Shutter glasses or passive 3D glasses?

[DarthTengil]

Hello. Since I did´nt could settle exactly where to put this question I lay it
here to reach out to more users than the ordinary peripherals forum would.

I´m about to buy a new 3D monitor and can still not decide which side I should prefer. Have found a list of 23" 3D monitors, some using active, other using passive. What I want to ask is if there are any advantage choosing the "older" shutter glasses before the "newer" passive ones, with the exception of the fact that passive is better for all us with real glasses? Is it supporting more games since they have been on the market for many more years than passive? Does the size of the screen matters in this case - is it better with passive the bigger the screen is - or is it the other way (I mean for PC gaming, not for a 250" cinema canvas)?

Which kind of games seams to work beast with which tecnology, and which games is best to support 3D (ex: Need for Speed, Legends Of Pegasus, Unreal Tournament, Top Gun Hard Lock, Battlefield 3 and strategy games)? How about older games, are those that support 3D mainly for the shutter market? Know there is two camps here that holds on to each tecnology, but to try to be as neutral you can - what do you think?

What 3D-games are YOU playing, what sort of glasses and
tecnology do YOU use, what type do YOU think is the future?

One thing I am not sure of if is D-Sub verses Double DVI. Have two MSI N460GTX HAWK GPUs and wonder if they really support D-Sub, or is it the monitor itself that have a D-Sub port that you insert the cable to those active glasses, or have I completly mixed this up? Please explain what they mean with D-Sub, in my head a SUB is a bass speaker,
but also my hair HAVE become more greyish since I looked it up...

Please, Please, Please visit my thread on the Computer Peripheals - Flat Panel Monitors forum!!!
Have got fantastic answers from the user MauveCloud (yea man - you deserves to be mentioned )
but need more answers from way more users before I can choose from those monitors listed in that thread.
Please help me choose out the 4 best screens for 3D use, which ones of they
would YOU buy if YOU wanted to get a new 3D PC monitor?

Its name is "3D or not 3D, thats the question" and the link comes here under (hope this work):

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/64278-29-question

Happy for any answer 😉

 

[bystander]

I have never used a passive system. I have only read about it, but I do play with an active shutter glass system.

The last I checked, on PC's, the industry is pushing active, so you may find better support. There are work around that I've seen to get passive systems to work.

The biggest difference that I've read about is that passive systems are set to play at half resolution. A 1920x1080 resolution becomes 960x1080 for each eye. I've read that you can see where the pixels are missing (being displayed to the other eye).

The advantage to the passive system is there will not be any crosstalk (I'm not sure if there is any light bleeding, however). If the monitors refresh rate does not sync up exactly with your glasses, you can catch a glimps of the previous image causing what looks to be like ghosting. This is most noticeable if there is heavy contrast. Though newer monitors have reduced this problem a lot, it's not completely solved yet.

My monitor is my signature. If I were to do it again, I'd get an Nvidia 3D Vision 2 monitor. I believe ASUS has a good one.

Currently, I'm playing Diablo 3 (I have a fix for a few indoor dungeons where the shadows are wrong), Skyrim (with fix for water that fixes reflections), Metro 2033 (near flawless except I turn off the in game laser site), The Witcher 2 (perfect, but requires a LOT of GPU power), Crysis 2 (perfect out of the box and uses surprisingly little power considering how demanding the DX11 patch and ultra textures are), Batman AA and Batman AC (near perfect), Starcraft II (near perfect), Titan Quest (near perfect).

I've played other games in 3D as well, but those are what are on my desktop ready to play. I'd never consider playing any of those without 3D on, now that I have played with it, with the exception of Diablo 3. If I'm feeling lazy or clumsy, I might turn off 2D. Isometric games have a disadvantage of the mouse being at the depth of your screen, but what you want to click on is deeper in to the monitor (as if it's a foot away from the surface of the screen). This makes it harder to click on targets.

I might add that at least half of the games that get released these days do not support 3D well. Some have fixes from Helix ( http://helixmod.wikispot.org/gamelist ) some don't. It has been improving lately, but there are still a lot of games that do not support 3D well.

 

[DarthTengil]

Thanks! Thought shutter glasses would be the more dominant when it comes to gaming but was not sure. Good link you pasted, gives me an idea of which kind of games that more or less support 3D.

Hove about this D-Sub? Do they mean Display Port and that the monitor have a separated intake for AMD GPUs that use it (guess nVidia use Double DVI) and just like older TV screens have a special "sub" port for VCR VHS usage but in this case for Display Port? Since I have nVidia GPUs I guess I dont even have a Display Port on those and should look for monitors that support Double DVI instead?

