Active or Passive 3d
- Thread starter GMac11
- Start date
Its not full res, most passive sets use 1920 x 540 any way you want to try and explain it thats not full res.
You say "most" there is the catch and you clutching at straws.
I used a LG passive same as most Theatres.
QUOTE: "LG claims they show all the resolution in the 1080p signal to each eye temporally"
http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/active-3d-vs-passive-3d-whats-better/
No matter what others said there in comments, an Optician know better how eyes work.
If you have 2 windows with slated (venetian) blinds on them and on left window slats #2/4/6/8/10 are missing and on the right window slats #1/3/5/7/9 are missing and you take a photo of both and put on top of each other you see slats #1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9/10.
You may want to do some homework before posting BS blanket statements, Touché
I used a LG passive same as most Theatres.
QUOTE: "LG claims they show all the resolution in the 1080p signal to each eye temporally"
http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/active-3d-vs-passive-3d-whats-better/
No matter what others said there in comments, an Optician know better how eyes work.
If you have 2 windows with slated (venetian) blinds on them and on left window slats #2/4/6/8/10 are missing and on the right window slats #1/3/5/7/9 are missing and you take a photo of both and put on top of each other you see slats #1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9/10.
You may want to do some homework before posting BS blanket statements, Touché
Last edited:
Well it would appear the argument is now moot (from my point of view anyway). The TV arrived yesterday morning not packaged at all well. You can guess what awaited me upon lifting it out the box- several handsome cracks right across the screen and what looked to be the result of some sort of massive impact to the top right corner of the unit itself.
That is the good and bad of the rainforest warehouse in one - you take a chance, sometimes it pays off but at least return is free.
I can't see another deal as good as that for the same unit so I think I will just get the non 3-d version now.
That is the good and bad of the rainforest warehouse in one - you take a chance, sometimes it pays off but at least return is free.
I can't see another deal as good as that for the same unit so I think I will just get the non 3-d version now.
You say "most" there is the catch and you clutching at straws.
I used a LG passive same as most Theatres.
QUOTE: "LG claims they show all the resolution in the 1080p signal to each eye temporally"
http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/active-3d-vs-passive-3d-whats-better/
No matter what others said there in comments, an Optician know better how eyes work.
If you have 2 windows with slated (venetian) blinds on them and on left window slats #2/4/6/8/10 are missing and on the right window slats #1/3/5/7/9 are missing and you take a photo of both and put on top of each other you see slats #1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9/10.
You may want to do some homework before posting BS blanket statements, Touché
Some 4k screens do Ive yet to see any hard evidence that a 1080p passive screen can show full res, its the same argument that there is no theoretical difference between 1080i and 1080p
Harsh, way to kick a guy in the balls when he's down
As it turns out there has been a turnaround in fortunes somewhat. Did some more scouring of the Internet and found a site that will remain unnamed for obvious reasons that had the 3D version at the same price as everywhere else but with a £40 off voucher bringing it down to a tasty £600 including postage. A slight bit more than the £514 I paid the rainforest people but at least this unit is brand new. Thread resurrected
The website says LG 'claim' their 1080p screens are showing full res passive 3d but it doesn't explain how they achieve it, nor have I seen an explanation anywhere else - I tend to find that 'claims' of AV companies can be greatly exaggerated.
Associate
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 677
Active
Just an update. My (new) Plasma arrived at the start of the week and I picked up a pack of Samsung active glasses yesterday. Have to say I'm very impressed by the 3d. I only stuck on the first 15mins of Pacific Rim admittedly but I thought the 3d was spot on. Not too overpowering yet not underwhelming - if that makes any sense at all lol
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 16,807
I'm very fortunate to have owned many 3D TVs over the past few years, for various reasons.
Currently I have a Samsung Active in the bedroom and an LG passive in the living room.
My advice.....go Passive
Passive is MUCH easier on the eyes, it doesn't darken the image as much, no crosstalk, glasses are only a few quid each and the 3d effect is more pronounced.
There really isn't any advantage in going active as far as I can see. There were rumours about active being able to display 1080p whilst active wasn't. I've compared both, and passive looks better to my eyes., but maybe that's down to the brightness.
Currently I have a Samsung Active in the bedroom and an LG passive in the living room.
My advice.....go Passive
Passive is MUCH easier on the eyes, it doesn't darken the image as much, no crosstalk, glasses are only a few quid each and the 3d effect is more pronounced.
There really isn't any advantage in going active as far as I can see. There were rumours about active being able to display 1080p whilst active wasn't. I've compared both, and passive looks better to my eyes., but maybe that's down to the brightness.
