My impression of the new Passive revolution. - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 109 Old 06-01-2011, 07:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LowellG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Helotes, TX
Posts: 1,324
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 79
Quote:


Originally posted by deArgila:
Saw the passive LG for the first time yesterday at Best Buy. I was really looking forward to it, but was extremely disappointed. It was playing an underwater scene with some fish swimming around and it looked terrible, like VHS. I saw a similar video playing on a Samsung LED and it looked fantastic!

I agree, that's a horrible demo. It's the IMAX Underwater; the fish pop off the screen which is what I think they want to emphasize, but the quality is awful. Plus the edges are all blurry. Then they show a 3D basketball game that's not impressive. I really want to like the TV, but I can't. I don't know if they have implemented the software upgrade they talk about that supposed to fake 1080P. I also wonder what there 9800 model will look like. I think it's a thin bezel like the Samsung D8000

Lowell


The MARVELous Home Theater: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/19-ded...e-theater.html
LowellG is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 109 Old 06-02-2011, 06:27 AM
Senior Member
 
bontrager's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Murrysville, PA
Posts: 414
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyDP View Post
I observed the same softness and jagginess that this article mentions with LG's looping demo on their 55LW5600. The potato cod snippet of video from Under the Sea looked like a standard def image; some courtside basketball clips also exhibited softness and visible stairstepping of the graphics on the parquet floor and billboard graphics. I was hoping it was just a poorly mastered video but this review would suggest that the drop in resolution to 540p is as bad as one would think.

Also interesting is the fact that the reviewer not only noticed crosstalk with the passive display, but that it was actually worse than the active display. I didn't notice any crosstalk with the LG demo but in all fairness I didn't notice it when viewing the same potato cod scene on my Samsung plasma either.

One of the reasons I was interested in the LG 55LW5600 was because I wanted a gaming TV that would give me decent 3D (crosstalk can be really bad on my 3D plasma under certain conditions) but I was unable to try my own content on the TV and the looping demo's videogame portion only had some pre-rendered cinematic and not actual gameplay, further evidence that 3D gaming probably doesn't look too good on this set either.

Tony, I have been playing Crysis 2 on my Toshiba 240Hz for hours. I think the picture is very good and I am sitting 4 feet from the screen. I also have a panasonic plasma and overall the Toshiba has less ghosting and a brighter picture.

No offense, but don't think you will ever be satisfied with the Samsung plasma as far as 3D is concerned.
bontrager is offline  
post #93 of 109 Old 06-02-2011, 03:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TonyDP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,836
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by bontrager View Post

Tony, I have been playing Crysis 2 on my Toshiba 240Hz for hours. I think the picture is very good and I am sitting 4 feet from the screen. I also have a panasonic plasma and overall the Toshiba has less ghosting and a brighter picture.

I've played Crysis 2 on my plasma in 3D mode and have noticed very little ghosting as well; the game's implementation of 3D yields really modest depth and no 3D pop out of the screen to speak of. As such, its really not a good litmus test for 3D gaming.

Now if you really want to put your Toshiba thru the wringer and see how it handles 3D ghosting in games, try Killzone 3. There's a 3D demo available for free on the PSN store (which is now back up). The ghosting in some areas of the game is absolutely horrendous with plasmas and I'd be very interested to see how a passive display handles that game.

Quote:


No offense, but don't think you will ever be satisfied with the Samsung plasma as far as 3D is concerned.

With regard to gaming you're probably right, which is why I've still not pulled the trigger on a second 3D TV. As far as BluRay content goes, my Samsung plasma works fine and I'd say 95% of the time I never notice any ghosting.
TonyDP is offline  
post #94 of 109 Old 06-02-2011, 07:28 PM
Member
 
scarri3r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 16
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I've heard nothing but great reviews about the LG 60pz950 ( the flagship LG plasma ) I just ordered one today and I'm stoked. One reviewer said the 2d pq was as good if not better than his neighbor's pioneer. For the price and better 3d pq than LED / LCD tvs, you all should check it out.

