Sharp’s 3D Touchscreen LCD Doesn’t Need Glasses

By Geoff Duncan April 2, 2010

Japanese electronics giant Sharp has unveiled its latest 3D display technology: a touchscreen LCD that can display 3D images users can perceive without awkward 3D glasses. The downside? The technology only works well when a user’s eyes are a fixed distance from the screen—for the 3-inch displays Sharp was showing, that’s about 30 cm (or one foot). The displays can switch between 2D and 3D modes, and Sharp is pitching the technology as ideal for smartphones and other portable devices—especially since the display is about the same as a conventional 2D LCD.

Image used with permission by copyright holder

The technology works by sending different images to viewers’ right and left eyes, the same way traditional 3D glasses work but building the separation into the display itself. Sharp says the technology may be applied to larger devices like televisions in the future; however, applications may be limited since the effect works best with a fixed distance between the viewer and the display. However, aside from televisions, the technology may have numerous applications in mobile devices, cameras, virtual reality gear, and arcade games.

The displays Sharp demonstrated measured 3.4 inches, offered a 854 by 480-pixel resolution, brightness of 500 cd/m², and 1,000:1 contrast ratios. The displays could switch between landscape and portrait modes. Sharp said it applied advances in CG-Silicon technology to reduce the wiring width in the LCD panel while simultaneously enabling more light to pass through the panel while reducing crosstalk.

Sharp has tried to sell 3D gear before, but the efforts largely fell flat due to poor image quality, but the company is confident its new efforts are far brighter and clearer than its competitors’. Sharp plans to begin mass production of the 3D-capable LCDs in the next six months.

Image used with permission by copyright holder

Editors' Recommendations

Topics

Former Digital Trends Contributor

Geoff Duncan writes, programs, edits, plays music, and delights in making software misbehave. He's probably the only member…

Computing

The best cooler for the 7800X3D isn’t as powerful as you’d think

AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D held between fingertips.

The AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D is the best CPU for gaming, and it's incredibly efficient, which means for most PC users who aren't looking to transcode video or create 3D renders, it's the best CPU overall. As efficient as it is, though, you do still need to cool it, and if you want it to run cool and quiet, you need a relatively capable one. But which is best?

You could just buy the best air cooler or AIO cooler available, and that will work absolutely fine. Really well, in fact. But you don't need to. Thanks to its relatively modest TDP, the 7800X3D doesn't actually need a monster cooler to run quietly and run well. You can save a lot of money by going with something more modest.
A single tower is all you really need

Computing

The RTX 4080 Super doesn’t move the needle — and it doesn’t need to

The RTX 4080 Super graphics card sitting on a pink background.

I suspect the RTX 4080 Super will be disappointing to some people. That doesn't make much sense, considering the RTX 4080 Super will replace the base RTX 4080, but for a market fixated on generational improvements and small percentage wins, it looks like a disappointing GPU.

Nvidia set the bar low, claiming performance improvements in the low single digits. The tests I ran for our RTX 4080 Super review show even smaller gains -- around 1% on average, often rounded up from less than a single percentage point. So, what's so super about this supposed Super refresh?

Computing

I’m a VR enthusiast. Here’s why the Vision Pro doesn’t excite me

A person wears an Apple Vision Pro in a dim room.

For over a decade, I've eagerly read about Apple AR glasses and VR headset leaks, patent documents, and rumors. I've always believed that if any company had the resources to bring us into the future I've been waiting for, it's Apple. But now that the Vision Pro is nearly here, I've lost much of my excitement for Apple's first extended reality device.

I'll purposely avoid the easy targets. We all know a $3,500 Vision Pro is shockingly expensive. But that may not be an issue for some people.We've also heard many stories of discomfort becoming an issue, even in a half-hour demo of the Vision Pro. That's a problem for some people, but VR enthusiasts like myself are used to heavy headsets. I won't challenge Apple's decision to put digital eyes on the front of the headset.