LG demos ultra-bright Full HD 3D monitor
By Darren Murph 
posted May 27th 2009 9:22AM
posted May 27th 2009 9:22AM
posted May 27th 2009 9:22AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
It looks 2D to me...
you need to be wearing those sunglasses as well as that is just a photo, so it is 2d.
One it's a two dimensional picture, two you need glasses to get the three dimensional effect. You'd know that if you read the article a few inches above your post, reading the read link wasn't even needed to find that out.
You need to use Google Chrome with 3D.
The girl wearing sunglass is the 3D image result of the monitor.
Now Samsung is trying to integrate tactile feedback to its 3D images so you can not only see her 3D but feel her as well. :)
pball, don't take it so seriously. I'm just a little tired of these "3D" displays. It's fine to watch a 3D movie in the theaters but it won't be a factor when buying my next TV.
the slight double images on the screen is the best indication of 3D
not sure if this is right, but with certain backgrounds, mainly those with fluorescent colors...my current secondary monitor sdoes this. it's an LCD MAG 19 inch monitor...
That's awesome! However, these manufacturers need to make sure that these displays are compatible with the RealD glasses you get in the theatres.
3D porn on the back wall!!
I wonder if she took the blue pill or the red pill before she put those glasses on.
GORGEOUS.
Can't wait to touch Windows 7 in 3D HD.
There is nothing different from this and a normal monitor, like come on you have to wear glasses. This is somewhat misleading it should read 2D monitor marketed as a 3D monitor. Any monitor you buy can have 3d with glasses like come on.
Yeah, like come on.
You fool! This is a polarized 3D monitor, it differs drastically from regular monitors in that it contains two stacked lcd panels with polarized light filters so that the panel which displays the left eye image sends light that can pass only through the lens over your left eye and vice versa.
So maybe its not exactly like any monitor but still when I think of a 3D monitor I think of something like this http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/11/ny-storefront-hosts-the-first-no-glasses-3d-lcd-ad/ Since this LG monitor still requires glasses I personally would never call it a true 3D monitor. While it does deliver 3D content so does any other monitor (Ever made those blue and red glasses). Personally I do not see a market for this because as of right now you can buy a 3D monitor that requires no glasses. When you think about it 3D content will not be mainstream till at least 2012 which by then the price of a glassless 3D monitor will surely decrease. Just my 2 cents.
Yeah, the idea of this is you can just wear "regular" polarized glasses, which are both cheaper, lighter and less bulky than "3D" glasses. Also, because the image switching is built into the panel, you don't have glasses which require batteries to make each eye flicker, which should mean it won't induce headaches like they do. I bet everyone who bought that nvidia 3D package must be kicking themselves.
Still, I'm holding out for those NEC panels that were 3D without the glasses.
Those 3d glasses actually don't look half bad. Better than the Imax ones even..
If you want good 3D, you need to have glasses. The ones that don't require them have severe limitations that make them impractical.
The polarized glasses approach is clearly the best available, as they can be made light and comfortable.
I'll hold out for 3D holographic displays that require no external accessories.
Note that I'm still waiting for a flying car.
I agree, flying cars and holograms or count me out.
Can I use my 80's shade glasses on this baby!/
They have a similar 3d screen at frys and I was very underwhelmed. They had COD4 in the demo, and it was annoying, because you had to stare at the center of the screen at all times. The 3d effect wasn't that impressive or clean. I could see it being useful for a 3d designer, but most professionals would probably spend their money elsewhere.
3-D TV? Pffft, pass.
Show me holograms, and I'll be impressed.
"Sadly, viewers are still required to don glasses when ingesting the action"
C'mon, guys, its not like non-3d-glasses-3d-tv, (phew that was hard to elaborate) are already available for mass consumption or anything
and oh! the girl is pretty too... from however much we can see
Any idea about the price?
(I won't add the typical Engadget comments about the girl and about this running Crysis in 3D :-) )
Completely Pointless
3D tv is a bit like Prince Charles..forever next in line to the throne.
The above is true - no matter how many pretty girls are employed for the promotion (heck, not even with Princess Diana around).
Hmm...Wonder what would it looks like displaying a 3-D monitor within a 3-D monitor?
i'm actually viewing this post with the monitor in the picture and i assure you; its mad 3-d
Only one person noticed the girl on the back wall?
Spam. Please flag his reply then mine.
Thank you.