Standardization in 3D technology (and glasses) is a step in the right direction, and the CEA has started an effort toward that objective. At some point, hopefully soon, that effort would have to be reconciled with a similar initiative made by XPAND 3D and Panasonic. Monster has also released their 3D glasses oriented to standardize communication with 3DTVs.
Recent announcements of 3D glasses standardization convey a similar spirit on standardization efforts. However, having customizable features in the glasses, and having “the operation” of active-shutter glasses synchronized with 3DTVs of different manufactures may not be sufficient. An important ingredient for an effective standardization across manufacturers is missing...
[url=http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/articles/2011/04/true-3d-standardization.php]Read Article[/url]
True 3D Standardization
-
Rodolfo
- Author
- Posts: 755
- Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:46 pm
- Location: Lansdowne VA
-
jscott75
- Member
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 2:28 pm
True 3DStandardization
Good point Rodolfo!
Can I ask, will this also apply to passive glasses systems or only active ones? I honestly see passive being the way of the future anyway once the half resolution issue is solved...
Can I ask, will this also apply to passive glasses systems or only active ones? I honestly see passive being the way of the future anyway once the half resolution issue is solved...
-
Rodolfo
- Author
- Posts: 755
- Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:46 pm
- Location: Lansdowne VA
Jscott75,
The efforts and companies mentioned in the article apply to only the standardization of active-shutter 3D glasses and its effect on the 3DTV panels themselves (due to color calibration, tint matching, etc.)
However, I tested the new passive glasses that LG Display supplied to me at the press meeting at CES 2011 and their polarization was reversed. So I was forced to use them up-side-down to been able to appreciate the 3D effect on a Vizio set demoed by Sensio at CES.
Several passive glasses 3DTVs were announced by Vizio, LG Display, etc at CES 2011 and will compete on the 3DTV market, as well as the glasses-free autostereoscopic sometime next-year (Toshiba, 3DFusion, etc).
I do not consider these two technologies as same level competitors of active-shutter glasses regarding image quality because of the half resolution per eye on passive and even lower resolution on autostereoscopic depending on number of views on the panel design.
But I consider them as alternatives when vision conditions preclude the viewer from using active-shutter 3DTVs, covered in the article about 3DTV technologies:
http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/articles/20 ... scopic.php
In such case the lower resolution is a trade off that can still allow a viewer to at least see a 3DTV image without having health/vision issues.
4K panels "may" make the half resolution issue of passive glasses 3DTVs less than an issue when been able to show 1080p images to each eye simultaneously, but they are going to have a higher price when available. 3D Blu-ray should show better than in a 1080p passive panel, but cable and satellite 3D is distributed at half resolution anyway so the panel will have to invent the other 1 million pixels with its 4K capablity (a 540px1920 image source boosted to a 1080px1920 displayed image per eye, which is half of the 4K).
Considering some new announcements (such as Samsung) that offer active-shutter glasses now for under $50 (rather than on the $150-$200 range) the low cost leverage of cheap passive glasses is gradually reducing its appeal, other than not needing batteries, etc.
Best Regards,
Rodolfo La Maestra
The efforts and companies mentioned in the article apply to only the standardization of active-shutter 3D glasses and its effect on the 3DTV panels themselves (due to color calibration, tint matching, etc.)
However, I tested the new passive glasses that LG Display supplied to me at the press meeting at CES 2011 and their polarization was reversed. So I was forced to use them up-side-down to been able to appreciate the 3D effect on a Vizio set demoed by Sensio at CES.
Several passive glasses 3DTVs were announced by Vizio, LG Display, etc at CES 2011 and will compete on the 3DTV market, as well as the glasses-free autostereoscopic sometime next-year (Toshiba, 3DFusion, etc).
I do not consider these two technologies as same level competitors of active-shutter glasses regarding image quality because of the half resolution per eye on passive and even lower resolution on autostereoscopic depending on number of views on the panel design.
But I consider them as alternatives when vision conditions preclude the viewer from using active-shutter 3DTVs, covered in the article about 3DTV technologies:
http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/articles/20 ... scopic.php
In such case the lower resolution is a trade off that can still allow a viewer to at least see a 3DTV image without having health/vision issues.
4K panels "may" make the half resolution issue of passive glasses 3DTVs less than an issue when been able to show 1080p images to each eye simultaneously, but they are going to have a higher price when available. 3D Blu-ray should show better than in a 1080p passive panel, but cable and satellite 3D is distributed at half resolution anyway so the panel will have to invent the other 1 million pixels with its 4K capablity (a 540px1920 image source boosted to a 1080px1920 displayed image per eye, which is half of the 4K).
Considering some new announcements (such as Samsung) that offer active-shutter glasses now for under $50 (rather than on the $150-$200 range) the low cost leverage of cheap passive glasses is gradually reducing its appeal, other than not needing batteries, etc.
Best Regards,
Rodolfo La Maestra
-
alkaloid
- Member
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 10:51 am
calibrating 3D now
I am an owner of a 3D plasma set and I had it calibrated in the 2D mode by an isf tech who has over 15 yrs exp. He calibrated my crt 11 yrs ago and it is still running now. I called Stacey Spears and discussed 3D test discs and was told there would be content available in the early summer of 2011. The plasma is very good now that it is calibrated, but I had to get creative to improve the picture in the 3D mode. After several attempts I came up with putting the set in the 2D-3D mode and the only patterns I could use acurately were the dynamic range patterns as well as the pluge to set the white and black levels. I did it with the glasses ( active shutter ) on because they are tinted and reduce light the same as sunglasses do. I truly noticed an improvement in shadow detail but the color is still anyones guess. I wonder if the tech put the glasses in front of the minolta color meter and did a greyscale cal if it would come out looking better or WAY off? I called up displaymate and they said they would be looking into 3D test signals too. I recently read an article in WS review that said Joe Kane was in the process of putting a disc together for 3D tests, and we all know how great that will be. My first test disc was on laser disc back in the 80s from Joe and it taught me so much about quality video.
I hope this will help someone get another inch out of their display in 3D for black and white levels, but for color accuracy we will still have to wait a bit more. I have directtv and the 3Dnet station is fantastic on my display. The content is growing and it appears to be in 720p but I don't know how much is lost in the compression of the signal. I wish the display manufacturers would standardize color temp at least, and start making accurate color decoders standard too. I wonder how much market share they would gain for the manufacturers who do it first?
I hope this will help someone get another inch out of their display in 3D for black and white levels, but for color accuracy we will still have to wait a bit more. I have directtv and the 3Dnet station is fantastic on my display. The content is growing and it appears to be in 720p but I don't know how much is lost in the compression of the signal. I wish the display manufacturers would standardize color temp at least, and start making accurate color decoders standard too. I wonder how much market share they would gain for the manufacturers who do it first?