[rameshkr]

What is difference between active and passive glasses for 3D TV?

[LincolnSpector]

rameshkr, on 19 July 2012 - 04:57 AM, said:

What is difference between active and passive glasses for 3D TV?

With active 3D, the TV switches back and forth from the left and right images. The glasses have LCDs built into them, which they use to block the light coming in. When the left eye image is desplayed, the LCDs block light from the right eye. When the right eye image is displayed, the LCDs block light from the left eye.

The problems are that the glasses are expensive, require batteries, and are heavy. Also, some people can see the flicker and get annoyed by it. (I see it when I look away from the TV.)

Passive 3D uses polarized lenses, similar to the glasses used in most movie theater 3D systems. Half the lines on the screen are polarized one way, the other half the other way. The glasses are lighter and cheaper.

The problem is that they can't display all 1080 lines for each eye simultaneously. Yet most people find passive 3D superior to active.

Lincoln

[LincolnSpector]

Puneet49, on 20 July 2012 - 01:05 AM, said:

Active glasses are heavy, need constant charging and use the old shuttering technology. While the passive ones are actually light weight 3d glasses like the ones LG supplies with LM series 3d LED TV. They do not need charging and show images to both right and left eyes simultaneously, without significant loss of picture quality. I hope that answers your question.

Actually, the latest Samsung active glasses are almost as light as the passive ones. But they stukk have all the other problems.

Lincoln

[waldojim]

Puneet49, on 20 July 2012 - 01:05 AM, said:

Active glasses are heavy, need constant charging and use the old shuttering technology. While the passive ones are actually light weight 3d glasses like the ones LG supplies with LM series 3d LED TV. They do not need charging and show images to both right and left eyes simultaneously, without significant loss of picture quality. I hope that answers your question.

Mi Mitsubishi set doesn't need charging. They use replaceable coin batteries, and last over 100 hours on a set. And no, there are absolutely zero TV's on the market (at the moments anyhow) that can deliver both images at one time without loss of quality. Not even LG.

[LincolnSpector]

waldojim, on 23 July 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

Mi Mitsubishi set doesn't need charging. They use replaceable coin batteries, and last over 100 hours on a set.

Yikes! That sounds much worse than recharging. Less convenient, more expensive, and worse for the environment.

waldojim, on 23 July 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

And no, there are absolutely zero TV's on the market (at the moments anyhow) that can deliver both images at one time without loss of quality. Not even LG.

That's true, although I've seen great-looking 3D images in LG and Vizio passive sets.

The best way to do 3D would be to double the resolution. But that's not economically viable for a home format. Even most movie theaters don't do that.

Lincoln

[waldojim]

LincolnSpector, on 24 July 2012 - 07:41 AM, said:

waldojim, on 23 July 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

Mi Mitsubishi set doesn't need charging. They use replaceable coin batteries, and last over 100 hours on a set.

Yikes! That sounds much worse than recharging. Less convenient, more expensive, and worse for the environment.

waldojim, on 23 July 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

And no, there are absolutely zero TV's on the market (at the moments anyhow) that can deliver both images at one time without loss of quality. Not even LG.

That's true, although I've seen great-looking 3D images in LG and Vizio passive sets.

The best way to do 3D would be to double the resolution. But that's not economically viable for a home format. Even most movie theaters don't do that.

Lincoln

First, most movie theaters use a very, very different method for displaying 3d content. From what I havr seen, they use a dual projector setup with polorizing filters.

Second, the batteries are a matter of choice. As of yet, I have not replaced a single battery. And I dont fret over the charger. Truth is, my glasses are lighter and more comfortable simply because the charging circuits arent needed, and they dont need ports to be plugged in. Just remember, everything has a tradeoff. In my case, as I already wear glasses, these were the only comfortable solution.

[LincolnSpector]

waldojim said:

1343151137[/url]' post='637063']
First, most movie theaters use a very, very different method for displaying 3d content. From what I havr seen, they use a dual projector setup with polorizing filters.

