LG announces LD950 passive shutter 3DTV for UK market
By Joseph L. Flatley 
posted April 1st 2010 11:59AM
posted April 1st 2010 11:59AM
Just like everybody else in the display business, LG is trying to figure out exactly how they're going to position themselves to benefit from the upcoming 3D Explosion! Since almost-sorta-not really pulling out of a deal with Sky TV to supply British pubs with 3D televisions, the company has announced that it will be offering its first 3DTV sets that uses polarization technology (as opposed to that active shutter stuff like NVIDIA's 3D Vision) to consumers. Presumably cheaper than its active shutter counterparts, the LD950 supports HDMI version 1.4, 1080p HD, external storage via USB 2.0 (with DivX HD, MP3, and JPEG support), and comes bundled with four pairs of polarized glasses. There's no word on a price or release date, but if it makes you feel better we can reveal that two new active 3D displays, the LX9900 (47-inch and 55-inch) and LX6900 (42-inch), featuring 1080p, Freeview HD, Netcast widgets (YouTube, Skype, Accu Weather, Picasa), and wireless AV link, will be available in May for a price yet to be determined.
Does anyone else think the guy's face (in the TV) is simply priceless?
@buri100 it looks like a chubby David Cross
@kingoffools
I was thinking the same thing.
@buri100
Thats the face I am going to have when I have to pay another $2000 for a decent TV to watch movies on.
It is David Cross from The Increasingly Poor Decisions Of Todd Margaret, a British sitcom about an American sent to run his company's UK division. Well played, Gizmodo, well played...
BTW, check out the pilot. It is amazing.
@DRock4776 I mean Engadget, not Gizmodo. I'm an idiot...
But Todd Margaret is still awesome.
@DRock4776 One of the greatest Pilots I have seen in awhile! Read it got picked up for a full season.
@buri100
Looks like a fat Toby Flenderson to me.
3D will never make it!
yeehaaaw :D
@Fu
I hope not, When an image is shown in 3D is it 2 separate images on the screen at once so a 1080p TV is showing each eye 540p or are they flickering between 1080p left/right so fast it looks like one image?
Because I did not buy a Full HDTV just to have sub HD quality all over again!!!
@Mentat
It's 1080p to each eye, hence 120hz instead of the standard 60hz.
@Fu
If the next gen. console gaming systems come 3d enabled, then 3d tv might just take off as rapidly as HDTV. Also, having passive 3d screens helps a lot with cheaper glasses. And since these screens can switch between 3d and 2d, with prices being pretty much the same, there would be no reason not to buy a 3d tv. But, as of right now, I could agree with you.
@Fu not really, if you have seen the 3dtv released by nvidia you'll be wow-ed.. http://bit.ly/3d-tv-future-opinions
I just hope the price for a 3dtv doesn't cost 20 benjamins..
"It's 1080p to each eye, hence 120hz instead of the standard 60hz."
No, not on a polarized set. On a polarized set, alternating horizontal lines are polaraized in opposite directions. So each eye gets half the vertical resolution of a non-3-D image, but full horizontal resolution.
Now, most talk of satellite or cable 3-D involves horseshit "side by side" squeezing, so that will cut the already crappy compressed image to half horizontal resolution anyway. When you combine that degradation with this, you're going to have 1/4 the picture you'd normally have.
Of course, even that full picture looks like ass because of today's pathetic data rates, so when you add all of this up, you get people settling for worse garbage all the time.
Isn't it great that we have the best audio and video devices of all time, but we have no high-quality content to play back on them, because of compression?
wow, dizzy already, just...llookkiinngg aatt iitt.
@One Love
aawweessoommee
++11
Poor David.
I thought Polarized sets were too expensive. How are they making it cheaper than Active Shutter? If so everyone should just do this. Polarized glasses are basically free.
@VampireHunterZ
You don't get all the color on those sets
@dswatson83
and how are you losing color?
