LG 3D TV Technology Blocks 25% Brightness – Samsung to Australian court
The legal battle between Samsung and LG on the issue of superiority of technology that goes into the making of their 3D TVs has now shifted to the courts in Australia. Samsung claims that their 3D TV technology, (read active) is superior to the passive technology that LG 3D TV sets are based on. Samsung has placed evidence in court that passive technology blocks about 25 percent of the picture brightness and this they say holds true in case of both 2d and 3D TV.
Samsung has accused LG of airing commercials which the former believes is misleading and contentious and hence want them banned. The four commercials in question aims to highlight the passive technology that the LG 3D TV sets are based on.
Samsung has staked claim in the Federal court that in 2010 they had started the use of a new form of Active 3D technology for their 3D TV sets which was also the time when LG began using their Passive technology for their 3D TV sets.
That Samsung uses the technology wherein a liquid crystal layer is applied to the lenses of glasses worn by a Samsung TV viewer was explained by Samsung Australia Technical Marketing Manager, John Fragiadakis to the court. The layer of liquid crystal is transparent in normal circumstances but turns dark when a voltage is applied to it. The rate of change of state of the lens is approximately 120 times a second, fast enough for the brain to be tricked into perceiving a whole image. He contended that it is therefore conclusive that active shutter technology alone would deliver full high definition picture quality to each eye in 3D or three dimensions or 3D mode. Hence, there is no need for the TV set to have any polarizing film or layer applied on the screen in case of active shutter technology being used.
Also, viewers who use the glass when using it for normal high definition picture viewing in 2 dimensions would notice very clear and distinct images. In 3D mode the viewers would get a blurry view in case not wearing the glass as the glass blends the left and right images into one. Is what John explained for the judge’s knowledge.
A signal that is emitted from the TV set indicates for the glass to turn dark and this process is such that the brain is tricked into visualizing or perceiving depth.
Samsung marketing director also added that until this year, companies like LG, Panasonic, Sony and Sharp, apart from they themselves as well marketed 3D TVs with active-shutter technology in Australia and internationally. In contrast, he then went on to explain to the court the process behind passive technology that LG was using.
The passive technology sets had a tinted patterned film placed over the screen which effected the polarization of the screen itself.
The film was therefore present for the viewer even while viewing 2D format and this would surely reduce clarity.
The film affected the signal that went to the eye of the viewer in a manner in which the left and right images from one single image would be filtered separately by the film. In the process he contended the resolution that was delivered would be halved in the vertical place when using this technology. One therefore would never get a full HD experience ever if using this passive technology.
25 percent of the brightness is reduced in case of passive technology is what Mr. Fragiadakis told the court and that to supplement the loss additional brightness enhancement tools were being used which further resulted in deteriorating resolution of the set.
The glasses that are used with this sort of TV set do not have any synchronizing factor with the TV set and therefore no battery or connection is required between the glass and the TV set.
The glasses themselves are polarized in a fixed manner with one being horizontally polarized and the other vertically. The effect is that when the screen is displaying an image in the vertical polarized fashion that is not visible to the eye which has a horizontal polarization lens before it and vice versa.
Due to such simplicity in its technology passive accessories like the glasses were inexpensive and lighter by weight.
The judge however ruled for Samsung to pay 80 percent of LG’s costs after hearing all the arguments as well as viewing the four contentious advertisements by LG.