Keep 3D active or make switch to Passive 3D TV - Page 13 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #361 of 408 Old 06-02-2013, 03:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cakefoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Defective unit, exchange for a new one?

My Videos

A movie with good 3D does not necessarily equal a good 3D movie!

cakefoo is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #362 of 408 Old 06-03-2013, 10:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Devedander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bry0769 View Post

Hi guys.
It seems there is lots of heated debate going on about passive and active 3D.
I am not a technical person but have just bought an LG 3D TV. This tv comes with four passive pairs of glasses. When I play a 3D movie the image flickers constantly. So much so that it is unwatchable. Funny thing is tho, that if you close one eye the flickering goes away. Close the other eye and it flickers again.
I changed the left/right setting on the TV and it swapped eyes.
I'm thinking, take the 3D TV back and get a 2D one???

What kind of flickering? Is this a 3D BR or a download of something? If you changed the left right and the flicker changed eyes it seems like the problem is likely in the source?

Monster Gold Plated Optical Cables: http://monstercable.com/productPage.asp?pin=1263

Awesome user review: "Unreal quality. Sounded like I upgraded my speakers." :D
Devedander is offline  
post #363 of 408 Old 06-03-2013, 10:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Devedander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by abcbity View Post

i agree with you,Just compare them for yourself before making a big purchase!thanks 15.gif

Definitely... everyone should get some hands on time (and preferablly buy from somewhere with a no questions resturn policy).

That said I think it's very important to make sure the info that is provided out there is accurate as a lot of people will be swayed by just what they read and or pre disposed as a result.

Monster Gold Plated Optical Cables: http://monstercable.com/productPage.asp?pin=1263

Awesome user review: "Unreal quality. Sounded like I upgraded my speakers." :D
Devedander is offline  
post #364 of 408 Old 06-17-2013, 07:08 AM
Member
 
kyzer the medic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Plattsburgh, NY
Posts: 178
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Without starting a holy war here, I went to the store (several actually) Looked at all the sets, played with all the settings, watched some 3D and went with the TV that had the best 2D picture I could find since lets face it, that's what I will be watching the most. If 3D was more prevalent and if companies like ESPN weren't canceling their 3D service I would care more. For me, and only me, 3D is kind of one of those extra added perks.
BTW the set I purchased happened to be an active set, but again, it was the 2D picture I will be watching 90% of the time that sold me.

We have nothing to fear but fear itself... and spiders

 

My current gear : (Mancave) Vizio M701, Sony Str-DA5800 receiver,  Speakers : Front.. Klipsh RF-7 reference flagship, Center.. RC-64 reference, Surrounds.. 4x RC-62 reference, DirecTv Genie, PS3, Oppo BDP-105 Universal Audiophile blu-ray. 

kyzer the medic is offline  
post #365 of 408 Old 07-22-2013, 02:42 AM
Newbie
 
Woof01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
As a devoted 3D fanatic for the past 20+ years, let me chime in a bit here. Active was the old school reference for 3D, but I think recent advances in passive 3D, particularly those found in 2013 HDTV models, are now just as good.

Fact: Stereoscopic vision in humans is achieved by fusing two images with slightly offset perspectives. For the purposes of our discussion, I'll highlight the resolution (R) and temporal (T) perspectives involved in achieving fully stereoscopic vision. Ideal 3D is 1 = R x T. Where R and T range from 0 to 1.

Active achieves 3D by showing you full resolution images (R=1.0) alternately or half the time (T=0.5) to each eye. Ergo score of 0.5 = 1.0 x 0.5

Passive achieves the same by showing you two complementary half resolution images (R=0.5) all the time (T=1.0) to both eyes. Ergo score of 0.5 = 0.5 x 1.0

Both approaches use "tricks" to simulate stereoscopic 3D. Active 3D tricks your brain by alternating two images at high speed while passive 3D tricks your brain by showing two "half images" all the time.

Neither is perfect 3D but they are good enough to trick us analog beings into perceiving 3D. Since both only get a 0.5 score, how do you account for the remaining 0.5? That's filled-in by your brain. Regardless of which approach, there's some work being done by our gray matter to make sense of the information conveyed by these two techniques. As such, there is some level of fatigue after extended 3D viewing regardless of approach. Which is more comfortable is up to your own individual experience.

