Will 2012 be the Year of Passive 3DTV?

Mar 29, 2012 9 Comments by

Eva Dudeck Will 2012 be the Year of Passive 3DTV?Will 2012 be the Year of Passive 3DTV?
By Eva Dudek, Global Marketing Project Manager, Polaroid Eyewear (Guest article)

review dividing line Will 2012 be the Year of Passive 3DTV?

2011 was a disappointing year for 3DTV, with much less adoption rates than the industry was hoping for. One reason for that is of course a lack of good quality 3D content, however I strongly believe that a move to passive 3D could make a huge impact on global adoption rates.

Passive 3DTV has a number of distinct advantages over the active systems, and that is becoming more and more apparent. Most of the CE manufacturers launched initially with active systems, because the cost and time-to-market is much quicker, but we are now seeing them launch passive 3DTVs. Indeed, the recent announcement from Sony means there is only one 3DTV manufacturer left only doing active. For the consumer, this will naturally mean more choice and more buying power.

Despite coming to the market quicker, active sets are also much more expensive in the long run, due to the sheer volume of technology in the glasses. Both CE manufacturers and broadcasters are offering bundled solutions to include 3D glasses with the TV set or broadcast service. Expensive glasses will naturally lead to a much higher bundle price for the consumer and there are typically not enough bundled glasses to satisfy the needs of the average family – leading to yet more expense.

Naturally active glasses are also extremely heavy and uncomfortable, due to the batteries and technology, so most consumers are not prepared to sit through a film whilst wearing the glasses. This is one of the main reasons that the industry is looking into glasses-free technology, however getting anywhere near a comparable experience to the glasses versions is a long way off.

Passive glasses are a lot cheaper and a lot more comfortable, they are also compatible across all passive systems, meaning that you can go to a friend’s house and take your glasses with you, as long as he or she has a passive 3DTV. A number of cinemas also have systems using passive circular polarization so you can equally take your glasses to the cinema.

Passive systems also get rid of the so-called “flicker effect” which is one of the biggest complaints of active 3DTV. Active 3D works on a system of constant shuttering, which causes flicker and can bother viewers who are sensitive to low refresh rates. Passive 3D, on the other hand, avoids that flicker effect, as it shows both images at once.

With so many manufacturers now offering passive sets, and likely more sets to come, we are truly seeing the move to passive 3DTV. The true effect of that remains to be seen, however, I truly believe that moving to passive 3DTV technology will be the first step to making 3DTV mainstream. The reduced cost of passive 3D glasses and the widespread compatibility across devices will surely catapult the marketplace to a level simply unattainable with active 3D.

Furthermore, I believe a move to passive technology will also bring with it a wider range of 3D content. As broadcasters and content providers find a more affordable route to market we should see a relative snowball effect of more affordable products. As the range of affordable products widens, a widespread adoption of the technology will follow.

MIPTV Coverage with Presteigne Charter Banner Will 2012 be the Year of Passive 3DTV?

 

FREE WEEKLY 3D NEWS BULLETIN – 

  • http://www.stereoscopynews.com/ Benoit Michel

    Don’t you think that halving the resolution of the image may be a concern? Passive TV sets use half of the pixels for one eye, and the other half for the other eye, effectively reducing the image quality by 50%.
    I think this may at least be mentioned…

  • Pingback: Will 2012 be the Year of Passive 3DTV? | Designer 3d Glasses

  • Adam Macdonald

    commercial / vs / quality are two distinctly different things, and we all know the one that usually wins the day!!!

  • Adam MacDonald

    ….then glasses free will really get things moving!!

  • TV Tom

    You are absolutely correct. How can she write an article about 3D TV and not mention the differences in picture quality between passive and active sets. Also, the one company that is exclusively selling active 3D (Samsung) is the #1 3D TV Market Share..Hmmm…..

  • Chris Kelly

    The debate about “half resolution” is a very contentious one. The brain works in ways thjat we do not fully understand when “merging the 2 images to for the 3D effect. Surely the deciding factor is the consumer and it is clear that consumers do not see the “half resolution” issue and definitely prefer the overall passive experience.. the consumer tests done done on a side-by-side basis saw consumer overwhelming chosing to watch the passive sets. Glasses-free is a way off. A glasses-free display is at least 4 times more expensive and delivers a very questionable experience – even with multi-sweet-spot eye tracking technology. It’s fine if you have a short piece of content but havving to stay in a sweet-spot for an hour or more is a big barrier.

  • http://twitter.com/3dfocuslive Jonathan

    I agree that the passive experience is better than the active one but I don’t know how LG can claim their sets are full HD. I think the consumer really can tell the difference. I think some shows on passive sets can look like VHS quality. Consumers will choose passive over active because they hate the flicker and the glasses and the resolution issue is forgotten. What we need is full HD passive which is already possible but very expensive. I hope we start getting such sets this year.

  • Pingback: Jabbertypeq

  • Pingback: Phlebotomy Training in Greenbush MI