HDTV Almanac - Vizio Proves Me Wrong!

[alfredpoor]

For quite a while, I’ve been saying that if you want 3DTV with a flat panel display, you’re going to be stuck with active “shutter glasses” for the foreseeable future. Why not use the inexpensive passive glasses like you wear at the local cinema? Because it costs too much to add the required extra polarizing [...]

[url=http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/columns/2010/12/hdtv-almanac-vizio-proves-me-wrong.php]Read Column[/url]

[BobDiaz]

One thing with the passive glasses and TVs; it looks like they only show 1/2 the scan lines (1920x540) of HDTV.

[img]http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f103/KQ6WQ/VideoExamples/DSCF0065.jpg[/img]


Bob Diaz

[alfredpoor]

Bob, you are entirely correct; any single-panel solution using passive glasses can only have half the resolution. Movie theaters deliver full resolution by using two projectors (though some only use one).

However, I suspect that the vast majority of the people with HDTVs would not be able to tell the difference even with the competing technologies shown side by side. I base this on the fact that most people have a display that is too small for the viewing distance. Sit about 8 feet from a 42" display and I don't think your vision is sharp enough to be able to see the difference, except perhaps with a test pattern. Afficianados with appropriately-scaled systems may be able to see the difference, in which case they may be happier with an active shutter glasses solution.

Alfred

[BobDiaz]

I still think it's cool that they have been been able to keep the cost down for passive and like many other things, there is a slight trade-off with the loss of vertical resolution. Still, passive does have the advantage of no batteries and a lost or broken set isn't as big a deal. As technology advances, it should be interesting to see what comes next.



Bob Diaz

[pzieger]

I guess this means in theaters some of the glasses won't make it back to the return bin after a 3D movie.