Active Better Than Passive Per Sony - Page 3

An argument being made does not equal fact. (One can argue that the sky is made of jello, it doesn't mean it's true.) More on that "argument", below.


The blue part of the quote from the article was a hyperlink to the "shootout" that claimed passive was better, so Lee's response used an article that was more recent than the one he was countering.

That same shootout is also discussed here, where the author politely points to some of the flaws of the shootout. http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20102018-1/study-finds-passive-3d-tvs-superior-to-active/?tag=contentBody;page

As mentioned here and in several other threads, the shootout was flawed from the beginning, using TV choices that (deliberately or not) would give biased results. On top of that, it draws debatable conclusions and uses subjective statements throughout the report that show even more bias.

I would tend to believe that the author of the shootout was acting as a shill for LG, but then again, I'm also a cynic sometimes.

The big benefit to passive 3DTVs . . . cheap glasses

Well, all I'll add to the matter is that for those who can perceive "subliminal flicker", it's about as subtle as an Activon commercial. Trust your eyes and leave the internet for experts.

I tried to keep my post balanced and I tried to extol the virtues of both techs (especially as I own both active and passive TVs), but I guess there's no point in trying to be civil. Fine, lets roll in the mud.

Yes passive glasses are cheap. Nothing wrong with that. Not to mention they have zero syncing issues, there's no need to charge or change batteries and they generally yield brighter images.

Instead of just flapping your gums (I mean keyboard) all the time I suggest you actually go someplace, put on the glasses and watch an honest to goodness 3D bluray on a properly calibrated 2012 LG passive. You may be surprised at how good it looks.

Btw, the reason I took so long to respond is because I spent the evening enjoying my 3D TV, instead of arguing about it.

1. I enjoy 3D BDs and 3D-TV all the time . . . on my 58" Panasonic VT25.

2. I have yet to see any LCD TV that remotely compares with the picture quality of a plasma - yes even your vaulted LG models. Sorry - not impressed at all.

3. Brightness is not an issue in my home as I have my TV setup in a 100% light controlled environment.

4. My 3D glasses don't use batteries. They are rechargable as most active glasses today are.

5. I have two seating positions in my TV room - One for 3D (6 Feet) and one for HDTV (9 feet). All the passive 3DTVs I have seen, at 6 feet, I can see the line structure in 3D mode - yuk!

Maybe you best watch more 3D on your 3DTV. That way you will post less drivel on a thread like this.

It is great that you are enjoying 3D but why do you have to insult? It is my understanding of the human brain that people like you who would rather insult other members rather than provide constructive posts on this forum are basically ignorant.

Double post

There is no reasoning with some people Wonka. People who protest too much usually are unhappy and just can't cope. Let them take their ball and play somewhere else

Seems you didn't see this huh? I will bring it to your attention. This BTW was posted after I made the simple post of; "the big benefit of passive glasses 3DTV is cheap glasses," which happens to be a dead bang fact.


So talking about ignorance - I guess that definitely applies to you as he specifically said . . . "let's roll in the mud." Guess he was insulted by a fact? Wow! Talk about thin skin!

BTW - you notice Tony never responded to my list did he?

LMAO! So does that mean you are finally leaving this thread?

Dream on...both about my leaving or the accuracy of your posts.

And I didn't respond to your list because nothing in it is factual, its all your opinion.

LOL - not accurate or factual? As you said . . . Dream on!

I wasn't calling you ignorant and apologize if it came off that way.

But saying cheap glasses is the only benefit of passive though is kind of not telling the entire story because it's not that simple and if it was we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Fact of the matter is there is so much consumer confusion but both technologies offer wonderful 3d solutions that can always co-exist (and I learned that on these forums by trying to understand as much as I could about 3d displays).

Going back and forth and trying to justify that the setup you have is superior to others really is pointless (although I must admit it can be quite fun to read).

Ask yourself is your post adding value to the discussion before pressing the enter button.

But hey, if trolling is your thing too, have at it.

I recognize everyone's name here,and I'm sure we are all very familiar with every argument posted on this subject. We're definitely repeating things we've all heard dozens of times before.

