Posts Tagged ‘Home Theater’

Consumer Electronics Show 2012

In: Technology

By: Steve Stanfill on Jan 17, 2012 at 5:19 pm

As I write this, the CES 2012 show is in full swing in Las Vegas.  My other duties have precluded my attending this year, but there are a number of technologies that are “up and coming” that might be of interest to our readership:

Gesture and Voice control of Electronic Devices–This seems to be a wave (ahem) of the future.  Samsung showed off a gorgeous TV that used gesture and voice control rather than the conventional remote.  Microsoft Kinect for Windows seems to be gaining some traction as well.  Apple is rumored to be developing a television with a “Siri-like” interface.  All of this actually makes sense.  If we can talk to our cars and our smartphones, it’s just a matter of time before this technology is commoditized to other devices as well.  I will give my personal “tech editor” award to the first company that makes a voice command driven remote that will translate to IR/RF and with older home theatre components.  Now that would be a “universal” remote!  And you wouldn’t have to search for the “light” button!

OLED Televisions–”Organic Light Emitting Diode” sets debuted in several booths this year.  This display technology is very power efficient and allows the design of very thin displays.  This technology has been used in smartphones and tablets for a number of years, and has found its way into the design of large displays.  In theory, display panels could be manufactured less than 1/4″ thick-certainly a conversation piece in anyone’s living room.  I question the practical advantages of such a thin display, in terms of shipping, set up, connectorization, etc.  There are no inherent quality advantages of OLED over currently available technologies, but that said, my sense is that we will see more of this technology in larger displays as manufacturing/logistical challenges are conquered.

Thunderbolt–The Intel “Thunderbolt” connectivity standard appears to be gaining mainstream acceptance.  Thunderbolt boasts incredibly fast data transfer rates, as well as the ability to connect multiple devices with different functions; i.e. an external disc drive and a display monitor in the same I/O port, for example.  Throughput is over 20 times faster than USB 2.0.  Apple’s new laptop line has had Thunderbolt connectivity for a while now, but peripherals and Wintel computers hosting the standard were pretty scarce.  Acer has embraced the standard with its new Aspire Ultrabook computer and both Seagate and Western Digital showed new external drives with the standard embedded. This particular technology becoming more ubiquitous  is a good thing IMHO as this is  a really, really good technology–very user friendly and highly capable.

A couple of notable points–3DTV was not generating the buzz that it did last year, although Samsung and LG, among others, still seem to be committed to the technology.  Most set companies appear to be pushing internet apps into their more mainstream (read: “cheaper”) televisions.  The show was again awash in tablets, just as it was last year.  But market penetration numbers have not changed much.

A great time to be alive, if you’re a gadget guy!

Until next time…

2
VN:F [1.7.4_987]

Rate Me

Rating: 4.8/5 (4 votes cast)

Tags

, , , , ,

The State of 3D

In: Technology

By: Steve Stanfill on Aug 19, 2011 at 8:26 am

As we approach the “3/4 mark” for 2011, I thought it would be informative to check up on 3D television technology generally, and where the industry sits at this time.

Just this past week, Sony and Samsung announced a joint initiative to develop common standards for active shutter glasses that would allow interchangeability between televisions made by different manufacturers.  Implicit in this idea would be the potential availability of glasses manufactured by third parties, potentially driving the cost of 3D technology down over time.  In a jointly prepared statement, the companies revealed:

“Panasonic Corporation, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Sony Corporation and X6D Limited (XPAND 3D) today announced their intent to collaborate on the development of a new technology standard for consumer 3D active glasses, under the name, “Full HD 3D Glasses Initiative.”

“With this new agreement, the companies intend to work together on the development and licensing of radio frequency (RF) system 3D active glasses technology, including RF system protocols between consumer 3D active glasses and 3D displays such as televisions, personal computers, projectors and 3D theaters with XPAND active shutter glasses.

“The standardization will also include multiple types of infrared (IR) system protocols between 3D active glasses and 3D displays, ranging from the protocols jointly developed by Panasonic and XPAND 3D*, to the proprietary protocols of Samsung and Sony, respectively.”

In my opinion, this is good news for 3D fans.  Certainly anything that standardizes 3D technologies is a positive development, primarily because this standardization potentially lowers the cost of entry.

From a non-technical perspective however, 3D remains a wild card.  Sales rates for 3D televisions this past year have been 1% for the United Kingdom, 2% in Canada, and 5% in the United States.  This is not very encouraging from an industry perspective.  There is some question as to whether these low numbers are the result of “early adopters” holding off for price decreases similar to what happened with HDTV sets, or whether there is just a general lack of enthusiasm for the technology.

A recent study of 400 filmgoers by L Mark Carrier of California State University suggests that 3D technology does not allow viewers to experience more intense emotional reactions, more immersion, or any other potential advantages over their 2D counterparts.  Neither did viewers experience an enhanced ability to recall a film’s details.  Carrier’s study also suggested that watching films in 3D increased the risk of eyestrain, headache, or other vision trouble by a factor of 3.

