or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Displays › Keep 3D active or make switch to Passive 3D TV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Keep 3D active or make switch to Passive 3D TV - Page 11

post #301 of 408
Hey I've looked around but havnt found an answer to this particular question. As far as the actual 3d content/programming goes is there a difference between active and passive? I've seen 3d movies that have a red like shift in the image, kind of like ghosting the first image. Then ive seen 3d that is 2 side by side images. Is this the difference in content between passive and active?

If so which is which and which has larger file sizes, and which one has better availability on blu ray discs and how do you tell the difference when buying?
post #302 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluemustang View Post

Hey I've looked around but havnt found an answer to this particular question. As far as the actual 3d content/programming goes is there a difference between active and passive? I've seen 3d movies that have a red like shift in the image, kind of like ghosting the first image. Then ive seen 3d that is 2 side by side images. Is this the difference in content between passive and active?

If so which is which and which has larger file sizes, and which one has better availability on blu ray discs and how do you tell the difference when buying?

Red-blue shifted images are the old anaglyph 3D technology and need matching glasses with red and blue (or cyan) filters. The video file size is the same as 2D and a 2D display is used. The colour when watching in 3D is very poor. This format is not normally used with modern movies. It is possible you could find an old anaglyph movie on a Blu-ray, but the Blu-ray packaging should contain a special warning if anaglyph is used.

Squashed side-by-side uses the same file size as 2D. It is the usual format for television broadcasting of 3D. You can find some files on the net in this format. To play them in 3D you may need to set the player manually to side-by-side 3D mode.

Blu-rays usually use frame-packed 24p for 3D which is Full HD for Left and Full HD for right and needs about 1.5 times the file size of a 2D Blu-ray version of similar bitrate quality. The Blu-ray player sends the 3D output using an HDMI cable to the 3D display which can be either of active or passive design. There is no such thing as a different Blu-ray disc or Blu-ray player format for active glasses displays compared with passive glasses displays. It is all done in the display.

Modern passive glasses have a fixed but different polarisation filter for each lens. Modern shutter glasses operate at around 120Hz and alternately shutter the Left and Right lenses, keeping in synch with the active 3D display or projector.

There were a few questions there, Bluemustang!

[There is also a special Dolby 3D system for public cinemas, a type of advanced anaglyph, using light with spectral offsets. This method is not used for domestic displays.]
Edited by MLXXX - 3/23/13 at 5:58am
post #303 of 408
Thanks! Perfect in depth answer i was looking for. Just a few days now before I can enjoy my new samsung pn60e7000 smile.gif
post #304 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLXXX View Post


[There is also a special Dolby 3D system for pubic cinemas, a type of advanced anaglyph, using light with spectral offsets. This method is not used for domestic displays.]

Is that like porn movies or what?
post #305 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowlinWolf View Post

Wrong. The lines aren't "difficult to notice" they are impossible for a human eye to detect unless you get too close. Just like the shutters if an active display are impossible for a human eye to detect unless you use them wrong.
You can sit at whatever distance with an active display abs it's not an issue. I can use whatever lighting I want with a passive display and it's not an issue. Both work fine when used as intended.

I sit about 9 feet from my 47" LG and can see the lines if i look hard enough (in 2D)...And i don't believe seeing 540 in each eye makes it 1080,if it did does it mean when i'm watching 1080p content my brain perceives it as 2k?(sounds stupid to me)..Anyway,i could really tell the resolution hit in a TOSHIBA 42" passive tv i had,3D images were softer than 2D and in it's 2D-3D feature i noticed the stair stepping effect in diagonal lines and not to mention that when i watched 1080p 3D movies and i'd press the info button on the remote it said the resolution was always 720p..My new LG passive tv the 3D is perfect and says the 3D is 1080p but i think it's a LG method that makes their passive 3D seem 1080p.
Edited by bigjoejgde - 12/26/12 at 5:53pm
post #306 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjoejgde View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by HowlinWolf View Post

Wrong. The lines aren't "difficult to notice" they are impossible for a human eye to detect unless you get too close. Just like the shutters if an active display are impossible for a human eye to detect unless you use them wrong.
You can sit at whatever distance with an active display abs it's not an issue. I can use whatever lighting I want with a passive display and it's not an issue. Both work fine when used as intended.

