Talk:Film-type patterned retarder

71.31.144.140 (talk) 15:41, 10 September 2011 (UTC) by ZenGeekDad

I'm surprised by the article's statement that "Shutter glasses mostly eliminate 'ghosting' which is a problem with other 3D display technologies such as RealD 3D," since: (A) I have never noticed any ghosting in any 3D movie that I have viewed through RealD glasses (spirally polarized), and (B) I observed intolerable ghosting in a home 3D set-up I bought and subsequently returned (Oct 2009) -- that was the Samsung 2233RZ monitor and the NVIDIA shutter glasses. That home system in particular showed severe ghosting when a dark character (gaming) was viewed in front of a light background, or visa versa. (Just to cover this base, the ghosting problem was not coming from my PC. I'd just built it as a fairly high performing HD-video-editing and gaming rig.  Also, the Samsung 2233RZ monitor was unusually good for a TN panel, but with the 3D aspect not satisfying, I returned it and bought a larger LED non-3D monitor.)

Further, PC World said this in their review of FPR glasses: "Active-shutter 3D glasses have two glaring problems with image quality: refresh-rate related flicker and 'crosstalk.' ... 'Crosstalk' ... occurs when the TV and the glasses can't switch from the right-eye image to the left-eye image quickly or cleanly enough, meaning you end up seeing 'ghosted' images in both eyes." That certainly matched my experience.

I haven't myself seen home RealD implementations yet, so I can't vouch for how theater-sized/projected technology scales down to a home-sized flat panel, wrt ghosting or other issues. For example, if home RealD also loses half the horizontal resolution, wouldn't you notice a fairly glaring drop in picture clarity: like going from HD back to DVD?

Outdated
Since each eye will only see one of two circularly polarized images and the polarizing filters are static, two unique images must be displayed simultaneously. This means that twice the number of pixels (interleaved with the "regular" pixels in rows or columns) are required to maintain the same effective resolution as a 2D image. Without these extra pixels the resolution would cut in half (for each eye) on the horizontal or vertical axis.

There's no such quote on the site: http://www.displaymate.com/3D_TV_ShootOut_1.htm!

This is a very disleading and false information on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.66.226.89 (talk) 09:57, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I have tried to fix the sections outlined above 188.181.8.98 (talk) 18:32, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Is this just a Polarized 3D System?
FPR appears to be an LG product implementing a Polarized 3D System. Is this article an advertisement? --John Moser (talk) 16:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)