Please help me judging my list of monitors I have on the other thread everyone 🙂

 

[bystander]

D-Sub is the old VGA connector. It's analog and will not work for 3D as far as I know. Definitely not for an active system. Nvidia uses Dual link DVI. When you say double, it sounds like you are thinking it needs two connections.

 

[DarthTengil]

So insted of just writing VGA port some manufactors have renamed it into D-Sub? Well, they have being good to mess around with names and terms before, so why not do it all again... No I am not planning to use that crap (cant find out why anyone would and why VGA still exist on the monitor market since DVI came in year 2000). Ment Dual Link DVI but my fingers wrote something else, what my subconscious was thinking was that the Dual Link cable is thicker than the standard DVI cable and therefore "double" went to my mind. Funny what our minds are doing in the background! But OK - since I have nVidia I will stuck to Dual Link screens. Now we got a bit further ones again in the process of shrinking down my monitor list 🙂

 

[DarthTengil]

Now I only have 6 screens left to choose from and I hope you can help me rank those. Its 3 active and 3 passive 3D monitors and it would be very helpfull if you people can rank them in two different categorys (active & passive). If YOU would want to get a 3D monitor right now, how would YOU rank those, which ones would YOU prefer?
Sad but true all uses TN panel but this is what I have found on the market:

ACTIVE 3D MONITORS:

A: - Dell AW2310 23" 3ms 80.000:1

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna [...] noteSearch

B: - ASUS VG236HE 23" 2ms 100.000:1

http://uk.asus.com/Display/LCD_Mon [...] ifications

C: - BenQ XL2420T 24" 2ms 12M:1 (Do they really mean 12.000.000:1)?

http://www.benq.com/product/monito [...] ifications


PASSIVE 3D MONITORS:

D: - LG D2342P-PN (in USA) or D2342P (in Europe) 23" 5ms 5.000.000:1 (Spec in PDF)

http://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-D2342P-PN-led-monitor

E: - Zalman ZA-M215WGD 21,5" 5ms 10.000:1 (Is this not too low value)?

http://www.zalman.com/ENG/product/ [...] sp?idx=384

F: - HP 2311gt 23" 5ms 3.000.000:1

http://www.shopping.hp.com/en_US/h [...] ED-Monitor


Hope and wish I can get plenty of answers this time, I really need them

 

[bystander]

I can only comment on the Active shutter system, but I'd get the BenQ XL2420T (TX if you can find it). It is the only one that supports 3D Vision 2 which has lightboost. You'll have to buy the 3D Vision 2 kit separately. The XL2420TX has a built in emitter, but I don't know if you can find one yet.

 

[DarthTengil]

OK. Now the big final battle lays between ASUS shutter and LG passive.

There is still something you wrote that I wonder if that really is a problem:

The biggest difference that I've read about is that passive systems are set to play at half resolution. A 1920x1080 resolution becomes 960x1080 for each eye. I've read that you can see where the pixels are missing (being displayed to the other eye).

This cannot be possible! When looking at a screen with passive glasses with booth eyes there is no way the resolution can change or be different for left and right eye since there is no input that can give the two different eye-glasses two different pictures. On the other hand, for active glasses it is possible for the computer to give two different pictures to each eye since those glasses is attached to the PC. Gess you meen that monitors that dont have Dual Link is lowering the screen resolution in 3D mode?

The last I checked, on PC's, the industry is pushing active, so you may find better support. There are work around that I've seen to get passive systems to work.

What really are you basing this of? A link would be wonderfull! Thus I find this somewhat supprizing and odd when you think of the fact that ALL cinema and TV technology is using passive glasses to make it more comfortable for the user. Who really wants to sitt with a glasses thats connected with the PC by a wire or using big and more uncomfortable shutter glasses with batterys when there now exist passive ones?

I might add that at least half of the games that get released these days do not support 3D well. Some have fixes from Helix ( http://helixmod.wikispot.org/gamelist ) some don't. It has been improving lately, but there are still a lot of games that do not support 3D well.

When thinking twice I wonder if the 3D support for the games that got this feature really not is the game itself that is opted for a specific type of 3D glasses or for that sake not any kind of active/passive monitors eider, but is it not the software inside the computer itself that tells the screen and shutter glasses to produce a 3D image? Please correct me if I´m wrong here but I think my question and the thinking of this question might was wrong from the first place?


How is your glasses to wear?
Is it still NO other user that can get into this thread 🙁
Everyone that have read this thread: Some of you just must have some sort of opinion?
We 2 cannot be the only ones on this forum that using 3D screens?

 

[DarthTengil]

MODERATORS - HAVE YOU ANY OPINIONS?