I sit about 9 feet from my 47" LG and can see the lines if i look hard enough (in 2D)...And i don't believe seeing 540 in each eye makes it 1080,if it did does it mean when i'm watching 1080p content my brain perceives it as 2k?(sounds stupid to me)..Anyway,i could really tell the resolution hit in a TOSHIBA 42" passive tv i had,3D images were softer than 2D and in it's 2D-3D feature i noticed the stair stepping effect in diagonal lines and not to mention that when i watched 1080p 3D movies and i'd press the info button on the remote it said the resolution was always 720p..My new LG passive tv the 3D is perfect and says the 3D is 1080p but i think it's a LG method that makes their passive 3D seem 1080p.
It sounds to me like your previous tv was 720p, while your current tv is 1080p. I'm not surprised that you can see a difference.
post #307 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowlinWolf View Post

It sounds to me like your previous tv was 720p, while your current tv is 1080p. I'm not surprised that you can see a difference.

It was a TOSHIBA 42TL515U 1080p 3D tv.
post #308 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjoejgde View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by HowlinWolf View Post

It sounds to me like your previous tv was 720p, while your current tv is 1080p. I'm not surprised that you can see a difference.

It was a TOSHIBA 42TL515U 1080p 3D tv.
None the less, you said if you hit the info button it said it was 720p, right? So you were only seeing 720p for some reason. Your new set is definitely 1080p, so it's not at all surprising that it looks better. I don't think it's an LG secret or anything, it's just 1080p vs 720p.
post #309 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjoejgde View Post

I sit about 9 feet from my 47" LG and can see the lines if i look hard enough (in 2D)...And i don't believe seeing 540 in each eye makes it 1080,if it did does it mean when i'm watching 1080p content my brain perceives it as 2k?(sounds stupid to me)..Anyway,i could really tell the resolution hit in a TOSHIBA 42" passive tv i had,3D images were softer than 2D and in it's 2D-3D feature i noticed the stair stepping effect in diagonal lines and not to mention that when i watched 1080p 3D movies and i'd press the info button on the remote it said the resolution was always 720p..My new LG passive tv the 3D is perfect and says the 3D is 1080p but i think it's a LG method that makes their passive 3D seem 1080p.

So you no longer see stairstepping/aliasing in high contrast hard edge items?
post #310 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjoejgde View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by HowlinWolf View Post

It sounds to me like your previous tv was 720p, while your current tv is 1080p. I'm not surprised that you can see a difference.

It was a TOSHIBA 42TL515U 1080p 3D tv.
Just to add to what I was trying to say so that maybe it comes across a little clearer.

I have a Sharp Aquos tv I got 4 or so years ago. It's a 1080p tv. It's not 3d, just 2d, but 1080p.

For some reason this tv will only do 1080i or 720p when watching directv. The directv receiver does not recognize it as being 1080p capable for some reason. I've called directv about it and called Sharp about it. I've tried it on several different directv receivers, and through a few different home theater receivers. Nothing makes it work. All my other tvs get 1080p just fine, using the same directv receivers and home theater receivers that this Sharp won't work properly with. And this Sharp gets 1080p just fine with a bluray player or a ps3.

I think you were having a similar issue, but with 3d blurays (or whatever your source was) instead of directv.
post #311 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devedander View Post

So you no longer see stairstepping/aliasing in high contrast hard edge items?

Because of the black lines across the screen i still get the aliasing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HowlinWolf View Post

Just to add to what I was trying to say so that maybe it comes across a little clearer.
I have a Sharp Aquos tv I got 4 or so years ago. It's a 1080p tv. It's not 3d, just 2d, but 1080p.
For some reason this tv will only do 1080i or 720p when watching directv. The directv receiver does not recognize it as being 1080p capable for some reason. I've called directv about it and called Sharp about it. I've tried it on several different directv receivers, and through a few different home theater receivers. Nothing makes it work. All my other tvs get 1080p just fine, using the same directv receivers and home theater receivers that this Sharp won't work properly with. And this Sharp gets 1080p just fine with a bluray player or a ps3.
I think you were having a similar issue, but with 3d blurays (or whatever your source was) instead of directv.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devedander View Post

So you no longer see stairstepping/aliasing in high contrast hard edge items?

