00:30
iphone3
With one huge exception the answer for Blu-ray players is "yes." No Blu-ray player maker has said it will upgrade existing 2009 or earlier standalone players to work with Blu-ray 3D movies, so a new 3D-compatible Blu-ray player will be required for many viewers to view the new 3D Blu-rays.The Sony PS3 is the huge exception. Sony released a free update in September 2010 that allows its game console to play 3D Blu-rays. According to our testing it works fine, as does the PS3's 3D gaming functionality.A few 3D games are available for the Xbox 360, but it's not a major focus for Microsoft the way it is for Sony. As far as we know there are no 3D games for the Nintendo Wii.Many current DVRs, satellite and cable boxes will allow you to view 3D TV shows, although all use the lower-resolution "side-by-side" format (see #20). Check with your provider to determine 3D programming availability
Unless you use your AV receiver for switching between HDMI video sources, you won't have to upgrade to enjoy 3D Blu-ray movies. You could get a 3D Blu-ray player with dual-HDMI outputs, such as the Panasonic DMP-BDT350, Samsung BD-C7900 or Samsung BD-D6700, or forgo high-resolution Blu-ray soundtracks that require an HDMI connection to the receiver. If you do want to retain HDMI switching on a receiver with even a single 3D source, you will need to get an AV receiver that's 3D compatible.
Yes. In our lab we've sent 3D Blu-ray signals through numerous varieties of HDMI cable, including inexpensive ones, and all have worked fine. That's because all HDMI cables are basically the same.HDMI 1.4 cables are available, but old ones work fine for 3D.
(Credit: Dong Ngo/CNET)There has been some confusion over whether certification in the newest HDMI standards, namely, "high-speed," HDMI 1.4 or HDMI 1.4a, is required for cables, TVs or other AV gear to properly handle 3D. The answer in our experience is "no." In short, HDMI specification is a messy business. Being HDMI 1.4 certified doesn't mean that certain features of the new specification, such as 3D, higher-than-1080p resolution and a new Ethernet channel, are necessarily included on a given piece of hardware. Our best advice is to ignore the HDMI version of a particular product and focus on actual features provided in manufacturer product information.2010 saw a smattering of still cameras and camcorders that can produce 3D photos and video (see the slideshow below for reviews and notes), and this year even more will arrive. The 2011 camcorders announced so far, with the exception of Sony's $250 Bloggie, "targeted prosumers and experimental indies; that is, gadget hounds with deep pockets and pros looking for relatively inexpensive (for them) models to start experimenting with" according to our CES wrap-up. New 3D camera announcements were relatively slim, aside from a couple Sony and Olympus models, but as 2011 rolls on we expect more 3D cameras to appear.
Most of the Best HDTVs we've reviewed include 3D capability, and we evaluate their performance in a special section at the end of the review. We've also created a six-way comparison that summarizes many of those performance findings so far. You can also sort our TV database by "3D-ready" to find both reviewed and unreviewed models, or scope our main 3D TV resource guide for more articles. Expect all of these resources to be updated throughout 2011.For other 3D gear, we first recommend our Best Blu-ray players list for 3D-compatible devices, although notably we haven't seen much difference in 3D picture quality. The same statements apply to our Best AV receivers, although current 3D Blu-ray home theater systems are rare. See #29 for 3D camera and camcorder reviews.One 3D TV product category we haven't publisged any reviews for is home theater projectors. While we certainly think projection is an ideal venue for 3D, other categories are currently higher-priority for our reviews team.Which is better: Active or passive 3D TV?In our brief experience so far, we preferred the active 3D experience since it delivered full resolution without the jaggy artifacts we saw resulting from the every-other-line method. Check out our side-by-side comparison of active vs. passive 3D TVs for more, including our current testing-based opinions on the advantages and disadvantages of each system. We expect this opinion to evolve as we test more passive displays.
