Comments on: LG to show off 84-inch 3D UD TV at CES 2012

By: Zohnny

Zohnny — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 22:08:00 +0000

But you need a 8gb video card

By: John

John — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 22:05:00 +0000

Yo, this tv is da shit. Linux looks awesome on it!

By: GentooLenixOPS

GentooLenixOPS — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 21:58:00 +0000

That bed would be very uncomfortable and to put any sort of clear liner on top would dull the TVs affect. Soft and comfy. Make a damn snuggle tv that flexes lg. like bubble wrap.

By: John

John — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 21:50:00 +0000

I just bought one and hooked it up with COX I have 4 screens of the same thing. They do not currently have a receiver for a 3840×2160. When will they?

By: Justin Stenberg

Justin Stenberg — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 18:57:00 +0000

If the TV was 1920×2160, you’d be correct. However, both horizontal and vertical resolutions are doubled, making it 4x the resolution.

By: Tankbuster

Tankbuster — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 14:40:00 +0000

I wonder if it has a crappy power supply?

By: Cucu Andrei

Cucu Andrei — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 11:54:00 +0000

the ppi of this TV with UD res is the same as a FULL HD at 42 inches so .. think about it :D

By: Sdr984

Sdr984 — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 07:08:00 +0000

Agreed, absolutely do not try to wash your clothes in this TV

By: Maria Fe Camaya O'Neill

Maria Fe Camaya O'Neill — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 00:32:00 +0000

I agree. My panasonic 3D has an awsome picture but the 3D thing turned out to be a novelty that wore off. I’m still waiting to see if any new and interesting content comes out but for now the kids will get more use out of it than i ever will.

By: Stephan Le

Stephan Le — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 22:36:00 +0000

great another reason for george lucas to re-release the star wars movies again.

By: BHPT

BHPT — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:38:00 +0000

Good grief. Soon millions will have no real lives at all –

By: Ghangstalked Poisonradiationto

Ghangstalked Poisonradiationto — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:35:00 +0000

deleted, on second thought.

By: Paul Dsu

Paul Dsu — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:34:00 +0000

Got my Samsung 46′ LCD and went dead 2 year later.

By: Gregg

Gregg — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:34:00 +0000

LG actually has a pretty good record for HDTVs. Vizio on the other hand is pure junk with a huge base of extremely unhappy owners with non-fuctioning tv’s and NO help at all from Vizio.

By: Paul Dsu

Paul Dsu — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:32:00 +0000

3D overrated…….I got my samsung 3D and regret.

By: Gregg

Gregg — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:29:00 +0000

The human eye cannot tell the difference between 720 or 1080 resolution on a 50″ HDTV if one sits more than 8 feet away from the screen. So an 84 inch with 4 times the resolution may be a waste beyond 12 feet or so, but then…..who wants to sit that far away anyway? And there IS content for this baby, just no method of delivery. Digital Cinema (what you see at the movies) is as follows
Digital film standards[1]
name resolution ratio pixel count Full Aperture 4K 4096 × 3112 1.32:1 12,746,752Academy 4K 3656 × 2664 1.37:1 9,739,584Digital cinema 4K 4096 × 1714 2.39:1 7,020,544Digital cinema 4K 3996 × 2160 1.85:1 8,631,360

By: TAZ

TAZ — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:28:00 +0000

It’s TWO dimensional. That’s 4 1080 TVs, so 4 times the pixels and 4 times the res.

By: Juliano Zucchetto

Juliano Zucchetto — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:22:00 +0000

Also remember that the bigger the TV it’s easier to put more pixels in it. So 2 times the resolution for that TV is nothing…. 1080p on a cell phone it’s way more difficult!

By: Zuma

Zuma — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:20:00 +0000

If you have to ask ….