“All other things being equal, I would say you’re increasing your chances of having some discomfort,” said Carrier at the America Psychological Association’s annual meeting on August 7th, 2011. “There aren’t going to be any benefits in terms of understanding the movie better or making the movie more meaningful, as far as we can tell,” he added.

This research potentially sheds light on why adoption rates for 3D have been so glacial.  I personally believe that another reason is simply that 3D should be an artistic tool for a gifted filmmaker to use with a light touch.  Implicit in that statement is the idea that not all films should use the technology–2D is the best choice for most of the quality content produced these days.  Simply shooting in 3D to get a short term financial hit from a theater release is a bad idea, and will backfire big time if the practice continues.  In fact, with one or two exceptions, 3D releases have not offered the box office boost producers were hoping for over the past 18 months or so.  It would be a shame if a potentially legitimate artistic tool would fall prey to misuse and overuse, souring a public already saturated in empty spectacle.

Until next time….

2
VN:F [1.7.4_987]

Rate Me

Rating: 4.0/5 (6 votes cast)

Tags

, ,

Streaming to Tablets–Part Deux

In: Technology

By: Steve Stanfill on Aug 12, 2011 at 9:27 am

Several weeks ago I wrote a piece on the dispute between Time Warner and Viacom. (See that article here.)  At the center of the “TV Everywhere” paradigm is the legal question whether consumers should have access to content on any device that they’ve paid for as part of their cable subscription without additional fees being levied on the cable provider and consumer.  Most cable companies, as you would expect, feel that a cable subscription to a channel should extend to every viewable device within the home at no extra charge to the distributor or consumer.  Content providers see additional screens as an opportunity for more revenue.

In an announcement made this afternoon, CableVision (another large cable player who had introduced a “TV Everywhere” service) and Viacom announced that they had settled this dispute to their mutual satisfaction.  In a joint statement, the companies said: “Viacom and Cablevision have agreed to resolve their pending litigation, and the Viacom programming will continue to appear on Cablevision’s Optimum Apps for iPad and other IP devices. In reaching the settlement agreement, Cablevision and Viacom were able to resolve the iPad matter and an unrelated business matter to their mutual satisfaction. Neither side is conceding its original legal position or will have further comment.”

Hmmm….wonder what that means.  At least one on line source opined that Viacom had indeed bowed to the legal opinion of Cablevision, but I’ve been unable to find any other corroboration of that possibility.

As I indicated in a previous post, the cat is out of the proverbial (technical) bag IMHO.  I do not believe that the content providers’ desire for more revenue based on screen size or portability is a sustainable model.

Case in point:

Several weeks ago I replaced one of my televisions with a Samsung 7000 series LED HDTV. Samsung calls it a “Smart TV”, and indeed, carries with it a full series of apps as well as a QWERTY remote and the ability to surf the net via its built in wifi.  Guess what else is part of the technology?  Yup…streaming all channels from the TV set to a second screen, the Samsung Galaxy tablet!  Now at present, there are some limitations on this paradigm if you are not using the built in digital QAM or ATSC tuners, but I suspect that it is only a matter of time before enterprising manufacturers increase the functionality of the app and extend the option to iOS devices as well as other screens using the Android OS.

The point is that this idea has consumer inertia that will push continued development of multiple screen access to content.  Try as they might, content providers have historically had little control over the consumer electronics industry generally, and I don’t believe that they will bear sway here either.

These developments in the industry should help the content providers realize that forcing distributors of content to pay additional freight for implementing elegant solutions to “TV Everywhere” makes little sense, and is not a sustainable business model.

Until next time…

0
VN:F [1.7.4_987]

Rate Me

Rating: 4.7/5 (3 votes cast)

Tags

, , , , , ,

Digital Video Transition–Almost complete

In: Technology

By: Steve Stanfill on Jul 22, 2011 at 4:01 pm

It’s been a long hot summer, though not over yet by any means.  WOW!’s video teams have been very busy with the digital video transition, which is complete in Michigan and Ohio, and in full swing in Illinois and Indiana.  The transition should be complete in Illinois by the end of August, with the Evansville market complete the following week.  We anxiously await the completion of this massive undertaking, which will allow expanded programming options for our customers.  High Definition channel lineups particularly will be beefed up as a result of this process.

I admit that I’m a selective TV viewer–part of this selectivity is that I seldom watch a program that isn’t in Hi-Def anymore.  Just can’t hardly bring myself to do it.  I relax that standard, obviously, as I enjoy some older content that didn’t have the benefit of HD technology when it was filmed, but even here, there are some pretty amazing HD transfers of older, film-based content.  The stuff that can’t be helped much is that which was shot  with analog standard-def video production techniques in the 70’s and 80’s.

Interestingly, video took a significant uptick in quality in the 90’s, driven by improvements in professional video gear that supported upwards of 540 scan lines.  Most of the video produced in the 20 years previous to that was between 240 and 300 scan lines–read: “not that great”.  These aforementioned production upgrades may have been as a result of anticipated demand for analog “Laserdisc” recordings that were offered to consumers in the 90’s.