I personally feel that both are very tolerable even after extended viewing if ideal viewing guidelines are followed, but I appreciate the advantages of passive's cost effectiveness and ease of use over that of active's. cool.gif

Something to remember is that active 3D will always limit your TV's maximum refresh rate to half unlike passive 3D that can run at maximum refresh rate even with 3D on - and oftentimes, that smoother image really helps the viewing experience, especially with fast moving scenes.
Woof01 is offline  
post #366 of 408 Old 07-22-2013, 04:45 PM
Advanced Member
 
dave1216's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Highlands Ranch, Colorado
Posts: 504
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
So I guess you would give a score of 1 to passive 4K capability for 1080p 3D?
dave1216 is offline  
post #367 of 408 Old 07-22-2013, 08:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cakefoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 31
.5 apples versus .5 oranges

Active wins in resolution, vertical viewing angle (3D's going to stink off-axis anyway), and active DLP wins crosstalk.

But I prefer passive because it has no flicker/motion ripple, and the glasses are free with a movie ticket and work without batteries or buttons.

My Videos

A movie with good 3D does not necessarily equal a good 3D movie!

cakefoo is offline  
post #368 of 408 Old 07-23-2013, 02:59 AM
Newbie
 
Woof01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
@dave1216

No, because it's still half vertical resolution relative to the full image. The reference point is the full resolution of the material and not a fixed resolution like 720 or 1080.
Woof01 is offline  
post #369 of 408 Old 07-23-2013, 03:23 AM
Advanced Member
 
Airion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
When the full resolution of the material is a fixed 1920x1080 per eye 3D Blu-ray, which it will be, then a 4k passive display (3840x2160) will be able to display every detail, with some horizontal upscaling.

The source only needs half of the vertical image of the display. There might or might not be other unforeseen issues with 4k passive displays, but given a 3D Blu-ray, there will be no resolution disadvantage vs current 1080p active displays. I think it deserves a "score of 1!"
Airion is offline  
post #370 of 408 Old 07-23-2013, 08:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Devedander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

there will be no resolution disadvantage vs current 1080p active displays. I think it deserves a "score of 1!"

There has to be something said for pixel spacing when every other line is black. Same number of dots maybe, but two projectors with the same resolution can have significant IQ differences due to things like screen door effect which is a similar effect to what each eye sees with passive although in both directions instead of just one like passive 3D

Monster Gold Plated Optical Cables: http://monstercable.com/productPage.asp?pin=1263

Awesome user review: "Unreal quality. Sounded like I upgraded my speakers." :D
Devedander is offline  
post #371 of 408 Old 07-23-2013, 08:53 PM
Advanced Member
 
Airion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devedander View Post

There has to be something said for pixel spacing when every other line is black.

Certainly. The black lines that 1080p passive panels have now won't go away, they'll just get smaller and allow for closer viewing distances. I'm curious to hear how close one can comfortably get. Hopefully the black lines won't be visible within any reasonably close viewing distance, but I don't know.

But at least it won't be a resolution disadvantage anymore.
Airion is offline  
post #372 of 408 Old 08-06-2013, 08:13 AM
Senior Member
 
rcandiloro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 376
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by fman3 View Post

I personally would never buy a Passive 3D set. It just doesnt look HD to me, and to me - that ruins the whole experience. its like HD vs SD.. I will say that every 2010 Active Shutter model that I have seen has crosstalk issues and eye strain issues. I would suggest gettting a 2011/2012 model Active Shutter Panasonic Viera Plasma. If you want 3d - then get a viera Plasma!
Also, if you are wanting to watch live sports in 3D, just keep in mind that means you are going to be watching espn 3D, which is already set to a half resolution - and combine that with the half resolution passive set... it is unwatchable.. There is a reason Best Buy has Directv espn 3d on display, but for some reason its always not working on the passive sets... Just compare them for yourself before making a big purchase!

I was worried about 3D not looking HD too. I have a 63" Samsung Plasma. 3D is crisp, but the glasses are really uncomfortable and there is a bit of crosstalk. I just bought a Vizio M series and the 3D is excellent. I played Batman on it and the image was very crisp, bright and had ZERO crosstalk. Of course everybody is different and there is no universal right answer, but for me, having owned an active 3D display (a very good one) and now a passive 3D display I strongly prefer passive. The lightweight comfortable glasses are a big factor too, but if I take a step back and consider picture only I still go with passive for the zero crosstalk, brightness and lack of flicker I saw with active. Again, this is just my opinion.
rcandiloro is offline  
post #373 of 408 Old 08-06-2013, 08:18 AM
Senior Member
 
rcandiloro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 376
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
It sounds like 4k passive will settle this once and for all. Full HD with the advantages passive brings.
rcandiloro is offline  
post #374 of 408 Old 08-10-2013, 05:35 AM
Member
 
