Understanding 3D technology

[budwzr]

OK, I got this one backwards. Fiat wants to build cars in China.

MeThinks this is just a clever new way to "go Chinese". Six of one, half dozen the other.

The Jennifer Lopez car is made in China, bottom line.


https://forum.videohelp.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=10271&stc=1&d=1325044370

[edDV]

Fiat now also owns Ferrari. Expect a Fiat with Ferrari brand.

Like the Porsche 914 was really a Porsche?

[budwzr]

Does Italy have an option but to go Chinese?

I had a Fiat Spider in the 80's, and that damn thing needed service every couple months. It was a money pit.

If they are willing to build their cars IN China, BY Chinese, then that tells the tale. Who on earth would do something like that, to basically teach them how to build a car? Somebody in dire straits.

But the Chinese are no threat economically. They have no creative abilities. They can copy and paste, but it never comes out quite right when it's designed by them. That's why they need Fiat because Chinese consumers don't want Chinese cars either.

There's an upside for both, but as far as Fiat re-emerging in the US, I think Mercedes ruined it for them. When Daimler started building MB's in the US, the build quality went way down to the point where it was a Mercedes in name only.

Little by little, Daimler ate up the goodwill from the Mercedes brand, until now when nobody wants one.

[aedipuss]

fiat owns 70% of chrysler. they are re-tooling u.s. plants to produce "fiats" stateside, no need to import from china, those will be sold domestically in china just like fiat builds cars in many other countries for their consumption.

Like the Porsche 914 was really a Porsche?

yes it was completely designed by porsche. chassis was built by karmann. motors by volks or porsche. the 914-6 was quite nice with the 911 flat-6. the ones with volks nameplates were slugs but handled ok.

[fritzi93]

I've done a lot of searching/reading on this subject this past week. I found a few things you all may find interesting.

First up is a review by Dr. Raymond M. Soneira, President of Display Technologies Corp:

http://www.displaymate.com/3D_TV_ShootOut_1.htm

He makes a persuasive case for why Passive 3D is superior to Active 3D in almost every way; crosstalk, brightness, flicker, ghosting, comfort while wearing the glasses. (Passive 3D does have a more restricted viewing angle than say, Active 3D on a plasma). He also states flatly that although it's a truism that passive has reduced resolution/sharpness, it's simply not true, *in practice*, due to "image fusion" in the brain. It's a case where a statement can be technically accurate, yet entirely wrong. Here's a couple excerpted paragraphs that summarize what he means:

We performed a series of quantifiable sharpness tests by using what is in effect a Reverse Vision Test where we determine 3D image sharpness by how small a text that can be read on a given 3D TV at a given distance when viewing regular Blu-ray movie content. If there is Image Fusion we should be able to read particularly small size text (6 to 10 pixels in height) with the Passive Glasses, but if the Passive Glasses only deliver half the resolution, as some claim, then it will be impossible to read the small text on the FPR TVs. The primary source for our tests was the Blu-ray documentary IMAX Space Station 3D because it has very high quality 3D imaging shot by NASA with an IMAX stereo camera without artificial effects or special effects and the spacecraft has lots of labels and printed signs with small text on the instruments and walls that are great for detailed quantifiable sharpness comparisons.

The 3D tests details are documented in the 3D Imaging, Resolution and Sharpness Viewing Tests section, with the results listed in Table 4. They were all done at the closest recommended 3D viewing distance of 6 feet. In all cases the small text (6 to 10 pixels in height) was readable on the FPR Passive Glasses, which definitively establishes that there is excellent 3D Image Fusion and the Passive Glasses deliver full 1080p resolution in 3D. Again, if the Passive Glasses only delivered half the resolution, as some claim, then it would have been impossible to read the small text on the FPR TVs. So those half resolution claims are manifestly wrong – no, ands ifs or buts!

-----------------

There's much more of course. Such as the effect of head tilt, which degrades the Passive 3D effect much less than with Active 3D. So go ahead and read the entire article if this interests you. I find his article to be persuasive.

Then there's the LONG thread at the AVS forum on the 47" LG passive LED-LCD set and its 55" big brother:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1319231&highlight=passive+3d

One of the AVS regulars who is a professional HDTV calibrator tech wrote a review as well:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=20102969&postcount=25

I find it interesting that he also prefers Passive 3D to Active 3D. Here are his impressions of the 2D -> 3D conversion:

I'm actually pretty impressed with how this set handles 2D to 3D conversion! Now, I've seen 2D to 3D conversion on Samsungs, both LED LCD and plasma, and when I did I thought, "Wow, that's interesting. Hmmm. Pretty weird..."
It does still look kinda fake, probably because it is. But somehow it's a lot less offensive than I remember.
It's fairly mild, so things don't look like they're going to reach out and grab you. But it does add a pleasant layer of depth.

-------------

The above agrees with my impressions of all the reviews I've read (and I read a whole lot of them). Most say the 2D -> 3D conversion adds a nice bit of depth, depending on source content, but nice overall. I do recall one reviewer though who said that with it dialed all the way up it could produce a really weird sort of "inside out reverse 3D effect", again, depending on source content. Sorry I didn't save a link to that one.

I'm gonna go see for myself sometime this week, although I probably won't buy for another couple of months.

[budwzr]

RE: a review by Dr. Raymond M. Someira, President of Display technologies Corp:
================================================== ==========

That article sounds interesting, but I read one by Dr. Vrindi Mabultonabaggara PhD Esquire from The Bombay 3D research institute that disagrees with the findings.

[chowmein]

RE: a review by Dr. Raymond M. Someira, President of Display technologies Corp:
================================================== ==========

That article sounds interesting, but I read one by Dr. Vrindi Mabultonabaggara PhD Esquire from The Bombay 3D research institute that disagrees with the findings.

lol

[KBeee]

3D works if you're sitting down to watch a movie - The rugrats will be off with $40 glasses stuck to their heads making "good toys" from the boxes their Christmas toys came in.. (yes, my Grandchildren came...)
And adults are pretty much the same
"Where's the 3D Daddy????" Well, you have to sit still and be VERY anal to watch this crap... if it interests you... Not exactly Kurosawa..."