Display Technologies for Consumer 3D TV Viewing Compared and Contrasted

Metadata

Publisher: SMPTE — White Plains, NY
Doc Type: Conference Paper
Content Type: Original Research
Volume: 2010, No. 7, pp. 1–11
Abstract: 3D is coming to the home, and there are several ways it can be viewed. For direct view flatscreen TV displays, there are two competing technologies available (LCD and plasma), with a third (OLEDs) waiting in the wings. Each of these display technologies has its strengths and weaknesses when showing 3D images. LCD technology, which is widely used for consumer TV designs, provides bright pictures under normal room lighting, but has difficulties with fast motion and 3D crosstalk. Optimum viewing angles are restricted for 3D LCD TVs. TV manufacturers are moving away from traditional CCFL backlighting to light-emitting diodes to provide local area dimming, higher contrast, and faster switching speeds. Plasma displays are well-suited to 3D because of their inherently wide viewing angles, high contrast, and deep black levels. They are largely immune to crosstalk. However, 3D plasma TVs must use different phosphor formulations for active shutter 3D viewing. Plasma technology also uses more power than same-size LCD TVs. Organic light emitting diodes have been in development since 1987, and may be best suited for 3D TV applications. However, there are still issues with brightness and color uniformity and organic color material lifetime that will be challenging to overcome if OLED TVs are to come to market.
Publication Date: 2010-07-01
DOI: 10.5594/M001414
Link: https://doi.org/10.5594/M001414
Author(s): Peter H. PutmanPresident, ROAM Consulting L.L.C.
Copyright: © 2010 Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers, Inc.

Source Data (JSON)

Full registry record with provenance metadata. Open directly: /api/doc/10.5594-M001414.json

Reference this Doc

Plain text (ISO 690 compliant)

Preview:

Peter H. Putman; Display Technologies for Consumer 3D TV Viewing Compared and Contrasted, SMPTE Meetings and Conferences ( July 2010); SMPTE, 2010. Available at https://doi.org/10.5594/M001414

Snippet:

Peter H. Putman; Display Technologies for Consumer 3D TV Viewing Compared and Contrasted, SMPTE Meetings and Conferences ( July 2010); SMPTE, 2010. Available at https://doi.org/10.5594/M001414

HTML (ISO 690 compliant)

Preview:

Peter H. Putman; Display Technologies for Consumer 3D TV Viewing Compared and Contrasted, SMPTE Meetings and Conferences ( July 2010); SMPTE, 2010. Available at https://doi.org/10.5594/M001414

Snippet:

<span class="citation">Peter H. Putman; <cite>Display Technologies for Consumer 3D TV Viewing Compared and Contrasted</cite>, SMPTE Meetings and Conferences ( July 2010); SMPTE, 2010. Available at <a href="https://doi.org/10.5594/M001414" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://doi.org/10.5594/M001414</a></span>

SMPTE's HTML Pub

Preview:

Peter H. Putman; Display Technologies for Consumer 3D TV Viewing Compared and Contrasted, SMPTE Meetings and Conferences ( July 2010); SMPTE, 2010
doi: 10.5594/M001414
url: https://doi.org/10.5594/M001414

Snippet:

<li>
Peter H. Putman; <cite id="bib-10-5594-m001414">Display Technologies for Consumer 3D TV Viewing Compared and Contrasted</cite>, SMPTE Meetings and Conferences ( July 2010); SMPTE, 2010
<span class="doi">10.5594/M001414</span>
</li>