[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Active 3D vs. Passive 3D here

[PCWCJS]

3D will become a big part in gaming

[NotRappaportqt7d]

3DTV: The Smell-O-Vision of our time.

[metatronsquest5p24]

Patrick contradicts himself which is confusing: he says that once he's noticed an artefact, in this case the alleged 'interlace effect' on the passive 3D TV he can't ever 'unsee' it. In the very next paragraph he says that once he's got used the effect it's not as noticeable! If you're going to make out like you are 'Mr Experience' Patrick, at least be consistent and don't make schoolboy errors like this.
Speaking from my own limited experience: I too have seen the active and passive 3D sets and I have to says that (a) passive TVs DO NOT look interlaced, unless you sit too close to the screen, which is easily done with today's massive screen sizes;( the shutter glasses, just like DLP projection, will give certain 'sensitive' people a massive headache: I find that these active glasses flicker madly, and to my eyes that causes a bid problem. I cannot stand them at all they make me ill.
Passive technology however looks fantastic, to me it does anyway - I wear glasses anyway, so the shutter glasses as too heavy and the designers just don't think about glasses wearers when they make these things. It's strange actually as most cheap cinema glasses are just fine for wearing over standard glasses.
Anyway, the image on the passive LG set I saw was clean, sharp and detailed. It didn't have that weird fast action strobe effect you get on some 200Hz sets either, you know the effect I mean? When an object zooms past quickly and it leaves a trail of 'frozen' strobed after images behind it? Shutter glasses seems to cause this effect really badly on fact action, so Tron for example looks great on passive TVs but nasty and migraine inducing on shutter glasses.
I hope passive becomes the standard, and maybe one day we won't need the glasses at all. I've seen demos of 'no glasses' TVs too, but they are a long way from the living room yet. The viewing angle is just too critical to be of any use, unless you want to watch on your own and never move your head!

Patrick contradicts himself which is confusing: he says that once he’s noticed an artefact, in this case the alleged ‘interlace effect’ on the passive 3D TV he can’t ever ‘unsee' it. In the very next paragraph he says that once he's got used the effect it's not as noticeable! If you’re going to make out like you are ‘Mr Experience’ Patrick, at least be consistent and don’t make schoolboy errors like this.
Speaking from my own limited experience: I too have seen the active and passive 3D sets and I have to says that (a) passive TVs DO NOT look interlaced, unless you sit too close to the screen, which is easily done with today’s massive screen sizes;( the shutter glasses, just like DLP projection, will give certain 'sensitive' people a massive headache: I find that these active glasses flicker madly, and to my eyes that causes a bid problem. I cannot stand them at all they make me ill.
Passive technology however looks fantastic, to me it does anyway – I wear glasses anyway, so the shutter glasses as too heavy and the designers just don’t think about glasses wearers when they make these things. It’s strange actually as most cheap cinema glasses are just fine for wearing over standard glasses.
Anyway, the image on the passive LG set I saw was clean, sharp and detailed. It didn’t have that weird fast action strobe effect you get on some 200Hz sets either, you know the effect I mean? When an object zooms past quickly and it leaves a trail of ‘frozen’ strobed after images behind it? Shutter glasses seems to cause this effect really badly on fact action, so Tron for example looks great on passive TVs but nasty and migraine inducing on shutter glasses.
I hope passive becomes the standard, and maybe one day we won’t need the glasses at all. I’ve seen demos of ‘no glasses’ TVs too, but they are a long way from the living room yet. The viewing angle is just too critical to be of any use, unless you want to watch on your own and never move your head!

[Tonhogg]

I just saw a passive 3d set at best buy today for the first time and must say I liked it. It looked great to me. Funny thing a friend who was with me said " hey don't you have those 3d glasses from the theater sitting in the back seat of your car." And yes I did so I went and got them to see if they worked with the tv at best buy. They did. Cheap way to get extra glasses if you go to a 3d showing at the theater.

[abster]

Ummm...not interested. I'll give 3D TV another generation or two, before considering it. I just don't feel it is the same 3D experience you get in the theater(and I'm not all that crazy with that). I'm usually a first-adopter on tech...but, nah...keep at it 3D guys...

[ROBLAW]

How were these televisions set up? Were they in the normal default settings or did anyone set them up to get them to look their best, adjusting contrast, brightness and sharpness settings? I don't own a 3D set yet but every tv that I have owned I have to change the tv settings some to make the image look more real.

