AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Displays › After three years of 3D my conclusion is
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

After three years of 3D my conclusion is - Page 3

post #61 of 250
5/25/12 at 8:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

The color resolution is only 1/4th of 1920 by 1080 at best. That's the standard.

This is not something I'm familiar with. Could you elaborate? I know full 1080p looks better than 720p in 2D, why would it be any different in 3D (one unique full 1080p image in each eye)?
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #62 of 250
5/26/12 at 12:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

I have that on my EVO 3D phone, Fuji 3D cameras, Sony 3D camcorders,JVC 3D camcorders and it's nice but the passive displays kill them all.

Are you seriously going to be impressed that a 3D HDTV kills a phone or display on a camera?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

Interestingly, I went out to lunch and shopping with my wife and after I got home I realized I had my passive 3D glasses on the entire time and didn't even realize it.

Between this and you saying how you used to be able to watch active 3D for hours on end but can't anymore because of the discomfort, I am starting to worry about you.

Do you find that you are getting confused easily? Do you often look for your keys even though they are already in your hand? Do you smell burnt toast even though no toast has been made?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

This is not something I'm familiar with. Could you elaborate? I know full 1080p looks better than 720p in 2D, why would it be any different in 3D (one unique full 1080p image in each eye)?

Because he has 3 years of watching 3D AND CREATING IT !!!!.

He has also compared passive 3D sets to phones, and guess what??? The passive set won!
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 250
5/26/12 at 4:19am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickoakdl View Post

Are you seriously going to be impressed that a 3D HDTV kills a phone or display on a camera?

On further consideration I've changed my opinion.
The winner is the SONY HDR-TD-10 autostereoscopic 3D display.


Quote:


Between this and you saying how you used to be able to watch active 3D for hours on end but can't anymore because of the discomfort, I am starting to worry about you.

Do you find that you are getting confused easily? Do you often look for your keys even though they are already in your hand? Do you smell burnt toast even though no toast has been made?

I can't remember.


Quote:


Because he has 3 years of watching 3D AND CREATING IT !!!!.

He has also compared passive 3D sets to phones, and guess what??? The passive set won!

See above.
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 250
5/26/12 at 12:14pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

This is not something I'm familiar with. Could you elaborate? I know full 1080p looks better than 720p in 2D, why would it be any different in 3D (one unique full 1080p image in each eye)?

It's known as chroma 4:2:0 subsampling. You can look it up.
That's only part of the issue of course. You also must consider anti aliasing, motion blur, (especially with 24P which is the only rate possible at 1080P.
As a matter of fact, 720P at 60 frames per second (versus 24 for 1080P) can have higher "effective" resolution because it requires much less motion blur.
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 250
5/26/12 at 12:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

On further consideration I've changed my opinion.
The winner is the SONY HDR-TD-10 autostereoscopic 3D display.

Now your getting all flip floppy! Next your gonna say the best 3D display is a pop-up book.
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 250
5/26/12 at 12:40pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickoakdl View Post

Now your getting all flip floppy! Next your gonna say the best 3D display is a pop-up book.

Maybe because I used to do lots of flip/flops when I was a gymnast?
Actually, I was only partially kidding about the Sony TD-10 being the winner.
It's a beautiful display and everyone who has seen it loves it.
It's just a tad small for watching movies on.
Reply
Reply
post #67 of 250
5/26/12 at 1:40pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrickMcKaha View Post

I knew you'd be engineering some one-of-a-kind solution. Don't let it stop you if manufacturers won't cater to your needs.

I have noticed that Stereoscopic Player gives 3D in a window now using just plain vanilla HDMI 1.4 to my projector - no need for checkerboard or interlaced there. Maybe more applications will support windowed 3D within HDMI 1.4, but I don't expect you to wait around for that.

I just noticed this. I might be interested in it except for the fact that it only works at 720P I presume.
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 250
5/26/12 at 3:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickoakdl View Post


Now your getting all flip floppy! Next your gonna say the best 3D display is a pop-up book.

I prefer lenticular cards.

Hey, you got 3d at home? Active or passive? Your cool
Reply
Reply
post #69 of 250
5/26/12 at 8:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

It's known as chroma 4:2:0 subsampling. You can look it up.
That's only part of the issue of course. You also must consider anti aliasing, motion blur, (especially with 24P which is the only rate possible at 1080P.
As a matter of fact, 720P at 60 frames per second (versus 24 for 1080P) can have higher "effective" resolution because it requires much less motion blur.

