Zappykins said:
Lafiel said:
jlrx said:
The last TV I bought (a couple years ago) was right before all the 3DTV's came out (After the LED-LCD ones came out though) and I would not have bought one then, but having one of my computer monitors as a 3D Monitor has convinced me of the value of 3D Entertainment (not that my 3DS didn't). So the next TV I purchase will infact be a 3D ready set, at the moment I am leaning towards active shutter glasses as they seem to be the best for picture and brightness. |
Hmm.. with the shutter technique you have real 1080p per eye so it certainly has better picture quality at the moment, but I'm not sure about brightness.. I have an active 3D monitor aswell and it's actually a little too dark in 3D mode, so I really prefer to play content with bright colors.
|
I strongly prefer the 'Passive' form of 3D TVs. I am aware that it halves the resolution - which is why I would like a 2K 3D TV - so you could get each eye in 1080P, but the additional picture quality from processing is so much better. You get free of the 2:3 pull down, judder free, 24p and the additional 'smoothing' from the extra frames of 120+ Hz.
Plus the glasses are lighter and don't need batteries. Till we have glasses free, it seems to me the best option.
I find the 60 frames per eye, just way to slow. In the same way a DLP project system in a Cinema is not satisfactory to me. It’s like a bad disco shorting out with all the flicker.
|
Yea, I'm waiting for affordable 4KTVs with passive 3D myself ("2K" is 2048x1080, so I guess you meant 4K).