scarri3r
scarri3r is offline  
post #95 of 109 Old 06-03-2011, 10:49 AM
Senior Member
 
rschleicher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Danville, CA
Posts: 258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by LowellG View Post

I agree, that's a horrible demo. It's the IMAX Underwater; the fish pop off the screen which is what I think they want to emphasize, but the quality is awful. Plus the edges are all blurry. Then they show a 3D basketball game that's not impressive. I really want to like the TV, but I can't. I don't know if they have implemented the software upgrade they talk about that supposed to fake 1080P. I also wonder what there 9800 model will look like. I think it's a thin bezel like the Samsung D8000

A couple of comments/speculations:

First is that the LG passive sets (and others that use their FPR film, incl. Vizzio passive 3D sets, and Toshiba's passive set) will show ghosting if you are non-trivially above or below the perpendicular of the set. I would guesstimate that being within 10 degrees is fine, but being more than 15 degrees above or below will lead to significant ghosting. Basically this is due to the FPR film being slightly in front of the actual LCD display, and if you are too far above or below the perpendicular, the alternating polarization lines of the film become partly misaligned with the content lines. (It's perhaps possible that the different brands have slightly different distances between the film and LCD display, but I think all of the above brands would be basically similar in this regard....) This was an issue at the Best Buy where I saw the LG demo - the aisle was narrow, and so you couldn't get more than about 6' away from the screen. And unless you crouched, your head was too high above the screen. Things worked pretty well when I was kneeling, but then I was really too close to the screen (not to mention blocking the aisle....)

The second comment is that 3D content seems to "work" best if there is very good depth of field (or depth of focus), in the original shooting of the content (even if it is shot in 3D). In the underwater scene of LG's demo, when the big fish really pops out in the foreground, it is reasonable to assume that this was very challenging in terms of having the sharp focus extend too far in the background. Camera optics are still camera optics. Especially in the relatively low light of underwater filming, if you are doing close-ups, and the camera(s) are focused on something in the near foreground, background objects are likely to be blurred, in BOTH of the 3D-camera images. So your eyes will detect that the background is indeed in the background, but the image in the background will still be blurred.

In 2D content, the fact that there is blurring of distant objects when the camera is focused on a near object, is expected, and no big deal. We look where the camera is focused, and don't worry about the out-of-focus parts. But with 3D content, especially when demo-ing a set, and watching critically, I think we tend to do more "looking around" the larger image, instead of focusing where the camera is focused. And then we are more bothered by background objects that are blurred.

The same issues tend to apply in shooting indoor sports, where you are reliant on artificial lighting. It still requires some degree of opening up of lenses, leading to poor depth of field. Basketball suffers from this. If focused on the court, then fans in the background (and perhaps foreground) will be blurred.

On the other extreme, things filmed outdoors, where the lenses can be stopped down, leading to very good depth of field, will tend to turn out better in 3D.

In the case of the LG demo, I think that at least some of the issues are related to the content, and the difficulties of shooting in lower-light situations.

Anyway, that's my theory, and I'm sticking to it!

As an aside, I downloaded the latest SW for my LG 55LW5600, which MIGHT have their new algorithm that essentially flip-flops between the odd and even rows of content, in terms of what is displayed on the odd/even rows of the screen. I only spent a few minutes watching some 3D content after downloading (some of the time watching a replay of winter X-games on ESPN 3D, and some of the time watching some flying-related content from Comcasts "3D event" channel). I didn't see any dramatic improvement, but then I've thought that the resolution loss wasn't that noticeable to begin with. (Of course you can see the lines of the FPR film if you get close enough, but that is a slightly separate issue, and not effected by the algorithm). Actually, since ESPN 3D is top-and-bottom format, I would expect no improvement there, since the content is already "line limited". But the side-by-side format of the flying movie would possibly be affected by the algorithm. But the problem there was that I've never seen that content prior to the download. In any case, no ghosting with either the X-games content nor the flying!
rschleicher is offline  
post #96 of 109 Old 06-03-2011, 11:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
thebard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,549
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by rschleicher View Post

