3D Technology

[Roman4604]

Here is a much better description of how LG is achieving their results.

http://www.hometheater.com/content/passive-3d-resolution-update

Exactly what I've been explaining from the start. The critical part relating to picture quality is this ...

As depicted above, in the first 1/120th of a second, the odd-line information for the left eye (1920x540) is displayed in the odd-numbered lines on the screen .... in the next 1/120th of a second, the even-line info for the left eye is displayed in the screen's odd-numbered lines

Can you now see the vertical position of where half the source lines (even) are physically displayed on the TV's screen (panel) are incorrect. So strictly speaking passive 3D is corrupting the original source line positioning, where as active 3D does not.

The dispute thus comes down to whether this is apparent to the viewer (i.e. discernible difference in 3D picture quality). For every expert you quote that says it isn't, I can find one that say it is (apparent).

Basically the same stalemate as before, and therefore not worth continuing.


PS: I do different with their view that the FPR polarization is like interlacing. Interlacing does not display source lines in an incorrect (shifted) position.

 

[wily me]

Exactly what I've been explaining from the start. The critical part relating to picture quality is this ...



Can you now see the vertical position of where half the source lines (even) are physically displayed on the TV's screen (panel) are incorrect. So strictly speaking passive 3D is corrupting the original source line positioning, where as active 3D does not.

The dispute thus comes down to whether this is apparent to the viewer (i.e. discernible difference in 3D picture quality). For every expert you quote that says it isn't, I can find one that say it is (apparent).

Basically the same stalemate as before, and therefore not worth continuing.


PS: I do different with their view that the FPR polarization is like interlacing. Interlacing does not display source lines in an incorrect (shifted) position.

Of course it's apparent at 1/12 arms length but beyond that there is no significant jaggies. It used to be worse at only 540 lines That is confirmed by a few reviews and many forum feedback's. Whether that "insignificant" problem is worth as oppose to all the rest of the problems experienced by active systems is completely a another issue to consider altogether. Therefore my claim that considering value for money the passive systems are better than the active systems all things considered. Just as I believe the value of the 2011+ LED TV's are better than plasma considering the small issue of a minute black level difference.

As I said time and again it's all in the eye of the beholder.