TCL completes the no-glasses 3D trifecta at CES

Add one more piece of tech to your glasses vs. glassless 3D display battlemap, as TCL was showing off this autostereoscopic display in an odd reflective frame at its CES booth. Around the corner from a conventional RealD shutter glasses setup, it whipped through several animated 3D renderings similar to those from Alioscopy and Magnetic3D. The frame made it hard to tell but it seemed to have a little less pop than the competition, with slightly better clarity. All the glassless displays we saw this year used similar lenticular lens technology applied to 1080p HDTV screens to achieve their affect, with mostly similar results, with so many players, there should be plenty of billboards and in-store opportunities for you to get a look yourself soon enough.

TCL autostereoscopic 3D

[techlord Posted Jan 11th 2010 12:34PM]

Why don't they do something like Star Wars (Hologram)

[Electromodo Posted Jan 11th 2010 12:44PM]

@techlord

They do:

http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/01/sony-unleashes-a-holographic-monster-on-tokyo-bay/

http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/22/prince-charles-delivers-speech-as-hologram-still-manages-to-bor/

[wrsu1996gmailcom Posted Jan 11th 2010 7:54PM]

@techlord
because no all of us are star whores nerds, and we want colored holograms not just in blue

[It Prints Money Posted Jan 11th 2010 12:48PM]

McDonalds going high-tech on their Happy Meal boxes?

[Eugene Action Posted Jan 11th 2010 3:14PM]

@It Prints Money ha, well I want THIS in my foyer so people who enter know what I'm all about baby

[MN82 Posted Jan 11th 2010 12:59PM]

im sick of all this 3D crap, I don't want 3D . i don't want to sit in my house and have to put freaking glasses on or have some stupid contraption to simulate 3d.

let the 3d experience stay in the cinema, everyone is to fucking crazy over 3D, it's 2010 your really that impressed over 3D - we should have freaking hover cars right now, or at least that kick ass skate board from back to the future.

[ClarkyAC Posted Jan 11th 2010 2:14PM]

@MN82
Considering you don't have to wear glasses. Is it just in the same way you had to have a "stupid contraption" to see colour television?

[Eugene Action Posted Jan 11th 2010 3:22PM]

@MN82 you havn't seen 3D until you've been to http://www.sprucegoose.org/IMAXinfo/schedule.html or the like... the screen is twice as big as a normal theater, has twice the sound, and they shows were made exclusively for this size of screen... it actually feels like reality... so if you have the chance to get to one... do it, it blows away any RealD or theater IMAX experience...

[Information Central Posted Jan 11th 2010 9:19PM]

"it's 2010 your really that impressed over 3D"

If you don't know how to spell "you're", you're not in a position to pontificate on anything.

YOU + ARE = YOU'RE

[n1hmrd Posted Jan 11th 2010 1:20PM]

so let me get this right the image we see is a 3d image of a huge box of tv ? demostration ,ether way no glasses 3d is the way to go

[RyanLN Posted Jan 11th 2010 1:42PM]

I don't know why- and I'm sure it's just me- but as an avowed techhead who just LOVES gadgets, gizmos and tecnology of all sorts, I just *cannot* get excited about 3D. Deep color, yes, higher scan resolutions, yes, thinning displays, larger screens, crystal clear picture with extraordinary level of detail- yes, yes and yes... but the prospect of 3D underwhelms me. I mean, movies like Coraline and Up were beautiful, but the tech seemed to take away from the overall beauty of the movies. I want technology that adds to richness and detail, and so far I haven't heard that- but if 3D also makes better, non-3D stuff cheaper- I'm all for that.

[Dale P Posted Jan 11th 2010 3:23PM]

@RyanLN I have to agree... I can't really see how 3D makes the films, TV and games I consume any better. It's a fancy effect, but it doesn't add to the content.

[GGG Posted Jan 11th 2010 1:52PM]

I hope somebody soon develops a glassless 3D technology that is not dependent on where you view it from.


About 7 years ago i saw some wonderful 3D holograms in a shop, they looked like real objects from any angle, i hope somebody applies that technology to moving images soon. But it's true it would require far more sophisticated recording methods than just 2 cameras side-by-side, i heard it has something to do with lasers.

[3dmaniac Posted Jan 11th 2010 2:17PM]

3D is about content, if you get a headache with glasses, it's because the content on the screen creates a brainsheer, you wear glasses in real life, you don't get sick, because the content in front of you is predictible and constant, in movies, they have to generate excesses that aren't perceived the same by everyone (in order to get that extra 3$ worth)

autostereo 3D shown at CES now are all based on the same technology which is lenticular matrix in front of a standard LCD, which reduces the perceived resolution down to about SVGA and even sub-vga when images are popping out due to how the pixel are redistributed and the optical limitations in this design.

Depending on how many views the unit works with (which creates a comfort zone to view the 3d within an acceptable range (centimeters) with 2 views you would end up seeing negative stereo and it would flip like crazy when walking sideways.

5 views = better resolution but less comfort zone, 9-views is more comfortable but lots less resolution.

These displays are nice for showing off, but (way) overpriced for home usage, and people are used to HD now, they won't accept the resolution tradeoff, and even less having to stand at a specific spot in space, to view 3D content.

Plus, the demo content on these devices is MADE for their displays, if you venture doing that on your own tomorrow morning, you're in for a steep learning curve. I know, because I work with these displays.

Note how little "filmed" content there is, lots of CGI, but little live content. It's not that it's impossible, it's actually fun and everybody in the field has it's own proprietary workflow to get this done...still...it's fairly straightforward to do... just ubberly expensive.

[TentosToys Posted Jan 11th 2010 11:07PM]

Shouldn't it be glassesless instead of glassless. Although they probably are made without glass...

[bigcow05 Posted Jan 12th 2010 1:34AM]

Woah, so the image changes depending on where you stand? What are the viewing angles?

[Dusty Posted Jan 12th 2010 9:01AM]

Pretty trippy!