Do you prefer plasma or LCD 3D TVs?Based on our reviews of 2010 models, plasma has a clear performance advantage over LCD. Plasmas we've reviewed have significantly less crosstalk (see #33), and also exhibit superior black levels in general compared to most 3D LCD TVs, all of which use LED backlighting. We wouldn't be surprised to see this performance gap narrow in 2011, however.
and use DLP technology.Crosstalk, sometimes referred to as "ghosting," is our least favorite 3D-specific picture quality issue, and has been present to a certain extent in every 3D TV we've reviewed. Visible crosstalk is caused when the both images on the screen--which should be alternately obscured by the glasses so you see only one unified 3D image--are visible at once to some degree. Another way to think about it: 100% crosstalk is where you're not wearing glasses at all.The main cause of crosstalk in our experience is the content. Some images, for example bright objects on a dark background or vice-versa, are show the doubling on nearly all 3D TVs. LCD TVs also seem more crosstalk-prone than plasmas (see #32). Finally, the 3D glasses, whether active or passive, also apparently have an effect.For a more thorough, albeit technical, discussion of crosstalk, this 2010 research paper provides a good starting point.Aside from potential viewer fatigue issues (see #7), crosstalk (#33) and the resolution loss in current passive systems (#5), we've observed a few picture-quality differences between standard 2D and the new 3D system.Since both active and passive glasses block light greater or lesser extent, the same image on a 2D TV will appear darker to the viewer than that of a 3D TV. Because we do our testing in a relatively dark room we don't mention this issue much and don't consider it a big deal for critical viewing, but if you prefer a brighter image, then it might become a problem. Most LCD TVs, especially at larger screen sizes, can get brighter than plasmas, and passive glasses allow significantly more light through than active ones.Different 3D glasses may also have different color characteristics; for example Panasonic's active glasses have a pronounced amber tint. TV makers compensate by creating "offsets" in the TV itself that apply when a viewer engages 3D mode. They mostly work well, but careful observers can detect color inaccuracies between 2D and 3D. The tint in active glasses can also color the crosstalk, making it even more noticeable.Panasonic's 3D glasses have an amber tint.(Credit: Sarah Tew/CNET)Viewing an active 3D TV from off-angle, either from the side or above or below, is generally the same as with 2D, and the 3D effect is preserved. Passive TVs, however, seem to lose the 3D effect more rapidly.
We have also observed that horizontal movement, for example camera pans, can appear choppier or more prone to judder than in in 2D (some TVs have smoothing processing in 3D designed to combat this effect). As we mentioned above (see #4, the edges of the screen in 3D become much more noticeable than in 2D; depending on the content, the image seems to "fall off" abruptly along the screen edge where the image ends and the rest of your field of vision begins. One effective way to address this issue is to sit closer (but not too close) or view a larger screen.
Unless you use your AV receiver for switching between HDMI video sources, you won't have to upgrade to enjoy 3D Blu-ray movies. You could get a 3D Blu-ray player with dual-HDMI outputs, such as the Panasonic DMP-BDT350, Samsung BD-C7900 or Samsung BD-D6700, or forgo high-resolution Blu-ray soundtracks that require an HDMI connection to the receiver. If you do want to retain HDMI switching on a receiver with even a single 3D source, you will need to get an AV receiver that's 3D compatible.
Yes. In our lab we've sent 3D Blu-ray signals through numerous varieties of HDMI cable, including inexpensive ones, and all have worked fine. That's because all HDMI cables are basically the same.HDMI 1.4 cables are available, but old ones work fine for 3D.
(Credit: Dong Ngo/CNET)There has been some confusion over whether certification in the newest HDMI standards, namely, "high-speed," HDMI 1.4 or HDMI 1.4a, is required for cables, TVs or other AV gear to properly handle 3D. The answer in our experience is "no." In short, HDMI specification is a messy business. Being HDMI 1.4 certified doesn't mean that certain features of the new specification, such as 3D, higher-than-1080p resolution and a new Ethernet channel, are necessarily included on a given piece of hardware. Our best advice is to ignore the HDMI version of a particular product and focus on actual features provided in manufacturer product information.2010 saw a smattering of still cameras and camcorders that can produce 3D photos and video (see the slideshow below for reviews and notes), and this year even more will arrive. The 2011 camcorders announced so far, with the exception of Sony's $250 Bloggie, "targeted prosumers and experimental indies; that is, gadget hounds with deep pockets and pros looking for relatively inexpensive (for them) models to start experimenting with" according to our CES wrap-up. New 3D camera announcements were relatively slim, aside from a couple Sony and Olympus models, but as 2011 rolls on we expect more 3D cameras to appear.