Oniichan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 41
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcandiloro View Post

I was worried about 3D not looking HD too. I have a 63" Samsung Plasma. 3D is crisp, but the glasses are really uncomfortable and there is a bit of crosstalk. I just bought a Vizio M series and the 3D is excellent. I played Batman on it and the image was very crisp, bright and had ZERO crosstalk. Of course everybody is different and there is no universal right answer, but for me, having owned an active 3D display (a very good one) and now a passive 3D display I strongly prefer passive. The lightweight comfortable glasses are a big factor too, but if I take a step back and consider picture only I still go with passive for the zero crosstalk, brightness and lack of flicker I saw with active. Again, this is just my opinion.

ok,
I just purchased a 80" M series Vizio, Passive 3D, I watched Storm Surfers 3D and it was awesome, what I was seeing on the tv was incredible, I also watched Prometheus 3D as well, and it was pretty good depth, I am very happy
rcandiloro likes this.
Oniichan is offline  
post #375 of 408 Old 08-23-2013, 03:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Augerhandle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 47
From the description of PS3 active glasses on Amazon:
Quote:
Best-in-class active 3D quality delivers full HD playback without the resolution loss of passive 3D
http://www.amazon.com/PlayStation-3-3D-Glasses/dp/B00562O8U0/

"The wise understand by themselves; fools follow the reports of others"-Tibetan Proverb
 
Augerhandle is offline  
post #376 of 408 Old 08-26-2013, 08:57 PM
Senior Member
 
mogrub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Merica
Posts: 311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 53
A short take on active versus passive 3D, from the perspective of a 3D fan that owns both.

First, proper calibration is a must, for both types of displays. That's not an avoidable, unnecessary additional cost. It's a basic part of purchasing the 3D viewing experience. Don't cheat yourself.

After that, for most people in most circumstances, both paasive and active can work, and work well. Real life issues probably drive the choice more than esoteric technical distinctions.

If you've got kids, especIlly young ones, and they are going to touch th glasses, that's plus one (and probably determinative) in favor of passive. I'd much rather my family kids ate and/or barfed on the vastly cheaper (and less toxic) passive glasses.

Some people (very few, but some) are headache sensitive to active shutters. Game over. You're a passive purchaser.

Axis issues will drive other viewer's decisions. Light control wiill others.

I enjoy both technologies and don't see a native, decision-driving difference between the two, that somehow says one is always preferable to the other.

If you are considering a 3D purchase, test both as fully as you can. Then overlay your real world family and viewing considerations, and go from there. Don't leave 2D picture quality out of the analysis. It's likely to be most of what you watch, by a high percentage.

But for whatever 3D viewing you do get to enjoy, whether you are recharging your glasses or not, this is fun technology, and well worth the price of admission.
mogrub is offline  
post #377 of 408 Old 09-11-2013, 01:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,815
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

When the full resolution of the material is a fixed 1920x1080 per eye 3D Blu-ray, which it will be, then a 4k passive display (3840x2160) will be able to display every detail, with some horizontal upscaling.

The source only needs half of the vertical image of the display. There might or might not be other unforeseen issues with 4k passive displays, but given a 3D Blu-ray, there will be no resolution disadvantage vs current 1080p active displays. I think it deserves a "score of 1!"

 

I am an absolute believer in passive technology, but to play devils advocate, it's important to point out that for 4K content (not upscaled HD), active 4K 3D sets (such as the new XBR-65X850A) can display 3840x2160 with no halving of vertical resolution.  It's still not worth it IMO, and I'm very happy with even 1920x540.  Very.


Well Vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before I get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified.
Date the ban will be lifted: Never
tgm1024 is offline  
post #378 of 408 Old 09-12-2013, 01:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,815
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof01 View Post

[........]

Passive achieves the same by showing you two complementary half resolution images (R=0.5) all the time (T=1.0) to both eyes. Ergo score of 0.5 = 0.5 x 1.0

[........]

Something to remember is that active 3D will always limit your TV's maximum refresh rate to half unlike passive 3D that can run at maximum refresh rate even with 3D on - and oftentimes, that smoother image really helps the viewing experience, especially with fast moving scenes.

