Passive 3D vs Active 3D = Sony's new 70" "passive 3D" TV for $2600 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 10 Old 04-09-2013, 07:44 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
jyeh74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
This must be a Sony thing, but some of their TVs are "active 3D" while some are "passive 3D" No other brands distinguish this. 3D is 3D.

Anyone know if there is a difference?

Compare the XBR 65HX950 for $5200 (active 3D)

http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921666483159

Vs a new one, bigger KDL70 R550A for $2600 (passive 3D)

http://store.sony.com/p/70-inch-HDTV%2C-LED-TV%2C-R-Series%2C-R550%2C-genie-whole-home-DVR%2C-3D-TV%2C-Edge-LED%2C-smart-TV%2C-Full-HD/en/p/KDL70R550A

Then they have "dynamic edge lit" vs "edge lit" The new 70" is "edge lit" not "dynamic edge lit" and is motion flow 240, not 480 or 960. I thought native is only 120hz or 240hz. Can anyone tell the difference? It's a pretty decent price for a 70" but something with "passive 3D" makes it seem like it is simulated or fake 3D.


Can someone help???
jyeh74 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 10 Old 04-09-2013, 08:10 PM
Member
 
bargugl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 22
A few manufacturers offer both active and passive 3d and they have all distinguished the difference. Passive 3D is just as real as active (passive is the same technique as what you get at a 3D movie theater), it just uses a completely different method of achieving it. Each tech has its advantages and disadvantages. Active 3D came out first and was pushed hard by the manufacturers. About 18 months later, passive was released in the US by LG (although it came out a lot sooner in Asia). LG was the one to introduce it and for the 2012 model year, several other companies started buying LG panels for passive 3D.

Sony just made the move to passive 3d for the 2013 model year. This coincides with their decision to start purchasing panels from LG Display as part of their attempt to cut costs in their failing TV business. Almost all of the TV's on the market that have passive 3D panels will be using the same LG passive displays, though that will change before too long. Panasonic has also switched a majority of their LED line to passive for the 2013 model year as they too are buying panels from LG.

There are supporters and detractors of both passive and active 3D which is further clouded by marketing shills telling half truths about the competing technologies. One of the best explanations and tests I have read is this one here as it actually attempts to provide at least some objective testing data and in more than one area. Whether the methodology is sound and free from being biased can of course be debated:
http://www.displaymate.com/3D_TV_ShootOut_1.htm

It's long, but a good and informative read.

Normal refresh rate is actually only 60hz as that is what a vast majority of source material is. The higher refresh rates are achieved by essentially computerized guessing (interpolation) of what comes in between frames. The higher refresh rate TVs do tend to resolve motion a little better but introduce other issues. It's fine for sports, but for watching movies, most of the time you are better off turning the fast refresh rates off. Further confusing the issue is that a lot of the refresh rates listed are actually inflated by using a flashing backlight instead of interpolating frames. Here's one article on refresh rate to get you started. There are more and the issue is even more complicated than described here:
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57524894-221/what-is-refresh-rate/

Dynamic edge lit I believe is Sony's term (someone correct me if I'm wrong) for what others refer to as edge lit local dimming. Essentially, the LED's are all at the edge of the screen as in regular edge lit, but they can dim a certain number of them independently from the rest. The idea is to try to create better black levels without overly dimming the whole picture. It does work somewhat, but is not the greatest solution to LCD black level weakness. Still it is usually a little better than an edge lit set without it.
bargugl is offline  
post #3 of 10 Old 04-10-2013, 08:42 AM
Senior Member
 
DRaven72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Wolverine Lake, Mi
Posts: 414
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 67
It looks like they contnued LG's bs Half Resolution Passive 3d. Meaning each eye sees 540 instead of 1080p in 3d. Hate it. Thats one of the reason its half the cost of the other.