Considered obsolete in this digital age, Laserdiscs looked pretty amazing on “enhanced definition” sets of the time.  Based on optical disc technology, the Laserdisc was, nonetheless, an analog format that had been refined to a “fare-thee-well”, and it still looks pretty good on present day HD sets, for that matter.  It was the pinnacle of analog-based consumer media.  I still have, though do not use, a Sony player and about 20 discs–big 12 inch diameter numbers that could be used as lethal weapons if thrown like a frisbee at an unsuspecting target.  DVD’s and Blu-ray are much more convenient–and safer ;)

So as WOW! officially retires its analog lineup with the completion of the digital transition, I may put my LaserDisc collection up on ebay to celebrate.  I hope that you find a way to celebrate the new HD content and viewing options this transition enables.

Until next time….

1
VN:F [1.7.4_987]

Rate Me

Rating: 2.4/5 (7 votes cast)

Tags

, , , ,

Sam’s Club

In: Technology

By: Steve Stanfill on Jan 19, 2011 at 9:25 am

One thing you can be sure of–when a technology shows up in Sam’s Club, it may be considered a mainstream offering.  Many of the technologies we have discussed in the past year are now Sam’s Club staples, including internet enabled televisions and Blu-ray players, as well as LED backlit displays.  One interesting inclusion that I noticed on my way to the fruits and vegetables–Sam’s Club now had a Samsung 3D system set up to demonstrate the technology to its “bulk buying” customers.  Wow!  I may have to rethink my lukewarm stance on 3D technology generally and whether or not it will go mainstream.

All that said, it is a fact that sales of 3D equipment (and televisions specifically) have been lackluster and disappointing to those who are pushing this technology.  It is also a fact that the majority of theatre releases using this technology have not sold well in 3D (within the theatre releases), and were probably not particularly well suited to the technology anyway from the standpoint of production artistry.  But in Sam’s Club?

Some things have become more clear in the last six months.  “Active glasses” designs have become more user friendly; the glasses are now lighter and use wireless technology to activate the shutters.  Manufacturers are lining up behind essentially three different technologies and their variants: 1) active shutter glasses w/ 120Hz plus displays; 2) Passive polarization glasses w/ displays using polarizing filters on the monitor; and 3)  3D displays which use no glasses at all, and rely on relatively new monitor technologies to produce a 3D image for the viewer.  Let’s take each of these in turn:

1) Active shutter/rapid image display–This technology is, at this point, probably the front runner in terms of quality of the experience, but carries with it its own set of baggage.  This technology displays different images at least 120 times a second, and the glasses only allow the viewer to see an image in one eye at a time, in a synchronized manner rapidly alternating between eyes and images perceived.  The brain then uses that different image information and creates a 3D image from what is presented.  In early versions, this would tether the user via a wire to the television, and the glasses were big and bulky.  The good news is that the glasses are now much lighter and use wireless technology (bluetooth, infrared, or wifi direct) to control the shutter action.  Advantages to this technology are a bright, clear picture in both 3D and 2D mode, and virtually no penalties on 2D material.  Samsung, as well as a number of other manufacturers are fully embracing this technology.

2)  Passive glasses/polarization panel monitor–At the recent CES show in Las Vegas, LG and Vizio demonstrated passive 3D models that will be released at retail later this year.  The huge advantage of this technology is that the glasses are light and “throwaway cheap”–certainly an advantage if one is prone to sit down on the couch before looking in the shadows ;)  The disadvantages of this technology are several:  Due to the polarization panel in the monitor itself, pictures generally are dimmer in both 3D and 2D, and the 3D experience does not carry the effective resolution of the active shutter technology.  The polarizer effectively shows only alternating scan lines to each eye, effectively reducing the available resolution in 3D to 540 vertical pixels/scan lines.  Further, the viewing angle for the full 3D experience is quite narrow; the 3D effect falls off drastically as the viewer moves to the side of the monitor.  In short, if your viewing environment is quite dim and your household environment favors the “cheap glasses” approach, this may be the technology to purchase.

3)  “Glasses Free” (auto-stereoscopic) monitor technology–Toshiba and a number of other manufacturers are working on display technologies that would do away with glasses altogether.  The immediate reaction of most people interested in 3D is “THAT’s what I want!”  And that’s understandable.  Toshiba actually demonstrated an auto-stereoscopic monitor at the CES show to mixed reviews.  “Reduced resolution”, “compromised 3D and 2D image”, “very narrow viewing angle” were some of the comments proffered.  It’s pretty clear that this design has as some technological hurdles to overcome, although Toshiba claims that these sets will be on dealer’s floors by the end of 2011.  This will be a technology to watch, but “ready for prime time” is probably several years away at best.

Add to this confusion a number of technologies out there that are in the lab, or that have commercial application only at this point.  Check out this interesting technology from Samsung and Real D that may find its way eventually into consumer 3D imaging.  Currently, Samsung says that this is being developed primarily for medical imaging applications in their business division.  We’ll see…

Until next time….

3
VN:F [1.7.4_987]

Rate Me

Rating: 5.0/5 (5 votes cast)

Tags

,