 

The story is a little more complex, but only because LG has gone back and forth on this.  Part of what is claimed with LG is that they alternate the every-other bit of information temporally (sort of like interlacing).  They can only display 540 lines at a time (and of course are still required to have the blank lines "line up" visually), but they display a frame by two consecutive half-frames of 540 (per eye).  This amounts to 1080 lines of input frame information being spread over two consecutive output frames of 540 lines each.

 

Note: it's not at all clear as to whether or not this is marketing once again getting ahold of a little information and extrapolating it up to nonsense.  Remember the "passive lets you see 3D lying down" ?  Aye yi yi.

 

If what they "sometimes say" is true, then what they're doing temporally is this:

 

Output Frame # is the first number on the line, and a count of each 1/120th of a second.

Input Frame information: Le = Left even, Lo = Left odd, Re = Right even, Ro = Right odd

A,B,C,D are information frames numbers.  So ARo is input frame A, Right side, odd scanlines of frame A.

 

1. ALe + ARe  (interwoven)

2. ALo + ARo  (interwoven)

3. BLe + BRe  (interwoven)

4. BLo + BRo  (interwoven)

 

Note: I don't particularly believe this!  But it does change the equation a little bit if true.  You are in fact getting 1080 lines of information (just 540 at a time).  The reason I don't believe this is because it would lend itself to the kind of edge jitter for even and odd input image lines that are different----similar to the problem you get with interlacing a thin horizontal line.

 

Here's an indepth discussion of the information LG is feeding to folks.  Note the indepth analysis.  Note also: I do not like their scanline image, because I find it misleading.


Well Vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before I get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified.
Date the ban will be lifted: Never
tgm1024 is offline  
post #379 of 408 Old 09-12-2013, 01:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,815
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devedander View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishdoom View Post

All I know is with Active when I turn my head the picture goes to hell. smile.gif

And with passive if you sit anywhere but the sweet spot in the center it's crosstalk central... both systems are best viewed in a specific way.

 

No, not true.  First, the (circularly polarized) lines are horizontal: one per scanline.  This means that there is considerable L/R flexibility because the FPR will still cover the same line regardless of "reasonable" angles.  It's the vertical viewing angle that is limited.

 

With my 2013 Sony KDL-60R550A, there's probably an 80° horizontal viewing angle flexibility, and far less than that vertically of course, but this is enough to comfortably have a wide couch fit everyone, including kids sitting on the floor, and even a person on the side couch (side farthest from the TV).  I keep testing it, and no one complains from any spot.


Well Vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before I get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified.
Date the ban will be lifted: Never
tgm1024 is offline  
post #380 of 408 Old 09-13-2013, 11:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Devedander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

The story is a little more complex, but only because LG has gone back and forth on this.  Part of what is claimed with LG is that they alternate the every-other bit of information temporally (sort of like interlacing).  They can only display 540 lines at a time (and of course are still required to have the blank lines "line up" visually), but they display a frame by two consecutive half-frames of 540 (per eye).  This amounts to 1080 lines of input frame information being spread over two consecutive output frames of 540 lines each.

Note: it's not at all clear as to whether or not this is marketing once again getting ahold of a little information and extrapolating it up to nonsense.  Remember the "passive lets you see 3D lying down" ?  Aye yi yi.

If what they "sometimes say" is true, then what they're doing temporally is this:

Output Frame # is the first number on the line, and a count of each 1/120th of a second.
Input Frame information: Le = Left even, Lo = Left odd, Re = Right even, Ro = Right odd
A,B,C,D are information frames numbers.  So ARo is input frame A, Right side, odd scanlines of frame A.

1. ALe + ARe  (interwoven)
2. ALo + ARo  (interwoven)
3. BLe + BRe  (interwoven)
4. BLo + BRo  (interwoven)

Note: I don't particularly believe this!  But it does change the equation a little bit if true.  You are in fact getting 1080 lines of information (just 540 at a time).  The reason I don't believe this is because it would lend itself to the kind of edge jitter for even and odd input image lines that are different----similar to the problem you get with interlacing a thin horizontal line.

Here's an indepth discussion of the information LG is feeding to folks.  Note the indepth analysis.  Note also: I do not like their scanline image, because I find it misleading.

I believe they utilize some kind of filtering to remove offensive differences that would cause just what you are talking about. This means you really are not seeing full resolution (as some is filtered out) and it brings into question why bother doing so if you are going to filter out stuff that is significantly different (ie you will only show the parts of both lines that are similar - well how much better is that than just one line then?).

