AVS Forum banner

3D 4K tests

15K views 38 replies 13 participants last post by  1957Mike 
#1 · (Edited)
Test of 3D 4K TVs

Before buying 3D 4K TV, here are some files which could be useful for testing ghosting and resolution of 3D 4K.
Here are the files I've used for testing ghosting and resolution of 4K 3D TVs (I tested only LGs - both LCD and OLED).
The particular model of TV does not guarantee anything. You can get good and bad ghosting on the same model. Eventually, I had to buy the already opened 4K 3D TV "on display" even though the seller opened 2 originally packed TVs in front of me (they had terrible ghosting). Out of about 12 4K 3D TVs only 3 of them were more or less OK concerning ghosting (1 OLED and 2 LED TVs).

So, the video and picture files I've used for the test are here:
http://dsc.ijs.si/damir.vrancic/down_3d/Tests/

Download zip file with right-click and choosing "Save link as". Put the files on some USB 3.0 key which will be inserted into the test TV.

The video and picture files are mostly over-under (except mpo files, of course). The ultimate ghosting test is
2160p_Red_Cyan_OU.mp4 or
2160p_Green_Magenta_OU.mp4

On the left eye you should see only red (green) colour, while on the right eye there should be cyan (magenta) colour. The colour should be even without any changes in brightness or colour (try to find the most optimal vertical viewing position, first). If there are any changes in brightness or colour, the polarisation film is probably not ideally mounted and you cannot do anything about it.

The ghosting can also be checked with
2160p_Black_Bars_TAB.mp4
or
2160p_MPO_Black_bars.mpo

but it's only an additional test to the previous one (which is the ultimate to me).
You should practically not see any "ghosts" when checking the picture.

Resolution of 3D on 4K TVs can be checked by:
2160p_TV_Resolution_Chart_OU.mp4
2160p_MPO_Resolution_Chart.mpo
2160p_JPG_Resolution_Chart_TAB.JPG

Due to the firmware bug on LG TVs, the MPO files will be shown in HD resolution per eye (I am not sure whether 1920x540 or 1920x1080) instead of 3840x1080 per eye (like JPG and mp4 variants). This is quite unfortunate, since MPO is automatically recognised as 3D, while for the other files, you should always manually select 3D over-under (moreover, sometimes you have to first switch off 3D and then switch on 3D over-under to see it, since the TV can automatically show 2D to 3D conversion instead!).

Anyhow, my conclusion is that it's very hard to find good 4K 3D LG passive TV. Without the mentioned files (I made them by myself) I would be unable to find good 3D 4K TV.

Damir

p.s. By the way, I also tried few 4K LG TVs which displayed 3D in 1920x540 resolution per eye. They were all perfect considering ghosting, but, the resolution was too low for me. The warning sign is the following: if the TV, besides side-by-side or over-under configuration, offers some other 3D configuration like checkerboard or similar, it's probably lower-resolution in 3D mode.
p.s.2. It's also quite unfortunate that on my new LG 4K passive 3D, all the movements in 3D are not "clear". I have exactly the same feeling as on my Panasonic active 3D. Like some kind of temporal missynch. I'll have to test it once with some higher frame-rate camera and analyse the results.
 
See less See more
#2 · (Edited)
Since the challenge lies in the variance from set to set within the same model, testing is really only beneficial if you can check the exact set you intend to purchase, making it impractical in many situations, especially with larger TVs. It would be nice if the underlying manufacturing tolerances and/or QC employed were improved; that's really where the change needs to happen. Imagine if there was an independent certification process for 3D displays, where a minimum criteria had to be met as it relates to viewing distance/angles, and degree of acceptable cross-talk/ghosting: that's what the industry needs IF it cared about delivering a quality 3D presentation.

But since 3D is all but gone with 2017 TV models, and the majority of the consumer market doesn't care about in-home 3D, the point is rather moot :(
 
#3 ·
Since the challenge lies in the variance from set to set within the same model, testing is really only beneficial if you can check the exact set you intend to purchase, making it impractical in many situations, especially with larger TVs. It would be nice if the underlying manufacturing tolerances and/or QC employed were improved; that's really where the change needs to happen. Imagine if there was an independent certification process for 3D displays, where a minimum criteria had to be met as it relates to viewing distance/angles, and degree of acceptable cross-talk/ghosting: that's what the industry needs IF it cared about delivering a quality 3D presentation.
Yes, you are limited to brick and mortar shops and to the sets they have currently on display.

