Toshiba working on 3D TV that doesn't require glasses

This year at CES, the big show for many television manufacturers was 3D technology, which many believed to be the next big thing since HDTV, while others disagreed and said the technology was only a gimmick.

However, that didn't stop Nintendo from presenting the Nintendo 3DS, which allows the consumer to play games in 3D, without the need for special glasses.

While early 3DTV sales were hugely disappointing, Toshiba announced on Tuesday that they are working on 3D sets that won't require you to wear glasses. Toshiba said they will unveil three models of the 3D television before Christmas, Yahoo and TheStar reported. The 3-D TV's will sell for around $7,000 each

Many consumers complained that the glasses either ruined the experience or were irritating to wear while watching a movie, television show or event.

The sets will likely be demonstrated at CES2011 in January, which will likely be the focal point of the trade show again this year. Expect to see more electronics and handheld devices utilizing 3D technology - without the need for glasses - in the near future.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Samsung Galaxy Tab shown off in official video teaser

Next Story

Google responds to Android DRM hack

41 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I saw 3D TV's that didn't require glasses over 10 years ago, cant remember what show I was at. Can't understand whats taken them so long. It was only fish on the screen, CG ones if I remember right and you had to stand it a very specific spot, but the effect was amazing at the time, really popped right out of the screen.

DARKFiB3R said,
I saw 3D TV's that didn't require glasses over 10 years ago, cant remember what show I was at. Can't understand whats taken them so long. It was only fish on the screen, CG ones if I remember right and you had to stand it a very specific spot, but the effect was amazing at the time, really popped right out of the screen.

Probably taking them so long to actually make a TV where you can have more than one person watching at a time and where it doesn't require you to rearrange your entire living room so people are sitting in the correct spots to be able to see the 3D effect.

3D is very over-rated, i'll stick with my Pioneer Kuro thanks

I must admit without the glasses though is a very good idea

I pointed this out yesterday a good few hours before this appeared on NeoWin... why did it take so long to post such a short article? o.O

JustinN said,
I pointed this out yesterday a good few hours before this appeared on NeoWin... why did it take so long to post such a short article? o.O

Because NeoWin writers are people too and they need to eat, sleep, etc rather than staring at your comments/forum posts 24/7.

At $7,000, I'll stick with my 1080i LCD. I don't see why anybody would spend $7,000 on a television set. As far as I can tell, my video games have been 3-D since like the N64 and PS1. iMax theatres and "3-D" tvs make my eyes water.

CoMMo said,
At $7,000, I'll stick with my 1080i LCD. I don't see why anybody would spend $7,000 on a television set. As far as I can tell, my video games have been 3-D since like the N64 and PS1. iMax theatres and "3-D" tvs make my eyes water.

The watering eyes syndrome is usually caused by the glasses, not the 3D effect itself as our eyes are meant to perceive things in 3D. As they are working on TVs without glasses, your issue is a moot point.

Well, this is old news. On YouTube, you can see that in January, there was a show where a LOT of manufacturers presented their 3D TV that doesn't require glasses. It was stated that they were gonna be available within a 12-18 months range. So in less than 12 months now.

Benjamin Rubenstein said,
But doesn't this technology require you to sit within a certain viewing angle?

Yeah, from what I've seen on YouTube, you're very restricted. You have to be in front of the TV, like the old laptops where you just couldn't see anything when you looked at the sides.

Shiranui said,
How is this supposed to work, anyway?

If you knew or someone on here knew the answer to that question they could make a fortune by approaching any manufacturer and licensing it to them

This has been out for over a year and was shown on BBC click ages ago. Sony are working on something very similar. The problem is actually getting the technology to be on par with the technology that uses glasses.

Mhm i'm not so convinced on 3D for the general user.

In the cinema for films that are shot natively in 3D (i.e. Avatar), it looks awesome (despite the headaches). But for things like sport, tv shows, etc... I think just a decent large TV with full resolution HD is the best you can get. 3D starts to make it look a bit fake and not as detailed...

dave164 said,
Mhm i'm not so convinced on 3D for the general user.

In the cinema for films that are shot natively in 3D (i.e. Avatar), it looks awesome (despite the headaches). But for things like sport, tv shows, etc... I think just a decent large TV with full resolution HD is the best you can get. 3D starts to make it look a bit fake and not as detailed...

Have you seen the sports in 3D ? It's not a gimmick. Every technological advancement will have a gimmick at first with cheap versions. Like HD camcorders for £150, not really HD, the footage was taken in SD and then the file blown up to 720P but now you can get a proper HD camera for around £150.

3D telly without glasses, in 10 years everyone will produce the 3D from scratch because it will be cheaper and it will continue to evolve.

Or should 3D stay in the cinema so it's a odd spark of pleasure instead of seeing it everyday making it eventually pointless leading it to be overcome by something slightly better to regain that pleasure.

dave164 said,
Mhm i'm not so convinced on 3D for the general user.

In the cinema for films that are shot natively in 3D (i.e. Avatar), it looks awesome (despite the headaches). But for things like sport, tv shows, etc... I think just a decent large TV with full resolution HD is the best you can get. 3D starts to make it look a bit fake and not as detailed...

3D porn?

LaP said,

Now we are talking ...

Ew, no. I don't think I want to see a porn actress' razor burn up close and in 3d, thanks.
Even HD is overkill for porn.

Andrew Lyle said,
3D phones next year? Possibly!

My phone is already 3D... It has width, height and depth.

Seriously, I suspect so... and without glasses, too. (a la 3DS)

This is where the future is and I've been saying it since these damn 3D TV's came out. These Toshiba units won't be perfect, but THIS is the technology companies need to pursue. I thank Nintendo and it's 3DS for making it more widely known that 3D without glasses is possible.

bangbang023 said,
This is where the future is and I've been saying it since these damn 3D TV's came out. These Toshiba units won't be perfect, but THIS is the technology companies need to pursue. I thank Nintendo and it's 3DS for making it more widely known that 3D without glasses is possible.

Agreed, With glasses the technology was just to annoying but 3D without them seems amazing and will be so awesome especially for games

TRC said,
Honestly I don't want a 3D television, glasses or not. The whole idea seems like a silly gimmick.

Congratulations! You just saved yourself $7,000!

TRC said,
Honestly I don't want a 3D television, glasses or not. The whole idea seems like a silly gimmick.

I wouldn't mind it for games but for regular TV... eh

TRC said,
Honestly I don't want a 3D television, glasses or not. The whole idea seems like a silly gimmick.
I agree completely, I noticed nothing special when watching Avatar in 3D. Nothing worth paying extra for.

Haha. I just read an article on neowin yesterday that had sony quoted saying that this technology wouldn't be possible anytime soon.

"There are no technologies at the moment to do glasses-free technology on TVs, and I don't think that's going to change for a while, actually, because any way you try and do it glasses-free on TV is incredibly complex," hocking said. "The cost would be very high, even if someone could develop it."

http://www.neowin.net/news/son...aystation-3-not-for-a-while

i know ehh???? hahaha

$7000 is nothing. 3rd tvs with glasses already costs $3500, so its only double that.

it will be down to normal price in a couple of years, i bet - just like any new technologie

7,000 for the initial price is kind of extraordinary, but I believe it's OK for the first commercial TV in 3D glasses-free.

What I am actually asking myself is, if the quantity of people who can appreciate this 3D effect will be limited or will actually be enough for a whole family to watch.