Most of the Best HDTVs we've reviewed include 3D capability, and we evaluate their performance in a special section at the end of the review. We've also created a six-way comparison that summarizes many of those performance findings so far. You can also sort our TV database by "3D-ready" to find both reviewed and unreviewed models, or scope our main 3D TV resource guide for more articles. Expect all of these resources to be updated throughout 2011.For other 3D gear, we first recommend our Best Blu-ray players list for 3D-compatible devices, although notably we haven't seen much difference in 3D picture quality. The same statements apply to our Best AV receivers, although current 3D Blu-ray home theater systems are rare. See #29 for 3D camera and camcorder reviews.One 3D TV product category we haven't publisged any reviews for is home theater projectors. While we certainly think projection is an ideal venue for 3D, other categories are currently higher-priority for our reviews team.Which is better: Active or passive 3D TV?In our brief experience so far, we preferred the active 3D experience since it delivered full resolution without the jaggy artifacts we saw resulting from the every-other-line method. Check out our side-by-side comparison of active vs. passive 3D TVs for more, including our current testing-based opinions on the advantages and disadvantages of each system. We expect this opinion to evolve as we test more passive displays.
Do you prefer plasma or LCD 3D TVs?Based on our reviews of 2010 models, plasma has a clear performance advantage over LCD. Plasmas we've reviewed have significantly less crosstalk (see #33), and also exhibit superior black levels in general compared to most 3D LCD TVs, all of which use LED backlighting. We wouldn't be surprised to see this performance gap narrow in 2011, however.
and use DLP technology.Crosstalk, sometimes referred to as "ghosting," is our least favorite 3D-specific picture quality issue, and has been present to a certain extent in every 3D TV we've reviewed. Visible crosstalk is caused when the both images on the screen--which should be alternately obscured by the glasses so you see only one unified 3D image--are visible at once to some degree. Another way to think about it: 100% crosstalk is where you're not wearing glasses at all.The main cause of crosstalk in our experience is the content. Some images, for example bright objects on a dark background or vice-versa, are show the doubling on nearly all 3D TVs. LCD TVs also seem more crosstalk-prone than plasmas (see #32). Finally, the 3D glasses, whether active or passive, also apparently have an effect.For a more thorough, albeit technical, discussion of crosstalk, this 2010 research paper provides a good starting point.Aside from potential viewer fatigue issues (see #7), crosstalk (#33) and the resolution loss in current passive systems (#5), we've observed a few picture-quality differences between standard 2D and the new 3D system.Since both active and passive glasses block light greater or lesser extent, the same image on a 2D TV will appear darker to the viewer than that of a 3D TV. Because we do our testing in a relatively dark room we don't mention this issue much and don't consider it a big deal for critical viewing, but if you prefer a brighter image, then it might become a problem. Most LCD TVs, especially at larger screen sizes, can get brighter than plasmas, and passive glasses allow significantly more light through than active ones.Different 3D glasses may also have different color characteristics; for example Panasonic's active glasses have a pronounced amber tint. TV makers compensate by creating "offsets" in the TV itself that apply when a viewer engages 3D mode. They mostly work well, but careful observers can detect color inaccuracies between 2D and 3D. The tint in active glasses can also color the crosstalk, making it even more noticeable.Panasonic's 3D glasses have an amber tint.(Credit: Sarah Tew/CNET)Viewing an active 3D TV from off-angle, either from the side or above or below, is generally the same as with 2D, and the 3D effect is preserved. Passive TVs, however, seem to lose the 3D effect more rapidly.
We have also observed that horizontal movement, for example camera pans, can appear choppier or more prone to judder than in in 2D (some TVs have smoothing processing in 3D designed to combat this effect). As we mentioned above (see #4, the edges of the screen in 3D become much more noticeable than in 2D; depending on the content, the image seems to "fall off" abruptly along the screen edge where the image ends and the rest of your field of vision begins. One effective way to address this issue is to sit closer (but not too close) or view a larger screen.
Posted in: determination,the consumer reports of 3dtv reviews
0 comments:
Post a Comment