Of course, you can always try your luck with internet shops, but the success rate, according to my "little study" is 1:4. I am not sure that Amazon would tolerate 3- or more-times returns. :(

Now I understand why they abandoned 3D. With 4K it became quite tough to place the polariser accurately on the screen. I suppose it might be still relatively easy by applying test picture on the TV and moving the polariser by robot hand until the picture is perfect from some pre-defined position. Unfortunately they probably used some simpler mounting procedures or bad quality polarisers.
 
#5 ·
Another reason I prefer my DLP PJ. I already know my 49ub8500 has some crosstalk issues, I keep hearing the problem hasn't gone away on '15 and '16 models so I'm not sure I'm going to bother with picking one up. Wish they would keep at least one flat panel model going. You can still buy glasses-free Izon model, so there is one 3D TV model still available. Not completely gone, but you'd have to shell out 6k for it. I'm not going to bother with a new flat panel with 3D until glasses free is available for less. It just makes since on flat panels they should be glasses-free because they're more casual viewing.
 
#6 · (Edited)
p.s. By the way, I also tried few 4K LG TVs which displayed 3D in 1920x540 resolution per eye. They were all perfect considering ghosting, but, the resolution was too low for me. The warning sign is the following: if the TV, besides side-by-side or over-under configuration, offers some other 3D configuration like checkerboard or similar, it's probably lower-resolution in 3D mode.
p.s.2. It's also quite unfortunate that on my new LG 4K passive 3D, all the movements in 3D are not "clear". I have exactly the same feeling as on my Panasonic active 3D. Like some kind of temporal missynch. I'll have to test it once with some higher frame-rate camera and analyse the results.
Damir, I have a LG 60UH8500 and very little crosstalk, but like all passive TVs, there is a sweet spot and you have to have your eyes center to the display vertically. As for movements and pans, I leave the motion control on (that soap opera effect) and the movements and pans are like butter. It really improves my personal videos and definitely scales them to add more sharpness, realism and depth. If you see temporal missynch as you call it, you possibly might have super resolution on--it's recommended to have that off, or if they are your own personal videos, they could be a partial frame mismatched, which will cause that weird movement pattern. I've tested SBS, T/B and MPO and they all work great and the feeling of depth and sharpness is much greater than with my 3D projector.
 
#10 ·
3D 4K sets were indeed sold up through 2016 by a few manufacturers. However, 3D is only available in 1080p format Blu ray.I purchased in early Spring this year the 2016 SONY XBR-55X930D since my other TV is a 2011 Sony. Both are active shutter. The 2011 model has a little less cross talk. But I'm glad I got the 930D to keep my 3D collection of Blu rays alive for, hopefully, a long time.
 
#12 ·
I use a Samsung 65JS8500 active shutter. I prefer active because when the 1080p 3D source uses upscaling, it uses every available pixel and indeed 'looks' UHD. On my replaced 1080p set, it too used every pixel. On a side note, the same is true for 1080p 2D titles. I honestly cannot see a huge difference from a native 2160p vs a 1080p upscale but there is some without a doubt. I think the real time upscale algorithms used to post process are exceptional. Since passive 3D turns off every other vertical line of resolution (black rows of lines between active pixel rows) do you find the clarity as good, better, or have you compared? My viewing distance is any where from 12' down to 3' depending where I happen to be sitting since I use this panel as a PC monitor as well and often close especially testing various things.
 
#13 ·
I use a Samsung 65JS8500 active shutter. I prefer active because when the 1080p 3D source uses upscaling, it uses every available pixel and indeed 'looks' UHD.
Personally, I don't see any advantage to upscaling a 1080p image. In some cases I have seen it make the image worse like on my 28" UHD monitor. It seems to group noise patters differently, I can't really explain it but it seems to look worse than a 1080p screen.

Passive 4K screens are using all their pixels too but not really upscaling, but you don't see any black lines now because the pixels are 4 times smaller. I didn't really see them on my 1080p either because I didn't sit 3 feet in front of it.

