3D TV

[edutech4schools]

Just got a new Samsung TV (E-series) and it has a fantastic picture quality but the 'active' 3d flicker hurts my eyes and I can only manage about 5 minutes. I would have thought they would have sorted this out by now.

 

Just interested if I should have got passive 3d instead.

[sted]

Just got a new Samsung TV (E-series) and it has a fantastic picture quality but the 'active' 3d flicker hurts my eyes and I can only manage about 5 minutes. I would have thought they would have sorted this out by now.

 

Just interested if I should have got passive 3d instead.

 

Im not sure it would make much difference i get a headache from passive at cinema it takes longer with the active on laptop to affect me but 30 mins tops.

[HaleStorm]

I struggle with 3D anyway as they dont make the glasses to fit over normal specs. So i Can either watch the double image without the 3D or watch a double image through the 3d glassess because I cant see well enough to not have my glasses on.

Therefore when I buy a new telly (sometime in june after i get married) I will but a smart TV and leave the 3d function off

[Sheepy]

I love the 3d effect... Only now and again I find that I get issues because of it and that tends to be because im actively looking around the screen to see the 3D effect.

 

I had a go on my mates passive 3D tv and found that gaming gave me stress straight away but just watching tv/movies was fine

 

Are you sure your glasses are synced up properly?

[Millgate]

Just got a new Samsung TV (E-series) and it has a fantastic picture quality but the 'active' 3d flicker hurts my eyes and I can only manage about 5 minutes. I would have thought they would have sorted this out by now.

 

Just interested if I should have got passive 3d instead.

 

I've got a Samsung active one and I get headache if I watch a 3d film. But like Sted said, i get it at the pics too.

 

I haven't used the 3d function in months. It was a good gimmick at first and I like 3d football but it's too much of an effort!

[sonofsanta]

I've got one of the LG passive ones and it's fine, my limit is around 4 hours before my eyes go dry and start to itch but that level of built-in limit is probably for the best

 

I'd quite happily recommend it over active - you always have loads of glasses around if people come over (particularly as you can get more pairs by just going to the cinema), you don't have to worry about charge levels, the glasses are fairly comfortable; the only downside is the loss of vertical resolution, but if you're sitting close enough to notice that, you're sitting too close - at 6 foot away from my 47" I can't see any drop in quality.

 

TBH though, it doesn't get used a great deal - the Smart TV stuff is handy for iPlayer alone, but the 3D is probably turned on about once a month at the moment...

[edutech4schools]

Cheers.

 

These companies are really holding back this tech and drip feeding it to us. I went to the science museum in London about 10 years ago and they had a 'future 3d tv' special demo exhibit on that week with 2 TV sets doing glasses less 3d. The image colour was washed out but the 3d element coming out was crystal clear and yeas ahead of anything I have seen since.

[Bezwick]

I have had a passive LG 3D TV for about a year now, and i have a couple of mates with Active ones. When i first got it my eyes would get sore after about 30 mins, but now i can watch it for hours without a problem. My mates with active ones still cant watch theirs for more than about 45 mins. I dont use it that much, as their aren't that many films out in 3D but games like Wipeout on the PS3 look amazing. Its also handy if you have a passive Tv and want to play split screen games, you can use the 3D sbs and the glasses. If you put both left lenses in one pair of glasses and both right in another. You can play split screen games full screen, by using the 3D feature. Works really well too.

[localzuk]

I stood gawping at a passive (and glasses-less) LG 3D TV last week. They had the Yogi bear movie on it and it was thoroughly impressive. The depth was amazing IMO, and it wasn't *that* expensive (£1500 for a 46" IIRC, and that was on the Isle of Man so likely had a 'you're in a remote place' tax on top).

 

The active ones don't go well with my eyes - I just get a headache!

Edited January 8, 2013 by localzuk

[tmcd35]

I've only ever seen good 3D twice, actually thrice, but the third time it ruined the film. The first was at a proper IMAX theater. When home 3D get's to that quality I might be interested (fish swimming in mid air, past the side of your face). The other time 3D impressed me was a couple of days ago when I was visiting my mum. I fired up Batman Arkham City on her active 3D TV and nearly put my hand in my pocket to buy one of my own!

 

The 3D in The Hobbit at 48fps was very impressive and noticeable but it ruined the film. Everything became almost cartoon like with characters seemingly hoovering above the background.

 

I've never seen 3D on a 3DTV (other than the Batman Game) that made it worth the money, always seemed a gimmick. I think I'll wait for the 4k TV's and the PS4 before I jump on the band wagon.

 

 

EDIT: actually I seem to recall a glasses-less TV on show a BETT a couple of years ago that surprised me, although I also recall the vomit inducing flicker as I walked past.

Edited January 8, 2013 by tmcd35

[PyROm]

We have a panasonic plasma active 3d tv, very good 3d, been told by friends with passive tv`s that its a better 3d effect. Neither I nor any of my friends have had problems with eye ache. One thing you might want to watch with active is that you shouldnt have any lights on, the mains frequency of the lights can give a strobe effect when viewing, Ive noticed this even with a little angle poise on in the corner of the room.