Active 3D Television Makers Band Together to Find a Standard

[TheDickWard]

The partnership says that we can expect to see these new glasses in the market by 2012.

http://presscentre.sony.eu/content/d...2&NewsAreaId=2

[Philnerd]

So this announcement is what.. 3, 4 years late? I still can't believe what a cluster the whole glasses thing has turned out to be. Shoot, Samsung can barely stick to the same standard in their own line.

While the 3D on my DLP is incredible, its about 99% likely my next 3D set will be passive. I'll happily take an imperceptible resolution drop in exchange for not dealing with batteries, charging and $60+ prices.

[Lee Stewart]

So this announcement is what.. 3, 4 years late? I still can't believe what a cluster the whole glasses thing has turned out to be. Shoot, Samsung can barely stick to the same standard in their own line.

While the 3D on my DLP is incredible, its about 99% likely my next 3D set will be passive. I'll happily take an imperceptible resolution drop in exchange for not dealing with batteries, charging and $60+ prices.

The first 3DTVs were released in March 2010 - Panasonic and Samsung

[AV_Integrated]

Still, it blows me away that if I have a Sony TV in one room, and a Sharp in another room, then there are no standard glasses which work with both of them, and will ALSO be compatible with whatever TV/projector I get a year or two down the line.

It's like they came up with a 3D video standard, and then blew the end game completely. Instead, they should have come up with 2 or 3 standards for glasses and some manufacturers (XPand, etc.) would make universal glasses which could be setup to work with any and all displays you may purchase.

I understand that it can be difficult to set standards, but I won't buy a new projector until I know the glasses I get for that will also work for the next TV I buy. Since that TV may be a 70" Sharp (maybe!) then it may make buying the forthcoming AE7000U projector from Panasonic a poor choice if they aren't compatible.

[Philnerd]

The first 3DTVs were released in March 2010 - Panasonic and Samsung

So these companies should have made this announcement around 2009

[TripleHBK]

Whoever is continuing the idea that people want glasses that need to be charged and cost $100+ should be fired. Passive is and always has been the way people want there 3d. As market demands rise, Active technology will disappear. The only reason it hasn't thus far, is because it gives the tv companies a way to screw you out of even more money.

Does anyone really think it costs even $30 to make Active style glasses... I guarantee those things can be produced for next to nothing.

[Geomancer21]

Not being standardized also means you have to buy THEIR glasses. its makes sense from a business point of view, even if it is ripping people off (nothing new though). Only this time people aren't swallowing it. I would hope this doesn't stifle competition though, and third parties will be able to produce glasses people can actually afford.

[Lee Stewart]

Whoever is continuing the idea that people want glasses that need to be charged and cost $100+ should be fired. Passive is and always has been the way people want there 3d. As market demands rise, Active technology will disappear. The only reason it hasn't thus far, is because it gives the tv companies a way to screw you out of even more money.

Does anyone really think it costs even $30 to make Active style glasses... I guarantee those things can be produced for next to nothing.

Except you can't advertise/market the slogan; "Full HD" with Passive Glasses 3DTVS because they aren't Full HD per eye like Active Glasses 3DTVs are.

[Sooner1Kid]

Except you can't advertise/market the slogan; "Full HD" with Passive Glasses 3DTVS because they aren't Full HD per eye like Active Glasses 3DTVs are.

Is passive possible with plasmas, because from my understanding LCDs and LED LCDs can't produce Full HD 3D per eye because the refresh rate isn't high enough, but a plasma w/ 600Hz is capable. Seeing that only Vizio and LG have passive sets on the market and those being LED LCD screens, I don't believe the limitation of 540 per eye lies with the passive technology as much as the sets they are limited to.

So in theory if Panasonic or Samsung produce a passive plasma, it should be 1080p per eye, but there is less money in selling passive glasses.

[taygan315]

I guess better late than never. Glad they are coming together (finally) on a set standard.

[bgillander]

Is passive possible with plasmas, because from my understanding LCDs and LED LCDs can't produce Full HD 3D per eye because the refresh rate isn't high enough, but a plasma w/ 600Hz is capable. Seeing that only Vizio and LG have passive sets on the market and those being LED LCD screens, I don't believe the limitation of 540 per eye lies with the passive technology as much as the sets they are limited to.

So in theory if Panasonic or Samsung produce a passive plasma, it should be 1080p per eye, but there is less money in selling passive glasses.

All the active shutter 3D LCD televisions I have seen are "Full HD" 1080p, but I have seen at least one Samsung Plasma Active 3D that was only 720p.

In a way you are correct that the limitation of 540 per eye does not lie with the passive technology, however. The passive screens work by adding a polarized layer over the screen with every odd line polarized one way and every even line polarized in the opposite way, so that the one lens of the glasses filters the odd lines and the other lens filters the even lines. Because the displays have 1080 lines, you end up with the 540 line "limitation". If they were to use 1920 x 2160 resolution panels, they could develop "Full HD" passive 3D screens... you'd still only be seeing half the lines per eye, but that half would now be 1080 lines. The LCD panels would be more expensive to manufacture and that isn't a "standard resolution", so more likely is that they will probably start making passive 3D 4K panels and you will have double the resolution in both the horizontal and vertical.

I haven't heard any reason why the filters wouldn't work on Plasma, so I think it is just a limit of how high they can make the resolution of the panels, be that LCD or plasma (and how expensive the premium) ...and how fine they can make the polarizing filter and align it over the panel, I guess.

That's how I understand it, anyway.

[Josh Z]

Still, it blows me away that if I have a Sony TV in one room, and a Sharp in another room, then there are no standard glasses which work with both of them, and will ALSO be compatible with whatever TV/projector I get a year or two down the line.

Does the Sony TV's remote work with the Sharp TV?

[Sooner1Kid]

Does the Sony TV's remote work with the Sharp TV?

I see what you did there, but the remote is included with the TV and doesn't cost $100+ and not everyone that comes over needs to hold a remote while watching TV.

I also understand that companies want to make money and knowing this it would be wise to stick with one brand in every room.

[LordoftheRingsEE]

Whoever is continuing the idea that people want glasses that need to be charged and cost $100+ should be fired. Passive is and always has been the way people want there 3d. As market demands rise, Active technology will disappear. The only reason it hasn't thus far, is because it gives the tv companies a way to screw you out of even more money.

Does anyone really think it costs even $30 to make Active style glasses... I guarantee those things can be produced for next to nothing.

The CR battery is more expensive than the glasses themselves!

[LordoftheRingsEE]

Does the Sony TV's remote work with the Sharp TV?

It should!