One neat trick you can do on passive 4K screens is send it a top/bottom 4K file which is 3840x2160 (3840x1080 per eye) and this is basically full 4K 3D but half-height. Can't use Blu ray because it's higher resolution, must send it to the screen via HDMI or use USB stick or Plex app. So really, I can already do 4K3D even though there's not an industry standard for it.
 
#16 ·
I don't see these same black lines using active with one eye shut by eye only or using a magnifying glass. I see every pixel in use.
Cnet appears to agree that not every pixel is in use with passive: https://www.cnet.com/news/active-3d-vs-passive-3d-whats-better/ So does Rtings: http://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/3d-tvs-active-3d-vs-passive-3d. Passive produces half the resolution an active system does. I guess sitting back far enough not to notice is acceptable to most. I've read with all the pixels 4k offers, when half of them are off it won't matter due to the shear amount left on. I think it matters personally.


The usual arguments why passive is better than active are as you wrote. Active creates flicker. This is because the lenses turn off and on rapidly alternating left and right. Passive purists like to condemn this as 'flicker' based on how it works and complain sensitive folks get headaches. I don't know what flicker is? I've never seen it nor experienced it. I understand I'm supposed to but quite simply I haven't. Perhaps there are folks that can actually see single frames during a 24fps viewing without a high speed camera able to capture a frame of such rapid movement but my eyes can't.


Active dims the picture: Yep. Active glasses dim the picture since the lenses go dark when they alternate left/right on and off. Unfortunately, so does passive simply because every other line of pixels are off (black) creating a darker image. So each dims the picture. Both lose to the nature of how 3D is rendered in its own way. Fortunately, modern displays have separate memory for 3D mode(s) and can be (should be) calibrated to overcome dim pictures in both passive and active. 3D titles are also edited brighter with dimness in mind to compensate at the source with its 3D counterpart in mind.


Personally, I think the largest difference between passive and active is resolution. That's cool some of you guys have cameras that you can film in UHD 3D. I've seen them on youtube. I was really writing about retail 3D most of us deploy though. I'm sure your videos look very nice on your passive display. I know they do on my active just to confirm good quality isn't limited to OLED passive and certainly isn't superior as we read everywhere imo for reasons I've touched upon. What is "2D/left version"?
 
#17 ·
"2D left", I rendered out just the left camera in 2D and compare that to the UHD 3D (top/bottom) version and then I compare both of those to a 1080p downscaled version which looks inferior to both. Yes, it's a shame there is no 4K3D retail standard. The crazy thing is (I don't know in the case of active 4K because I haven't tested files on those yet, see below) we already can play 4K3D on 2014-2016 4K passive screens, it's just not 2160p per eye but it's sort of the same thing as Blu ray 3D on a 1080p passive set before 4K passive screens arrived. How many bought a 1080p passive and complained that the resolution didn't look HD? If you get close enough, yes it's noticeable. But seated at normal distances the picture looks HD since both eyes are required for 3D. So what you have is 1920x540p and on 4K passive it's now 3840x1080p which looks more UHD than HD so long as the source is 4K and not an upscaled image.

Getting back to the black lines or pixels, I don't see black lines either. I can't sit close enough to see them, if I do I will see ghosting and that's worse and ghosting is even worse on active LCD panels, so there you go. It isn't an issue. Every pixel is in use, they have to be in use. Black lines don't mean black pixels, it's only dark in the other eye which is how the FPR layers work, in other words the left eye is dark when viewing through the right eye and the right eye is dark viewing thru the left. So they're dark in that sense and not being used for both eyes at the same time. It's really the glasses blocking the corresponding layer for each eye. If you take the glasses off, every pixel is used on the display, glasses on: each eye gets half the vertical resolution but all of the horizontal. So what that means is you're getting 3840x2160 to the screen but each eye sees 3840x1080p. The resolution is now enough to display all of blu-ray 3D frame packing signal and then upscaled to fit the screen at least the horizontal resolution is upscaled.

I haven't tested yet on active 4K how it handles 4K3D source yet. Maybe you can compare for me if you have a way to access the files.

4K 2D sample:


4K3D sample top/bottom:


You might have to download 4K source from YT to compare, I have not been able to access 4K now on YT because of recent changes to YT. Also, would be curious to know if your screen allows you to play the file either in YT app or from a PC and what resolutions show up.

