3D screen quality compared to 2D?
 

Andy Burns wrote:
Norman Wells wrote:

since DSO has been completed (as far as I'm aware)

Not yet ... North East England and Northern Ireland still to go (this
month and next respectively).

do TVs that are sold in the UK still come with an analogue tuner?

Yes, and likely to for years to come.

I hope so, 'analogue' RF is useful for piping PVR and CCTV outputs to
secondary TV sets around the home.


--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

www.paras.org.uk

3D screen quality compared to 2D?
 

On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 09:18:17 +0100, Steve Thackery
wrote:

I can confirm what the others have said: there is no disadvantage at
all in getting a 3D-capable set. You can switch the 3D on or off, and
if it's off the screen works exactly like a standard 2D set.

HOWEVER, I think that is only true for TVs using ACTIVE 3D. They use a
screen which is exactly the same as that in a normal 2D TV and simply
flash the left/right pictures at high speed.

Passive 3D sets have polarising material on the front of the screen.
This shouldn't make any difference when viewing 2D, but I suppose it
just might. Obviously the eye is insensitive to light polarisation,
but nevertheless passive 3D screens have a slightly different
construction so it's something we should consider.

What if you are wearing sunglasses with polarising lenses at the time?

3D screen quality compared to 2D?
 

In message , Mark Carver
writes
Andy Burns wrote:
Norman Wells wrote:

since DSO has been completed (as far as I'm aware)
Not yet ... North East England and Northern Ireland still to go
(this month and next respectively).

do TVs that are sold in the UK still come with an analogue tuner?
Yes, and likely to for years to come.

I hope so, 'analogue' RF is useful for piping PVR and CCTV outputs to
secondary TV sets around the home.

Which is exactly why, if any new sets are made without an analogue RF
input, that fact should be made perfectly clear to any potential buyer.
--
Ian

3D screen quality compared to 2D?
 

Steve Thackery wrote:

Passive 3D sets have polarising material on the front of the screen.
This shouldn't make any difference when viewing 2D, but I suppose it
just might. Obviously the eye is insensitive to light polarisation, but
nevertheless passive 3D screens have a slightly different construction
so it's something we should consider.

LCD panels are inherently polarized in any case. Try looking at a
conventional Samsung screen through Polaroid glasses and you'll see what
I mean. Rotating the lens, the image is almost completely extinguished
at a certain angle.

The effect is quite different with my LG passive 3D panel, which uses
circular polarization. The image stays bright at any angle of the
Polaroid lens.

3D screen quality compared to 2D?
 

Mark Carver wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Norman Wells wrote:

since DSO has been completed (as far as I'm aware)

Not yet ... North East England and Northern Ireland still to go (this
month and next respectively).

do TVs that are sold in the UK still come with an analogue tuner?

Yes, and likely to for years to come.

I hope so, 'analogue' RF is useful for piping PVR and CCTV outputs to
secondary TV sets around the home.

If there's nothing coming in on RF, there's no need for an RF tuner.

What you're talking about is RF out, which I suggest is a specialist
hobby area that you should pay extra for. It's not necessary as a
standard, nor wanted by many.

3D screen quality compared to 2D?
 

"A.N.Other" wrote in message
...
Hi all,

I've been asked by my dad to look for a new telly for him. He's
currently got a very nice 2009/10 Viera 32" with Freesat HD and
standard freeview. What he wants is essentially the same thing, but
with a bigger screen size - 42 or 47". I've got more or less the same
telly as him, but the 2011 version, so we'd ideally be looking at
another Viera set as we've been really happy with them.

Unfortunately, I have run into a couple of issues, which a-

1) That Freesat now seems to be an option on the top of the range sets
only, with Freeview HD being the default.
2) Those sets are almost entirely 3D in nature.

Obviously, we'd like to keep the cost down and being 76 he doesn't
give a hoot for 3D, so that feature is entirely superfluous for him. I
suspect that he's also going to want to keep Freesat instead of just
Freeview HD, as there are channels there that he likes that are not on
the Freeview platform.

What I would appreciate some guidance on is whether there is any
benefit to focussing on the more limited range of 2D sets or whether
to bite the bullet and just get a passive 3D set. Are the 3D sets
still the compromise solution that they used to be or do they now give
a picture as good as a traditional 2D panel?

You could try looking for a previous year's model.
The electrical retailers are still trying to shift loads of 720p 'HD Ready'
sets at low, low prices so there must be a massive stockpile of older
technology ouy there somewhere.
Don't know if Panasonic went to Freeview and Fresat HD before starting on
3D - if so there may be bargains to be had.
You don't say what your budget is but I suspect there may be decent sets out
there at £500+

Cheers

Dave R

--
No plan survives contact with the enemy.
[Not even bunny]

Helmuth von Moltke the Elder

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

3D screen quality compared to 2D?
 

John Legon wrote:

LCD panels are inherently polarized in any case. Try looking at a
conventional Samsung screen through Polaroid glasses and you'll see what
I mean. Rotating the lens, the image is almost completely extinguished
at a certain angle.

The effect is quite different with my LG passive 3D panel, which uses
circular polarization. The image stays bright at any angle of the
Polaroid lens.

All very interesting stuff, which I didn't know.

The question remains, though: does the "different" polarisation of a
passive 3D screen affect its 2D performance in any way?

It sounds like it doesn't, which is great for the OP. Gives him the
choice of either, and just switching the 3D off.

--
SteveT

3D screen quality compared to 2D?
 

Mark Carver wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Norman Wells wrote:

since DSO has been completed (as far as I'm aware)

Not yet ... North East England and Northern Ireland still to go (this
month and next respectively).

do TVs that are sold in the UK still come with an analogue tuner?

Yes, and likely to for years to come.

I hope so, 'analogue' RF is useful for piping PVR and CCTV outputs to
secondary TV sets around the home.


Not to mention the hotels, universities, prisons, etc. Conversion to DVB
for in-house channels won't happen overnight.

Bill

3D screen quality compared to 2D?
 

Scott wrote:

Passive 3D sets have polarising material on the front of the screen.
This shouldn't make any difference when viewing 2D, but I suppose it
just might. Obviously the eye is insensitive to light polarisation,
but nevertheless passive 3D screens have a slightly different
construction so it's something we should consider.

What if you are wearing sunglasses with polarising lenses at the time?
Only a daft lad would wear sunglasses in t'ouse.

Bill

3D screen quality compared to 2D?
 

Norman Wells wrote:
Mark Carver wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Norman Wells wrote:

since DSO has been completed (as far as I'm aware)

Not yet ... North East England and Northern Ireland still to go (this
month and next respectively).

do TVs that are sold in the UK still come with an analogue tuner?

Yes, and likely to for years to come.

I hope so, 'analogue' RF is useful for piping PVR and CCTV outputs to
secondary TV sets around the home.

If there's nothing coming in on RF, there's no need for an RF tuner.

What you're talking about is RF out, which I suggest is a specialist
hobby area that you should pay extra for. It's not necessary as a
standard, nor wanted by many.
You've got the wrong end of the coax there I think.

Bill