Passive 3D vs Active 3D

[bluflu]

5 May, 2011 By: Chris Tribbey


A new study by TCO Development found little difference between 3DTVs that use active shutter or passive glasses, at least when it comes to the visual experience.

“As a certification body with a long history in the field of visual ergonomics for displays, it is important for TCO Development to evaluate the visual ergonomics of these new technologies and to assess any possible impacts on the user experience. TCO Development will further investigate the need of a TCO Certification for 3D,” said Niclas Rydell, product and certification director at TCO Development.

Cross-talk, or ghosting, was low for both types of glasses, though proper height and distance placement was more important for a set using passive glasses. White luminance was three times lower for active shutter glass sets compared with passive sets. And the lower resolution available for a passive 3DTV (1920-by-540 vs. 1920-by-1080 for active shutter) is noticeable, but not too much of a drawback, the study concluded.

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/3d/...-glasses-23880

[ay221]

I rather have the full resolution of 1080p.

[linkgx1]

haters gonna hate.

[Jeff Kleist]

I find it pretty incredible that they couldn't see the giant pixel lines in it and interlacing artifacts

If you notice, all the scenes that LG shows on their in-store demo reel are VERY static The second things start moving is where it goes to hell.

[linkgx1]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

I find it pretty incredible that they couldn't see the giant pixel lines in it and interlacing artifacts

If you notice, all the scenes that LG shows on their in-store demo reel are VERY static The second things start moving is where it goes to hell.

[gman102081]

Originally Posted by linkgx1

I take it you must own an LG set. Sorry, but active shutter is the way to go for true HT enthusiasts. Passive is great if you have large families since the cost of entry is more family friendly.

[linkgx1]

Originally Posted by gman102081

I take it you must own an LG set. Sorry, but active shutter is the way to go for true HT enthusiasts. Passive is great if you have large families since the cost of entry is more family friendly.

When did I say that? I have a Panasonic GT series 3D plasma.

[WTFBBQ]

I have the passive LG set, and the interlaced effect is not obvious with motion. I sometimes see it with very close parallel lines. Also, I do not see the giant pixel lines you are talking about, and you won't see them unless you sit pretty close to the set. As the article states, it looks very good and is a good trade off considering costs.

[MiC. UHD]

What's up guys! I was just wondering, what everyone here thought about the introduction of passive 3D, and what that means for the future of active shutter?

Now that the manufacturers have chosen their sides, it's our turn. Passive technology is significantly cheaper to produce/purchase in comparison, and the average consumer, especially those with large families won't be looking to break their wallet just to upgrade their home theater.

Can these two technologies co-exist? For the time being, only active shutter can provide FULL 1080p 3D to each eye, but will consumers on a budget really care or even notice? Does anyone feel that either of these options will become obsolete over the next couple of years?

Personally I'm in favour of active 3D, the quality is supreme, and despite a higher cost, I feel that there is currently NO substitute. What do you guys think?

[moviegeekrp]

I am currently looking for a new HDtV, and the thought of passive 3D excites me because of it being cheaper. I've also noticed getting a headache whenever I tried to demo the active glasses in the store, but not when I went to the theatre to see a 3D film. Although my receiver does not offer 3D pass through, I'd be running any 3D films through a ps3 for the time being, so I'd just have to run an optical for audio (a downgrade in audio quality, but not much for my system.)

I'm still on the fence for 3D, but I am all about preparing for the future

[seregloth]

I think there is room for both.
Cinephiles can get the higher quality sets, and everyone else (particularly parents of kids who will enjoy seeing all of the many kids movies out in 3D) will get passive sets.

c. $800 passive sets that play regular movies in 1080p and don't involve a huge startup cost in glasses and are kid friendly~ there is no way that's bad for 3D. And when passive is full HD in 3D, I might switch over so my nieces and nephews can all watch stuff at my place.

[AutomaticDriver]

I hope there is room for both.

Just because Passive is out now. Doesnt mean they should get rid of Active Shutter. Some people prefer Active Shutter and some prefer Passive. I dont think they should alienate one side or the other.

[PaulGo]

New study reveals differences between active and passive glasses for 3DTV’s



...Studies suggest that images with the same resolution are perceived in more detail in 3D than in 2D. This means that the perceived detail of watching both (passive 1920 x 540) and (active 1920 x 1080) in 3D will be slightly higher than watching of each eye (passive 1920 x 540) and (active 1920 x 1080).

Full article at:
http://www.tcodevelopment.com/pls/nv...d=4146&mid=821

[bhampton]

I may not have to choose sides for years depending on when my current projector breaks.

-Brian

[TWright]

Originally Posted by PaulGo

...Studies suggest that images with the same resolution are perceived in more detail in 3D than in 2D.

That's interesting, I had noticed this and assumed that they had just managed to get more out of the 3D renditions somehow. I didn't consider that it had something to do with perception. It's very true for me though, the 3d movies look much more crisp and detailed than the same movie played in 2d.

[rubystone356]

you might want to read this:
I own the panasonic tcp50gt25. its a wonderful tv set and the 3d is awesome.

Jacob

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-...contentBody;1n

[radagast]

Samsung and RealD are ready to license their Full HD Passive system. I heard that sets should be out next year. It will have the advantages of the active and current passive systems. No word on price yet.

[RocShemp]

Originally Posted by radagast

Samsung and RealD are ready to license their Full HD Passive system. I heard that sets should be out next year. It will have the advantages of the active and current passive systems. No word on price yet.

Do you have a link of where you read that? It sounds real promising if true.

EDIT: Found something. http://www.3dfocus.co.uk/3dtv/samsun...d-glasses/3607

[radagast]

Originally Posted by RocShemp

Do you have a link of where you read that? It sounds real promising if true.

EDIT: Found something. http://www.3dfocus.co.uk/3dtv/samsun...d-glasses/3607

Here's another link:

http://www.home-entertainment-news.c...maybe-not.html

To explain it simply: This third system has a display that switches back and forth between right and left images like the active system TVs do. The difference is that the active displays simply switch back and forth between right and left images, whereas this new system ALSO switches polarization on the images back and forth.

The result is that passive glasses work with this system and there is no flickering effects with other light sources in the room.

And each image for the right and left eyes are full 1080p HD.

[trinireb]

well i was at future shop yesterday and tried out one of their passive lg sets and all i got was alot of flickering..i never get that with the active glasses....i do know that these store dont really set up the tvs and so forth correctly but when i first tried out the active setup, not properly set up i still never got a flicker.