Top/bottom renders are ideal for passive since they can't display full 2160p height only 1080p but you get the full width of UHD, it would be interesting to know the results of a top/bottom 4k3D file on an active screen. I also have files rendered in SbS half UHD which might work too on active but I don't have an active 4K to test.
 
#23 ·
"2D left", I rendered out just the left camera in 2D and compare that to the UHD 3D (top/bottom) version and then I compare both of those to a 1080p downscaled version which looks inferior to both. Yes, it's a shame there is no 4K3D retail standard. The crazy thing is (I don't know in the case of active 4K because I haven't tested files on those yet, see below) we already can play 4K3D on 2014-2016 4K passive screens, it's just not 2160p per eye but it's sort of the same thing as Blu ray 3D on a 1080p passive set before 4K passive screens arrived. How many bought a 1080p passive and complained that the resolution didn't look HD? If you get close enough, yes it's noticeable. But seated at normal distances the picture looks HD since both eyes are required for 3D. So what you have is 1920x540p and on 4K passive it's now 3840x1080p which looks more UHD than HD so long as the source is 4K and not an upscaled image.

Getting back to the black lines or pixels, I don't see black lines either. I can't sit close enough to see them, if I do I will see ghosting and that's worse and ghosting is even worse on active LCD panels, so there you go. It isn't an issue. Every pixel is in use, they have to be in use. Black lines don't mean black pixels, it's only dark in the other eye which is how the FPR layers work, in other words the left eye is dark when viewing through the right eye and the right eye is dark viewing thru the left. So they're dark in that sense and not being used for both eyes at the same time. It's really the glasses blocking the corresponding layer for each eye. If you take the glasses off, every pixel is used on the display, glasses on: each eye gets half the vertical resolution but all of the horizontal. So what that means is you're getting 3840x2160 to the screen but each eye sees 3840x1080p. The resolution is now enough to display all of blu-ray 3D frame packing signal and then upscaled to fit the screen at least the horizontal resolution is upscaled.

I haven't tested yet on active 4K how it handles 4K3D source yet. Maybe you can compare for me if you have a way to access the files.

4K 2D sample:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c72XH6dfEUE&t=22s

4K3D sample top/bottom:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0c3AkVIh3w

You might have to download 4K source from YT to compare, I have not been able to access 4K now on YT because of recent changes to YT. Also, would be curious to know if your screen allows you to play the file either in YT app or from a PC and what resolutions show up.

Top/bottom renders are ideal for passive since they can't display full 2160p height only 1080p but you get the full width of UHD, it would be interesting to know the results of a top/bottom 4k3D file on an active screen. I also have files rendered in SbS half UHD which might work too on active but I don't have an active 4K to test.

Playing the video from the site reports 3840x2160 at the display and I have to manually enter TAB but that is not what it's rendering. The highest resolution I can select is only 1440p in YT settings. So, I copy the url into MPC-BE and it renders a true 3840x2160 TAB @60Hz and goes into TAB automatically but the video is choppy. Streamed youtube UHD has always been problematic for me and really never had enough interest in it to fix the problem that is probably my GPU VP9 profile. No idea how to D/L and play it local which would produce no flaws. Switching to 30Hz didn't help either. Couldn't find the video using the display app. Fwiw, crosstalk was very bad early on especially in rushed to market 3D panels and PJ's about a decade ago. Todays modern panels exhibit zero crosstalk, at least mine. I picked up the best of the last of the Mohicans imo. HDR 10, 4k, 3D Active, Flat panel, etc. No crosstalk was my deciding factor right next to no burn-in or retention worries. Again, using this as my PC monitor too, I display lot's of static images for hours at a time. Also, no brightness degradation as someone is on the thing everyday for 16 hours for the past couple years now. Hope it continues to last cuz when it goes, no more 3D. Waiting for a native laser 4k with 3D, HDR, etc that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. May never happen..... Sorry couldn't give you more feedback.
 
#18 ·
Observations-
I see the black lines on my 28" LG passive. Must wear the passive glasses and close one eye. That's the way it should be for the technology to work. If you sit far enough away you may not see the black lines because your vision just can't resolve that detail from distance. Likewise, 4K on that same monitor from that distance is likely not detail visible either and HD and UHD will look pretty much the same.

In my HT, I have a 92" wide screen with a good 4K projector. I sit about 8 ft from the screen which is my front row seats. If I sit in the rear, about 18 ft, the HD and UHD tends to look the same with respect to image detail.

Regarding the flicker. This is a problem with most active TV sets. Sony tried to resolve this by using higher frequency switching active glasses. The lower frequency causes more eye fatigue and headaches as well. In rare cases the lower switching frequency has caused people with epilepsy to suffer seizures if they were off their medication.

TB vs SBS on an active screen really makes no difference since there is no lenticular filter blocking every other pixel line. All Pixels are active. So resolution is limited in some way, one or the other. However, I can only observe 1080p 3D content as 4K3D is disabled on my projector. If you create a 4K 3D TB or SBS program, I must limit the program by down scaling it to 1080P or the projector will reject the program. I will see it but only in it's 2D T/B or SBS image.
Then with 1080p, the projector has a feature that generates tween pixels as a special upscale that is beyond basic pixel multiplying. This isn't true 4K data but rather creates a smoother image with 4K pixels but the input data is still 1920x1080.
 
#19 ·
I assume all 4K projectors with 3D won't work with 4K3D files like yours Don, I was curious to know if any active 4K panels would work. It may be like on your projector they will not enter 3D mode with any resolutions higher than 1080p. I do know that some Samsung models support 4K 3D at least half UHD resolution 3D. It may also have to be rendered in SbS but I'm not sure.
 
#20 ·
I found the documentation on LG supported resolutions which includes 3D supported resolutions. Only problem it's in a interactive web format which I had to open in web tool. (Tried to find it on their website now but the new Web OS 3.0 guide doesn't have it or I don't see it?) I copied it from there to text edit then export to pdf so I can attach it here. Had to make the text smaller so it would look right for pdf and not 30 pages long.

LG actually lists 3D supported at UHD resolutions up to 4096x2160 but must be entered into 3D mode manually. The highest resolution you can render that the TV will display pixel for pixel is 3840x2160 top/bottom.
 

Attachments

#21 ·
LG actually lists 3D supported at UHD resolutions up to 4096x2160 but must be entered into 3D mode manually. The highest resolution you can render that the TV will display pixel for pixel is 3840x2160 top/bottom.
Tom, I'm assuming that for passive 3D, the interweaved L/R eyes would be 1080 vertically and 4096 horizontally--so are the 3840 pixels getting up-scaled to 4096. Not sure I understand your explanation.

I will have to try this on my LG 60". Thanks for your research on this.
 
#22 ·
Yes, for passive only. Only 3840 horizontal resolution, if you send a DCI 4096 image it will downscale and crop but you can send it apparently. I don't have anything that films in DCI yet so no way I can test right now. Only 3 3D modes are available in resolutions over 1080 which are 2D-3D, SBS and T/B. A SBS 3840x2160 frame would yield 1920x1080/eye same as Blu ray 3D, but top/bottom can show 3840x1080 since you're keeping the horizontal resolution and keeping the height at 1080 which isn't reduced further by the screen.

You should be able to play the native 4K from YT since you have a 2016 LG which has Web OS 3.0.
 
#24 ·
Yes, I can't even access 4K resolution anymore on YT. They disabled the h.264 files so only VP9 so I have to use Chrome browser and that only allows 720p on my Mac Pro even though I have a 4K gpu. You'd have to use a YT downloader and grab the 3840x2160 file and play it locally, that is if you have a PC with 4K GPU.
 
#25 ·
I see the horizontal black lines on my 42LW5500 from 1.8meter distance.
But i like to upgrade.. Can somebody confirm, that this distance will reduce to around 1.2meter with a 55" 4k 3d passive tv? (if my math is correct)
That would be fantastic! Such huge field of view without black lines?

Also,what does this mean?
"if the TV, besides side-by-side or over-under configuration, offers some other 3D configuration like checkerboard or similar, it's probably lower-resolution in 3D mode."
My old LG offers checkerboard, but i don't think i see lower resoluton in T/B mode because of this. Or this is only valid for 4k tvs? Why? For all models?
I don't understand the relationship. Or its just an experiment with one specific model?

