Login at Kodi Home

brazen1 · 2017-02-03, 16:47

(2017-02-03, 15:51)querty1000 Wrote:
(2017-02-03, 09:53)T800 Wrote:
(2017-02-02, 18:27)the_jaguar Wrote: what do you guys think of the conversion kits for making active 3D PJ's into passive ones? I have heard mixed opinions, so wondering if you folks have any thoughts/experience here? I would much rather prefer a passive 3D experience (similar to my LG OLED65E6P)..

Why passive over active?
- less flickering
- better brightness and contrast
- really better pop outs
- better 3D deep

if the conversation kit will do it also, i don't know.

*Cough* How did you arrive at those conclusions?

tate1293 · 2017-02-03, 18:41

(2017-02-03, 16:47)brazen1 Wrote:
(2017-02-03, 15:51)querty1000 Wrote:
(2017-02-03, 09:53)T800 Wrote: Why passive over active?
- less flickering
- better brightness and contrast
- really better pop outs
- better 3D deep

if the conversation kit will do it also, i don't know.

*Cough* How did you arrive at those conclusions?

Yeah I don't know about the better 3D depth and popouts, and the brightness and contrast really depends on implementation. The biggest reason I would say are the glasses. Active glasses are more expensive, heavier, require batteries, syncing... overall much more hassle. I can barely get my wife to watch 3D with passive glasses, she hates watching a movie with glasses so much, I definitely wouldn't be able to get her to do active Tongue

timstephens24 · 2017-02-03, 18:48

Active is better on a 1080p screen if you're talking purely from a resolution standpoint. But active 3d is more prone to crosstalk, has lens stuttering, and glasses that are heavier and require batteries.

On a 4K TV, the disadvantage of resolution for passive goes away since now both give 1080p to each eye, so passive is better in that there's no lens stuttering, less crosstalk issues, and lighter glasses with no need for heavy batteries and flickering lenses.

Passive 3D needs to be at eye level though, unlike active, so if you have your TV/projector mounted high and you're looking up at it, passive will have a lot of crosstalk.

brazen1 · (This post was last modified: 2017-02-03, 19:38 by brazen1.)

I think you both are bringing up facts from 2009 era. Crosstalk does not exist on decent displays anymore. Cheaper ones, of course. You get what you pay for. Glasses have also come a long way. My active glasses weigh less than my lightweight prescription glasses. I don't have a scale to weigh them but I can assure both of you, weight is not an issue. Heavy batteries? Do you know how small and lightweight a CR1620 coin battery is? If you'd really like to make a real world comparison, hold your passive glasses in one hand and a pair of SSG 5150's loaded with that hefty CR1620 in the other. Lens stuttering? LoL. I think you want to feel good about your passive or something. Let me help you. Lift up your feather weight glasses and look closely at the pixels on your passive screen. See a row of black dots every other line of vertical resolution? Enjoy them.

Edit
https://www.cnet.com/products/samsung-ss...ses/specs/
0.81 oz

http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Samsung-SSG-...Sw5cNYkJrw
$19

the_jaguar · 2017-02-03, 19:53

(2017-02-03, 18:48)timstephens24 Wrote: Active is better on a 1080p screen if you're talking purely from a resolution standpoint. But active 3d is more prone to crosstalk, has lens stuttering, and glasses that are heavier and require batteries.

On a 4K TV, the disadvantage of resolution for passive goes away since now both give 1080p to each eye, so passive is better in that there's no lens stuttering, less crosstalk issues, and lighter glasses with no need for heavy batteries and flickering lenses.

Passive 3D needs to be at eye level though, unlike active, so if you have your TV/projector mounted high and you're looking up at it, passive will have a lot of crosstalk.

That's true - I hadn't through of the projector height issue. My basement has a low ceiling with a false ceiling, so I think it should be ok, but something for me to keep an eye out for.

(2017-02-03, 19:21)brazen1 Wrote: I think you both are bringing up facts from 2009 era. Crosstalk does not exist on decent displays anymore. Cheaper ones, of course. You get what you pay for. Glasses have also come a long way. My active glasses weigh less than my lightweight prescription glasses. I don't have a scale to weigh them but I can assure both of you, weight is not an issue. Heavy batteries? Do you know how small and lightweight a CR1620 coin battery is? If you'd really like to make a real world comparison, hold your passive glasses in one hand and a pair of SSG 5150's loaded with that hefty CR1620 in the other. Lens stuttering? LoL. I think you want to feel good about your passive or something. Let me help you. Lift up your feather weight glasses and look closely at the pixels on your passive screen. See a row of black dots every other line of vertical resolution? Enjoy them.