That ignores the fact that the lines go out of place relative to each other.

As to the point of Active halving the refresh rate of your display (as was brought up by the post you replied to) I would argue that until we get source material that is higher than 60hz it really doesn't matter unless you REALLY like interpolated material. And even then it only matters on displays of less than 240hz.

Monster Gold Plated Optical Cables: http://monstercable.com/productPage.asp?pin=1263

Awesome user review: "Unreal quality. Sounded like I upgraded my speakers." :D
Devedander is offline  
post #381 of 408 Old 09-13-2013, 11:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,815
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devedander View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

The story is a little more complex, but only because LG has gone back and forth on this.  Part of what is claimed with LG is that they alternate the every-other bit of information temporally (sort of like interlacing).  They can only display 540 lines at a time (and of course are still required to have the blank lines "line up" visually), but they display a frame by two consecutive half-frames of 540 (per eye).  This amounts to 1080 lines of input frame information being spread over two consecutive output frames of 540 lines each.

Note: it's not at all clear as to whether or not this is marketing once again getting ahold of a little information and extrapolating it up to nonsense.  Remember the "passive lets you see 3D lying down" ?  Aye yi yi.

If what they "sometimes say" is true, then what they're doing temporally is this:

Output Frame # is the first number on the line, and a count of each 1/120th of a second.
Input Frame information: Le = Left even, Lo = Left odd, Re = Right even, Ro = Right odd
A,B,C,D are information frames numbers.  So ARo is input frame A, Right side, odd scanlines of frame A.

1. ALe + ARe  (interwoven)
2. ALo + ARo  (interwoven)
3. BLe + BRe  (interwoven)
4. BLo + BRo  (interwoven)

Note: I don't particularly believe this!  But it does change the equation a little bit if true.  You are in fact getting 1080 lines of information (just 540 at a time).  The reason I don't believe this is because it would lend itself to the kind of edge jitter for even and odd input image lines that are different----similar to the problem you get with interlacing a thin horizontal line.

Here's an indepth discussion of the information LG is feeding to folks.  Note the indepth analysis.  Note also: I do not like their scanline image, because I find it misleading.

I believe they utilize some kind of filtering to remove offensive differences that would cause just what you are talking about. This means you really are not seeing full resolution (as some is filtered out) and it brings into question why bother doing so if you are going to filter out stuff that is significantly different (ie you will only show the parts of both lines that are similar - well how much better is that than just one line then?).

That ignores the fact that the lines go out of place relative to each other.

 

No, there's no reason for any such filtering because there are no offensive differences.  (Unless you're talking about the pulse situation of super thin lines).  Their attempt here is to provide all 1080 lines (by using two sucessive output frames).  All the input information is present and accounted for: it just takes two output frames to show it.  Almost a perfect analogy to interlacing.  Again though: I don't trust LG and their ability to correctly convey WTF they're actually doing under it all.  I suspect they're simply throwing information away.  This would result in an image with a horizontal line 1/1080th of a raster high having the potential of vanishing entirely.  I should actually test this soon: I'll have to crock something together though---there is no such 3D information test.

 

I'm also not sure what you mean that the lines go out of place relative to each other.  They line up perfectly.  Technically one would think that because stereoscopic information is left/right in nature that they'd have to be at exact vertical positions to line up, but scanlines are so thin that this is not a problem.  The brain immediately snaps the L eye line over the R eye line (and the L gap with the R gap) and so on down the raster.  <---Are you referring to something else?


Well Vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before I get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified.
Date the ban will be lifted: Never
tgm1024 is offline  
post #382 of 408 Old 09-13-2013, 07:34 PM
Advanced Member
 
Airion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
The LG does in fact filter out vertical details.

From http://www.hometheater.com/content/closer-look-active-vs-passive-3d-flat-panels:
"To reduce the appearance of vertical judder, Kane says the TV filters the incoming video signal to remove the highest frequencies in the vertical direction, thus reducing vertical resolution."
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

I'm also not sure what you mean that the lines go out of place relative to each other.  They line up perfectly.

I think the problem is each eye still only has 540 physical lines on the TV with which to display video. The missing 540 lines of video data essentially gets stacked on top of the previous 540 in the same position. It's not like interlacing in that regard. You still have 540 permanent black lines in each eye.
Airion is offline  
post #383 of 408 Old 09-14-2013, 08:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,815
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 550
Quote:
Quote:Originally Posted by Airion View Post

The LG does in fact filter out vertical details.

