Question about 3D resolutions.
Hi :) Today I had time to mess a little with my uhd40 ..and when I watched my 3D family pictures I thought To myself how come 1080p looks so sharp on a 120” screen? Almost like my 4k oled. So I need verification for my understanding of the uhd40 3D resolution. is the 1080p 3D frame sequential actually 4k? Simply put, if each eye is getting 1080p - the total presentation for both eyes is 3840x2160! If I’m using the same logic, the 3D on the passive oled tv gets 3820x1080 for each eye (after losing half the vertical resolution) so does it actually gets in total 7649x2160 pixels?!? Can someone organize my thoughts here?! Thanks in advance
Hi :)
Today I had time to mess a little with my uhd40 ..and when I watched my 3D family pictures I thought
To myself how come 1080p looks so sharp on a 120” screen? Almost like my 4k oled.
So I need verification for my understanding of the uhd40 3D resolution.

is the 1080p 3D frame sequential actually 4k?
Simply put, if each eye is getting 1080p - the total presentation for both eyes is 3840x2160!
If I’m using the same logic, the 3D on the passive oled tv gets 3820x1080 for each eye (after losing half the vertical resolution) so does it actually gets in total 7649x2160 pixels?!?


Can someone organize my thoughts here?!
Thanks in advance

#1
Posted 05/25/2019 04:00 PM   
[quote="eitan8385"]is the 1080p 3D frame sequential actually 4k?[/quote] Absolutely not, it is 1080P. [quote="eitan8385"]Simply put, if each eye is getting 1080p - the total presentation for both eyes is 3840x2160![/quote] Your math is way off, but understandably because it can be confusing until you look at it in the right perspective. [img]https://www.wepc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/The-difference-between-1080p-and-4K.jpg[/img] 4K is not 1080P times two, as you are thinking. You are simply doubling the width, but you must also double the height. 4K is four times as large as 1080P, refer to the image, you can see that 1080P is 1/4th the size.
eitan8385 said:is the 1080p 3D frame sequential actually 4k?


Absolutely not, it is 1080P.

eitan8385 said:Simply put, if each eye is getting 1080p - the total presentation for both eyes is 3840x2160!


Your math is way off, but understandably because it can be confusing until you look at it in the right perspective.

Image


4K is not 1080P times two, as you are thinking. You are simply doubling the width, but you must also double the height.

4K is four times as large as 1080P, refer to the image, you can see that 1080P is 1/4th the size.

#2
Posted 05/26/2019 12:01 AM   
[quote="eitan8385"]If I’m using the same logic, the 3D on the passive oled tv gets 3820x1080 for each eye (after losing half the vertical resolution) so does it actually gets in total 7649x2160 pixels?!? [/quote] Two times 3840x2160 pixels are "rendered" when you account for the right and left offset stereo frames, but every odd line of resolution is discarded for one frame and every even line for the second frame, thus there is a heavy performance hit because full frames must be rendered. But a Line Interlace Format is sent as half frames, consisting of the a fore mentioned frames, one consisting of the even lines and the other the odd. Add them together and they equal 3840x2160, not 7649x2160.
eitan8385 said:If I’m using the same logic, the 3D on the passive oled tv gets 3820x1080 for each eye (after losing half the vertical resolution) so does it actually gets in total 7649x2160 pixels?!?


Two times 3840x2160 pixels are "rendered" when you account for the right and left offset stereo frames, but every odd line of resolution is discarded for one frame and every even line for the second frame, thus there is a heavy performance hit because full frames must be rendered.

But a Line Interlace Format is sent as half frames, consisting of the a fore mentioned frames, one consisting of the even lines and the other the odd. Add them together and they equal 3840x2160, not 7649x2160.

