HDTV Almanac - DIY 2D->3D

This forum is for the purpose of providing a place for registered users to comment on and discuss Columns.
hharris4earthlink
Major Contributor
Major Contributor
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 8:08 pm
Location: Pasadena, California

3D, Not 3D and Maybe 3D

Post by hharris4earthlink »

Surely manufactures have realized that very few people are going to want to put on glasses for all content. You should be able to opt out of 3D anytime. A 3D or nothing philosophy would most likely result in nothing in my opinion. We live complicated, multitasking lives and putting on glasses presupposes a dedicated, single-minded activity.

I'm an enthusiastic supporter of 3D TV, but I've yet to see a demo. Every time I go to a dealer, I'm told they have the TVs but the glasses are either all broken, missing or not arrived yet. Please tell me this is just a coincidence.
alfredpoor
Major Contributor
Major Contributor
Posts: 1805
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:27 am

Re: 3D, Not 3D and Maybe 3D

Post by alfredpoor »

hharris4earthlink wrote:Surely manufactures have realized that very few people are going to want to put on glasses for all content. You should be able to opt out of 3D anytime.
Actually, this is quite simple to do, as you can easily have "2D" glasses. If passive, use the same polarizer for both eyes. For shutter glasses, a simple switch could make both eyes see just the left image and the right image would be blocked for both eyes.

We're a long way from having to worry about too much 3D content, but so long as we're talking about stereoscopic images, 2D is always available by simply showing just one of the two images.

Alfred
Roger Halstead
Major Contributor
Major Contributor
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:13 pm

Regular content should be just that.

Post by Roger Halstead »

Regular content should be just that. IE, no glasses.
IF sets require glasses for all viewing I predict they will end up turning 3D TV into a fad with a limited market.
There is no reason that those sets can not be compatible with 2D as there are already sets out there that will receive and work with 3D that have been receiving 2D for some time.
hharris4earthlink
Major Contributor
Major Contributor
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 8:08 pm
Location: Pasadena, California

Post by hharris4earthlink »

I doubt if anyone would want to wear glasses just to see 2D. I guess my question is, is it possible to show normal TV on a 3D set—even when the source is 3D? It would seem to me that the ability to do without glasses at will would be an essential feature for most busy people.
alfredpoor
Major Contributor
Major Contributor
Posts: 1805
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:27 am

2D on 3D -- easy

Post by alfredpoor »

All you have to do is turn off the 3D and it will just show one of the 2D stereoscopic images. I haven't done this with a 3D set -- haven't had one to play with -- but there's no reason why it shouldn't be a simple setting. I imagine that the manufacturers have this feature built in.

My point about the glasses is that it should also be easy to have a set show 3D and still let some people watch 2D if they prefer that.

Alfred
Post Reply