Cool Beans.
DRaven72 is offline  
post #4 of 10 Old 04-10-2013, 09:21 AM
Member
 
bargugl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRaven72 View Post

It looks like they contnued LG's bs Half Resolution Passive 3d. Meaning each eye sees 540 instead of 1080p in 3d. Hate it. Thats one of the reason its half the cost of the other.

However, most consumers disagree with you so passive, for better or worse, is rapidly catching up and will soon overtake active in the marketplace. Most active solutions have much more serious crosstalk issues, eyestrain issues, and there is the issue of dimness. These are all quantified in the article I linked to in my earlier post. Not to mention, active glasses are a pain in the rear. In regards to the half vertical resolution, the same article states this:

"The theory and fundamental principle behind full FPR vertical resolution and sharpness is that the 3D TV images have only horizontal parallax from the horizontally offset cameras, so the vertical image content for the right and left eyes are in fact identical – but with purely horizontal parallax offsets from their different right and left camera viewpoints. So there isn’t any 3D imaging information that is missing because all of the necessary vertical resolution and parallax information is available when the brain combines the right and left images into the 3D image we actually see. So as long as the viewing distance is sufficient so that the raster lines are not visually resolved (for 20/20 vision the visual resolution is 1 arc min, which corresponds to 6.1 feet for a 47 inch TV) the brain should fuse the images from the right and left eyes into a single full 1080p resolution 3D image."

In their visual performance testing, they declared:
"In all 14 cases the small text (6 to 10 pixels in height) was readable on the FPR Passive Glasses. This definitively establishes that there is excellent 3D Image Fusion and the Passive Glasses deliver full 1080p resolution. Again, if the Passive Glasses only delivered half the resolution, as some claim, then it would have been impossible to read the small text on the FPR TVs. So those half resolution claims are manifestly wrong."

Some people do see the difference in image resolution. Not necessarily that info is missing, but there are jagged edges and black lines in the image. Personally all the crosstalk/ghosting when I have tried active has obscured any resolution advantage. It's just too distracting for me to actually be able to enjoy the image. I'm sort of thinking that like a lot of things, everyone sees things/processes information a little differently so active may seem better for some passive may seem better for others. For me, I actually get a better 3D experience with my passive set than I have ever had in a theater.
bargugl is offline  
post #5 of 10 Old 04-10-2013, 09:43 AM
Senior Member
 
Dave A.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by bargugl View Post

Personally all the crosstalk/ghosting when I have tried active has obscured any resolution advantage. It's just too distracting for me to actually be able to enjoy the image. I'm sort of thinking that like a lot of things, everyone sees things/processes information a little differently so active may seem better for some passive may seem better for others. For me, I actually get a better 3D experience with my passive set than I have ever had in a theater.

The active 3-D on my Sony 950 is bright, free of cross talk and makes the local theater's 3-D look like a joke. It probably has more to do with the brightness factor than anything. After a couple hours of this greatness I feel like clawing my eyes out. That's also probably due to the brightness and the shutter glasses causing fatigue. As good as the 3-D viewing experience is for me, I will admit that people clawing their eyes out will cut into 3-D Blu-ray sales in the long run, so perhaps the new passive sets will be good for the longevity of the format.
Dave A. is offline  
post #6 of 10 Old 04-13-2013, 10:14 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
jyeh74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRaven72 View Post

It looks like they contnued LG's bs Half Resolution Passive 3d. Meaning each eye sees 540 instead of 1080p in 3d. Hate it. Thats one of the reason its half the cost of the other.

can you notice the difference? does the 540 in each eye make the picture non 1080p?can you see the lines. is it less clear? what is it?
jyeh74 is offline  
post #7 of 10 Old 04-13-2013, 10:39 AM
Advanced Member
 
hoozthatat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Big Sky Country
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by jyeh74 View Post

can you notice the difference?
Is there a reason there's an entire new thread for this? TGM and I were answering your questions in a timely manner. It's not 540 in each eye, it's 1920 by 540 lines, and the 540 is the vertical resolution portion. Like TGM said, "Dynamic Edge Lit" is referring to local dimming on the panel, or as much "local dimming" as an edge lit will allow. And the 240 MotionFlow means that it's a 120 Hz FP.
Quote:
does the 540 in each eye make the picture non 1080p?
Due to the drop in vertical resolution it is not 1080.
Quote:
can you see the lines. is it less clear?
No, you can't see the lines. Although you experience a drop in resolution you also get a much needed boost in brightness, which is something active 3D lacks.