@VampireHunterZ
It's all BS. Companies trying to push active shutter tech just want to make more money off the glasses. the extra cost on these passive 3d screens comes from the polarizing filter that's on the screen. from what I have read, what they do is polarize each line in opposite directions, so in actually, what you may lose is half the line of resolution per eye for 3d, until or unless they add resolution to compensate or do something I havent read about. Either way, I still prefer passive over $100+ active goggles that require power and give me a headache.
You get all the color. WTF are you talking about?
On a polarized set, alternating horizontal lines are polarized in opposite directions. So each eye gets half the vertical resolution of a non-3-D image, but full horizontal resolution.
@Information Central
I think he means brightness is lost due to the polarization, which looks like the image has less color saturation
The long wait to use all those 3D glasses I got from the movie theater will soon be over :)
Dear Engadget,
How does 3D play into the robot apocalypse?
Thanks!
Ok, I'm gonna come clean. This post will be n00b central; any and all answers welcome.
Passive shutter 3D is the system used in the cinema, so my cheap-ass circular polarised cinema glasses will work a treat on this set- and Engadget reckons this set will be cheaper than an active shutter TV?
So basically, this TV is potentially chock full of win?
@Herbaceous Border Patrol
The color on a passive shutter 3d system is not that good as it doesn't preserve all the detail. Active shutter systems do offer a color advantage. But i'm still not sold on the glasses thing. I'm a multitasker and I almost never watch tv w/out working on the laptop, making some food...something else that won't work with glasses on
@dswatson83
Ok, I see the potential benefit of Active shutter; also I hear you on the multitasking. I take it that you can switch to a 2D mode if you're not fussed about watching some 3D? Glasses free 3D FTW, but no tech on the horizon that you don't have a set number of 'sweet spots'.
Harumph.
@Herbaceous Border Patrol - Sorry, but the theatre's circular polarized glasses won't work, these will use standard 90 degree polarized glasses, but the good news is that they're about a buck each to get, so it's still a big win.
@jonyah
eew, standard polarised lenses. Vote no on that.
@jonyah If these are 90 degree polarization, then it sucks. With 90 degree you have to keep your head perfectly straight up, any tilting and you will see ghosting from the other eyes image. This had better be circular
Will she really get good 3D from that angle ?
Is it linear or circular polarization?
I might bite if it's circular, but linear polarization is a head-ache inducing disaster that I won't touch with a 10-foot pole.
ok, but doesn't the 3d bluray spec not count for polarized displays? Just finished reading the article on tomshardware.com and that's what they're claiming. So what exactly will play on this?
@jonyah it will work - the hdmi spec and 3d bluray specs just call for how to transmit the data to the tv - no matter what display tech the tv has all it needs to be able to do is decode the feed it is given, so yeah this tv can work with 3d blurays, 3d tv and the hdmi 1.4 spec.
Yeah, it's just a matter of getting two separate frames to the TV. The TV can then display them how it wants, either interlaced (like this set) or sequentially (for shutter glasses).
The stupid thing is that so far, 3-D Blu-Ray players have only one HDMI output. They should have two (left & right), to drive two projectors with polarized lenses on them. This would be the best solution, letting you see full-resolution 3-D with no flicker and polarized glasses.
I prefer 2D explosions. Much easier to get out of the way.
Funny how the asian woman is all like 'OMG I've gotta touch your face!'
I had to read the title of the story twice. For some reason (I think it was the shuttered image in my periphery), I saw cuss words all over the place.
Yawn more BS 3D news, why on earth do these manufacturers think 3D will save them. IT WON'T. Lower priced HDTV's is what we want not more expensive 3D 540px2
Mmm... isn't the terminology just "passive" and not "passive shutter"? Shuttering is the term for the way in which the glasses block out one eye and the other in sync with a tv that's flickering between mulitple camera angles.
@dwilday yeah, im right there too. very confusing, joe...
Yes, where exactly are the shutters on a pair of polarized glasses?