Source is PS3..On the TOSHIBA 1080p 2D content was 1080p..3D 1080p content was 720p..1080p 3D is displayed as 1080p on my LG.
post #312 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjoejgde View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Devedander View Post

So you no longer see stairstepping/aliasing in high contrast hard edge items?

Because of the black lines across the screen i still get the aliasing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HowlinWolf View Post

Just to add to what I was trying to say so that maybe it comes across a little clearer.
I have a Sharp Aquos tv I got 4 or so years ago. It's a 1080p tv. It's not 3d, just 2d, but 1080p.
For some reason this tv will only do 1080i or 720p when watching directv. The directv receiver does not recognize it as being 1080p capable for some reason. I've called directv about it and called Sharp about it. I've tried it on several different directv receivers, and through a few different home theater receivers. Nothing makes it work. All my other tvs get 1080p just fine, using the same directv receivers and home theater receivers that this Sharp won't work properly with. And this Sharp gets 1080p just fine with a bluray player or a ps3.
I think you were having a similar issue, but with 3d blurays (or whatever your source was) instead of directv.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devedander View Post

So you no longer see stairstepping/aliasing in high contrast hard edge items?

Source is PS3..On the TOSHIBA 1080p 2D content was 1080p..3D 1080p content was 720p..1080p 3D is displayed as 1080p on my LG.
Yeah, similar issue. I get 1080p (2d) from my ps3, but only 1080i or 720p from my directv receivers. It's probably just an issue with the ps3 recognizing it as a 1080p device for 3d.
post #313 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjoejgde View Post

Because of the black lines across the screen i still get the aliasing.
Source is PS3..On the TOSHIBA 1080p 2D content was 1080p..3D 1080p content was 720p..1080p 3D is displayed as 1080p on my LG.

What content were you watching? If it was games they will probably render in 720 when in 3D mode...
post #314 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devedander View Post

What content were you watching? If it was games they will probably render in 720 when in 3D mode...

MotorStorm RC and watching tv with the 2D-3D feature..Just watched AVATAR in 3D and the picture was beautiful,i didn't see any aliasing.
post #315 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjoejgde View Post

MotorStorm RC and watching tv with the 2D-3D feature..Just watched AVATAR in 3D and the picture was beautiful,i didn't see any aliasing.

Motorstorm from PS3 might well render in 720p... can't speak to the TV stuff.

Avatar did do a pretty good job, the only area I specifically remember being able to see aliasing was in the video diary scenes and it's pretty hard to spot as the computer overlay is minimal. If you look at the O in the bottom left logo and the corners of the box in the top left I can see aliasing and scanline artifacts. It's not terribly noticeable as it doesn't move so there is no crawling and it's believable that its just supposed to look that way, but if you flip back to 2D mode, you see that the overaly does not acually have aliasing and scanlines and is a very smooth solid image. This tends to be the case with most of the movie... due to it's nature, where most passive artifacts come into play, it looks reasonable that's just how it was supposed to be and not until you A/B to the 2D mode can you tell, although them it's often very obvious.

Even the worst real world offenders, coffee cut rims, tend to hold up pretty well in this movie. However I tend to attribute this to the fact the whole movie appears softened a lot, I think in a (mostly successful attempted) to blend the CGI into the live action stuff cleanly.

