Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 54 of 54
  1. #51
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    153,473
    No...

    Flat out wrong. That's old school. I'm talking the new state of the art.

    They do it two different ways. PLANAR makes a two screed set that uses polarized glass. Some other makers have the physical polarization etched in the flat panel. there are physically two color groups next to each other, with polarities 90 degrees apart.

    SD2620W 26" Widescreen Stereo/3D Monitor:




    JVC GD-463D10U PROFESSIONAL 46-INCH 3D DISPLAY MONITOR:


    In other words, the realD technology I was talking about in my post. The problem with polarization tech is that you lose brightness and in some cases (like the Hyundai XPol that the JVC monitor you mention uses) you lose half the vertical resolution.

    Notice also that both displays are actually professional monitors, not consumer TVs.

    Right now, the Dolby3D is probably the better tech out there. It's just too expensive outside of a theater though. Circular polarization has a chance to replace shutter glasses for consumer TV if they find a way to produce the polarized filter screens for cheap. At least cheaper than making shutter glasses.

  2. #52
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    In other words, the realD technology I was talking about in my post. The problem with polarization tech is that you lose brightness and in some cases (like the Hyundai XPol that the JVC monitor you mention uses) you lose half the vertical resolution.
    Still, it's not the shutter glasses, or colored glasses.
    Notice also that both displays are actually professional monitors, not consumer TVs.
    True. I bought a professional series desktop. Why not monitor as well?
    Right now, the Dolby3D is probably the better tech out there. It's just too expensive outside of a theater though. Circular polarization has a chance to replace shutter glasses for consumer TV if they find a way to produce the polarized fikter screens for cheap. At least cheaper than making shutter glasses.
    I see possible reverting back to polarity at 90 degrees apart with LED screens, at like a +/- 45 degree. I think the dolby 3d will be a failure as some people will perceive the two different color pallets differently. Just my opinion though.

    Let's not forget the parallax type monitors that don't require any glasses.

  3. #53
    Spur-taaaa TDMVPDPOY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Post Count
    41,384
    3d bs is just a gimmick

    u can always ask them to give u the non 3d screen....

  4. #54
    uups stups! Cant_Be_Faded's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Post Count
    28,114
    Anyone have a guess on how long this stupid 3D fad lasts?
    Three years, tops.

    1) I cannot simply imagine people of any demographic consistently using those stupid glasses, and straining their eyes to watch 3d movies

    2) The movies that are actually 3d worthy are VERY VERY VERY VERY few and far between.
    I can imagine myself smoking a joint with a few friends and wanting to watch avatar in 3d on my TV. But what other ing movie would you want to do that for? Anyone with a smidgen of brain that WANTS to pay for a 3d TV is basically buying the TV to watch Avatar, Beowulf, Coraline, and maybe one or two children's CGI movies. That's IT! The movies that are being chastized 3d ing blow in 3d and we all know it.

    3) The consumer is not paying that much money for these days, if they have a choice to save several hundred dollars without getting 3d they will do it.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •