http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_technews/20110106/tc_yblog_technews/eyes-on-with-vizios-passive-3-d-tv-displaysCES: Eyes-on with Vizio’s passive 3D TV displaysBy Ben Patterson ben Patterson – Thu Jan 6, 1:26 pm ET
Who wants to pay $100 for a single pair of active-shutter 3D glasses? Good question—and maybe that's why 3D TV sets using cheaper, polarized 3D glasses are making such a big splash at CES.
Bargain TV maker Vizio is just one of the manufacturers showing off its passive-glasses 3D displays this year (LG is another), and yes — they work as advertised, using (more or less) the same polarized glasses you'll find in movie theaters. Unfortunately, there are trade-offs.
First, a quick 3D primer. Active-shutter technology (which made up the bulk of last year's 3D TV announcements) uses battery-powered glasses with ultrafast LCD "shutters" that open and close in sync with a 3D TV, with the lens for, say the right eye opening at the precise moment that the image intended for that eye appears on the screen.
The beauty of the "active shutter" technique is that both your eyes get to see the full resolution of your gorgeous, 1080p 3D TV. The downsides? Active-shutter glasses, as everyone knows, aren't cheap, and those rapidly opening-and-closing lenses lead to a fair amount of (annoying) flicker.
Polarized "passive" glasses, on the other hand, are pretty much like cheap sunglasses, with the left and right lens polarized in different ways (usually in a circular pattern) so that each individual eye sees only what it's supposed to see — no pricey LCD shutters required.
Bargain TV manufacturer that it is, Vizio has decided to go the passive route with its 3D TV displays this year, and while the company hasn't announced pricing for its new 3D TVs yet, the glasses should be dirt cheap — as in $10 or so, with some Vizio sets shipping with four pairs of shades.
But trade-offs are the name of the game when it comes to 3D TV, and passive-glasses technology doesn't get a pass.
Vizio's passive 3D TVs work by interlacing the left and right 3D images together on the screen, at the same time — take the glasses off, and the screen image will look a little jagged, akin to the interlaced SD pictures on older tube TVs.
With the glasses on, pow — everything's in 3D, and the 3D effect looks pretty cool, as advertised. The only problem is that you're effectively seeing only half the resolution that you'd normally see in a 2D HD image, and on Vizio's bigger 3D TV sets (in the 50-inch range), horizontal scan lines are clearly visible. It's not exactly the best way to watch, say, the gorgeous 3D effects in "Avatar."
On the other hand, there's no distracting flicker at all — a great upside, if you ask me — and it's a comparative joy wearing a light pair of polarized 3D glasses rather than the bulky active-shutter models.
One thing to consider, though, is that the half-resolution 3D problem becomes less of a factor with smaller displays. I tried out Vizio's 32-inch 3D set and came away quite pleased with the image; I could barely make out the horizontal scan lines, and again, no flicker to speak of. (Vizio will be putting out 3D TVs as small as 22 inches this year, but it gets hard to discern the 3D effect with a screen that small.)
Vizio hasn't announced pricing for its new line of passive 3D sets (due to arrive this summer), but I'm told that its current 32-inch, 2D HDTV sells for about $300 — and it's conceivable that the new 3D models won't come with that much of a premium.
So who knows — perhaps a smaller, bargain 3D TV with cheap polarized glasses might be the ticket for, say, 3D gamers, or anyone who wants an eye-popping 3D video experience on a budget.
As for the perfect 3D setup, though — complete with a full HD picture, and cheap or even no glasses — the search continues.
— Ben Patterson is a technology writer for Yahoo! News.