A couple of comments/speculations:

First is that the LG passive sets (and others that use their FPR film, incl. Vizzio passive 3D sets, and Toshiba's passive set) will show ghosting if you are non-trivially above or below the perpendicular of the set. I would guesstimate that being within 10 degrees is fine, but being more than 15 degrees above or below will lead to significant ghosting. Basically this is due to the FPR film being slightly in front of the actual LCD display, and if you are too far above or below the perpendicular, the alternating polarization lines of the film become partly misaligned with the content lines. (It's perhaps possible that the different brands have slightly different distances between the film and LCD display, but I think all of the above brands would be basically similar in this regard....)

The second comment is that 3D content "works" best if there is very good depth of field (or depth of focus), in the original shooting of the content (even if it is shot in 3D). In the underwater scene of LG's demo, when the big fish really pops out in the foreground, it is reasonable to assume that this was very challenging in terms of having the sharp focus extend too far in the background. Camera optics are still camera optics. Especially in the relatively low light of underwater filming, if you are doing close-ups, and the camera(s) are focused on something in the near foreground, background objects are likely to be blurred, in BOTH of the 3D-camera images. So your eyes will detect that the background is indeed in the background, but the image in the background will still be blurred.

In 2D content, the fact that there is blurring of distant objects when the camera is focused on a near object, is expected, and no big deal. But with 3D content, I think we tend to do more "looking around" the larger image. And then we are more bothered by background objects that are blurred.

The same issues tend to apply in shooting indoor sports, where you are reliant on artificial lighting. It still requires some degree of opening up of lenses, leading to poor depth of field. Basketball suffers from this. If focused on the court, then fans in the background (and perhaps foreground) will be blurred.

On the other extreme, things filmed outdoors, where the lenses can be stopped down, leading to very good depth of field, will tend to turn out better in 3D.

In the case of the LG demo, I think that at least some of the issues are related to the content, and the difficulties of shooting in lower-light situations.

Anyway, that's my theory, and I'm sticking to it!

ehhh... no.

He's not talking about focal blur, which you are correct is related to f-stop in the camera, and is dictated by available lighting conditions. These issues, true, can be addressed in cgi stereoscopy (read: Tangled), but not so much in live action.

LowellG is talking about the effect the polarizing film has on object lines & edges, particularly diagonals. Objects - foreground and background - will have "jaggies" as the object's boundary passes across the scan lines, giving the scene a blurry appearance. I saw this first hand when I demo'd the LG set. Granted it was in-store (not optimal viewing conditions), but there was at least 8 feet of clearance in front of the display, and I could see the effect all the way back. Looked like SD to me.

Don't get me wrong; I love passive, I think it will lead to more adopters of 3d in general. But the think the upcoming rdz tech (active display + passive glasses = full 1080 HD) will be the way to go.
thebard is offline  
post #97 of 109 Old 06-03-2011, 12:02 PM
Senior Member
 
rschleicher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Danville, CA
Posts: 258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebard View Post

ehhh... no.

He's not talking about focal blur, which you are correct is related to f-stop in the camera, and is dictated by available lighting conditions. These issues, true, can be addressed in cgi stereoscopy (read: Tangled), but not so much in live action.

LowellG is talking about the effect the polarizing film has on object lines & edges, particularly diagonals. Objects - foreground and background - will have "jaggies" as the object's boundary passes across the scan lines, giving the scene a blurry appearance. I saw this first hand when I demo'd the LG set. Granted it was in-store (not optimal viewing conditions), but there was at least 8 feet of clearance in front of the display, and I could see the effect all the way back. Looked like SD to me.

Don't get me wrong; I love passive, I think it will lead to more adopters of 3d in general. But the think the upcoming rdz tech (active display + passive glasses = full 1080 HD) will be the way to go.

I know what you are talking about - I might have misinterpreted what LowellG meant by "blurred at the edges" - I took it (initially) that he saw blurring at the edges of the overall image (i.e., in background objects), whereas in reading his post over again, he may well have been referring to edge effects on all objects, due to the inherent FPR film characteristics (probably was, in fact).