Yes, there's tons of factors to consider, screen size and viewing distance on top of all that. But you're just tip toeing around the fact that your passive displays don't deliver 1080p per eye.
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 250
5/27/12 at 5:28am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

Yes, there's tons of factors to consider, screen size and viewing distance on top of all that. But you're just tip toeing around the fact that your passive displays don't deliver 1080p per eye.

Irrelevant since 1080P per eye only works at the low rate of 24 frames per second which I never use.
Over the years I shot test 3D video at 24 frames per second and couldn't stand it. Having to use resolution destroying slow shutter speeds was the biggest issue.
So you see? I'm not only not losing resolution by going passive, I'm losing the active shutter glasses headaches also.
Reply
Reply
post #71 of 250
5/27/12 at 6:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

Irrelevant since 1080P per eye only works at the low rate of 24 frames per second which I never use.

Ah, irrelevant to you right now. Not irrelevant to those of us who want to view 3D Blu-rays with 1080p per eye. My 3D display is a 720p projector so I'm not yet a part of the 1080p per eye club, but I'm not going to fool myself. 4k passive displays (allowing 1080p per eye 3D) are on the way. Higher bandwidth HDMI chips allowing frame packed 1080p@60fps 3D are arriving now. Let's not be short sighted.
Reply
Reply
post #72 of 250
5/27/12 at 6:34am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

Ah, irrelevant to you right now. Not irrelevant to those of us who want to view 3D Blu-rays with 1080p per eye. My 3D display is a 720p projector so I'm not yet a part of the 1080p per eye club, but I'm not going to fool myself. 4k passive displays (allowing 1080p per eye 3D) are on the way. Higher bandwidth HDMI chips allowing frame packed 1080p@60fps 3D are arriving now. Let's not be short sighted.

I've produced numerous 3D Blu-Rays at 1920P per eye and only one of them looks as detailed as some of my 1/2 resolution videos that were shot at higher frame rates.
The one that does was an experiment shot at a very fast shutter speed so as to maintain the resolution with motion. The problem is that as soon as anything moves you are immediately aware of how choppy 24P looks without motion blur.
Reply
Reply
post #73 of 250
5/27/12 at 6:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

Passive is the way to go.
I'm getting rid of all my active sets and replacing them with passive.
My wife, family and friends all agree.

I disagree. Both passive and active suck. Glassesless-3D is the only way I will jump into 3D. I am not alone.
Reply
Reply
post #74 of 250
5/27/12 at 6:46am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by [Irishman] View Post

I disagree. Both passive and active suck. Glassesless-3D is the only way I will jump into 3D. I am not alone.

For the millions of people like me that already wear glasses, passive glasses are not a problem at all and yes, there are those who will refuse to wear them period and will opt for surgery when their eyes start failing them as they age.
Reply
Reply
post #75 of 250
5/27/12 at 7:15am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by [Irishman] View Post

I disagree. Both passive and active suck. Glassesless-3D is the only way I will jump into 3D. I am not alone.

Perhaps you all could have circular polarizers laser engraved onto your pupils?
Reply
Reply
post #76 of 250
5/27/12 at 8:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

I've produced numerous 3D Blu-Rays at 1920P per eye and only one of them looks as detailed as some of my 1/2 resolution videos that were shot at higher frame rates.

I don't doubt it, in fact I think 720p60fps 3D is better than 1080p24fps 3D. Ask any gamer and they'll agree.

Still doesn't change the fact that you can't get Blu-ray's 1080p24fps per eye on your passive display. You can't ask a film on Blu-ray disc to natively refilm itself at a higher frame rate just because it would have been better.
Reply
Reply
post #77 of 250
5/27/12 at 8:28am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

I don't doubt it, in fact I think 720p60fps 3D is better than 1080p24fps 3D. Ask any gamer and they'll agree.

Still doesn't change the fact that you can't get Blu-ray's 1080p24fps per eye on your passive display. You can't ask a film on Blu-ray disc to natively refilm itself at a higher frame rate just because it would have been better.

As I keep trying to point out, this 1080P24fps per eye isn't worth much anyway because that resolution will virtually never show up for the reasons I've stated.

