Originally Posted by LJG
After further adjustments in 3 D settings for phase, and realizing one pair of the CE4 glasses left shutter was not functioning propery(the pair I was using), all I can say now is I have watched the most amazing 3D Bluray presentation of Imax 3D Under the sea.
I have not experienced 3D any where near this in a commercial theater it is truly spectacular.
Light output at both 1.78 12', and 2.35 14' was more than adequate, no where near 80% loss as reported by some, I would guess around 40-50% at the most.
Before putting 3D down as a fad, one has to see it properly implimented on a high end front projector.
With the good pair of CE4 glasses I was able to retrun the dark time to the default, so Xpand 101's may work with the CE4, I will let you know Chris as I ordered one pair of X-101's to test
Where did you get the IMAX Bluray? I watched that on Directv and it looked pretty fantastic. Im sure the Blu-ray will be way better! Yes, id love to know your thoughts as to how the CE4 and x101 compare.
Also, I agree completely the image only looks 40% to 50% dimmer in 3D then 2D. I have read about this a tremendous amount and everything I have read confirms what Mark says. The efficiency of a single projector with shutter glasses is about 16% with 84% loss.
If what i read is correct, and most of my info was taken for a nice piece of Barco literature showing the efficiency ratings of all different type of stereoscopic presentations, the light loss is from the duty cycle of the projector multiplied by the efficiency of the glasses.
The projector duty cycle should be 50% but it is a little less efficient because there is a little more separation to help with ghosting. So that gives us a duty cycle of 45%. The efficiency rating of shutter glasses is about 37% due to the polarizing lens. So 45% x 37% gives us about a 16% overall efficiency rating.
But that left me confused as to why my image doesn't look 84% dimmer than what my 2D image does. I think its because that a calculation of actual brightness and not perceived brightness.
So with my 2D image at 40fl my 3D image would be 6.4fl. If that is correct then that is no where near how it looks to my eyes. I think its because that is the brightness that one eye receives at a time. So since the switching is happening so fast my eyes don't realize one is closed at a time then my perceived brightness would be double that of actual brightness?
If that is the correct formula for calculating the actual brightness of a 3D setup, there has to be a calculation for perceived brightness.
Barco Stereoscopic format comparison.http://www.barco.com/projection_syst...copic_proj.pdf