3D 4K tests - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 2Likes
  • 1 Post By crunchy3d
  • 1 Post By WOLVERNOLE
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 24 Old 02-06-2017, 06:50 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
crunchy3d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Liked: 14
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.
tezster likes this.

Last edited by crunchy3d; 02-06-2017 at 06:55 AM.
crunchy3d is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 24 Old 02-06-2017, 07:39 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tezster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mississauga, Canada
Posts: 1,481
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 517 Post(s)
Liked: 402
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

Last edited by tezster; 02-06-2017 at 07:42 AM. Reason: typo
tezster is offline  
post #3 of 24 Old 02-06-2017, 08:28 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
crunchy3d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by tezster View Post
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.
crunchy3d is offline  
 
post #4 of 24 Old 02-06-2017, 08:33 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
crunchy3d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by tezster View Post
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
At least there are many people who are interested in 3D. Maybe they would change their mind and introduce at least one 3D set in 2018? Of course the chances are close to none.
https://www.change.org/p/lg-please-r...-oled-tv-model
crunchy3d is offline  
post #5 of 24 Old 02-07-2017, 06:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
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.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #6 of 24 Old 02-08-2017, 06:08 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchy3d View Post
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.

Last edited by 3DBob; 02-08-2017 at 06:12 AM.
3DBob is offline  
post #7 of 24 Old 03-07-2017, 12:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
latreche34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Baja, California Mexico 965392
Posts: 526
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Liked: 64
I did those tests on my TV LG OLED E6 and they seem to all passed, I didn't get how the vertical black bars work though. Active 3D is the best in my opinion and the TV has to only have fast refresh rate all done in the glasses, LG went with cheap passive 3D instead and now they abandon it because it's problematic.
latreche34 is offline  
post #8 of 24 Old 03-28-2017, 02:52 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
WOLVERNOLE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: DUMFRIES, VA USA
Posts: 2,679
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
I did those tests on my TV LG OLED E6 and they seem to all passed, I didn't get how the vertical black bars work though. Active 3D is the best in my opinion and the TV has to only have fast refresh rate all done in the glasses, LG went with cheap passive 3D instead and now they abandon it because it's problematic.
I may be incorrect but I believe that the Sony Z9D (very high-end) LED full backlit has 3-D, and for THAT reason, I may go for it compared to an OLED (LG or Sony).
Can anyone comment on the 3-D quality of that Sony Z9D ? Oh, and it comes in 75".
EVERRET likes this.
WOLVERNOLE is offline  
post #9 of 24 Old 04-08-2017, 07:06 PM
Member
 
vitop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Spring, TX
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 0
I honestly thought there were no 4K 3D TVs ever sold. I thought all 3D TVs were 1080. Am I wrong?
vitop is offline  
post #10 of 24 Old 09-24-2017, 11:22 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
steve ans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,059
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by vitop View Post
I honestly thought there were no 4K 3D TVs ever sold. I thought all 3D TVs were 1080. Am I wrong?
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.

Sony XBR-55X930D, Sony KDL-55HX729, Sony HT-NT5 Sound bar, Sony UBP-X800 BD Player, Sony 3D Glasses: TDG-BT500A, BR-750 & TDG-BR250, Apple TVs, Gen 3 & 4 APC Back Up UPS XS1500.
steve ans is offline  
post #11 of 24 Old 09-25-2017, 05:58 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by vitop View Post
I honestly thought there were no 4K 3D TVs ever sold. I thought all 3D TVs were 1080. Am I wrong?
Agree with above. But note, due to the smaller pixel size you do get an apparent boost in resolution due to some upscaling to fit the 1080 into the 4k format. And there is a difference in how passive polarized and active shutter 3D utilizes the 4K pixels as well. The clarity for me on my 60" LG is amazing and very 4K-like.
3DBob is offline  
post #12 of 24 Old 09-25-2017, 08:35 AM
Senior Member
 
brazen1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 206
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 43
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.
brazen1 is offline  
post #13 of 24 Old 09-25-2017, 09:16 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazen1 View Post
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.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #14 of 24 Old 09-25-2017, 09:49 AM
Senior Member
 
brazen1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 206
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtastic View Post
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.


