Image

To Were Glasses or Not to Were Glasses

Posted by SMG on Wednesday Sep 19, 2012.
9.19.12

As in Movie Theater 3D?

 

We are at an interesting point in video game history; displays passing the 1920×1080 or 1080p levels. This resolution was for a time, the point where you had to pay an extra $200 just to upgrade to that point. I was pushed back to the point of awe when I saw my friend’s laptop, which had Intel 3000, an i3 and 320 gigs of hard drive space, but it had a 1920×1080 resolution setting. His father then proceeded to walk in and say, “Wow this thing has great graphics huh?” which quite frankly infuriated me.

 

 

Explain with Examples


As a hardcore PC gamer, games graphics are the engines that are running the game itself, not the screen resolution. The reason that I am going over all this is simply because of the displays that are now being released onto the market. For example Apple’s new MacBook pro; they have a 15 inch version that has 2880×1080. That is simply crazy. However I am not saying that it is bad, just incredibly crazy. If you recall I wrote about how the 3D in Battlefield was mind-blowing; the reason for this was because of the display. I was playing on an asus 3d display and the clarity was beautiful. The glasses, an NVidia 3d 1 set was working great as well. The reason I bring this up is because of the production of non-glasses 3d.

 

 

Theater vs Living Room


Think about watching Avatar in 3d in the theater and then in your living room without the glasses that attract every speck of dust in a five mile radius; brilliant right? Well yes and no; you see there is a cost at taking the glasses away. The cost is the screen resolution and the hertz that the screen can move at. You see 3d works by tricking your eyes into literally cross themselves to see a clear image that seems to be coming at you through the screen. When I went to CES last year Toshiba was débuting its finishing touches on their non glasses 3d displays and the resolution looked to be 1600 or less. I’m not dissing on the 1600, but it is in fact a step back. I am simply passing on the message of “look at your product before you buy it.” Don’t just look at the features and be ok with the fact that it has 1600 resolution, because that is actually bad for current TV’s, for laptops it is actually ok. TV’s are actually getting to the point where a Samsung TV actually has a Kinect built in. Where if you wave to your TV, the TV will recognize your hand movements and you can change the channel, volume and access apps throughout your TV just by a simple motion from your hands.

 

 

So Laptops are OK?


As does every one of my rants lead up to a point, this one is about how TV developers are rushing to get the first TV out of the stores and into your living room with terrible resolution, screen ratios, and hertz levels. I believe that it is now up to the TV developers to hold their horses and actually create a great product off the bat, rather than just release a couple of software updates and discontinue a line of them to solve a problem that could have been solved just by taking the time to actually give a family an awesome experience of 3D TV.

 

 

-SMG-

Posted in the categories: News

Comments:

Share this by easily informing your online social networks.
Share this with your friends on Facebook.
Share this with your friends on Twitter.
Share this with your friends on Friendfeed.
Share this with your friends on Tumblr.
Submit this URL to Digg.
Submit this URL to Stumbleupon.