EDIT: Just verified motorstorm shows up as 720p on mine also...
Edited by Devedander - 12/31/12 at 12:45pm
post #316 of 408
As for Avatar, it might depend on where those video overlays are in 3D space. I've noticed that when displaying something at screen depth (with no separation at all between left and right eyes), that the aliasing is more apparent than if the object is slightly offset from the 2D plane. The most obvious example is the UI overlays in a video game, which are usually rendered at screen depth. It's like putting the glasses on to view a webpage.. it looks like crap. But it all snaps back together nicely once there's a slight offset between the two eyes. No idea why that is.
post #317 of 408
It looks from CES that this may be the year we see reasonably priced 4K 3D TVs, which means true 1080 passive 3D.
post #318 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by eweiss View Post

It looks from CES that this may be the year we see reasonably priced 4K 3D TVs, which means true 1080 passive 3D.
What do you mean by reasonably priced? I know some people's reasonably priced is outrageous to other people, so figured I should ask, lol.
post #319 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowlinWolf View Post

What do you mean by reasonably priced? I know some people's reasonably priced is outrageous to other people, so figured I should ask, lol.

I suspect we may soon see 55" 4K 3D Passive TVs for under 4K retail - e.g., Westinghouse or Hisense, or maybe this will be for 2D only at first. This is not much more than LG's 55" HD Passive 3D. We should know in a month or two.
post #320 of 408
lol i'm glad i never bought a tv last year
post #321 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowlinWolf View Post

What do you mean by reasonably priced? I know some people's reasonably priced is outrageous to other people, so figured I should ask, lol.
I agree... the ONLY new Sony display that will make use of Simulview is $25,000!!! If thats what one considers reasonable, BRAVO FOR MAKING IT IN LIFE!!!

I still struggle a bit here and there.

My own thoughts on this all circle around if Sony decides to update EXISTING 240 hz 3D Bravia's to work with Simulview; as shown works just fine on this forum and many other around the web... I will stay with my active 46" Bravia I purchased last year. However, if they maintain Simulview as simply a marketing tool to force sales... they can get bent. I will be selling my Bravia and 5 pairs of active shutter glasses and going LG PASSIVE. Heck, if this is what occurs I will do my best to not purchase ANYTHING Sony related... trade my PS3 Launch 80GB B/C unit in for XBox... check my audio/video content for Sony before I buy (dont care how bad I want to see the movie or hear the CD). This may sound silly but would you rather suggest we just keep swallowing this BS and just be happy we got the bits we did?

As a US Marine... I dont bend thata way!!! No... I attack this BS head on and hope others will understand why this IS the only method that will get Sony to WAKE THE FRAK UP. All the hacking hasnt done it, why continue in insanity doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome.

While I dont consider LG to be the top of the line (from using their cel phones, maybe their TV's rock), they seem to be CONTINUALLY making decisions that not only help increase new consumer ownership, but increase the continued faith of thier existing customer base. They seem to get economic growth and profits are cuased more by existing consumer recomendations (word of mouth) than ANY OTHER FORM OF ADVERTISING. Thats the type of company I want to know is behind the products I choose to spend the little money I have on!!!
post #322 of 408
Vizio is in the game for 3D 4K TV this year. The prices will come down quicker than people think. http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/11/ultra-hd-tvs-stole-the-show-at-ces-2013/#continued

So does my family wait another year for a new TV, or do we get a stop-gap 2K non-3D TV to hold us till then? I think this may be the way to go.
post #323 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by eweiss View Post

I suspect we may soon see 55" 4K 3D Passive TVs for under 4K retail - e.g., Westinghouse or Hisense, or maybe this will be for 2D only at first. This is not much more than LG's 55" HD Passive 3D. We should know in a month or two.

Lg 55 inch passive sells for well under a grand regularly... I got one with sound bar and brpkayer for 799
post #324 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devedander View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by eweiss View Post

I suspect we may soon see 55" 4K 3D Passive TVs for under 4K retail - e.g., Westinghouse or Hisense, or maybe this will be for 2D only at first. This is not much more than LG's 55" HD Passive 3D. We should know in a month or two.

Lg 55 inch passive sells for well under a grand regularly... I got one with sound bar and brpkayer for 799
Wow where can I get that deal? I could use another for the basement, and probably my bedroom too as long as they're practically giving them away.
post #325 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowlinWolf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Devedander View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by eweiss View Post

I suspect we may soon see 55" 4K 3D Passive TVs for under 4K retail - e.g., Westinghouse or Hisense, or maybe this will be for 2D only at first. This is not much more than LG's 55" HD Passive 3D. We should know in a month or two.