I just ordered a LG 65LM6200 to replace my Samsung PN63C7000 plasma (full 1080P24FPS per eye) Whoopie!
Next to go will be my two Samsung UN40C7000s.
Reply
Reply
post #78 of 250
5/27/12 at 1:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

As I keep trying to point out, this 1080P24fps per eye isn't worth much anyway because that resolution will virtually never show up for the reasons I've stated.

I just ordered a LG 65LM6200 to replace my Samsung PN63C7000 plasma (full 1080P24FPS per eye) Whoopie!
Next to go will be my two Samsung UN40C7000s.


Frank, is this all a joke? You must be Mitt Romney in disguise. You must be very wealthy. You're throwing away all these 2010 model displays any one of which any of my friends would be overjoyed to have, because of the 3D format. You're wholesale buying into a format, FPR passive, that in a year or two will be improved on, making the current models seem mediocre.

I can see what people see in passive displays, but for the money you're throwing away you could have custom made active glasses made for your family and friends that are very comfortable. Your could buy one very high end passive display for 3D viewing and keep the rest for 2D.

Sorry, I've been quietly following this thread and I just don't get it.
Reply
Reply
post #79 of 250
5/27/12 at 1:51pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robut View Post

Frank, is this all a joke? You must be Mitt Romney in disguise. You must be very wealthy. You're throwing away all these 2010 model displays any one of which any of my friends would be overjoyed to have, because of the 3D format. You're wholesale buying into a format, FPR passive, that in a year or two will be improved on, making the current models seem mediocre.

I can see what people see in passive displays, but for the money you're throwing away you could have custom made active glasses made for your family and friends that are very comfortable. Your could buy one very high end passive display for 3D viewing and keep the rest for 2D.

Sorry, I've been quietly following this thread and I just don't get it.

I hear you.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid the "improvements" you refer to will likely render impossible one of the main things I like about the passive displays which is displaying 2D and multiple resizable 3D windows on my computer desktop without the need to even engage the 3D mode of the TV.
So I figure I'd better do it now before the "improvements" make what I'm enjoying impossible.
None of my equipment is "thrown away" by the way, It all goes to worthy causes.
If you think I've wasted a lot of money on 3D displays you don't want to know how much I've spent on producing the 3D that I enjoy, not to mention the time I've spent designing the equipment and making it.
Reply
Reply
post #80 of 250
5/27/12 at 2:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

I just ordered a LG 65LM6200 to replace my Samsung PN63C7000 plasma (full 1080P24FPS per eye) Whoopie!
Next to go will be my two Samsung UN40C7000s.

Nice, that makes two of us grabbing the 65LM6200 this weekend. I realized I wasted almost two years waiting on the next best thing when I should have been enjoying the hobby for what it is. I was expecting the Samsung/RealD team-up hybrid to be exactly what I wanted, when that fizzled I was waiting on the 72" from LG. Just decided I was missing out on quite a few things I would otherwise be enjoying.
Reply
Reply
post #81 of 250
5/27/12 at 2:47pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by THe_Flash View Post

Nice, that makes two of us grabbing the 65LM6200 this weekend. I realized I wasted almost two years waiting on the next best thing when I should have been enjoying the hobby for what it is. I was expecting the Samsung/RealD team-up hybrid to be exactly what I wanted, when that fizzled I was waiting on the 72" from LG. Just decided I was missing out on quite a few things I would otherwise be enjoying.

Congratulations!
I hope you enjoy it as much as I know we're going to enjoy ours.
I'm currently working on hooking up another 3D outdoor camera with remote control and wireless HDMI so we can watch live 3D of the forest animals outside and control the camera functions from the coach.
Reply
Reply
post #82 of 250
5/27/12 at 4:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

Congratulations!
I hope you enjoy it as much as I know we're going to enjoy ours.
I'm currently working on hooking up another 3D outdoor camera with remote control and wireless HDMI so we can watch live 3D of the forest animals outside and control the camera functions from the coach.

After one week I'm beginning to think that Frank is just a braggart.
Reply
Reply
post #83 of 250
5/27/12 at 4:35pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wonka702 View Post

After one week I'm beginning to think that Frank is just a braggart.