 

[bystander]

OK. Now the big final battle lays between ASUS shutter and LG passive.

There is still something you wrote that I wonder if that really is a problem:

The biggest difference that I've read about is that passive systems are set to play at half resolution. A 1920x1080 resolution becomes 960x1080 for each eye. I've read that you can see where the pixels are missing (being displayed to the other eye).

This cannot be possible! When looking at a screen with passive glasses with booth eyes there is no way the resolution can change or be different for left and right eye since there is no input that can give the two different eye-glasses two different pictures. On the other hand, for active glasses it is possible for the computer to give two different pictures to each eye since those glasses is attached to the PC. Gess you meen that monitors that dont have Dual Link is lowering the screen resolution in 3D mode?

I think you need to read more on how passive is achieved. There is a way.

Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarized_3D_glasses

The idea is the light on the pixels are polarized differently and you were glasses that allow different types of polarized light to enter the lenses. The different pixels are then set to be visible by one eye, and others are visible by the other.

Because neutral-gray linear-polarizing filters are easily manufactured, correct color rendition is possible. Circular-polarizing filters often have a slight brownish tint, which may be compensated for during projection.

Until 2011, home 3D television and home 3D computer primarily used active shutter glasses with LCD or plasma displays. TV manufacturers (LG, Vizio) have introduced displays with horizontal polarizing stripes overlaying the screen. The stripes alternate polarization with each line. This permits using relatively inexpensive passive viewing glasses, similar to those for movies. The principal disadvantage is that each polarization can display only half as many scanning lines.

Advantages

Generally inexpensive.
Do not require power.
Do not require a transmitter to synchronize them with the display.
Do not suffer from flicker.
Do not cause an eye fatigue because they do not need battery and transmitter.
Do not cause visible crosstalk.
Have a wide horizontal viewing angle (compared to Active Shutter Glasses).
Can produce brighter 3D images.
Lightweight, per piece of glasses only 16g.

Disadvantages

The images for polarized glasses have to share the screen simultaneously, and therefore cannot have full resolution delivered to each eye simultaneously. A full 1080p picture results from image fusion.[14][15]
There are incompatible polarized systems (Circular or linear polarized.)
Narrow vertical viewing angle.

 

[bystander]

The last I checked, on PC's, the industry is pushing active, so you may find better support. There are work around that I've seen to get passive systems to work.

What really are you basing this of? A link would be wonderfull! Thus I find this somewhat supprizing and odd when you think of the fact that ALL cinema and TV technology is using passive glasses to make it more comfortable for the user. Who really wants to sitt with a glasses thats connected with the PC by a wire or using big and more uncomfortable shutter glasses with batterys when there now exist passive ones?

I base it off of the fact that 3D Vision and all its kits are designed as active shutter systems: http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d-vision-main.html

AMD doesn't have a set standard, but their list of recommended displays are mostly shutter glass systems: http://sites.amd.com/us/recommended/Pages/hd3d-panels.aspx

 

[bystander]

I might add that at least half of the games that get released these days do not support 3D well. Some have fixes from Helix ( http://helixmod.wikispot.org/gamelist ) some don't. It has been improving lately, but there are still a lot of games that do not support 3D well.

When thinking twice I wonder if the 3D support for the games that got this feature really not is the game itself that is opted for a specific type of 3D glasses or for that sake not any kind of active/passive monitors eider, but is it not the software inside the computer itself that tells the screen and shutter glasses to produce a 3D image? Please correct me if I´m wrong here but I think my question and the thinking of this question might was wrong from the first place?


How is your glasses to wear?
Is it still NO other user that can get into this thread 🙁
Everyone that have read this thread: Some of you just must have some sort of opinion?
We 2 cannot be the only ones on this forum that using 3D screens?

The type of 3D used has pretty much zero impact on how well 3D will be achieved from a game. Every type of stereoscopic 3D followed the same principle; create 2 different images for each eye in the same manner you'd view in real life.

The problem is some games will take short cuts with different aspects of the game. Some will use 2D graphics for some things, most often shadows and refraction (water). If they do this, 3D won't work well. Helix's mod is designed to fix those 2D shadows and water refraction.

As far as comfort goes. At first it was a bit uncomfortable, mostly because the rubber nose piece kept falling out of place. Once I super-glued it together, that problem went away, but they still become irritating after a couple hours of play, as I don't normally wear glasses, I get red indentations on my nose.

 

[jaguarskx]

So insted of just writing VGA port some manufactors have renamed it into D-Sub? Well, they have being good to mess around with names and terms before, so why not do it all again...

D-sub is a type of connector based on it's shape and the term has been around for a long time. The VGA port is specific type of D-sub connection.