I'm a bit surprised that you were still seeing the jaggies 8 feet back. I have to be closer than that (at 6 feet or less, roughly) for this to be an issue for me. Possibly a case of eyesight differences, but perhaps also a case of "how much it matters" to two different individuals.

I agree that the upcoming rds technology (flipping the polarization dynamically at the display, but with passive glasses) may be very good (and may be the ultimate "winner"). Although I kind of think that there will be some non-trivial added cost for this approach in the near term, and it will take a little while to traverse that learning curve. The good thing is that the content doesn't have to care what the set is doing, so the obsolescence factor is not that bad.
rschleicher is offline  
post #98 of 109 Old 06-03-2011, 12:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
thebard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,549
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by rschleicher View Post

I agree that the upcoming rds technology (flipping the polarization dynamically at the display, but with passive glasses) may be very good (and may be the ultimate "winner"). Although I kind of think that there will be some non-trivial added cost for this approach in the near term, and it will take a little while to traverse that learning curve.

Actually, from what I've been able to pick up on in the media, it may actually add less of a premium to set prices than the FPR tech! This because, aparently, the alternating polarization plate applies to the entire screen, and only needs to move fast enough & be synced with the L/R frames (something shutter glasses already do), whereas the polarizing film has to be manufactured to tight tolerances & aligned precisely.
thebard is offline  
post #99 of 109 Old 06-06-2011, 03:03 PM
Senior Member
 
rschleicher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Danville, CA
Posts: 258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebard View Post
Actually, from what I've been able to pick up on in the media, it may actually add less of a premium to set prices than the FPR tech! This because, aparently, the alternating polarization plate applies to the entire screen, and only needs to move fast enough & be synced with the L/R frames (something shutter glasses already do), whereas the polarizing film has to be manufactured to tight tolerances & aligned precisely.
I guess it will depend on what the costs of a large-enough alternating-polarization plate are. I appreciate that there will be no need for tight tolerances and aligning (vis-a-vis FPR film), but dynamic polarization doesn't seem that all that simple to me. I'm also basing my speculation on the fact that the first products using this approach will supposedly be computer monitors in the 20-25" range (I've seen somewhere that the intended application is for medical imaging monitors.) This implied to me that they were looking for a "high-value" application to begin with, that wasn't very cost-sensitive. I also have zero idea of the inherent speed of the polarization switching process, and if it is comparable to turning an LCD on and off (as in active-shutter glasses). But time will tell - I'm sure the learning curve will be pretty fast, in any case!
rschleicher is offline  
post #100 of 109 Old 06-06-2011, 05:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Jacob305's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,398
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by LowellG View Post

I agree, that's a horrible demo. It's the IMAX Underwater; the fish pop off the screen which is what I think they want to emphasize, but the quality is awful. Plus the edges are all blurry. Then they show a 3D basketball game that's not impressive. I really want to like the TV, but I can't. I don't know if they have implemented the software upgrade they talk about that supposed to fake 1080P. I also wonder what there 9800 model will look like. I think it's a thin bezel like the Samsung D8000

I have direct tv with active 3d glasses. i saw some amazing stuff on one of the channels. where the sea creatures were swimming inside the tv and then out from the tv. it felt like you could touch the sea creatures. I am not trying to say that active is better then passive. my first impression from the active. it was interesting.

Jacob
Jacob305 is online now  
post #101 of 109 Old 06-06-2011, 09:16 PM
Advanced Member
 
Michael2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 894
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 27
After looking at many 3D TVs at CES, I finally got to the Vizio booth. Unfortunately, I was disappointed with what I saw. While the vertical resolution was lower, the bigger problem to me was each eye has every other scan line turned off, so you have huge black gaps between scan lines. My eyes kept trying to put the two scan lines together, and they, of course, couldn't. I ended up with pseudo ghosting, since my eyes couldn't figure out where to focus.

I also have to wonder if the current passive 3D method is a stop gap. Shutter glasses are bound to go down in price considerably as production increases. If the manufacturers come up with a standard, they will go down even more. On TV full screen shutters are a possibility, too.

