Originally Posted by Lee Stewart
Polarized 3D LCD flat panel displays only produce half the vertical resolution (1920x540P) per eye where shutter viewed 3D on LCD and PDPs gets you Full HD per eye.
That does seem to be true with all of the current direct-view polarized sets.
It seems to be due to the physical structure of having the left and right eye elements side-by-side on the screen simultaneously... so you have to cut your rez in half along whichever axis the manufacturer chooses. Since current displays max out at 1920 x 1080, that means you get half HD for each eye (though the visible loss is much less... some folks claim they can't see the difference because of the way the brain perceives total visible detail by combining what both eyes see, giving you a complete 1920 x 1080 visible frame).
I wonder if newer, higher-resolution panels might change this down the road. For instance, imagine a PJ that has double the usual resolution in either direction... now you have enough to show the full 1080p left/right images. Or they could do what Real3D projectors do... use polarized light *but* still alternate left/right so each fraction of a second each eye is getting the full resolution of the entire screen. It sort of combines the best of both worlds... you get full res but still don't have the headache of active shutter wear... and the "flicker" is reduced because the glasses don't have to add any blanking time... just the back/forth of the actual TV image.
In that case, you'd need a way to quickly change polarizing filters with each left/right transition since the same panel pixels would be used. I'm not sure how the Real3D projectors do it... in that case it may be a physical filter that moves out of the way similar to a DLP color wheel. That obviously wouldn't work for a fixed panel display.
BTW, polarized sets (by JVC) are what Cameron and his team used when creating the 3D in AVATAR.
I heard that LG is developing LCD panels with an active polarizer. This would alternate the polarisation of the light coming from the panel from one frame to the next. At 120 Hz, this would give you full resolution at 60 Hz per eye, with passive polarized glassed, and no impact on the 2D viewing. In 3D, the brightness per eye would be cut in half, compared to 2D, of course, just as with shutter glass solutions, but better than the quarter brightness of Xpol.
Fascinating. That's my answer! I think in a few years polarized direct view may be competitive with active wear if that active polarizing works... once you get a 240Hz or higher set, flicker would be minimal or not visible and you'd have a fantastic full-resolution for each eye 3D image you could use for your superbowl party and everyone could just stock up on free eyewear from what they take home after watching 3D movies in the theater.