News Stories

NAB: LG Shows Glasses-Free 3D Mobile DTV

 

[by www.dealerscope.com]

LG demonstrated a first on Friday- a seven-inch glasses-free 3D mobile digital TV. The device transmits 3D images broadcast via the ATSC Mobile DTV Standard.

The new TV was shown by the company at the NAB show in Las Vegas. The company did not announce a name, price or release timetable for the product.

“The ATSC Mobile DTV standard offers broadcasters remarkable flexibility to address the changing demands of consumers and advertisers,” Dr. Skott Ahn, president and chief technology officer, LG Electronics, Inc., said in a statement.

“As broadcasters continue their national rollout of Mobile DTV, LG is proud to lead the transition with the latest innovations in mobile DTV services like 3D and applications like Tweet-TV and Electronic Coupons.”

See the original post here:  http://www.dealerscope.com/article/lg-demonstrated-first-friday-seven-inch-3d-mobile-digital-tv/1

Samsung and LG in war of words on 3D TVs


[By Song Jung-a in Seoul, Financial Times]

[Excerpts]

Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics, the world’s two largest flatscreen television makers, have in recent weeks been embroiled in rare public mudslinging about their rival 3D TV technologies.

The clash is not simply normal competitive tension between South Korea’s largest consumer electronics makers. They are major suppliers of the panels used for making 3D televisions and each company is backing a different technology. Only one type of panel will become industry standard.

Although sales have been disappointing so far due to high prices and a lack of content, market researcher DisplaySearch forecast that 3D TVs will account for more than 40 per cent of global flatscreen TV sales by 2014, from 2 per cent last year.

Samsung and LG make their own branded 3D TVs, and Samsung is industry leader with a 37.2 per cent market share, followed by SonyPanasonic and LG with 5.6 per cent. But the two Korean companies also supply the core 3D component – the panel – to many non-Korean TV makers.

Park Kang-ho, analyst at Daishin Securities, compares the Samsung-LG battle with the clash over video formats 30 years ago – Sony’s Betamax versus JVC’s Video Home System, which JVC ultimately won.

Samsung panels use active shutter glass (ASG) technology, which involves viewers wearing bulky battery-operated glasses to create 3D effects. Its panels are used in Sony’s 3D TVs. Sharp and Panasonic also use the same technology but manufacture their own panels.

ASG had been the dominant technology until this year, when LG came up with film patterned retarder technology (FPR), which applies a film to a TV screen and works with cheaper and lighter polarised glasses, similar to those worn in the cinema. LG’s panels have been adopted by Toshiba of Japan, Philips of the Netherlands, Vizio of the US and some Chinese TV manufacturers.

The war of words got nasty this month. First, LG described Samsung’s 3D technology as “a generation behind” its own, while Samsung said the difference between its product and its competitor’s was “one of night and day”.

Then, Kim Hyeon-Seok, executive vice-president of Samsung’s visual display unit, said LG’s claim that its 3D TVs offer full high definition (HD) pictures was “an attempt to deceive consumers” and that the company had “no conscience”.

LG is also fuming over a recent Samsung commercial featuring a popular actor and a monkey wearing special 3D glasses with a caption next to the monkey asking: “Why is my 3D TV not fully high-definition?”

LG has hit back, saying it is in talks with Sony about using FPR instead of Samsung’s panels.

Mr Kwon says LG’s technology not only creates full HD effects but also provides better picture quality and is more cost-effective.

He adds that FPR has overcome a weakness in Samsung’s technology which leads to blurred and flickering images, which would cause eye strain and dizziness.

Analysts are saying it’s too early to tell which technology will emerge the winner.

“From a consumer’s point of view, it is hard to tell the differences in terms of 3D effects,” says Mr Park at Daishin Securities.

“What counts for them is content rather than technology,” he adds.

James Murdoch, chief executive of News Corp Europe and Asia, said last month at a conference: “Customers will not want big events that are not in 3D at some point in the future because it is such an exciting and immersive experience.”

Read the full article here: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/6ab79d54-556e-11e0-a2b1-00144feab49a.html#axzz1HWUIMTNc

 

< PREVIOUS ARTICLES NEXT ARTICLES >

Specification for Naming VFX Image Sequences Released

ETC’s VFX Working Group has published a specification for best practices naming image sequences such as plates and comps. File naming is an essential tool for organizing the multitude of frames that are inputs and outputs from the VFX process. Prior to the publication of this specification, each organization had its own naming scheme, requiring custom processes for each partner, which often resulted in confusion and miscommunication.

The new ETC@USC specification focuses primarily on sequences of individual images. The initial use case was VFX plates, typically delivered as OpenEXR or DPX files. However, the team soon realized that the same naming conventions can apply to virtually any image sequence. Consequently, the specification was written to handle a wide array of assets and use cases.

To ensure all requirements are represented, the working group included over 2 dozen participants representing studios, VFX houses, tool creators, creatives and others.  The ETC@USC also worked closely with MovieLabs to ensure that the specification could be integrated as part of their 2030 Vision.

A key design criteria for this specification is compatibility with existing practices.  Chair of the VFX working group, Horst Sarubin of Universal Pictures, said: “Our studio is committed to being at the forefront of designing best industry practices to modernize and simplify workflows, and we believe this white paper succeeded in building a new foundation for tools to transfer files in the most efficient manner.”

This specification is compatible with other initiatives such as the Visual Effects Society (VES) Transfer Specifications. “We wanted to make it as seamless as possible for everyone to adopt this specification,” said working group co-chair and ETC@USC’s Erik Weaver. “To ensure all perspectives were represented we created a team of industry experts familiar with the handling of these materials and collaborated with a number of industry groups.”

“Collaboration between MovieLabs and important industry groups like the ETC is critical to implementing the 2030 Vision,” said Craig Seidel, SVP of MovieLabs. “This specification is a key step in defining the foundations for better software-defined workflows. We look forward to continued partnership with the ETC on implementing other critical elements of the 2030 Vision.”

The specification is available online for anyone to use.

Oops, something went wrong.