Depends on the system. iMax (both the film and digital versions) use two projectors. Sony 4K projectors (and maybe othr 4K's; I don't know) use a special attachment that uses two lenses., one on top of the other. Each is showing a 2K portion of the single 4k picture element.
Everything else uses a single-lens projector with a rotating polarized wheel.
Lincoln

[Julian789]

LincolnSpector, on 23 July 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:

Puneet49, on 20 July 2012 - 01:05 AM, said:

Active glasses are heavy, need constant charging and use the old shuttering technology. While the passive ones are actually light weight 3d glasses like the ones LG supplies with LM series 3d LED TV. They do not need charging and show images to both right and left eyes simultaneously, without significant loss of picture quality. I hope that answers your question.

Actually, the latest Samsung active glasses are almost as light as the passive ones. But they stukk have all the other problems.

Lincoln

When I tried Samsung's 2012 3D glasses, I could feel that they got lighter than last year's but not as light as polarized 3D glasses though. But I still don't like the idea of having the batteries on my head for a long time while watching 3D movies. The electromagnetic waves from them might cause something to my brain.

[Simon0q62]

Julian789, on 25 July 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:

LincolnSpector, on 23 July 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:

Puneet49, on 20 July 2012 - 01:05 AM, said:

Active glasses are heavy, need constant charging and use the old shuttering technology. While the passive ones are actually light weight 3d glasses like the ones LG supplies with LM series 3d LED TV. They do not need charging and show images to both right and left eyes simultaneously, without significant loss of picture quality. I hope that answers your question.

Actually, the latest Samsung active glasses are almost as light as the passive ones. But they stukk have all the other problems.

Lincoln

When I tried Samsung's 2012 3D glasses, I could feel that they got lighter than last year's but not as light as polarized 3D glasses though. But I still don't like the idea of having the batteries on my head for a long time while watching 3D movies. The electromagnetic waves from them might cause something to my brain.

Besides, the kicker for me is that the lenses of the shutter glasses went black when I tilted them. What is the point of having a 3D TV if you can't watch in whatever position you want like lying down????

[cheeesecake]

Simon0q62, on 26 July 2012 - 12:16 AM, said:

Julian789, on 25 July 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:

LincolnSpector, on 23 July 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:

Puneet49, on 20 July 2012 - 01:05 AM, said:

Active glasses are heavy, need constant charging and use the old shuttering technology. While the passive ones are actually light weight 3d glasses like the ones LG supplies with LM series 3d LED TV. They do not need charging and show images to both right and left eyes simultaneously, without significant loss of picture quality. I hope that answers your question.

Actually, the latest Samsung active glasses are almost as light as the passive ones. But they stukk have all the other problems.

Lincoln

When I tried Samsung's 2012 3D glasses, I could feel that they got lighter than last year's but not as light as polarized 3D glasses though. But I still don't like the idea of having the batteries on my head for a long time while watching 3D movies. The electromagnetic waves from them might cause something to my brain.

Besides, the kicker for me is that the lenses of the shutter glasses went black when I tilted them. What is the point of having a 3D TV if you can't watch in whatever position you want like lying down????

This is due to linear polarization! And yes, this is actually another big reason why I bought a TV with passive 3D which uses circular polarization (which allows me to lie on my side while watching TV if I wanted to).

[Simon0q62]

cheeesecake, on 26 July 2012 - 06:20 PM, said:

Simon0q62, on 26 July 2012 - 12:16 AM, said:

Julian789, on 25 July 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:

LincolnSpector, on 23 July 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:

Puneet49, on 20 July 2012 - 01:05 AM, said:

Active glasses are heavy, need constant charging and use the old shuttering technology. While the passive ones are actually light weight 3d glasses like the ones LG supplies with LM series 3d LED TV. They do not need charging and show images to both right and left eyes simultaneously, without significant loss of picture quality. I hope that answers your question.

Actually, the latest Samsung active glasses are almost as light as the passive ones. But they stukk have all the other problems.