Hmmm? I only see improvement to the upscale on my particular panel and certainly doesn't look worse. In fact, when I force the output to remain at 1080p and not allow the upscale to 2160p it looks downright terrible and find outputting to 2160p as intended a great factor in upscale clarity. I guess some displays are different than others.


I don't understand what you mean when you write passive is using all their pixels too, not upscaling, and because the pixels are small you can't see the ones that are not being used? I would assume either you are using all the pixels or you're not.... and utilizing post processing algorithms on every pixel as intended.


Yes, I played with 3D UHD resolution when it first became possible but the new native resolution was not improved enough from the original 1080p for me. The biggest increase I noticed was file size and didn't amount to it's space imo. I also prefer native frame packed 3D's in their entirety, untouched. TAB and O/U are distant memories for me now but once were in demand due to player limitations at the time. Now I don't have to hack my source to be able to play it and just rip one to one back ups. The entire Blu-ray with all the bells and whistles is smaller than the higher resolution encodes I was doing without them and looks the same. https://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=113646&page=8
brazen1 is offline  
post #15 of 24 Old 09-25-2017, 02:57 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazen1 View Post
I don't understand what you mean when you write passive is using all their pixels too, not upscaling, and because the pixels are small you can't see the ones that are not being used? I would assume either you are using all the pixels or you're not.... and utilizing post processing algorithms on every pixel as intended.


Yes, I played with 3D UHD resolution when it first became possible but the new native resolution was not improved enough from the original 1080p for me. The biggest increase I noticed was file size and didn't amount to it's space imo. I also prefer native frame packed 3D's in their entirety, untouched. TAB and O/U are distant memories for me now but once were in demand due to player limitations at the time. Now I don't have to hack my source to be able to play it and just rip one to one back ups. The entire Blu-ray with all the bells and whistles is smaller than the higher resolution encodes I was doing without them and looks the same. https://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=113646&page=8
Yes, passive 4K is using all 8.3 million pixels too. But you don't get a true 2160p image because it can only display 3D in 1080p height. The black lines are visible same as a 1080p passive if you close one eye and move very close, they're still there but with 4 times smaller, much harder to notice. In normal seating position, impossible to see.

With passive you do get the width upscale of 4K at 3840 or native if you're using a 4K source. Some benefits with passive 4K over active are less dim glasses, and no flicker.

UHD 3D, I'm referring to my own content I film in UHD and render it into top/bottom half 3840x2160. I've played this on a passive 4K display and it's indeed 4K3D compared to the 2D/left version.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #16 of 24 Old 09-25-2017, 06:27 PM
Senior Member
 
brazen1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 206
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 43
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-...-whats-better/ So does Rtings: http://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/3d-tv...-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"?
brazen1 is offline  
post #17 of 24 Old 09-25-2017, 09:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
"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.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #18 of 24 Old 09-25-2017, 10:44 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 12,404
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1313 Post(s)
Liked: 373
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.

My 3D videos and more
Don Landis HT System: Projector Sony VPL VW665ES Players: Samsung UBD K8500 OPPO BD93 Sony BDP S6200 All Regions Player Denon AVR 4311ci, 7.1 JBL Professional series and Klipsch PS3, XBOX360, Dish VIP722K; 3D Edit Suite: Edius7.53, Vegas Pro v13, Power Director15, i7-950, LG 3D TV DM2752
Don Landis is offline  
post #19 of 24 Old 09-26-2017, 07:43 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
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.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #20 of 24 Old 09-26-2017, 08:43 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
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.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf LG Supported Resolutions.pdf (161.8 KB, 2 views)

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #21 of 24 Old 09-26-2017, 09:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtastic View Post
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.
3DBob is offline  
post #22 of 24 Old 09-26-2017, 10:49 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
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.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #23 of 24 Old 09-26-2017, 11:08 AM
Senior Member
 
brazen1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 206
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtastic View Post
"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.
brazen1 is offline  
post #24 of 24 Old 09-26-2017, 11:39 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
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.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply 3D Displays

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