From http://www.hometheater.com/content/closer-look-active-vs-passive-3d-flat-panels:
"To reduce the appearance of vertical judder, Kane says the TV filters the incoming video signal to remove the highest frequencies in the vertical direction, thus reducing vertical resolution."

 

IMO, they're misusing the term "judder" slightly, but that's fascinating.  Think of this though: from their examples their patterns might be leading them to an incorrect conclusion.  In a fixed pattern the eye is free to accidentally line up the grid horizontally as well as the normal "shift up by one line" vertically.  I have to think on this.  Thanks for that link!!!

 

I'm being led astray I think by my trying to put this in context with what I've seen before: Given my work with FFT's on images (eons ago), there is an odd effect once resolution is halved: it "sort of" approximates the reduction of the high-frequency component.  But this is an interesting deinterlacing style filter.  Thanks again.  I'm thinking.

 

 
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

I'm also not sure what you mean that the lines go out of place relative to each other.  They line up perfectly.

I think the problem is each eye still only has 540 physical lines on the TV with which to display video. The missing 540 lines of video data essentially gets stacked on top of the previous 540 in the same position. It's not like interlacing in that regard. You still have 540 permanent black lines in each eye.

 

Yes, correct of course, but I was clarifying a claim that sounded entirely different from that.  Interlacing isn't a fully appropriate example anyway because a 60hz interlacing can display either 30 fps (completed by two frames) or 60 fps having a half frame continue on in the time domain every 60th of a second---depending on how it was filmed (think the analog design in the old days).  But interlacing is a near perfect way to look at it anyway in the 60Hz30fps case.


Well Vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before I get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified.
Date the ban will be lifted: Never
tgm1024 is offline  
post #384 of 408 Old 09-18-2013, 06:23 PM
Newbie
 
dandunthe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Good info,I'd have to Google it again and find it but it was something like that. thank you 23.gif
dandunthe is offline  
post #385 of 408 Old 11-09-2013, 04:29 PM
Member
 
LeeC22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcandiloro View Post

... I still go with passive for the zero crosstalk, brightness and lack of flicker I saw with active. Again, this is just my opinion.

Come and watch my Sony KDL-47W805 passive 3D TV... that'll dispel the "passive 3D = zero crosstalk" myth for you. I used to think my Epson TW6000W had occasional crosstalk issues, until I bought this TV. It makes my Epson seem crosstalk free by comparison, it's that bad.
LeeC22 is offline  
post #386 of 408 Old 11-10-2013, 08:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,815
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeC22 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcandiloro View Post

... I still go with passive for the zero crosstalk, brightness and lack of flicker I saw with active. Again, this is just my opinion.

Come and watch my Sony KDL-47W805 passive 3D TV... that'll dispel the "passive 3D = zero crosstalk" myth for you. I used to think my Epson TW6000W had occasional crosstalk issues, until I bought this TV. It makes my Epson seem crosstalk free by comparison, it's that bad.

 

I have the "bigger little brother" of that Sony line (60" lower technology): KDL-60R550A.  And there is occasional crosstalk, but it's not "that bad" by any means.  You're definitely overstating things.  We just saw a 3D family movie, OZ: The Great and Powerful, and I didn't notice a single instance of crosstalk once with either the black and white or high contrast color scenes.  It's interesting: with a 3D image object, to achieve a position along the Z axis you of course need a horizontal separation.  If the object is very bright on a black background, it'll be up to the quality of the circular polarizers on the TV and then in the glasses to block out R information from the L lens.  This has been very impressive with the latest FPR technology...particularly on the Sony that I have seen.

 

I just saw Gravity 3D and while the display vehicle is different, it still requires circular polarization filters to cleanly remove L info from R eyes, etc., and while much was bright white on black space I didn't see any cross talk at all.  Not a fair comparison, but it shows that clean image removal is pretty darn good these days.

 

Note, I'm not saying you're doing this LeeC22, but many people confuse crosstalk with images that converge too far along the Z axis...particularly toward you.  This makes it very difficult to fuse the two images and often results in a far-too-obvious dual image floating in front of the 3D background you're focusing on.  Extreme crosseye effects do this.  This is not crosstalk.  I've come across this misunderstanding time and time again.


