09-21-2011 01:41 AM
So I still havent' bought my 3D TV.. but I decided to pay a little bit more and get a new one just to be safe.
But I still can't decide which one to buy. I've been reading a lot of forums and reviews...
It seems like a lot of people are shifting towards passive 3D TVs and specifically LG 3D TV because they ranked #1 on consumer report.
I also read on cnet an article about passive 3D TVs being better than active 3D TVs in both comfort and image quality...
It said that passive 3D TVs have brighter images, sharper images, less flickers, more depth, etc and said that LG Cinema 3Ds have the least flickers and crosstalks.
But there are still a couple people on forums who say active 3D TVs are better so I really can't decide which one is better.
Does anyone own a LG passive 3D TV? Can you tell me what the pros and cons are?
09-21-2011 11:24 AM
09-21-2011 11:26 AM
09-22-2011 09:24 AM
Yup, it's "true 1080p" in that it has 1080 horizontal lines - but in 3D mode it uses half of these lines for each eye. So each eye sees 1920x540.
09-22-2011 09:25 AM
Or possibly 960x1080 - depending on whether they alternate lines or columns.
09-22-2011 06:23 PM
I had a client argue the same point about the passive 3D sets being 1080P certified, because each eye gets a 540P signal and are combines by interlacing the two together. His words: "its basic math man!", my Response: "active 3D glasses allow each eye to see 1080P, so according to your laws of basic math, active sets should be 2160P certified".- his expression was classic.
I dont mind either tech, but I do prefer active for what my uses are for. I just dont like incorrect information being labelled as truth
09-25-2011 08:10 PM
It really depends on personal preference. Other posters here are correct about passive 3D TVs having half resolution. However, LG did recently update their 3D system and software on Cinema 3D to improve resolution. Here’s an article on it: http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=sho
If you read this article, it says “[the new algorithm] shows 1080i for the left eye and 1080i for the right eye [and] when these are combined the two pictures create a 1080p picture.”
I own a LG Cinema 3D myself and I’m really satisfied with it. While information the other posters have provided are good and true, I disagree that the 2D quality on a passive TV is inferior. Well, at least on my TV. It has LED backlighting so the color’s really nice and deep and the 2D images look amazing. I personally prefer passive 3D TVs because they’re easier on the eyes (because there’s no flicker) and easier to maintain (no need to replace or charge the batteries) but in the end, it really depends on what you like.
09-27-2011 09:27 AM
Basically, there is no way to do 3D without giving each eye only half of what the TV can display.
Active shutter-glasses based 3D TVs do this by splitting time in half - each eye gets half the time. In the past this caused flicker because it halved refresh rate from 60 Hz to 30 Hz. Fortunately, as LCD technology has improved, it has been easier and easier to crank up the refresh rate of TVs - with 120 Hz refresh rates readily available, halving this only dropped you to 60 Hz.
Passive glassis do it by splitting space in half - each eye sees half of the image elements of the screen.
It turns out it's a LOT easier to double refresh rate than it is to double resolution.
Note: Projection systems are a bit different, these can achieve passive 3D without any compromise, as in these systems, you can use two separate projectors, each with a polarizing filter. The two full-resolution images are overlaid together on the screen, right on top of each other. This is not possible with any direct-view approach. I think some projector systems behave similar to shutter-glasses, except with a switchable polarizer on the projector - e.g. the "shuttering" is done in the projector. It's a lot easier to have a small switchable polarizer in the optical path of a projector than one which covers the entire screen of a TV.
03-12-2012 05:13 AM
In reference of full HD image as many of you above already discussed that 1080p resolution actually divides into two eyes and it tends to delivers 540p to one eye and 540p to other...
Considering this fact this year LG introduce its Ultra Definition TV (UDTV) which which delivers 4k resolution and simultaneously both the eyes get full HD image of 1080p individually.
I wonder about the full HD quality if its actually comes out with 1080p on individual eye