The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

Sony to ship passive 3D, OLED TVs in 2013

Giant's TV chief spills the beans

Sony is to release a passive 3D TV, and will follow it with OLED televisions next year, Reg Hardware has learned.

The Japanese giant, which currently sells passive 3D monitors to broadcasters, has already begun shipping consumer-friendly models into the Chinese market.

Sony’s passive Bravia screens are expected to make their European debut at this September's IFA technology show in Berlin.

While Sony has yet to formally announce plans for a global roll-out of passive panels, its Deputy President of home entertainment products, Noriaki Negishi, confirmed to Reg Hardware in Tokyo that Sony will be aggressively promoting the technology within a year.

“Our engineers don’t really like [passive],” Negishi said, “because it has half the resolution of active shutter 3D, but consumers appreciate the convenience of passive.”

Sony passive 3D specs

Sony's stance reflects a growing pragmatism and the understanding that expensive active shutter 3D technology isn't driving TV sales. Last month, Panasonic announced passive 3D TV sets, so Sony's move leaves Samsung as the only major TV maker exclusively supporting active 3D.

The arrival of passive 3D TVs will be accompanied by the introduction of OLED televisions. Sony's first Organic LED TV was the 11in XEL-1, launched in 2007. But it soon backed away from the tech, which was too expensive for the mass market.

Officially, Sony said: "We have continued technical development of OLED to enlarge its display size and enable mass production as major candidate for the next generation TV, but refrain from commenting on the details of commercialisation." And: "We have no current plans to launch passive type 3D TVs outside China."

Negishi, however, said: “2013 will be the year when we will really fight back with new technologies." ®

3D. Give up. Please.

A gimmick from the start and it's not going to get any better using the current technologies. 3D films have such an artificial 3D look with an exaggerated foreground against a background and not much in between. It detracts from the artistic direction and sometimes the narrative. Not to mention a slightly blurry image that I personally experience.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Passive is nicer.

Passive is much more pleasant to watch. Active glasses make the window flicker in the corner of your eye.

BTW. Do opticians offer prescription 3D glasses yet, like they do prescription sunglasses, or did I just invent them now?

1
0

Here's an idea

Sell TVs with 2HD resolution, so that in 3D mode you get full HD. Not that anyone at a sensible viewing distance could tell the difference, unless they are selling 200" screens.

1
0

Re: Lefty righty

Obviously the previous posters missed your point. Yes you are right, all this fuss about half resolution (and yes, it is 540 lines per eye) is complete drivel.

True, each eye only gets 540 lines but the key is that they are displayed at the same time, so at any one point in time you are still seeing 1080 lines (just like active shutter).

The real downfall with passive compared to active is that if you sit a bit too close you can see the affect of the film polariser on the screen and see the interlace structure - try closing one eye and you'll get what I mean. At reasonable viewing distances though (I'm talking over about 5 feet from a 50" screen) you can't see it at all.

0
0

Re: Lefty righty

They don't really need to go 4k by 2k with this. All they need is 1. a 1920x2160 polarized LCD panel (horizontal rectangle pixels similar to Apple Lisa pixels so the screen still turns out 16:9 widescreen), and 2. circuitry to convert 3D signal to interlacing 1920x2160 p60/p50/p24 interlaced. In 2D mode, two pixels are vertically combined to form a square pixel, while in 3D mode the two pixels are operated independently.

Maybe the problem in this is that it requires a custom LCD panel that no one has ever used before and thus will drive the price up significantly?

Bootnote: I'm aware that only frame-packed 3D signals are 1920x1080, which are apparently only found on blu-ray discs- most games will output in 1920x540 vertical (seen this on my PS3 when playing 3D games) even if the console supports bitpacked 1920x1080 3D, and most pay TV decoders actually output in 960x1080 horizontal (seen this on a few channels on two different pay TV providers).

0
0

More from The Register

Android is a mess and needs sprucing up, admits chief
Can Google really fix it? It isn't in control any more
New Lumia 925: This, loyalists, is the BIG ONE you've waited for
Nokia veep drills high-end master plan for El Reg
Android device? Ooohhhh, you mean a Samsung phone
Koreans nabbed nearly all the Q1 profits – more even than Google
Review: HP Pavilion 14 Chromebook
All roads lead to Chrome?
Borked your iDevice? Pay EVEN MORE to have it fixed by Applecare
Or scream at their hapless techies on their forums
Euro PC shipments plummet into bottomless pit of DOOOOM
11th quarter of decline, 20pc drop on last year - Gartner
Report: AT&T dropping Facebook phone after dismal sales
Turns out folks won't buy that for a dollar