60F8000; RX-V367; TSi300 x2; YST-SW102; Harmony 650; Apple TV; Microsoft Xbox One Console; RF-HTS120;

xRite i1 Display Pro (OEM); CalMAN 5 Basic; ColorHCFR
hoozthatat is offline  
post #8 of 10 Old 04-13-2013, 10:51 AM
Member
 
bargugl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 22
I think the best thing to do would be to go see the two different types yourself. Did you read the article I linked? In my experience, the passive was actually a superior view. Active was just too fuzzy with ghosting and crosstalk all over. Some people have different experiences. Everyone's eyes have a different amount of space between them, different shaped eyeballs, some wear glasses or other vision correction. The list goes on and all those things can affect how an individual perceives a picture, especially when you are talking about something that tries to fool the brain into thinking it sees a 3D image that's not really there, where all those things can affect perception of depth. Some people do see jagged lines and some black lines in a passive 3d image, though for many more people, its minimally noticeable if at all and in any case is not bothersome. A good part of this is the distance you are from the TV. I actually found the passive image to come across as much sharper and more defined than the active image and in general the passive 3d sets on average rank higher for 3d quality than active on many review sites(at least on the LED/LCD sets, active on plasma generally scores very well too and some maintain that active 3D on plasma is the best option of all), although there are always exceptions both ways.
bargugl is offline  
post #9 of 10 Old 04-14-2013, 05:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
eric3316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 631 Post(s)
Liked: 848
I have owned an LG passive 2012 LED TV and now own a Samsung Plasma active TV. They are both fine. I do not notice any crosstalk on the Sammy active and the 3d is fantastic. I actually feel like it is clearer and brightness is not an issue. Also, Samsungs newer glasses are lightweight and work great so the days of uncomfortable active glasses are now gone!

On the passive set if you go to close the TV you can see lines going through the picture if you are to close so size of the TV and viewing distance will play more of an important role based on 3d viewing. An active set you will not need to take that into consideration and can sit as close up to the TV as you want without ruining the 3d experience.

As far as how the actual 3d content looks as far as depth and pop out, I could not really tell a difference. They both look fine. It is not like one TV brings the picture closer or further to you.

Now having said all that, my main reason for buying a new TV was because I wanted a 3d set. After searching for a TV and trying plenty of them in my home the 2d picture become more important to me then 3d. The amount of 3d you will probably watch compared to 2d will probably not even be close. Maybe a movie here and there while a 2d picture will be viewed daily for hours.

So the bottom line is don't get caught up in which 3d is better but by the TV with the better specs if you can afford it the 3d is a bonus and either one will work fine. I would say local dimming if it works well is more important to the viewing experience then active or passive 3d. While some might not agree with this statement my guess is a lot of people who thought they would be watching so much 3d content really just don't because of the lack of content out there that is even worth watching in 3d.
eric3316 is online now  
post #10 of 10 Old 04-20-2013, 01:04 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
jyeh74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I saw the new sony passive 3D today. its not that big of a deal for me compared to active 3D. I do notice the horizontal lines up close and the picture is a lil' blurry unless you are at least 5 feet away from the TV. but lighter glasses and cheaper (half the cost) of active makes it attractive.
jyeh74 is offline  
Reply LCD Flat Panel Displays

Tags
Sony Xbr 65hx950 65 Inch Bravia Led Hdtv , Sony Kdl 70r550a 70 Inch Led Hdtv
Gear in this thread



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off