were some nice effects, and the landscape shots looked really good, but that was about all that 3D improved.
It was also the only movie I've seen of late that I didn't sit there thinking that it would look better in HD.
You lot make me laugh
You all moan and groan about HD and now 3D (OK stereoscopy for the pedants). What people do not realize is that we can now only enjoy large displays because of HD. Before that anything show on a screen larger than 32" looked awful. A fuzzy mess lacking any clarity. Now you can watch HD on a 60" display without feeling like you need new spectacles.
Sure sterescopic displays cost extra right now but eventually it will come as standard. Also technology is constantly changing and eventually we will no longer need to wear special glasses to see it (You can already but only from one or two viewing angles).
If you lot had you way we'd still be using fixed line phones exclusively.
Is this monster TV set still just 1080p? If so, the pixels must be the size of ping pong balls.
Things I'd buy before buying this
A picture of Susan Boyle eating a banana
A large bonsai tree
A George Bush sex doll
A 3 thousand pound book called "How to make a million"
Some I can understand...
but for you to even think of a George Bush sex doll suggests to me that your medication needs increasing...
Bored of vinyl-loving black&white valve amp nutters...
I really don't understand the venom on La Reg for 3D. Yes a bit of emperor's new clothes scepticism is healthy, but you'd think from some on here that 2D TV was about to be switched off......
1) Nobody expects you to sit and watch regular 'everyday' TV in 3D. 3D content for the next few years will obviously basically be 'event' stuff like blockbuster films, sport and gaming.
2) Why is everybody suddenly so concerned what they look like when watching TV? Who are the other people in your living room watching you watch TV? By default everyone looks gormless gawping at the goggle-box anyway!
3) Yes, the majority of 3D films so far are crap. But then probably early colour films were crap attempts to exploit the new technology. I saw Tron in IMAX 3D the other day and the visuals (and soundtrack) were incredible, unfortunately the script left much to be desired. Also films where weak 3D is added 'in post' like Clash of the Titans are possibly giving people a poor impression of the tech. But did anyone expect any different while the technology was in its infancy? Is it any different to when CD, DVD or Blu-ray launched and initially there wasn't much of anything good to 'demo' your expensive new set-up?
4) Having played GT5 in 3D extensively of late, I can promise you that if 3D movies and TV don't appeal, then 3D gaming most definitely is the future.
5) Please can everybody stop saying 'but its only stereoscopy.' Presumably you won't be happy until your flat panel TV renders a photorealistic image with infinite depth where your eyes can focus on objects at any 'distance', all without glasses? i.e. when it defies physics. This 3D technology is called 'a window' and is already available, but sadly most 'windows' only have one channel available!
Wait a minute...
Tron had a script?
Well, color me astonished. I couldn't see any sign of it when I watched the blasted movie. Perhaps you saw some sort of super-secret director's cut?
They'd like their monolith back
Am I the only one?
I have an old telly; it is a CRT and it will die one day. It's fine to watch the news on and when I can be bothered I use an HD projector to watch films. I look forward to one day spending good money on a good new telly.
Every time there's a significant advance in the mainstream technology: 1080P; panels with better contrast; LED backlighting; network media playing; freesat; HD freeview, 3D; smellovision: it resets the lock on my wallet that will only open once these things become common and cheap. The 4 or 5 hundred pounds that I'll spend on a telly one day remains in my wallet and I spend my money on something else instead.
We are torn between choosing bleeding-edge or choosing mundane. I am not old enough to have seen waves of quadraphonic, laserdisc, etc so it is hard for me to estimate whether times have changed and the choice would have been simpler in the past; the high rate of technology changes seems to blur the line.
Are we normal consumers these days even more compelled to opt for bleeding-edge than in times gone by? I realise that there is no such thing as future-proofing.
You must be quite old to even know it existed?
Remember digital vinyl???
Is the "jump out" effect relative to TV size?
The general theory with large TVs is you need to sit further and further back so you don't see the pixels, but I'm wondering - with 3D TV, does the width of the TV affect how much the 3D elements "jump out" of the screen? Not seen this mentioned in any reg articles yet.
@Robert E A Harvey
Artifacts are a result of the encoding, not the number of pixels on the display. The failure of a stream to handle frame rate encoding is also not a function of the display device.
surely the more of the buggers there are, the more bandwidth you need?
4K x 2K
Now screens are getting this big, even 1080P isn't going to cut it, you'll need 4K x 2K resolution not to see the pixels. But it looks like 3D will be mainstream before we see content in that format begin to be available.
Like a lot of technologies (videotape, the internet etc.) 3D will only become widely taken up when there's porn available. Can you imagine Ron Jeremy in 3D?
Is no one gonna mention it?
FREAKING GAMES! Yes, ladies and gentlemen. I have a racing wheel and going to have a DLP 3d projector very soon. Getting the Nvidia 3d stuff too. TOO PLAY RACING GAMES IN FREAKING 3D!
This kind of TV is excellent for games. There, I said it. Anybody disagrees can suck on my grenade.
Games and porn, of course...
4k vs 1080p
By the time my old 32" 16:9 CRT blows up, it'll be 4k and not s-hd thats being tested right now that'll be top line tech that everyone will be googling their eyes at..
Not bothering with HD until BBC is broadcasting in 1080p via freeview... So holding on to my wallet until then... or my telly blows up....
that is all....
another use ?
and think of when the TV will fail after the warranty expires ... you get ...
a magnificient glass topped coffee table !!
(btw I prefer a nuclear power plant to a windfarm, less space, far more efficient ... for the half wits that curse at them, I would like to reclaim all the electricity and goods it has produced in the last 30 years from their homes, you could also install solar panels on your roof, put a wind turbine in your garden, recycle calories from your wastage ... but you haven't done so I bet :D).
- +Comment Trips to Mars may be OFF: The SUN has changed in a way we've NEVER SEEN
- Vid Google opens Inbox – email for people too stupid to use email
- Pic Forget the $2499 5K iMac – today we reveal Apple's most expensive computer to date
- Google+ goes TITSUP. But WHO knew? How long? Anyone ... Hello ...
- RUMPY PUMPY: Bone says humans BONED Neanderthals 50,000 years B.C.