Originally Posted by DRaven72
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.