Hey, Frank. It took me a couple of minutes to grasp exactly what you were saying. I agree (if I understand how this stuff works - a big "if"
): for the 1080 60i 3D video that you're creating, you will see all the information on screen that was captured. So, it's true full HD 3D. No loss of information. I don't argue that for 1080 60i 3D the way you watch it.
That said, can we agree that what a person sees with a passive display (like these LG LCDs anyway) consists of a series of fields, not frames? In other words, because the FPR layer filters out every other line of the display, the maximum information on the screen for a period of 1/120th of a second is only 1920x540 lines. In an active 3D TV, the display scales the 1920x540 field to a full 1920x1080 frame, every 1/120th sec. So, the information on the screen for that time consists of half original and half interpolated pixels, just as a SbS image consists of 960x1080 pixels scaled up to full 1920x1080 3D for display. That's what's happening when I watch footage from my JVC TD1 directly out of the camcorder at 60i. The display always scales each of those 1920x540 fields up to 1920x1080 FRAMES. That's why it looks so frickin' awesome. For each eye, I see 60 full HD 3D frames every 1/120th of a second. From a distance, many people won't be able to tell the difference between the two, but especially on hard diagonal lines the difference is there. I don't think Blu-ray 3D at 24fps (I know, you hate it
) works the same way. But even if LG works some magic and is able to reproduce all the original information from the original film frame with 3:2 pulldown, the appearance is not as smooth as active 3D. At least it isn't to me. And the closer you get, the more obvious it is.
But as I said, I'm sold on passive now. You got me thinking, and after giving it a chance, I really like it. The benefits far outweigh the drawbacks. That's the most important thing for me.