Then again threads like this are the most interesting reading on this forum. When I scan the titles if I see fresh posts in this thread, I go right to read it.

Edit: Oops, I guess this doesn't add value to the discussion.

Except I didn't say that did I? I said . . . "the big benefit" . . . NOT. . . "the only benefit." So please do not put words in my mouth I didn't say. How rude!


My post with my 5 point list adds value as far as I am concerned. I am speaking from personal real world experience. How much more valuable can you get? Each point is a factual one, not an opinion or speculation.


The only one trolling here is you. And please stop trying to be a psuedo-mod will you.

Actually he said it was "the big benefit to passive 3DTVs," which is the same thing that passive fans say. At least, that's the main reason why my next TV will be passive. Am I mistaken? But because it was from someone who posted some positive things about active technology, it was interpreted as negative by said passive fan(atic)s.

I agree this stuff is entertaining reading though. We all love 3D, but argue so much about the details. The more we agree, the more we argue!

Thank you for pointing that out. They both seemed to have missed it.


It isn't as simple as passive versus active glasses 3DTVs and which is bettter. It is MUCH more complicated than that. There are so many variables involved that affect the decision as to which 3DTV tech one should buy. Each tech has it's positives and negatives. It is definitely not a case that one is far better then the other. It's a subjective issue based on the variables of the home environment that the 3DTV will be going into.

I agree we are all big proponents of 3D, and the fact that we talk so passionately about the different technologies just shows how important the feature is to all of us. When a real world, affordable, glasses free technology becomes available someday, I think we all agree that will be a great day for all of us.

I want (and will get one someday and do my own tests) an active set to see if that is the biggest advantage. Because if you take the cost of glasses out of the equation my other understanding is eye strain is quite a bit less with passive. I dont get eyestrain with passive but dont think I would with active either. But that to me is a major consideration considering I like to game. Bottom line one isn't better than the other, just a different solution to offer us a cool illusion, and as I always say I feel fortunate to have either technology in my home.

I just ignored your simplified post originally. Your...then cheap glasses implies that is the only real benefit. Since money isn't an issue to some people that in an of itself may not be a benefit at all.

And as far as being a pseudo-mod, I am glad my posts come off as objective rather than arrogant so thank you for the compliment.

Fixed it!

When a real world, affordable, high quality glasses free technology that is equal to what exists today, becomes available someday, I think we all agree that will be a great day for all of us

It implied nothing of the sort. That is YOUR interpertation (really a misinterpertation). And money issues? LOL - anyone would see the benefit of spending $60 for 10 pair of passive glasses versus $600 for 10 pair of active glasses.


LMAO! Cripes you are funny! Try . . . authoritative . . . NOT objective as you claim. Cripes you are a legend in your own mind huh?

I definitely am a legend to my own mind, but then I have to consider the source telling me that is my own mind so then there is that, have fun with your tv and I will have fun with mine.

LMAO I get a kick out of how wonka702 posts "Ask yourself is your post adding value to the discussion before pressing the enter button."

It's like someone threw a switch and everything degenerates to name calling and character assassination.

The most eyestrain I've ever had was with the 3DS, an autostereoscopic display, when I first got it. Why? Because it was when I first got it and my eyes hadn't yet adjusted to stereoscopic 3D. Seriously, terrible eye strain, but it went away completely after a few days of stubbornly playing Zelda 3D for 1-2 hours at a time.

Today, I play 3D games for 1-2 hours every day with my PC, occasionally for sessions of up to 7 hours (party time!), on my active 3D DLP 720p projector and it's completely comfortable. Same for my friends who have joined in on those 7 hour 3D gaming sessions.

The only thing that makes me sick is switching the game back to 2D mode. Yuck. The real enemy here isn't active or passive, it's 2D. No exaggeration, it's downright ugly and unsettling once you're used to 3D.

Passive has it benefits but I will wait until the 4K sets allow me to see the full 3D resolution from my 3DBDs. Active is currently the way to go for projection based home theater. Passive still has many obstacles in that environment... multiple projectors, aligning the two, filters, maintaining similar brightness, color correction, dedicated 3D screen, etc. Active in that segment is much more plug and play. I don't think my image is less bright compared to the commercial 3D screens in my area.

