DS Forums

 
 

LG passive 3D TV


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 27-06-2011, 16:37
ironjade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 8,651

I was tempted and gave in. It arrives on Thursday. Free Blu-Ray player too.
ironjade is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 27-06-2011, 17:22
InTheNorth
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 26
I was tempted and gave in. It arrives on Thursday. Free Blu-Ray player too.
Well done, lots of good reviews on the web for the latest LG passive 3D tellys.

Which model are you having?
InTheNorth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-06-2011, 22:25
ironjade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 8,651
Well done, lots of good reviews on the web for the latest LG passive 3D tellys.

Which model are you having?
The 42LW650T. It was the glasses which decided me as the picture quality seems to be the same as the sync shutter models.
Being as specs wearer, the extra weight of the battery glasses was really noticeable, plus they cost a fortune; LG give you seven pairs for free.
I may now also have found a use for my collection of old Polaroid 3D specs which I've been saving (until now for no apparent reason).
ironjade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2011, 00:35
pocatello
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 8,622
Well it isn't, to get passive working, the resolution is far lower in 3d mode. All the way down to 540p SD. Sync shutter glasses allow hdtv with bluray to reach full 1080p 3d.
pocatello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2011, 00:43
c4rv
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Essex
Posts: 16,223
Well it isn't, to get passive working, the resolution is far lower in 3d mode. All the way down to 540p SD. Sync shutter glasses allow hdtv with bluray to reach full 1080p 3d.
It is, but there is theory that you eye merges the two images to effectively look like HD. I have not seen it for myself yes but the reviews do give the TV really good ratings.
c4rv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2011, 01:06
pocatello
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 8,622
It is, but there is theory that you eye merges the two images to effectively look like HD. I have not seen it for myself yes but the reviews do give the TV really good ratings.
No, the eyes merge 2 images into 3d. Not HD!! You don't double your visual resolution by looking at something with 2 eyes at all! Else 1080p bluray 3d could claim to be double HD!! The only thing reviewers are going on is convenience and price probably, and perhaps broadcast which is lower resolution/bitrate to begin with. For real 3d bluray HD this method is inferior currently. Until they have affordable 4k displays, no way there is going to be real passive 3d that is full resolution, and that will take many years.
pocatello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2011, 06:38
ironjade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 8,651
I'm sure you're right but it looked ok to me and I've no intention of forking out for Blu-Ray discs, free player notwithstanding.
ironjade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2011, 10:18
InTheNorth
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 26
The 2011 passive LG 3D tellys - which the OP is getting - are said to be a big improvement over last year's models.

Several reviewers think the tiny loss in quality will be barely noticeable by a lot of people, and is more than made up for by the added convenience of the easier-to-wear glasses.

This is, after all, about immersing yourself in the action, which you can't do if the bridge of your nose is irritating or a low battery light is flashing.

The LG is also said to be very good at 2D.

I think 3D is here to stay this time, but for most 3D TV owners it will be 'event TV' - a major sports fixture or blockbuster movie - rather than watching the news or a soap.
InTheNorth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2011, 11:07
c4rv
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Essex
Posts: 16,223
No, the eyes merge 2 images into 3d. Not HD!! You don't double your visual resolution by looking at something with 2 eyes at all! Else 1080p bluray 3d could claim to be double HD!! The only thing reviewers are going on is convenience and price probably, and perhaps broadcast which is lower resolution/bitrate to begin with. For real 3d bluray HD this method is inferior currently. Until they have affordable 4k displays, no way there is going to be real passive 3d that is full resolution, and that will take many years.
Your brain is receiving the full HD picture, half to each eye. All I can suggest is go to a store and try it out for yourself. If you are not happy with it then fine.

At the end of the day, technology and reviews are only a guide. The only thing that matters is what you personally can see.
c4rv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2011, 13:57
pocatello
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 8,622
Your brain is receiving the full HD picture, half to each eye. All I can suggest is go to a store and try it out for yourself. If you are not happy with it then fine.

At the end of the day, technology and reviews are only a guide. The only thing that matters is what you personally can see.
Sorry no, that isn't how the visual system works, it is 540p, and if your idea of how the visual system worked were right then 1080p tv's could claim double 1080p resolution when playing back 1080p 3d material. This is clearly not something that happens, no 3d vendor is claiming doubling of resolution because of 3d.

Each eye receives only X resolution of image, the only thing your brain does with that is to extrapolate depth information from the difference between the eyes, if anything you lose resolution doing this matching, let alone the loss through the glasses.
pocatello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2011, 14:04
c4rv
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Essex
Posts: 16,223
Sorry no, that isn't how the visual system works, it is 540p, and if your idea of how the visual system worked were right then 1080p tv's could claim double 1080p resolution when playing back 1080p 3d material. This is clearly not something that happens, no 3d vendor is claiming doubling of resolution because of 3d.

