Home / News / TV News / LG Launches First Full LED 3DTV

LG Launches First Full LED 3DTV

Gordon Kelly


LG Launches First Full LED 3DTV

It's 3D technology time again folks and I'm going to say nothing (other than having been taken to a press screening of 'How to Train Your Dragon' in Sony's special 4K 3D this week that a) the film was fantastic and highly recommended, and b) I still didn't think I'd be missing anything by seeing it in 2D). Then again, here comes LG also looking to convert us...

The 'LX9500' is the rather unsexy name given to what LG claims is the World's first Full LED 3DTV. As you might expect, specs are excellent with a Full HD display backed up by a mammoth 400Hz refresh rate, ridiculous 10,000,000:1 dynamic contrast ratio (this number really doesn't mean a thing) and a choice of 47in and 55in form factors.

Taking a more superficial viewpoint, what also really impresses me about the LX9500 is just how slim and minimalistic its styling is. 3D TVs tend to be thicker than their you'll-have-to-put-up-with-2D equivalents and also have started a worrying trend back towards thicker bezels, so the 22.3mm thickness of the LX9500 and its discrete 16mm bezel are a sight for sore eyes.

A 4.7m Won (£2,750) RRP is being placed on the 47in LX9500 when it launches next week in Korea with the price tag on the 55 incher unknown, but it makes up for that with an international launch date of May.

If you do feel your future involves watching TV in circa £100 plastic glasses then this is certainly the most potentially pleasing model I've seen to date.


via Engadget


March 26, 2010, 1:25 pm

I'm glad this technology is all coming together and in due course we'll learn about UK tuner options (Free-view/-sat S/HD etc). Just a question about the fundamentals, as we are due some slight power shortages (here at least) in a few years time, and as we should all be a bit greener anyway, are manufactures using OLED (which I understand uses less power) for things like this from the off or are there good reasons why they are not?


March 26, 2010, 3:28 pm

Please tell me those lenses aren't different colours. If it's anything like wearing the old style cardboard 3D glasses, those things will cause headaches within minutes, so watching a two hour film will be a horrendous experience.

Regardless of the pros and cons of new generation 3D, I was encouraged by the fact that polarised lenses seemed to be the same colour, until now...


March 26, 2010, 5:10 pm

@Metalex - those aren't polarised, nor are they anaglyphic (different colour). They are active shutter glasses (hence the chunky £100 price tag suggested in the article). The lenses alternately block light using an LCD 'shutter' very quickly (120 times a second or so), and this is in sync with the TV which displays alternate frames for left and right eye. The apparent colour difference is likely just an optical quirk from photographing the LCDs.


March 26, 2010, 5:13 pm

@M7S - standard LEDs are incredibly power efficient, and will be what is used here. The reason you will have heard OLED is more efficient is that OLED TVs (which aren't available at reasonable prices or in practical sizes) use a completely different technology to conventional LCDs. Conventional LCDs are transmissive; that is, they have a backlight (either fluorescent or LED) and then use an LCD as a filter to selectively block parts of this to display a picture, so you are always 'wasting' some of the light energy produced. OLED is an emissive technology - the picture is produced by directly varying the output of red, green and blue pixel components, so you aren't wasting light in the same way.


March 26, 2010, 5:36 pm

@Metalex: Those glasses are not polarised as such. All home TV 3D technology uses the "active shutter" technology that shuts out alternate eyes at 120Hz (or thereabouts) so at any one time, one eye is dark and the other is clear. The picture is then synced so that at 120Hz the picture alternates between left and right eye, so each eye "sees" 60Hz


March 26, 2010, 7:19 pm

Thanks for the clarification John and CDO. I was under the impression that some TVs would use polarised glasses instead of active shutter. So, are all 3D TVs going to use active shutter?


March 26, 2010, 7:50 pm

@ChaosDefinesOrder - actually, not all proposed home 3D technology uses active shutter glasses. There are manufacturers working to produce screens which use polarising filters to alternately polarise columns of pixels, so you have a form of interlaced image where the two images are displayed simultaneously on the screen, rather than one after the other as with active shutter glasses, albeit at the expense of effectively halving the resolution for 3D. I tried out a screen like this at the Westfield Centre the other day when Sky was demoing Sky 3D. Very impressive effect, and it used passive polarised glasses.


March 27, 2010, 4:59 am

I finally got to see Avtar 3D at BFI's Waterloo IMAX and it was great despite the naf looking 3D glasses.

Anyway, Matrix, Gaia and the tv series Dinosaurs (the one where the humans fly the Pterodactylus after being chosen by it!!) came to mind for some reason.

Andrew Fordham

March 29, 2010, 11:28 pm

I got to try out both 3D TV technologies at the Ideal Home Show the other week. The polarised version (I think it was an LG TV) was very easy on the viewing eye without the resolution being obviously reduced, but the active shutter Sony version did my head in within a few seconds. I tried watching it for a couple of minutes but came away with a nasty headache.

I wonder what percentage of the population are going to have the same problem as me. What happens if they buy the TV without trying out the 3Dness in a shop?

comments powered by Disqus