3-D

Okay! How does a 3-D TV differ from a std TV?

wrote:
Okay! How does a 3-D TV differ from a std TV?

"Real3D" TVs are not yet commercially available unless
you own a movie theater. What they do is to project
simultaneous left and right circularly polarized light
and the user wears "Avatar" glasses.

Other 3-D TV have been tried that use small differences
in the LCD cells to project Left&Right - the user does
not have to wear glasses (!) but they have to view from
the right location.

Other 3D methods work with std tv sets, but the quality is debatable!

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:35:06 -0500, RickMerrill
wrote:

wrote:
Okay! How does a 3-D TV differ from a std TV?

"Real3D" TVs are not yet commercially available unless
you own a movie theater. What they do is to project
simultaneous left and right circularly polarized light
and the user wears "Avatar" glasses.

Other 3-D TV have been tried that use small differences
in the LCD cells to project Left&Right - the user does
not have to wear glasses (!) but they have to view from
the right location.

Other 3D methods work with std tv sets, but the quality is debatable!

For one Rose Parade about twenty years ago, it was broadcast over NTSC
to everyone's existing CRT tube TVs in some kind of "3D" on Los
Angeles KTLA channel 5. I thought it sort of kind of worked, but I
have no idea how since IIRC there were no glasses involved. Some kind
of exaggerated perspective, perhaps. But it was not repeated.

J.

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:16:47 -0800, JRStern
wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:35:06 -0500, RickMerrill
wrote:

wrote:
Okay! How does a 3-D TV differ from a std TV?

"Real3D" TVs are not yet commercially available unless
you own a movie theater. What they do is to project
simultaneous left and right circularly polarized light
and the user wears "Avatar" glasses.

Other 3-D TV have been tried that use small differences
in the LCD cells to project Left&Right - the user does
not have to wear glasses (!) but they have to view from
the right location.

Other 3D methods work with std tv sets, but the quality is debatable!

For one Rose Parade about twenty years ago, it was broadcast over NTSC
to everyone's existing CRT tube TVs in some kind of "3D" on Los
Angeles KTLA channel 5. I thought it sort of kind of worked, but I
have no idea how since IIRC there were no glasses involved. Some kind
of exaggerated perspective, perhaps. But it was not repeated.

J.

I remember back in 1973 a 3D experiment done on the evening national
news. Some researchers on the east coast had discovered you could
send the left-right images sequentially and get the 3D effect without
glasses or special TV.

The news anchor cut to a short clip where it looked like the picture
was wobbling back and forth at about a 5 Hz rate as the L-R images
were switched. It was amazing to cut from the news anchor to this
clip, and instantly there was a 3D picture, and then back to the news
anchor and the 3D effect disappeared.

The researchers were saying how in a few years time all TV would be
3D. I guess they were wrong.

The only downside to this technique was a slight wobble to the
picture. OK, it wasnt a slight downside, it was a major downside which
probably explains why it didnt catch on.

When all is said and done, what are the mnfrs offering who say: 3-D
Ready?

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:01:37 -0500, wrote:

Okay! How does a 3-D TV differ from a std TV?

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:38:15 -0500, wrote:

When all is said and done, what are the mnfrs offering who say: 3-D
Ready?

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:01:37 -0500, wrote:

Okay! How does a 3-D TV differ from a std TV?

here's an explanation of what Mitsubishi has been offering since 2007
on their DLPs.
http://www.twice.com/article/442871-...Ready_Sets.php

My tv is rd ready but the glasses and processor would cost a grand or
so and there simply isn't enough content now to bother with it.
Thumper

"JRStern" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:35:06 -0500, RickMerrill
wrote:

wrote:
Okay! How does a 3-D TV differ from a std TV?

"Real3D" TVs are not yet commercially available unless
you own a movie theater. What they do is to project
simultaneous left and right circularly polarized light
and the user wears "Avatar" glasses.

Other 3-D TV have been tried that use small differences
in the LCD cells to project Left&Right - the user does
not have to wear glasses (!) but they have to view from
the right location.

Other 3D methods work with std tv sets, but the quality is debatable!

For one Rose Parade about twenty years ago, it was broadcast over NTSC
to everyone's existing CRT tube TVs in some kind of "3D" on Los
Angeles KTLA channel 5. I thought it sort of kind of worked, but I
have no idea how since IIRC there were no glasses involved. Some kind
of exaggerated perspective, perhaps. But it was not repeated.

J.

It was January 2, 1989. And it was KTTV Channel 11. But the effect worked
on all the channels.
Cardboard glasses were required (I still have my pair).
The technique was based on the fact that your eyes have a difference in
persistence at different light levels.
The left eye was clear plastic. The right eye was a 50% neutral density
filter.
As long as all the motion was from left to right (as is typical with Rose
Parade floats), then there was a real 3-D effect.
If there was no motion, or if the motion was right to left, then there was
no 3-D effect.

W²

On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:53:45 -0500, Thumper
wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:38:15 -0500, wrote:

When all is said and done, what are the mnfrs offering who say: 3-D
Ready?

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:01:37 -0500, wrote:

Okay! How does a 3-D TV differ from a std TV?

here's an explanation of what Mitsubishi has been offering since 2007
on their DLPs.
http://www.twice.com/article/442871-...Ready_Sets.php

My tv is rd ready but the glasses and processor would cost a grand or
so and there simply isn't enough content now to bother with it.
Thumper

Thumper: But what does 3-D ready mean (as some mnfrs advertise)? 3-D
is still 2 overlayed images separated slightly and hued differently,
the glasses then filtering one image over the other. Is this true?

On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 20:05:55 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:53:45 -0500, Thumper
wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:38:15 -0500, wrote:

When all is said and done, what are the mnfrs offering who say: 3-D
Ready?

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:01:37 -0500, wrote:

Okay! How does a 3-D TV differ from a std TV?

here's an explanation of what Mitsubishi has been offering since 2007
on their DLPs.
http://www.twice.com/article/442871-...Ready_Sets.php

My tv is rd ready but the glasses and processor would cost a grand or
so and there simply isn't enough content now to bother with it.
Thumper

Thumper: But what does 3-D ready mean (as some mnfrs advertise)? 3-D
is still 2 overlayed images separated slightly and hued differently,
the glasses then filtering one image over the other. Is this true?

Glasses showing one eye then the other as the transmitter sends out
alternating pictures. It has been available for a couple of years.

Thumper

"Thumper" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 20:05:55 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:53:45 -0500, Thumper
wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:38:15 -0500, wrote:

When all is said and done, what are the mnfrs offering who say: 3-D
Ready?

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:01:37 -0500, wrote:

Okay! How does a 3-D TV differ from a std TV?

here's an explanation of what Mitsubishi has been offering since 2007
on their DLPs.

http://www.twice.com/article/442871-...u_ray_Adapter_
For_Legacy_3D_Ready_Sets.php

My tv is rd ready but the glasses and processor would cost a grand or
so and there simply isn't enough content now to bother with it.
Thumper

Thumper: But what does 3-D ready mean (as some mnfrs advertise)? 3-D
is still 2 overlayed images separated slightly and hued differently,
the glasses then filtering one image over the other. Is this true?

Glasses showing one eye then the other as the transmitter sends out
alternating pictures. It has been available for a couple of years.

Thumper

Yea, I saw this at a display at Irvine Spectrum (California) with video
games and was quite impressed.