By: Juliano Zucchetto

Juliano Zucchetto — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:19:00 +0000

The resolution is not 4 times… she got it wrong… 1080 x 2 = 2160… so 3840×2160 is 2 times the resolution of 1080p. :-/

By: Sniper_X-(LB)

Sniper_X-(LB) — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:14:00 +0000

I beleive that they are still in 3D though, yes?

By: Bigboy8

Bigboy8 — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:01:00 +0000

Don’t worry this TV won’t leak.

By: John Ciraldo

John Ciraldo — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:01:00 +0000

Everything that you are saying is completely correct. However, it does nothing to change how much I want this TV.

By: Jeremy Mcleod

Jeremy Mcleod — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:56:00 +0000

Actually unless you’re a lot closer or the panel is MUCH bigger than current TVs the extra resolution will be wasted, as the human retina only has a certain “resolution” as well, and won’t be able to detect the extra detail. Even today some 1080p sets are wasted because viewers sit too far back, which means pixels seem to blend together, effectively lowering the resolution from the viewer’s perception.

Edit: Though for 3D content that requires halving the resolution to display two simultaneous images this would actually be pretty useful. Hadn’t thought of that when I originally posted.

By: Jeanne

Jeanne — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:42:00 +0000

I would beware of LG. We have an LG washer and dryer that was purchased 3 years ago. Looks great and for the first 1 1/2 years, worked great. Then it started leaking. Found reports on line from other owners that they were suffering with the same dilemma. Apparently there is a design flaw that contributes to the wear on one of the hoses, resulting in a hole in the hose and leakage. Haven’t heard anything about LG acknowledging the flaw and issuing a repair order. With LG, you’re on your own!

By: Bloomswift

Bloomswift — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:32:00 +0000

Price Tag Please.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:07:00 +0000

The high res also gives some relief from the passive-3D problem of cutting vertical resolution by half. And there are image scaling options that do quite a nice job – if you put your mind and computer to it, with a no-edge-ringing sharpener and some CPU, you can even make 720×480 look passable at1440x960 on a CRT projector. Going from HD to the strange-ish resolution on that TV won’t be optimal, but it can be done [ EDIT: Strike that - I misread the resolution. Of course it's pixel-doubled, so perfect for upscaling]. The question is whether they went the route of some other manufacturers’ SD -> HD converters, and just did a nearest-neighbor or bilnear upscale. :P Nah, I can’t imagine that.

I wonder, though, how the presumably-large FOV it will be used at will affect the 3D; currently, passive 3D suffers significantly when off-axis vertically. The top and bottom of a large-FOV display will by necessity be off-axis from the viewer’s point of view – try looking at a TN LCD close up, or turning it 90 degrees to see a magnified version of the effect left-to-right – so the problem will be exacerbated.

84″ is getting up there in size; my home theater is about that size, and while it’s so-so for a projected screen, it would look absolutely freaking ginormous with a panel.

You probably want to carry that sucker on its edge.

In other news, the world now has a TV which will enable you to put a layer of lexan over it, and get a clear air mattress, and voila! Television in bed is television *in bed*! Soothing screensaver in the evening, dim glow at night (or a bit of Google Earth if you want some ‘flying’ dreams), and in the morning, a massive yellow flashing scroller – ideally accompanied by a picture of Samuel L. Jackson – saying, “GET UP, MOTHERF***R!!”.

Humanity has just a bit more civilized – indeed, life’s good, thanks to lg.

By: Liquidalloy

Liquidalloy — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:00:00 +0000

Just like I said earlier this year. They would have to double the 1920 x 1080 resolution to make the passive glasses look great. The passive glasses cuts the resolution in half for each eye so by doubling the resolution it is actually 1080p quality in 3D mode.

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 16:53:00 +0000

it’ like a multi monitor with no bezels

By: °°°°°°°° STOLEN IDEAS °°°°°°°°

°°°°°°°° STOLEN IDEAS °°°°°°°° — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 16:08:00 +0000

awesome!

By: Yoderz

Yoderz — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 16:08:00 +0000

Hot robot included? :)