Confused.

[clapple]

A few weeks ago I looked at a 3D tv display. They were showing an animated film. 3D looked great and with out the glasses it looked like normal HD. Yesterday at Best Buy, there was another 3D display, with live action, that without glasses had a double image, like in a movie theater. Unfortunately, I did not really check the TV brands. What's the deal.

 

[TheForce]

Here is a web page that explains the difference.

 

[clapple]

Here is a web page that explains the difference.

Sorry; but what web page?

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Click on the HERE in his message

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Thanks for the link Don...

I learned something there...

Disadvantages of Passive Polarized 3D Glasses

• Half-resolution image quality. Each eye sees only half of the vertical resolution of a 2D picture because both left eye and right eye images are contained in the same frame.

Now I know why the 3D version of Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs looked SO MUCH better on my new 3D Plasma then it did when I saw it in 3D at the movies!

 

[HiDefRev]

Than

THAN, not then !!

 

[clapple]

Thanks Don. Now I've got it.

 

[tnsprin]

Thanks Don. Now I've got it.

However your experience sounds like either you never saw the set in 3d or had never looked at the screen without having the glasses on. With the glasses off and the 3d enabled on the set, then two rapidly changing images are shown and should look somewhat blurred.

 

[toto]

A few weeks ago I looked at a 3D tv display. They were showing an animated film. 3D looked great and with out the glasses it looked like normal HD. Yesterday at Best Buy, there was another 3D display, with live action, that without glasses had a double image, like in a movie theater. Unfortunately, I did not really check the TV brands. What's the deal.

Animated movies do not have the depth of field that live action does. Thus very little blurring, sans glasses.

 

[navychop]

Sigh. Side by side. Cut every corner, spare every penny.