Mudslinging at Display Week (active versus passive 3d).

[Eric Lange]

Mudslinging at Display Week (active versus passive 3d).

http://www.ieee.org/netstorage/spectrum/radio/mp3/IEEESpectrum_2011.05.25_DisplayWeek.mp3

This is a really super podcast of a well published “technologist” at display week (May 20th). Very good summary of current and emerging 3d display systems (from industry players).

There was the suggestion that LG is essentially price dumping to gain market share.

The journalist also alluded to much mudslinging over the various technical deficiencies regarding active eyewear (shutter glasses) versus passive circular polarized for home viewing and DI suites.

For me resolution is very important and it seems that the passive eye wear/blocking filter will cut that in half. At the same time I don’t like flicker induced headaches.

There just doesn’t seem to be really good S-3d display… still!

The Sony HD CRT’s were awesome.


Hard to find a good replacement.

Anyway some really good technical and industrial market info, worth a listen.


Was anyone at Display Week etc. to bring further clarity to the alluded to “mudslinging”?, apparently things have come to a real head and fever pitch on this issue of active versus passive for TV’s and other display devices... or anyone well versed in the issues and main arguments?

Cheers In advance.

Eric

 

[Doug Horton]

Although there's obviously an argument over resolution being cut in half, but for me personally, we lots of times do multi-rig shoots, which means multiple displays next to one another. So it's just easier to hand clients our Oakley passive glasses and they can hang onto them for the job and stare at whatever display they want, without having to explain or deal with AS explanations and what not.

not saying better, just works for us on set. Oh, and the LG monitor unfortunately looks too good to argue with anything at that price point. $3,000 monitors (or what was $5,000 a year ago) do not look as good as the LG.

 

[Eric Lange]

Although there's obviously an argument over resolution being cut in half, but for me personally, we lots of times do multi-rig shoots, which means multiple displays next to one another. So it's just easier to hand clients our Oakley passive glasses and they can hang onto them for the job and stare at whatever display they want, without having to explain or deal with AS explanations and what not.

not saying better, just works for us on set. Oh, and the LG monitor unfortunately looks too good to argue with anything at that price point. $3,000 monitors (or what was $5,000 a year ago) do not look as good as the LG.

OK I think you almost have me sold…


Ten years ago it was so important to show how realistic our stuff really looks, so we had to go all out high res 3d and S-3d to demonstrate to prospective clients that absolute life like quality is possible at the workstation. We also had twin projectors, passive glasses all linear polarized on a Harkness Hall silver screen and a CYVIZ frame sequential to dual passive high res converter. Looked/looks amazing. I’m still a big fan of linear polarization.


The LG’s you look at them and you think wow that’s not bad at all, but a bit chunky looking (almost lenitcular like), BUT then I searched for the posted Oakley S-3d glasses and I thought “wow”. I was really blown away so it seems a practical and “cool” factor could be the tipping point here. Exactly as you say you can pass them around without fear or extra problems. The other passive glasses/“dorky” offerings are not well designed functionally or aesthetically.

The high end active eyewear ($1000.00) that we use is really expensive and for some reason no matter how careful you are with these shutter glasses they seem to self destruct.


I can really see that for monitoring and larger projection and multiple screens the LG/Oakley combination is FAR more practical than endless synch issues, and flicker/lighting conflict.


However if you have software that’s engineered for frame sequential stereo in a window or multiple stereo windows on multiple screens then there may be a few challenges to produce a dual passive signal for the “TV”. At some point I need to find better concrete information about in-card frame sequential to dual passive conversions that manage stereo in a window rather than a single full screen output…

Thanks for the Oakley suggestion.

I wonder if there is a 4k solution for the dual passive filter type display? That really might do it all!

Cheers,

Eric