Lincoln

When I tried Samsung's 2012 3D glasses, I could feel that they got lighter than last year's but not as light as polarized 3D glasses though. But I still don't like the idea of having the batteries on my head for a long time while watching 3D movies. The electromagnetic waves from them might cause something to my brain.

Besides, the kicker for me is that the lenses of the shutter glasses went black when I tilted them. What is the point of having a 3D TV if you can't watch in whatever position you want like lying down????

This is due to linear polarization! And yes, this is actually another big reason why I bought a TV with passive 3D which uses circular polarization (which allows me to lie on my side while watching TV if I wanted to).

I'm not talking about polarized glasses. I'm talking about shutter glasses.

[Julian789]

I have a passive 3D TV and it is totally fine to watch 3D lying down. It only happens to active shutter glasses because the TV set sends left and right images one at a time. When the glasses are tilted, they get out of sync.

[technify]

There are 2 different 3D technology out there. Many big brand companies have been coming up with Passive 3D (new generation 3D) which is the same technology that theaters is using. I believe Samsung is the only company that uses Active 3D. Passive 3D has glasses that are light and do not use batteries. It is the same glasses you use at the movies. On the other hand, Active 3D glasses are the chunky glasses that require charging and have fast flickering.

[LincolnSpector]

Julian789, on 25 July 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:

When I tried Samsung's 2012 3D glasses, I could feel that they got lighter than last year's but not as light as polarized 3D glasses though. But I still don't like the idea of having the batteries on my head for a long time while watching 3D movies. The electromagnetic waves from them might cause something to my brain.

People who are hearing-impaired have batteries in their ears at all times. This has been going on for some time, and I've never heard or read of any problems.

But I still prefer passive glasses.


Lincoln

[Julian789]

LincolnSpector, on 03 August 2012 - 08:45 AM, said:

Julian789, on 25 July 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:

When I tried Samsung's 2012 3D glasses, I could feel that they got lighter than last year's but not as light as polarized 3D glasses though. But I still don't like the idea of having the batteries on my head for a long time while watching 3D movies. The electromagnetic waves from them might cause something to my brain.

People who are hearing-impaired have batteries in their ears at all times. This has been going on for some time, and I've never heard or read of any problems.

But I still prefer passive glasses.


Lincoln

Yeah.. There is no scientific proof that the batteries in the 3D glasses have an affect on brain but it just concerns me. Apart from electromagnetic waves, I prefer passive 3D glasses, too because they don't flicker. I assume that this is the major reason for the people who chose passive 3D TV.

[techmanusa]

Julian789, on 12 August 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

Yeah.. There is no scientific proof that the batteries in the 3D glasses have an affect on brain but it just concerns me. Apart from electromagnetic waves, I prefer passive 3D glasses, too because they don't flicker. I assume that this is the major reason for the people who chose passive 3D TV.

When I got to know more about 3D TV, which technology it adopted became critical. Before I tried both active and passive 3D TVs, I thought that all 3D TVs were using the same technology as what they use at the movie theaters. However, movie theaters use Passive 3D technology which only certain home TVs have.

[LincolnSpector]

Julian789, on 12 August 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

Yeah.. There is no scientific proof that the batteries in the 3D glasses have an affect on brain but it just concerns me. Apart from electromagnetic waves, I prefer passive 3D glasses, too because they don't flicker. I assume that this is the major reason for the people who chose passive 3D TV.

There are other reasons. Passive glasses are lighter. You don't have to replace or recharge batteries. You don't have to turn them on. You can have a 3D movie party without first spending a fortune in glasses.

Lincoln

[LincolnSpector]

techmanusa, on 12 August 2012 - 09:34 PM, said:

When I got to know more about 3D TV, which technology it adopted became critical. Before I tried both active and passive 3D TVs, I thought that all 3D TVs were using the same technology as what they use at the movie theaters. However, movie theaters use Passive 3D technology which only certain home TVs have.

Long ago (I think it was in the 80s or 90s), Imax and other large-format film-based special venues used active 3D. Most of them abandoned it and went back to polarized 3D (passive) because of problems with maintaining the active glasses.

Lincoln