Lg 55 inch passive sells for well under a grand regularly... I got one with sound bar and brpkayer for 799
Wow where can I get that deal? I could use another for the basement, and probably my bedroom too as long as they're practically giving them away.
I think he may be talking about 1080p 3D LG's going for under $1000. Thats what I can find out there.
post #326 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devedander View Post

Lg 55 inch passive sells for well under a grand regularly... I got one with sound bar and brpkayer for 799

That's really good! Best Buy, the closest seller of the 55" 3D Passive LG's, is nowhere near that price for the 240Hz models, but one of the older 120Hz models gets down close to $1,000, the 55LM4700.
post #327 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowlinWolf View Post

Wow where can I get that deal? I could use another for the basement, and probably my bedroom too as long as they're practically giving them away.

Fry's has been pumping out 3D 55-60 inch 2012 model sets for dirt cheap lately... I haven't seen it get quite that cheap but I think I did see the TV without soundbar and BR Player for $699 for a brief period.

Keep an eye on slickdeals.net. been all kinds of cheap deals lately as they clean out the 2012 models.
post #328 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

The numbers back this up. Let's look at the number of pixels of video data you're seeing (approximated slightly):

720p 2D: 1 million pixels
1080p 2D: 2 million pixels
720p per eye 3D: 2 million pixels (1 million left plus a different 1 million right).
1080p per eye 3D: 4 million pixels
1080p passive w/540p per eye: 2 million pixels.

So with 1080p passive, each eye sees 540 lines but the actual number of pixels is equivalent to the number of pixels in a standard 720p 2D image, per eye. It should make sense of course on a 1080p passive panel that you're seeing exactly the same number of pixels in 2D as 3D, just divided between your eyes in 3D. I think that's why many say 1080p passive still looks like 1080p, because you're literally seeing the same number of pixels as a 1080p 2D image. 1080p 2D is already more than most people can resolve given their screen size and seating distance, and for many people the resolution advantage of 1080p active or 4k passive (both 1080p per eye) is probably a wash.

I'm sorry. I know this thread is months old, and I rarely post in forums such as this, but the common sense missing form this argument baffles me.

1080p active per eye = 4 million pixels. I agree with this. But at any one moment in time only 1 eye is seeing 1080p, then it switches to the other eye which is then also seeing 1080p. Meaning at any one moment in time the brain is only seeing a 1080p signal. The brain cannot see both at the same time. If it did there would be no 3D effect.

With passive 3d each eye is seeing 540p AT THE SAME TIME. The brain sees a 1080p image by taking the info from one eye and adding the info form the other eye thus creating a 1080p combined 3d image.

How can anyone possibly argue against this?
post #329 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by tremor1521 View Post

I'm sorry. I know this thread is months old, and I rarely post in forums such as this, but the common sense missing form this argument baffles me.

1080p active per eye = 4 million pixels. I agree with this. But at any one moment in time only 1 eye is seeing 1080p, then it switches to the other eye which is then also seeing 1080p. Meaning at any one moment in time the brain is only seeing a 1080p signal. The brain cannot see both at the same time. If it did there would be no 3D effect.

With passive 3d each eye is seeing 540p AT THE SAME TIME. The brain sees a 1080p image by taking the info from one eye and adding the info form the other eye thus creating a 1080p combined 3d image.

How can anyone possibly argue against this?
I tried to tell them the same thing.
post #330 of 408
I tried out a D2343P-BN 23" monitor. In 2d mode it was like looking through mini blinds. I wonder if I would have the same problem with a larger tv? I've been thinking about purchasing a 3d set but most of the sales are for 55 and smaller. I was hoping to go for a 65" this time around as we already have a 60" and a projector which I would like to eventually replace with a large flat screen.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: 3D Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Displays › Keep 3D active or make switch to Passive 3D TV