or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Tech Talk › 3D Shutter DLP Glasses: REVIEWS?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

3D Shutter DLP Glasses: REVIEWS? - Page 7

post #181 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjb16 View Post

After having used the Mits glasses and the x102s, I have to say I like the x102s more. I have prescription glasses, and the x102s not only seem to fit over better (more comfortably at least), the x102s also seem to block out a lot more ambient light.

Ambient light aside is there any difference in picture quality? Any ghosting, rainbowing, etc. differences?
post #182 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcterp View Post

Ambient light aside is there any difference in picture quality? Any ghosting, rainbowing, etc. differences?

Not that I saw. I've yet to see ghosting or rainbows on any 3D media on my set with either the Mits glasses or x102s.
post #183 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjb16 View Post

After having used the Mits glasses and the x102s, I have to say I like the x102s more. I have prescription glasses, and the x102s not only seem to fit over better (more comfortably at least), the x102s also seem to block out a lot more ambient light.

I have two pair of x102's sud models and I will do you a straight across trade for you Mitsubishi glasses if you want.
post #184 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjb16 View Post

Not that I saw. I've yet to see ghosting or rainbows on any 3D media on my set with either the Mits glasses or x102s.

Good to hear. I have a kit coming on Tuesday. I can see dim rainbows (not too distracting) with my X102's. I'll post a comparison with the Mits glasses when I get them.
post #185 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcterp View Post

Good to hear. I have a kit coming on Tuesday. I can see dim rainbows (not too distracting) with my X102's. I'll post a comparison with the Mits glasses when I get them.

Ditto. Btw, have you tried to determine if the plastic screen is the cause of the rainbow? I pushed the screen slightly and it does affect the rainbow I think but it affects the video content as well so still not sure. Mits has my complaint and photos and is supposed to respond on Monday. Would be nice if a free screen swap would fix it.
post #186 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjknatl View Post

Ditto. Btw, have you tried to determine if the plastic screen is the cause of the rainbow? I pushed the screen slightly and it does affect the rainbow I think but it affects the video content as well so still not sure. Mits has my complaint and photos and is supposed to respond on Monday. Would be nice if a free screen swap would fix it.

If you see the rainbows try to tilt your head to one side or wear the glasses crooked (at an angle).They disappear for me.

I just thought it was weird. all they would need to do is rotate the lens of the glasses 15-20 deg. to fix it. I first noticed it while looking at my laptop monitor. the screen is hard to see unless i tilt my head.
post #187 of 517
I'm using x102s with a Mits 65737--no rainbows, no ghosts--just glorious 3D!
post #188 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dintkin View Post

If you see the rainbows try to tilt your head to one side or wear the glasses crooked (at an angle).They disappear for me.

I just thought it was weird. all they would need to do is rotate the lens of the glasses 15-20 deg. to fix it. I first noticed it while looking at my laptop monitor. the screen is hard to see unless i tilt my head.

That does help. There is a sweet spot where the rainbow is almost entirely gone. Believe that is related to the polarization angle of the lenses.

I had tried 90 degree rotation before with no benefit. Thanks for the tip.
post #189 of 517
I lucked out with my X102s--they work fine and they fit me comfortably. However, I tried the Panny glasses at BB--and for me they are terrible--they don't fit, are uncomfortable, and I can see a "flicker." From my experiences, as well as the comments of others here, it appears to be important to try before you buy--this is especially true of sets like the Mits where you have many choices.
post #190 of 517
I received the starter kit today and some first impressions regarding glasses:

1. No rainbows with the Mits glasses. I tested this side by side with my X102's and both pairs of Mits glasses using a paused image. The X102's have several vertical rainbows while the Mits glasses have absolutely none. I'm much relieved about this.

2. No sync problems like those I encountered with the X102's. I watched Directv in 3D for awhile under my overhead CFL lights and there was no flicker or loss of sync. My overhead CFL's cause havoc with the X102's sync.

3. Every time I press a button on my remote there is a split second flutter with the Mits glasses. The IR of the remote interferes with the glasses. Not a big deal unless you constantly change volume during a program.

4. The X102's and Mits glasses are reverse of each other. Not usable together on my setup.

I only played with the kit for about 30 minutes so these are just my initial impressions.
post #191 of 517
got my kit today but haven't been in a hurry to test. glad to hear no rainbows. Hope I'm as fortunate. Still no word from mits re my complaint about rainbows with dlp link glasses. Perhaps now we know why the kit has the Samsung glasses.
post #192 of 517
Someone posted that the 2200's are actually better than the 2100's in more ways than just the charging aspect. Not sure exactly what he was stating, but can anyone gives us a comparison?

I asked this in another thread as well, but have not gotten an answer. Maybe this thread is better anyway.
post #193 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcterp View Post

I received the starter kit today and some first impressions regarding glasses:

1. No rainbows with the Mits glasses. I tested this side by side with my X102's and both pairs of Mits glasses using a paused image. The X102's have several vertical rainbows while the Mits glasses have absolutely none. I'm much relieved about this.