 

[DarthTengil]

BenQ???

When thinking all over this entire projekt and the screens I have come
forth with a tripple times more I have looked at the BenQ you mentioned
(XL2420TX) and that one seams to be a very very good monitor:

* It has the same brightness (350) and same static & dynamic contrast (1000:1 / 12M:1) as the XL2420T.

* Both verisions have support for NVIDIA 3D Vision 2 & LightBoost,
but TX have also an IR Emitter and comes WITH shutter glasses!!!

* Further it only consume 24W/0.5W.

* They also both use Senseye 3 and TCO 5.1 and can be adjusted in tilt, swivel & hight.
This is very practical and ergonomic since my own only can be tilted!


Thus all this extra everything I always have heard that BenQ (and its rival Acer) is a lesser brand and only make low-end products and as standard sells monitors that have rather low quality in comparence with long-known brands like HP, ASUS and Dell. Have heard rumors that those two brands mainly are fighting in the bottom legion swamp. Is that true or am I dissinformed? Even thus the very high-end spec of those BenQs I just want to make sure - its alot of money and something I cant afford to regret.

Here we comes back to a question I had in the beginning but never got any answer to:
I still wonder what they mean with that dynamic contrast spec, do they really mean 12 million
to one (12.000.000:1)? If so I find it hard to believe when other manufactors at the most
write 5 million to one (5.000.000:1). Can this really be true?
Is it - how on earth did they managed that?

Another VERY important question is where the heck do you buy 3D shutter glasses kits?
Have searched at ASUS homepage and webshop but found nothing. Only one local store in my city have "Nvidia Geforce 3D Vision 3D glasses without transmitter" - its just only one pair of extra 3D glasses. A webstore have "Samsung SSG-M3750CR active 3D glasses" - and is only supporting some of Samsungs 3D monitors! Both kinds of glasses costs 110 EURO = 1100 SEK. Thats it - nothing like ASUS or BenQ NVIDIA 3D Vision 2 kit - or any other brand! Those kits every user have to buy besides the monitor itself to be able to see 3D just dont exist!!!

I dont get it - in the spec for ASUS monitor there is nothing inkluded besides power- and DVI-cable.
As above only the BenQ TX is shipping a 3D kit with the screen. Please help me here! Is it possible to
use say Samsung active glasses on a BenQ? Why is it impossible to buy those 3D kits? Is it like this in
the rest of the world too?

Please give me some links to webstores that do have all those glasses
for different brands! Please remember that I live in Sweden - a part of Scandinavia.
Links to Newegg or any other US store wont help me when they dont export/send to Europe!

PLEASE HELP

 

[DarthTengil]

Does anyone know what this monitor costs?

 

[Mousemonkey]

This topic has been moved from the section Graphics & Displays to section Computer Peripherals by Mousemonkey

 

[bystander]

I don't know where to search for the glasses in Sweden, but you can buy 3D Vision 2 kits on newegg and amazon.

As far as quality goes, I don't know much about BenQ, other than they have the only 3D Vision 2 monitor I've seen, in the 23"-24" range. ASUS has a 27", but when reading the reviews, it has some odd quirks.

I have an Acer monitor, which is generally a low budget and low quality brand, however, if you read the reviews of owners on newegg, it seems many of them first tried the Samsung 750 and 950 monitors first and found Acer's 3D vision monitor much better (not 3D Vision 2, unfortunately).

Just because a brand is known for low budget monitors doesn't always mean that is all they make.

Contrast ratios are also confusing to a lot of people, especially since they don't follow a set standard. They market however they can draw you in.

 

[DarthTengil]

Best answer selected by DarthTengil.

 

[DarthTengil]

Now I´m back!

Unfortunely BenQ has decided not to release the XT2420TX model outside the US mainland (not Alaska, Hawaii, any other US belonging land, and not internationall trading). This SUCK and I am very angry at BenQ for arguing that Europe and Scandinavia shall not know the existence of this big brother model and be stuck with their older products so they can sell out the stock-house on us! Shame on you BenQ!!!

Thus this, the T-model is in stock in a swedish webstore I use to trade with and at least with this firm the 3D glasses comes with the monitor 🙂 So even when angry I think I will buy the XL2420T when there right now not exist any other brand with those features. Thank you so much for helping me out!

This thread is now SOLVED!!!

 

[chanshin]

From what I read the industry is pushing passive too, manufacturers don't want to pay patents to Nvidia with their active 3D. They rather do their own technology such as Cinema 3D exclusive to LG and yes its more comfortable for the user. I use Passive 3D with my LG 27" and its great. You cant base the industry direction on a Nvidia website.