#3
Posted 05/26/2019 12:13 AM   
Thank you D-man! I never been so good at math actually and the picture illustrate your point nicely. Somehow I thought we can calculate the sum of resolution each eye gets in 3D but I guess it’s pointless. But still the family pictures I took with my 2 Samsung nx1000 camera rig looks so damn sharp on my 120” screen and in 1080p. Taking into account I have less pixels than my 4k oled and these are spread on 120” in comparison to 65” of my oled- and still the picture is crazy. I really expected far less quality so I’m just trying to understand it. So my next question is What actually happens when I present 3840x2160 3D picture on 1080p? Is the native resolution just degrades the quality?? Thanks :)
Thank you D-man!
I never been so good at math actually and the picture illustrate your point nicely.
Somehow I thought we can calculate the sum of resolution each eye gets in 3D but I guess it’s pointless.
But still the family pictures I took with my 2 Samsung nx1000 camera rig looks so damn sharp on my 120” screen and in 1080p. Taking into account I have less pixels than my 4k oled and these are spread on 120” in comparison to 65” of my oled- and still the picture is crazy. I really expected far less quality so I’m just trying to understand it.
So my next question is
What actually happens when I present 3840x2160 3D picture on 1080p? Is the native resolution just degrades the quality??

Thanks :)

#4
Posted 05/26/2019 06:36 AM   
I'm not really sure, I'd imagine that it is due to the LCD shutter glasses and the medium that they place between you and the display. It's often referred to as a "buttery" effect. I'm not sure about pictures, static and rendered images behave differently. I would assume that it would depend on the app being used to display the image, as well as any processing applied by the display, be it proprietary tech, licensed or otherwise.
I'm not really sure, I'd imagine that it is due to the LCD shutter glasses and the medium that they place between you and the display. It's often referred to as a "buttery" effect.

I'm not sure about pictures, static and rendered images behave differently. I would assume that it would depend on the app being used to display the image, as well as any processing applied by the display, be it proprietary tech, licensed or otherwise.

#5
Posted 05/26/2019 09:39 AM   
DLP displays have a huge pixel fill factor, which has always helped them look better than you'd expect for any given resolution. Also, your brain does wierd and wonderful things with what you see and I think it's a bit simplistic to just consider resolution when you're talking about 3d. You're still getting 1080p res but you're getting it 120 times a second and you're getting a load of depth information which wouldn't normally be present. One side effect of that is that it appears to reduce aliasing effects.
DLP displays have a huge pixel fill factor, which has always helped them look better than you'd expect for any given resolution.

Also, your brain does wierd and wonderful things with what you see and I think it's a bit simplistic to just consider resolution when you're talking about 3d.
You're still getting 1080p res but you're getting it 120 times a second and you're getting a load of depth information which wouldn't normally be present.
One side effect of that is that it appears to reduce aliasing effects.

Gigabyte RTX2080TI Gaming OC, I7-6700k ~ 4.4Ghz, 3x BenQ XL2420T, BenQ TK800, LG 55EG960V (3D OLED), Samsung 850 EVO SSD, Crucial M4 SSD, 3D vision kit, Xpand x104 glasses, Corsair HX1000i, Win 10 pro 64/Win 7 64https://www.3dmark.com/fs/9529310

#6
Posted 05/26/2019 09:51 AM   
[quote="eitan8385"] I never been so good at math actually and the picture illustrate your point nicely. Somehow I thought we can calculate the sum of resolution each eye gets in 3D but I guess it’s pointless. [/quote] The frames can be added together in a 2D wobulated image, this is how they are achieving 4K in 2D. But 3D is limited to 1080P on this projector. In regards to the buttery effect, simply play a 3D game and use ctrl+t to cycle 3D on and off, you will see the effect I am talking about.
eitan8385 said:
I never been so good at math actually and the picture illustrate your point nicely.
Somehow I thought we can calculate the sum of resolution each eye gets in 3D but I guess it’s pointless.


The frames can be added together in a 2D wobulated image, this is how they are achieving 4K in 2D.

But 3D is limited to 1080P on this projector.

In regards to the buttery effect, simply play a 3D game and use ctrl+t to cycle 3D on and off, you will see the effect I am talking about.

#7
Posted 05/26/2019 07:53 PM   
I guess in the 3D world the whole is bigger than the sum of its parts. You will never compensate the lack of depth with colors, resolution, aliasing etc... or is it just us 3D enthusiasts who had the luck to taste the “bad apple”.
I guess in the 3D world the whole is bigger than the sum of its parts.
You will never compensate the lack of depth with colors, resolution, aliasing etc... or is it just us 3D enthusiasts who had the luck to taste the “bad apple”.

#8
Posted 05/27/2019 06:50 AM   
Scroll To Top