[jmattioni]

What about the effects on 2D viewing on a passive 3D set? I would imagine there's a polarized filter on the screen that could have some effect on normal viewing. Most of the content today is 2D so the set needs to support it without adverse effects.

That seems to be one advantage of the active 3D sets since there's no real change to the display screen. If 3D dies just throw away the glasses and you still have a perfectly good 2D set.

[nebulasdesignyuyo]

Great roundup thank you. I'm really hoping to get a 3D TV soon and really wasn't sure of the difference between the two 3D types. Although quality is a factor the thought of having to buy a pair of glasses at nearly £100 which my toddler will probably break feels me with dread!

[FilipeRibeirol3vf]

Does these LG screens work with AMD 6000 series gpu ?

[waldojim]

FilipeRibeirol3vf, on 25 July 2011 - 07:25 PM, said:

Does these LG screens work with AMD 6000 series gpu ?

The AMD 6000 series GPU properly supports HDMI 1.4spec. All current 3d technologies should work properly. Remember though two important factors.

1. The software must support it.
2. The drivers are not perfect. When I had my laptop with the 6630 in it, I found that often it worked as advertised, but occasionally, it wouldn't sync up correctly. Remember that this is still very new to the AMD cards, and to be patient.

[NCenkTengerlijql1]

I think passive 3D is the way to go too but rather than arranging pixels as scanlines, using a checkerboard type pattern would create a more impressive 3D experiment. Monitor producers should think about that too.

[RaoBravemw83]

Yesterday I went to local frys electronics to see sharp 70 inch tv. But I liked the passive 3D of LG. Now I am strongly considering buying LG 65inch LCD or Plasma. If LG had 65 inch THX certified I would have bought it by now.

Yesterday I went to local frys electronics to see sharp 70 inch tv. But I liked the passive 3D of LG. Now I am strongly considering buying LG 65inch LCD or Plasma. If LG had 65 inch THX certified I would have bought it by now.

[RobertSmithrlp7]

I Can't agree more, passive 3D is the clear winner in the 3D race.

you can get an LG LW5600 is a great smart 3D with lots of features and 4 free glasses for your family.

I had about the same experience as the reviewer, with Cinema 3D being the clear winner.

[AaronFoust]

Passive 3D HERE TO STAY!!!

This post has been edited by AaronFoust: 09 September 2011 - 09:41 PM

[AaronFoust]

2D on 3DTV's is Great!!!

This post has been edited by AaronFoust: 09 September 2011 - 09:40 PM

[AaronFoust]

I'm a tech-geek, I been one 4 a long this now, when a problem happens to one of my many friend's electronics, they call me to fix; whether it's a PC, TV, GPS, Laptop, etc. I once had a teacher tell me DVD will not be around for long in '97, I told him he was fill of BS, and I was right, of course. And I tell everyone now Passive 3DTV's are here to stay. I know a winner, when I see one!!!
-2D great on Passive
-Can use 3D RealD eyeware from Cinema on them; so no need to buy glasses
-More Depth inside & outside the screen

This post has been edited by AaronFoust: 09 September 2011 - 10:11 PM

[Haavard]

Now that there are fashion designer glasses like Calvin Klein, Gucci and Ingri:Dahl it should help out a lot, a lot of this was considered very "dorky" before

Now that there are fashion designer glasses like Calvin Klein, Gucci and Ingri:Dahl it should help out a lot, a lot of this was considered very "dorky" before

[brainiacmaniac32]

PCWCJS, on 15 April 2011 - 01:38 PM, said:

3D will become a big part in gaming

I agree. I have a LG Cinema 3D and action games look so much better on it. I use LG 3D TV's 2D-3D conversion to play all of my games in 3D and they look amazing and make it a lot more fun.

[marcusreed]

Beside CK and Gucci, Oakley have been made polarized glasses for a passive users too. It is little pricey but definately looks great. Oh by the way, there is a THX certified LG TV that came out this fall. I don't know if it comes in 65" too but I know it is available in 55" for sure. It is lw9800 and I heard it is a first THX certified passvie 3D TV. I saw the picture of it and it looks sleek and fancy. Plus it has a local dimming backlight stuff and have all the other great features. Look it up if any of you are interested in.