One thing against passive 3D displays has always been the lowered resolution that comes from the interlaced design. Cutting the vertical resolution in half seems like it would be a bad thing, and has driven many people to use Active displays instead. A new study at DisplayMate however, says that human perception can’t see any difference.
The study finds that passive 3DTVs, which use an alternating raster scan approach, deliver a full-HD resolution 3D experience due to image fusion in human visual perception. The findings are significant as it elevates the impact of human perception of image quality as a measure of the 3D experience, as specs alone seem inadequate.
I have to disagree. Current 3D passive displays have significant artifacts, at least in my experience. Particularly when using them with data visualization tools and seeing 1-pixel wide lines (or even slightly bigger) turn into perforated lines as they cross the screen diagonally.
Personally, I can’t wait for 1920×2160 displays (double 1080 tall), where they can still interlace but leave you with 1080 lines in each eye.
via GraphicSpeak » DisplayMate shootout prefers passive 3D glasses.
I think in the future we might no longer use 3d glasses?
You obviously didn’t read my article because I cover the artifacts issues you mention in detail. Next time, before you write a commentary first read what you are commenting about! Here is my article link: http://www.displaymate.com/3D_TV_ShootOut_1.htm
I did actually, and I commend you on your technical & balanced review.
The different is in the use-case. For viewing real video and movies, you’re right and Passive is a superior technology. For synthetic visuals however, such as the interactive output from a visualization tool, the commonly 1px white borders and legends on black backgrounds simply don’t work very well. It’s not entirely the TV’s fault, as they probably shouldn’t be using 1px lines in 3D space anyway, but it’s a situation that is very visible and distracting when using the TV’s.