I just took a quick look through the non-rechargeables and rechargeables. At least when they are off (or on but not syncing because I don't have the emitter hooked up yet) I see no rainbow with either pair unless I turn my head away from the TV and look at it through the corner of my eye. then the rainbow (purple streak anyway) does faintly reappear. However, I am pleased with what I have seen so far considering no one will watch the TV with their head turned far enough to cause the streak to show up.

When checking for the rainbow, be sure and take off the plastic protective layers from the glasses. Looking at the TV with those still on the glasses produces severe rainbows which bummed me out at first but then I was relieved once I removed the protective layers.

Another note, the tint on the non-rechargeables and rechargeables appears to be exactly the same.
post #194 of 517
One concern I do have with the kit glasses is ghosting. The vertical and horizontal polarizing layers of the LCD shutter are what produce the shutter in combination with the LCD layer.

If the kit glasses have less effective polarizing layers than other glasses, which avoids the rainbows, presumably there would be more cross-over of left and right frames into right and left eyes, respectively.

However, if the horizontal and vertical polarizing layers are placed on an angle less then 90 degress from the normal, that might be how they are avoiding the rainbows. I'll have to experiment with tilting them to find out.

Either way, sounds like most are happy with them so far.
post #195 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjknatl View Post

One concern I do have with the kit glasses is ghosting. The vertical and horizontal polarizing layers of the LCD shutter are what produce the shutter in combination with the LCD layer.

If the kit glasses have less effective polarizing layers than other glasses, which avoids the rainbows, presumably there would be more cross-over of left and right frames into right and left eyes, respectively.

However, if the horizontal and vertical polarizing layers are placed on an angle less then 90 degress from the normal, that might be how they are avoiding the rainbows. I'll have to experiment with tilting them to find out.

Either way, sounds like most are happy with them so far.

Tilting the Mits glasses produces the same rainbows as my X102's. I have to tilt uncomfortably far to see them so no worries. I think what you said about rotation is correct.
post #196 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcterp View Post

Tilting the Mits glasses produces the same rainbows as my X102's. I have to tilt uncomfortably far to see them so no worries. I think what you said about rotation is correct.

Ironically, that is very good news because that means these shouldn't suffer from ghosting any more than the glasses we have tried that produce rainbows when worn normally.

I didn't see rainbows with the rechargeable samsung glasses either when worn normally, so apparently samsung has been smart enough to implement the tilted polarization. Nice work by somebody at Samsung!!
post #197 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjknatl View Post

..... so apparently samsung has been smart enough to implement the tilted polarization. Nice work by somebody at Samsung!!

Or by whoever is making them for Mitsubishi & Samsung...........

post #198 of 517
I have yet to actually hook up the mits starter kit emitter and test the Mits and rechargeable samsung glasses. Trying to get that done tonight in preparation for X-games.

Has anyone tried the rechargeable glasses and can confirm that they sync in the same order as the mits glasses? I have heard some say that the mits glasses sync as standard while I've heard at least one person say that the rechargeable samsung glasses synced as reverse. Surely the two have the same sync order?!
post #199 of 517
The sync order is based on the processing time to create the display in the TV it is not based on the Mits adapter or glases themselves, If your image is bad because the left eye and right eye shutter closings are wrong select Reverse in you TV.
post #200 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by walford View Post

The sync order is based on the processing time to create the display in the TV it is not based on the Mits adapter or glases themselves, If your image is bad because the left eye and right eye shutter closings are wrong select Reverse in you TV.

I am of the opinion that the glasses do have a set sync order based on the emitter (or DLP link) signal being received. Something about that signal apparently triggers the order, hence the reverse and standard settings of the TV adapting the signal to flip the order.

Most agree that the x102 glasses (and I have included the optoma glasses in this same group) provide a proper viewing experience with the TV set to reverse while the mits glasses provide a proper viewing when the TV is set to standard. Thus, it has been stated that mits glasses and x102/optoma sync opposite of one another at least for blu-ray and D* 3D content and won't work together for that reason. My hope is that the rechargeable samsung glasses sync in the same order as the mits glasses, which would be the opposite sync order of the x102/optoma glasses.
post #201 of 517
The reason that the X102 DLP-link glases have the correct sync signal is because the DLP-link flashes the "White-flash" on the screen between the actual two 3D frames so there is no way it can be out or sync since it knows if it is diaplaying a right eye or left eye frame.
post #202 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by walford View Post

The reason that the X102 DLP-link glases have the correct sync signal is because the DLP-link flashes the "White-flash" on the screen between the actual two 3D frames so there is no way it can be out or sync since it knows if it is diaplaying a right eye or left eye frame.

Are you suggesting the same logic isn't used for the "IR flash" from the emitter?
post #203 of 517
I am sugesting that there is possibly a time delay in the TVs procesing of the
TV's display of the white flash on the TVand the and output of an IR sync signal which requires that the TV delay the sync signal to the glass by 1/120th of a second by selecting reverse on the TV
post #204 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by walford View Post

The reason that the X102 DLP-link glases have the correct sync signal is because the DLP-link flashes the "White-flash" on the screen between the actual two 3D frames so there is no way it can be out or sync since it knows if it is diaplaying a right eye or left eye frame.

The point is that a given white flash apparently triggers the x102 to sync one lens versus the other, and the standard/reverse setting of the TV controls which lens is synced by that white flash (or at least which lens is synced first by that white flash).

I'm with Darin, I'd say the IR burst from the emitter works the same way as the white flash from the screen.

The problem is that one model of glasses syncs left lens from a white flash or IR burst occurring at time t=0 while a different model of glasses syncs the right lends from a white flash or IR burst at time t=0.

It isn't a matter of saying well the screen looks funny so let's change the standard/reverse setting. It looks funny through one model of glasses at the same time that it looks normal through another model of glasses. Switching the standard/reverse on the TV then switches which model of glasses allow the screen to look normal. So either way, one model of glasses looks funny, while the other looks normal. So you have to be careful about which glasses you purchase to avoid this.

It is conceivable that all DLP link glasses require reverse, while all emitter glasses require standard. I'm not sure of that but saying it is possible.
post #205 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by walford View Post

I am sugesting that there is possibly af thtime delay in the TVs procesing of the
TV's display of the white flash on the TV and output of an IR sync signal which requires that the TV delay the sync signal to the glass by 1/120th of a sont

In other posts, you have stated this as fact. What is your source? I've pointed out a couple of times that this defies logic. The sync simply needs to be driven off the same timing as the wobulation mirror. What makes you think that they would derive the sync timing from a point that is upstream of any processing that could inherently cause timing inaccuracies?
post #206 of 517
i put a poll up ...but darin, all of my content with the 2200ars look to require "reverse"

are you contradicting this...and if so does this mean that differnt people process better with differnt syncs. tonight we watched dinasaurs of pategonia and of course the 3d mode defaults at normal....quickly figured out reverse was where the "pop" was.

ive been using reverse for everything thus far. i thought i had normal selected at one time but realized that it probably hould have been reverse all along.

wd73833 and ssg2200ar , 3da1, and hr21 directv box.
post #207 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by nc88keyz View Post

i put a poll up ...but darin, all of my content with the 2200ars look to require "reverse"

are you contradicting this...and if so does this mean that differnt people process better with differnt syncs.

No, not at all. I'm just saying that the need for reverse mode is to compensate for EITHER the particular glasses that are being used being "backwards" from what the considers to be correct, or the content is coded backwards from the TV considers correct. It's not to adjust for timing delays within the TV itself. That would be silly because a) the TV manufacturer would know if/what the delay is, so there should be no need for a user setting for that situation, and b) the simple and obvious solution to internal signal processing delays is to drive the sync signal AFTER any signal processing. And that is simply in time with the screen refreshes.

So it's easy for the TV manufacturer to ensure that the sync signal is in time with the left/right images being displayed. But what is totally out of their control is glasses from other manufacturers not using the same standard they are, or content producers not using the same standard. One might consider left to be the first image, and the other right. 3d appears to be lacking in a lot of standardization right now.

On a side note, now that you mention it, yes, I think my 2200ARs also look better in reverse mode. I really haven't used them other than to confirm they work, since I can't play any real 3d content yet. The ONLY test material I can use at this point is the function within PDVD10 to convert 2d DVDs to 3d. And right now, sound doesn't even work for me in PDVD10. But I've paused an image, and flipped back and forth, and I do think it looks better in reverse. But I need real 3d content to confirm. That software is making a guess at what's supposed to be close, and what's supposed to be far, so it's not the best test to use. My adapter is SUPPOSED to ship by the end of the month, so I'll be able to try out DirecTV then. Hopefully I'll get some blu-ray content soon as well.
post #208 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by nc88keyz View Post

i put a poll up ...but darin, all of my content with the 2200ars look to require "reverse"

Do you have the mits starter glasses and is so do they also require reverse? I'm thinking the 833 series of TVs may be opposite the sync of the others.

My samsung rechargeables and my mits starter pack glasses both work properly in standard, while my DLP link glasses work properly in reverse.

A particular piece of content that really does a good job of showing the difference between correct and incorrect sync is the Disneyworld castle in the background with "Walt Disney" popping out in the foreground. If the glasses are in incorrect sync, my eyes can't focus on the screen and it is nearly painful.
post #209 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjknatl View Post

My samsung rechargeables and my mits starter pack glasses both work properly in standard, while my DLP link glasses work properly in reverse.

Just curious... is your emitter connected to the adapter, or to the TV?
post #210 of 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by walford View Post

The reason that the X102 DLP-link glases have the correct sync signal is because the DLP-link flashes the "White-flash" on the screen between the actual two 3D frames so there is no way it can be out or sync since it knows if it is diaplaying a right eye or left eye frame.

Some photos to illustrate the problem of different models of glasses having opposite sync (regardless of standard/reverse setting) and thus not being able to be used together.

In these photos, the Optoma DLP link has the dark lens on the opposite side of the mits and rechargeable samsung glasses, so the optoma glasses can't be used at the same time.
LL
LL
LL
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: 3D Tech Talk
AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Tech Talk › 3D Shutter DLP Glasses: REVIEWS?