Just trying to share what I'm doing with others.
My wife doesn't have a clue.
Reply
Reply
post #84 of 250
5/27/12 at 6:00pm
Thread Starter 
For those who think I'm nuts,rich,bragging,etc:
The reason I've devoted so much time and money to 3D in the last three years is because I became extremely excited about an idea I had for leveraging 3D for observing and documenting the wide variety of wildlife around me.
I explored many options and the best options I found unfortunately involved using poorly documented features of some 3D televisions (a source of extreme frustration)
I put 3DTVs in most rooms I occupied and connected them all to a central computer that I could control from each location.
Each 3DTV would show my computer desktop where I could watch live 3D from cameras I had at different locals.
I have never played a 3D video game and have only watched 4 or so 3D Blu-Ray movies.
I love watching wildlife unobserved in 3D from the comfort of my home.
It has turned out to be an expensive hobby but I would do it all over again.

I just wish I had switched to passive earlier.
Reply
Reply
post #85 of 250
5/28/12 at 1:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

For those who think I'm nuts,rich,bragging,etc:
The reason I've devoted so much time and money to 3D in the last three years is because I became extremely excited about an idea I had for leveraging 3D for observing and documenting the wide variety of wildlife around me.
I explored many options and the best options I found unfortunately involved using poorly documented features of some 3D televisions (a source of extreme frustration)
I put 3DTVs in most rooms I occupied and connected them all to a central computer that I could control from each location.
Each 3DTV would show my computer desktop where I could watch live 3D from cameras I had at different locals.
I have never played a 3D video game and have only watched 4 or so 3D Blu-Ray movies.
I love watching wildlife unobserved in 3D from the comfort of my home.
It has turned out to be an expensive hobby but I would do it all over again.

I just wish I had switched to passive earlier.

Frank, have you described the technique and settings you use to display resizable 3D windows without activating the TV's 3D mode?
Reply
Reply
post #86 of 250
5/28/12 at 2:47pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrickMcKaha View Post

Frank, have you described the technique and settings you use to display resizable 3D windows without activating the TV's 3D mode?

NO
It's not a secret though.
I anyone really wanted to know I would certainly attempt to explain it.
Reply
Reply
post #87 of 250
5/28/12 at 6:43pm
Frank,
I do not yet have a 3DTV and I do not watch many movies but I do watch live sports and news.
Therefore when I do get a 3D unit I am looking for the following.
1. A Passive 60" 4K model
2. A 2d-Faux 3D capability.
3. 2D PQ and resolution capability as good as my current 55" LCD 1080p 120Hz model. The 120Hz interpolation feature makes a large difference with Marque scrolling such as stock market prices or sports scores.

Do you have any thoughts as to when such a unit will become available.
Keep up your great 3D work, As a sailboat racing fan I enjoyed your sailing clips a lot.

Walford
Reply
Reply
post #88 of 250
5/28/12 at 7:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by wonka702 View Post

Be frank with me Frank, wanna be friends? ;-)

I'm in line ahead of you....way ahead....
Reply
Reply
post #89 of 250
5/28/12 at 9:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

Passive is the way to go.
I'm getting rid of all my active sets and replacing them with passive.
My wife, family and friends all agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank View Post

I never sell my used stuff. I donate it to friends and family.
Always have, always will.

Sorry

Frank, everything you said about passive 3D vs active are my sentiments precisely. But regarding these two posts you made. Might I point out that the support from friends and family might be due to them wanting to receive your old (But still new) sets?

Also, I have one question. If a movie is played at 29-30 fps, then the active 1080p per eye argument vs passive's 540p per eye is invalid? Please elaborate.
Reply
Reply
post #90 of 250
5/29/12 at 3:57am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by walford View Post

Frank,
I do not yet have a 3DTV and I do not watch many movies but I do watch live sports and news.
Therefore when I do get a 3D unit I am looking for the following.
1. A Passive 60" 4K model
2. A 2d-Faux 3D capability.
3. 2D PQ and resolution capability as good as my current 55" LCD 1080p 120Hz model. The 120Hz interpolation feature makes a large difference with Marque scrolling such as stock market prices or sports scores.

Do you have any thoughts as to when such a unit will become available.

Not a one.
Quote:
Keep up your great 3D work, As a sailboat racing fan I enjoyed your sailing clips a lot.

Walford

Thanks, I had a lot of fun trying different techniques. I have many hours of footage no one has seen but me. One of the things I learned was that I need an external microphone when shooting with my gyro stabilized dual camcorder unit. The sound of the gyros is on much of my otherwise cool videos.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: 3D Displays

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Displays › After three years of 3D my conclusion is