Edit
https://www.cnet.com/products/samsung-ss...ses/specs/
0.81 oz

http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Samsung-SSG-...Sw5cNYkJrw
$19

Once you have seen passive 3D on an LG 4K OLED, believe me, you will not want to go back to active 3D again. Only issue though is that the 77" screen is crazy expensive, and for a home theater room, I am looking for 120" screen. Also, my wife gets headaches because of active 3D (fortunately, I haven't had that issue).

brazen1 · 2017-02-03, 20:04

IMAX at home looks pretty good too. Only issue is it's $400,000 but you'll get your 120" screen.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/06/...at-300000/

tate1293 · 2017-02-03, 20:14

(2017-02-03, 19:21)brazen1 Wrote: I think you both are bringing up facts from 2009 era. Crosstalk does not exist on decent displays anymore. Cheaper ones, of course. You get what you pay for. Glasses have also come a long way. My active glasses weigh less than my lightweight prescription glasses. I don't have a scale to weigh them but I can assure both of you, weight is not an issue. Heavy batteries? Do you know how small and lightweight a CR1620 coin battery is? If you'd really like to make a real world comparison, hold your passive glasses in one hand and a pair of SSG 5150's loaded with that hefty CR1620 in the other. Lens stuttering? LoL. I think you want to feel good about your passive or something. Let me help you. Lift up your feather weight glasses and look closely at the pixels on your passive screen. See a row of black dots every other line of vertical resolution? Enjoy them.

Edit
https://www.cnet.com/products/samsung-ss...ses/specs/
0.81 oz

http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Samsung-SSG-...Sw5cNYkJrw
$19

Those look just like the ones I used on my grandma's Samsung TV a couple months ago. You're right, they're not as bad as I thought they might be, but they're still a good bit heavier than my passive glasses, and having to keep up with replacing batteries, turning them all on and making sure they were syncing was a pain that I don't have with passive. If I get an active projector it'll just be something I'll have to deal with but it's definitely not a non-issue. Also, it makes no difference that there's a row of black every other line when you close one eye because my 4K screen still displays 1080P to each eye. If there were 4K 3D blurays available, you'd have a point, but there are no such things and looks like there may never be.

the_jaguar · 2017-02-03, 20:54

(2017-02-03, 20:04)brazen1 Wrote: IMAX at home looks pretty good too. Only issue is it's $400,000 but you'll get your 120" screen.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/06/...at-300000/

I wish I could afford such luxury Big Grin

brazen1 · 2017-02-03, 21:03

I just thought it fair to compare apples to apples. I have $1500 invested. And your passive you have how much invested Huh

??

the_jaguar · 2017-02-03, 21:12

(2017-02-03, 21:03)brazen1 Wrote: I just thought it fair to compare apples to apples. I have $1500 invested. And your passive you have how much invested??

well, it's actually closer than you think - I have about $2800 invested in my 65E6P (yes, I got a great deal 6 months ago).

brazen1 · (This post was last modified: 2017-02-03, 21:57 by brazen1.)

Nice. So did I. Waiting a year for the latest and greatest to become last years model saved me about $3500 a year ago for my 65JS8500.
I could have done the curved screen thing for a year newer model same features but the flat screen appeals to me more.
Still waiting for native 4k PJ's to become priced realistically for average users like myself.
Then everything I could have wasted on an OLED can be better spent.
That's assuming a decent budget minded PJ comes on the market with 3D still and that I'm not waiting for years upon years.
This puppy will get me by until then I think......

Off topic:
I watched Man of Steel 3D again, this time on the 4k panel. I had to turn down sharpness to 0. Watched plenty of other titles at normal 45 without overdoing the detail. This movie though.....

the_jaguar · 2017-02-03, 22:26

Nice! I am in the same boat as you when it comes to buying the 4K PJ. The current pricing levels seem too high, but I am hoping that later this year or early next year, we will see good deals on 4K PJ's. My home theater room will have to wait until then Big Grin

I haven't seen Man of Steel in 3D yet. I do have the blu-ray, so I guess I will watch it this weekend.

**hdmkv** · 2017-02-03, 23:42

Maybe VR will also keep 3D alive.

brazen1 · 2017-02-04, 00:24

(2017-02-03, 23:42)hdmkv Wrote: Maybe VR will also keep 3D alive.

I swear nothing 3D related gets past you. I don't even bother to surf for info anymore. I just look YOU up. LoL.

**hdmkv** · (This post was last modified: 2017-02-04, 17:06 by hdmkv.)

LoL... love 3D, know it's misunderstood and underappreciated... pray it stays alive, and at least thrives as a niche format Smile

.