Michael
Michael2000 is offline  
post #102 of 109 Old 06-07-2011, 12:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
wnielsenbb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Phoenix AZ
Posts: 2,050
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Shutter glasses are only 50 bucks, 45 each for 10. http://www.ultimate3dheaven.com/ul3dgl.html
Passive is still clearly the holy grail, it is just yet to be implemented well.
wnielsenbb is offline  
post #103 of 109 Old 06-07-2011, 01:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ohyeah32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The Land of Enchantment
Posts: 2,671
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyDP View Post

Believe me, I'd like nothing more than to be wowed by passive, if only for all the RealD glasses I have lying around and Samsung deciding to go from IR to BT with their active glasses.

Unfortunately, I can only go by what I can see and LG's own demo has been less than inspiring, not to mention the fact that they have, so far, made it very difficult for people to go to a store like BB and try out their own content. I always get leery when I'm locked out of switching off the demo loop and actually watching and playing some of my own stuff.

Oh well, I'm sure that passive will be the way to go eventually and I'm hopeful that 2nd or 3rd gen sets will be able to give a full 1080p image to each eye.

I was in the same boat as you. I saw the LG 3D passive store demo at BB and was not very impressed. But thankfully my whole opinion changed big time when the salesman agreed to let me see the same 3D Blu-ray that was playing on the Panasonic VT30. It took him a while to get a 3D blu-ray player connected to the LG, but once he did all I can say is WOW! The images I saw totally knocked my socks off!! Clips from Avatar and Ice Age were amazing! No lines, no crosstalk, just a beautifully vivid and detailed 3D image!

It impressed me so much, that now I'm holding out to get LG's upcoming 72" model. From what I've heard LG is releasing that model in North America as a passive 3D TV instead of active.


Seth
ohyeah32 is offline  
post #104 of 109 Old 06-07-2011, 05:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
davyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: las vegas nevada
Posts: 4,303
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael2000 View Post

After looking at many 3D TVs at CES, I finally got to the Vizio booth. Unfortunately, I was disappointed with what I saw. While the vertical resolution was lower, the bigger problem to me was each eye has every other scan line turned off, so you have huge black gaps between scan lines. My eyes kept trying to put the two scan lines together, and they, of course, couldn't. I ended up with pseudo ghosting, since my eyes couldn't figure out where to focus.

I also have to wonder if the current passive 3D method is a stop gap. Shutter glasses are bound to go down in price considerably as production increases. If the manufacturers come up with a standard, they will go down even more. On TV full screen shutters are a possibility, too.

Michael

My impressions were quite different,,, I was actually very impressed with the passive 3D at the Vizio and LG booths during CES 2011.

I liked the Vizio 65 incher so much I purchased one, but in the end returned it as I was not happy with the 2D picture.

Between passive and active I think they both can look very good but at the same time I think both technoligies have a ways to go.

I just purchased the 70" Sharp and will give it plenty of love until 3D gets a bit better.

Cheers
Davyo
davyo is offline  
post #105 of 109 Old 06-07-2011, 08:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
Michael2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 894
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohyeah32 View Post

I was in the same boat as you. I saw the LG 3D passive store demo at BB and was not very impressed. But thankfully my whole opinion changed big time when the salesman agreed to let me see the same 3D Blu-ray that was playing on the Panasonic VT30. It took him a while to get a 3D blu-ray player connected to the LG, but once he did all I can say is WOW! The images I saw totally knocked my socks off!! Clips from Avatar and Ice Age were amazing! No lines, no crosstalk, just a beautifully vivid and detailed 3D image!

It impressed me so much, that now I'm holding out to get LG's upcoming 72" model. From what I've heard LG is releasing that model in North America as a passive 3D TV instead of active.


Seth

That's always the best, when you can do an A/B comparison right then and there. What exactly did you like about the LG's 3D image? After all, the VT30 puts out a very polished 3D image.