Plus if you are serious about 3D immersion, a large screen projection setup is really the only way to go unless you want to sit closer to your flat panel.

Would it be possible to keep this thread civil? Some of you posting here are out of control, please private message one another with your childish arguments. Seriously, some of you are probably 60 or 70 years old and you have nothing better to do than bicker? It's sad. Let's keep this forum as a place where others can trade useful info and share opinions; and not reduce the whole thing to the level of a **** measuring contest. I bet none of you would talk to one another like this if you weren't hiding behind a keyboard.

I am very good at giving advice just like most people, problem is I am not very good at taking it. You Robut have a way of being totally condescending yet for some reason because you have conviction in your posts even when you're being arrogant and stubborn, it doesn't bother me.

In addition to that you are the one who pointed out to me that this (or maybe it was Augerhandle) that we aren't in a format war, this isn't active versus passive like it was with 360 vs PS3 or hd dvd vs blu ray, both technologies can exist together.

I didn't know half the things I know now before I bought my 3dtv because there is so much misinformation on 3d. Im trying to be part of the solution and not the problem when someone is looking to buy a 3DTV.

I'm still pissed and amazed at Frys Electronics sales people because the day I decided I was going to get a 3dtv the salesman at Frys told me I didn't need it and tried to sell me a 2d tv. I looked at him and said I got a great 2d Samsung at home what do you have in 3d and he still tried to sell me a 2d tv. The displays were not working properly so getting a demo was almost impossible and I ended up just researching things on line and had to buy my set blind based on different posts and reviews on line. The active 50 Panasonic was originally my choice and I was going to go back to Frys and buy it and glasses. Well low and behold, Frys had this beautiful 50" THX certified Panasonic 1080p Plasma (I loved my Samsung plasma and pretty much wanted to stick with plasma) but no glasses came with it and Frys didn't even have any that I could buy at that time. Thats when I went back to the drawing board and stumbled upon Vizios passive technology which I later just ordered from using information I found online about it without ever seeing it in action (price was reasonable enough that it made the risk low).

I decided I wanted a 3dtv because I have ALWAYS LOVED 3D and still remember the day in April or May of 2005 that I heard about Real D 3d coming to theatres. I was a GM for Century Theatres at the time and was in San Rafael CA for training when it was announced.

I like to provide my opinions on these forums so others can have as much information since they too will probably have a hard time getting any real information from the sales people at any of the retail stores in existence as I later had a similar experience at Best Buy trying to get demos of 3d with a friend who later bought a LG passive set.

So yeah, why do we have to argue with each other about which is better? Makes no sense to me because if you know anything about the state of 3d in cinemas right now (if 3d goes away at the cinema we wont have new content to enjoy) then you know it is on life support. The numbers for Avengers this weekend
were phenomenal but most of the people who saw it in 3d were basically forced to because the 2d screens were all sold out. At my buddies theatre he had two screens of 2d and 6 screens of 3d and the 2d outsold 3d and the people who did buy 3d tickets did it because they couldn't buy 2d tickets (not all but most). So yeah if we create dissension as 3d lovers with each other, someday soon, we may not have any new content to even enjoy and discuss.

I completely agree and know the strain you speak of from my Evo 3d, almost felt as if someone was pushing on my eyes the first couple of days. I am waiting until they integrate that new second analog stick into the redesign before I purchase one, or I would already have one. I

So how much content is available in 3d on PC? I use 360 and PS3 for gaming mainly.

Even thought my little comment quoted from you I didn't mean to direct it at you or frankly anyone else. I just thought it was comical and I wanted to point it out as a joke (lame one).

If I come off condescending I'm sorry. In reality I find it a real challange to argue with you or others I could name. You comebacks are spot on most of the time. Part of my constant sort of attaches, for want of a better word, on this subject are that I find reading and adding to the argument pretty entertaining. I'm not a good or fast typer so I have to make short comments and I suppose they come out sharp.

I apologize to you and others. This of course will not be the end of that happening.