Well Vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before I get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified.
Date the ban will be lifted: Never
tgm1024 is offline  
post #387 of 408 Old 11-10-2013, 08:51 AM
Member
 
LeeC22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

I have the "bigger little brother" of that Sony line (60" lower technology): KDL-60R550A.  And there is occasional crosstalk, but it's not "that bad" by any means.  You're definitely overstating things.

I am impressed that having never seen my set, you can categorically state, without any doubt, what I am definitely overstating. That "bigger little brother" must have some impressive networking features, that allow you to see into my house... perhaps I should have got that version instead. rolleyes.gif

You look at this image, which comprises of two sections from one of the clips, then tell me that I am "definitely overstating things". This was photographed through one of the lenses, so has nothing to do with "fusing two images together". This is perfectly indicative of how this set is, all the time. There is always, something ghosting like that on the screen... always.

LeeC22 is offline  
post #388 of 408 Old 11-10-2013, 09:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,815
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeC22 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

I have the "bigger little brother" of that Sony line (60" lower technology): KDL-60R550A.  And there is occasional crosstalk, but it's not "that bad" by any means.  You're definitely overstating things.


I am impressed that having never seen my set, you can categorically state, without any doubt, what I am definitely overstating.

 

I am impressed that it was YOU that stated "categorically" that the passive on 3D was  bad because of YOUR TVs.  The previous poster was talking about passive in general.

 

Since you've seem to forgotten, here's the "categorical" statement that you made:

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeeC22 View Post
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcandiloro View Post

... I still go with passive for the zero crosstalk, brightness and lack of flicker I saw with active. Again, this is just my opinion.


Come and watch my Sony KDL-47W805 passive 3D TV... that'll dispel the "passive 3D = zero crosstalk" myth for you.  I used to think my Epson TW6000W had occasional crosstalk issues, until I bought this TV. It makes my Epson seem crosstalk free by comparison, it's that bad.

 

 

Quote:
That "bigger little brother" must have some impressive networking features, that allow you to see into my house... perhaps I should have got that version instead. rolleyes.gif

 

You must have some impressive networking features to assume that YOUR set produces as bad a passive 3D image as everyone else's.  Or even the majority.  Those are your assumptions you started with.

 

 


Well Vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before I get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified.
Date the ban will be lifted: Never
tgm1024 is offline  
post #389 of 408 Old 11-10-2013, 10:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,815
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 550

When I swapped out the first R550A (because of a dreaded & common image aberration that I've never quite seen on any other model of LCD) I noticed that the cross-talk did seem worse.

 

There was some speculation among my fellow imaging friends about why this might be (aside from the routine problem of having a circularly polarized light not being "perfectly" filtered out by the reverse polarized filter).

 

  1. The most obvious would be that the FPR is difficult to allign properly over a scanline.  Being "off" by a little vertically will result in a L scanline leaking abnormally into the R eye.
     
  2. The other potential problem had to do with the actual width (actually height) of each of the FPR lines themselves.  The usable viewing angles are obviously compromised.  Similarly if they are too narrow.  It becomes a nasty game.  In fact, it seems to be a game that Sony has recently given up on the 55" version of the 4K XBR X900A (not the 65") because of how difficult designing and placing the FPR was for super skinny 4K lines without producing a dramatically bad usable viewing angle.  (<---Note, this is an absolute PR disaster for Sony....it makes the blank scanlines appear far more obviously and if they're not clustering the scanlines correctly it might actually result in a 540p resolution).

 

There are definitely some monitors producing worse FPR crosstalk than others, however, even on the current R550A that I identified as being slightly worse than my first one, it's rarely noticed.  I didn't see it once in the 3D Oz movie.    The technology far better than it used to be.

 

As far as filtering alone: Given that in the theater during Gravity 3D, I was looking for it with the worst case scenario of white objects on a black background, and couldn't see it: again, this only proved to me that filtering cleanly has improved.  Also, this theater used more expensive non-give-away glasses---I can only guess that the circularly polarized filters were better than the give-away ones are but I can't be certain.


Well Vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before I get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified.
Date the ban will be lifted: Never
tgm1024 is offline  
post #390 of 408 Old 11-10-2013, 10:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Augerhandle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Are you sure they weren't active glasses since they were non-giveaway?

"The wise understand by themselves; fools follow the reports of others"-Tibetan Proverb
 
Augerhandle is offline  
Reply 3D Displays

Tags
3d Hdtv

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