Michael
Michael2000 is offline  
post #106 of 109 Old 06-07-2011, 08:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
Michael2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 894
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by davyo View Post

My impressions were quite different,,, I was actually very impressed with the passive 3D at the Vizio and LG booths during CES 2011.

I liked the Vizio 65 incher so much I purchased one, but in the end returned it as I was not happy with the 2D picture.

Between passive and active I think they both can look very good but at the same time I think both technoligies have a ways to go.

I just purchased the 70" Sharp and will give it plenty of love until 3D gets a bit better.

Cheers
Davyo

What didn't you like about the Vizio's 2D image?

Michael
Michael2000 is offline  
post #107 of 109 Old 06-07-2011, 11:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ohyeah32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The Land of Enchantment
Posts: 2,671
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael2000 View Post

That's always the best, when you can do an A/B comparison right then and there. What exactly did you like about the LG's 3D image? After all, the VT30 puts out a very polished 3D image.

Michael

I liked everything I saw with the 3D Blu-ray demo on the LG. The colors were so vivid, the image was bright, and the 3D effect was like it was floating out and beyond the TV. I was very impressed with the 3D image and effect on the Panasonic also, but I have to say that the 3D image and effect was just as immersive on the LG. And I didn't notice a hit in resolution on the LG using the passive glasses.


Seth
ohyeah32 is offline  
post #108 of 109 Old 06-08-2011, 09:23 AM
Senior Member
 
rschleicher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Danville, CA
Posts: 258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
The demo files for various brands of 3D TVs are available as downloads on various sights - the files I've seen of the LG in-store demo imply (based on the file name) that they are in SxS format, which wouldn't really be representative of BD 3D content. I guess what I'm not sure of is whether the LG demo that is actually playing in the store displays is also SxS format? You'd THINK that whoever plans these demos would like to show the set using the highest-quality content material possible (at least in terms of format), but who knows.... It's interesting that the poster above was very unimpressed watching LG's demo content on the LG set, but WAS impressed watching Panasonic's demo content on the LG set.
rschleicher is offline  
post #109 of 109 Old 06-09-2011, 02:10 PM
Senior Member
 
Robut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I viewed this display 65LW6500 Yesterday. It definitely was half resolution in an obvious way.

If a display was 540 x 1920 where the pixels filled the screen it would be less bothersome than having every other line of pixels in black. To me this "screen door" effect is a big problem. It emphasizes the stepping effect of diagonal and curved edges. This is particularly noticeable when text is on the screen. The sales guy moved me to 9' away from the screen. the lines did lessen but the whole image was softer. After the razor sharp edges of 1080P images I can't live with that and my eyesight isn't perfect, I usually use glasses for distance but even at that the lines and softness are obvious. Its worse than going back to DVD after experiencing Bluray or HD DVD. At least there are no black lines of pixels in a DVD image. It's just a less sharp image. Why do we up convert standard DVD? To get sharper edges.

No one can ever convince me "most people can't tell the difference" or "it's not noticeable".

Even if they double the resolution the black pixel lines will be there, although much less visible.

I'd like to address some of the so called superior points of passive:
1. brighter image: you can ramp up the brightness of a modern led lcd to the point that you can't look at it. Most displays automatically ramp up the brightness in 3D mode. And don't give me that crosstalk is increased. More and more that issue is being reduced or eliminated.

2. Comfortable glasses: the new Samsung high end glasses are extremely light and the battery is located behind the ear so the ears support that weight. This eliminates headaches from any weight on the nose bridge. the weight think can be solved much easier than the resolution problem of passive.

3. Flashing: The flashing isn't on the screen its from room lights. if it's really bothersome darken the room. I guaranty you won't see flashing. With modern 240hz or even 480hz sets the flashing effect is much less.

4. Fatigue: to some degree yes active is fatiguing to the eyes but I can watch two movies with no problems.

IMO active will not go away until they can double the vertical resolution at a low price. By that time both formats will be going the way of Laser discs Etc.
3D without glasses will start to be a reality. So that active will soon be obsolete argument is pretty bogus.
Robut is offline  
Reply 3D Displays

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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