55UF850 is a good choice if i can test ghosting before buy? Any other cheap recommendation?
It's not HDR, i know. Would be good that too (my tv stick can do 4k/60 HDR), but cannot have all think for low price..

Thanks for test files crunchy!
 
#26 ·
You won't see any black lines with 4K, but you will get crosstalk sitting too close. I can't get closer than 6 feet with my 49". A couple more feet would be better for minimum distance like 7-8 at this size. You'll have to pull up the models supported resolutions stats and see what it supports under each 3D mode and frequency. I'm pretty sure that all LG 4K models support up to UHD resolution for 3D in top/bottom and side by side modes. See post above attachment.
 
#29 ·
I can watch 2D 4k from 1.2 meter, i checked in the store on a 2D TV.
But if get crosstalk in 3D mode this will change everything :(
Why is that? I can see my 42LW5500 from 0.5m without any additional ghosting what is exist from 3m too.
(if i'm still on the sweet spot of course) With 4k something changed here?
 
#30 ·
I was never able to sit that close on my 65" LW 1080p screen because of the black lines. Can't remember if crosstalk was an issue at closer distance. Viewed at 10-12 feet the black lines were not noticeable.

I can really only give my own experience on my 4K model which is the 49" UB8500 and 6 feet is about it. Possibly other models were better. At 6' and 49" screen, that is actually pretty close viewing, nearly the same as viewing my 140" screen at 10'.
 
#31 ·
Thanks for your effort, but i feel a little variance here. Don't you? :)

"Can't remember if crosstalk was an issue at closer distance."

vs

"You can't sit 1 meter from the screen, not for 3D anyway. You'll get crosstalk"

My math says i can watch it nicely from 1.2 m, but your experience is 1.8m.
Ok, i should see it with my own eyes, but now 4k-3d tv isn't available in my city.
 
#32 ·
Speaking about my 1080p 3D screen which I haven't watched 3D on it in years. It sits above a fireplace so the vertical angle is off, mainly use it for 2D. My 4K screen I can't get closer than 6 feet because of crosstalk, hope that helps.
 
#34 ·
I tested 55UF850V today. Resolution was good, and horizontal black lines was invisible from 1.5m!
This sounds good, however ghosting was bad from this distance (tomtastic you were right), even from the sweet spot :(
I had to step back to around 3m from where it was almost perfect.

The Red-Cyan and Green-Magenta test video should be white screen with naked eyes? It wasn't from 1.5-2m, but from 3m whole screen was white.
So how good is this tv? Should i buy? Or what about 2016 HDR models? If i buy for 4-5 years, should i buy HDR instead? How do you like?
Can i make 3D-HDR videos with my consumer equipment? (gopro3+, TD30, 2xSony A5100, etc)

thanks!
 
#35 ·
Crunchy3d:
I'm curious you call red-cyan test the "the ultimate" for you.
Yes, left eye should see red and right cyan, but what if some ghosting occur?
Left eye will see just a little cyan, but the whole picture still looks red, so users can think, yes! it's good.
But it's not. When you use my picture, right eye should see only black (in a perfect world).
If you see ghosting you can compare two display by numbert. Mine circle 1-4 isn't visible, 5 is barely visible.

Also: 2160p_Black_Bars_TAB.mp4 should be used in SBS mode, right? :)
If i select T/B both eye will see the same picture.

thx!
 

Attachments

#38 · (Edited)
Ok, i got my 55UB850V finally.
2D-4K is fantastic from 1.5-2m!
3D-4K is very nice from 3 meters, small ghosting starts in 2 corners from 2.5 meters, big ghosting from 2 meters..
Now i can watch my own 3D videos in 3840x1080x60p/eye quality :)
MPO: yes, unfortunately from usb these 4k-3d pictures only show as Fullhd 3D. Don't know why.
I have 3 dead subpixel, but fortunately pixels are so small, i cannot see it from normal viewing distance.

After 2-3 years, i like to buy a used oled 3d too :)

edit: i just tested 3840x2160 TB jpeg-s, and as i select 3d mode from the remote the picture show in 3D, but unfortunately stretched vertically to half at the center of the screen.
Why is that? I can not find any setting for this.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top