Each eye receives only X resolution of image, the only thing your brain does with that is to extrapolate depth information from the difference between the eyes, if anything you lose resolution doing this matching, let alone the loss through the glasses.
go along and view it, if your not happy with it then don't buy it
c4rv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-06-2011, 17:24
pocatello
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 8,622
go along and view it, if your not happy with it then don't buy it
Has nothing to do with viewing it, this is about the visual system, if you are going to give advice about this stuff one should at-least get it straight.
pocatello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-06-2011, 13:56
ironjade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 8,651
The LG is up and running with just a few muffled curses. Having politely declined Curry's £60 installation charge I set it up myself (a bit like Captain Nemo wrestling the squid) and it looks pretty good.
It'll take a while to get the picture just right given the fiddly menu system but the bit of Sky 3D I've watched looked pretty damn good.
I think it's a bit sneaky of Sky to promote a load of 3D material but to be a bit coy about how much of it is pay-per-view.
I now have more 3D glasses than I have shirts.
ironjade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-06-2011, 14:07
grahamlthompson
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Redditch Worcs
Posts: 17,296
I now have more 3D glasses than I have shirts.
Is that because it cost the shirt off your back to afford the TV

Interested to hear how the Wimbledon finals look in 3D compared to 2D.
grahamlthompson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-06-2011, 16:11
ironjade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 8,651
Is that because it cost the shirt off your back to afford the TV

Interested to hear how the Wimbledon finals look in 3D compared to 2D.
I have to admit that football doesn't look very impressive but Rugby League may do better as it tends to have more close up shots (and is considerably less boring anyway).
Incidentally, using the Internet on this tv is a massive PITA. Typing with the tv remote or onscreen keyboard reminds me of Sky Open. That aside, it works and YouTube looks just as crap on the tv as it does on a laptop.
If the range of material on Sky 3D improves I may never leave the house again.
ironjade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-06-2011, 16:46
JulesandSand
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Caledonia
Posts: 5,687
3D Blurays, particularly animations, are even more impressive. I can't wait until Toy Story 3 3D comes out.
JulesandSand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2011, 08:22
loz
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 4,686
Your brain is receiving the full HD picture, half to each eye.
No it isn't.

watching two left + right 1920x540 images doesn't make a single 1920x1080 image. It makes a 1920x540 3D image.

It is the same resolution image from two slightly different angles, not two halves of a higher resolution image.

Moreover, when watching broadcast 3D, such as Sky 3D, the resolution on the passive display is just 960x540, as broadcast 3D uses a side-by-side method with 2x 960x1080 images. Each 960x1080 images is then both stretched and squashed to 1920x540 by the passive display.

That all said though, most viewers will still be sufficiently wowed by 3D image to not notice any loss of resolution.

But if you compared the 3D bluray of Avatar at full 1920x1080 resolution for each eye on an active display, against the Sky 3D broadcast on a passive display at effectively 960x540, you should see a visible difference in detail.
loz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2011, 08:37
ironjade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 8,651
The 3D picture is definitely not HD but I wasn't expecting it to be.
It's perfectly acceptable nonetheless.
ironjade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2011, 08:39
ironjade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 8,651
3D Blurays, particularly animations, are even more impressive. I can't wait until Toy Story 3 3D comes out.
Toy Story 1 & 2 or on Sky 3D in the next few days so I'll definitely give them a look. 3 was so depressing that I don't really want to see it again.
ironjade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2011, 08:43
JulesandSand
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Caledonia
Posts: 5,687
Toy Story 1 & 2 or on Sky 3D in the next few days so I'll definitely give them a look. 3 was so depressing that I don't really want to see it again.
It didn't depress us at all. It was the first 3D film we saw in the cinema and we laughed out loud at several scenes.

A snippet of it was on the 3D demo disc I saw in store when we were choosing our 3D TV. The colours were much more vibrant and the 3D effect seemed better defined than in the cinema.

Most people I've spoken to (without hardware to sell) are convinced that 3D will take off, I'm not so sure.
JulesandSand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2011, 09:03
ironjade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 8,651
It didn't depress us at all. It was the first 3D film we saw in the cinema and we laughed out loud at several scenes.

A snippet of it was on the 3D demo disc I saw in store when we were choosing our 3D TV. The colours were much more vibrant and the 3D effect seemed better defined than in the cinema.

Most people I've spoken to (without hardware to sell) are convinced that 3D will take off, I'm not so sure.
3D turns up in cinemas every 20 years or so as the next big thing (it's only been around since the 1940s) but the recent bout appears to have some stamina, even if only as a means of combating piracy.
TV could go either way: some things will never lend themselves to 3D and the range of material on Sky 3D needs to widen rapidly, at the moment it has a shop demo feel to it.
There are lots of classic 50s 3D movies which Sky already show in 2D so, assuming the 3D version is usable, why aren't they screening them?
ironjade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2011, 11:47
loz
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 4,686
There are lots of classic 50s 3D movies which Sky already show in 2D so, assuming the 3D version is usable, why aren't they screening them?
Because the studio still has to produce a master suitable for broadcast, and so far there seems to have been little interest in doing so.
loz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2011, 13:09
ironjade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 8,651
Because the studio still has to produce a master suitable for broadcast, and so far there seems to have been little interest in doing so.
Given that movie companies are always droning on about how much money they're losing, it seems like a wasted opportunity.
ironjade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2011, 22:59
ironjade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 8,651
Rugby League in 3D takes a bit of getting used to: the camera angles are very different from the normal HD broadcast (as are the commentators for some reason) and seem closer to what one would see from the touchline.
The heads of the roving cameramen and assorted flunkies bobbing about at the bottom edge of the screen are a bit distracting but not overly so.
Toy Story and The Reef are excellent 3D but Disney animation and fish documentaries aren't going to keep people interested forever. More varied material please (and less PPV).
ironjade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2011, 02:56
pocatello
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 8,622
Given that movie companies are always droning on about how much money they're losing, it seems like a wasted opportunity.
Not at all, every release has to be economically viable. Restoring old films costs money, doing it well costs a lot of money, the matter is whether there are enough paying fans to get a gone with the wind or star trek tos level restoration.

Old 3d films tend to be obscure, thus probably a big risk, so unless the company is flush, they aren't going to sink money into such money losers so eagerly.
pocatello is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:00.