Zalman Xpol

[Avalon]

Hi all,

First of all I'm sorry for posting a somewhat "covered" topic. However, I've read all the information the forum had on the zalman technology and I still have a few questions before buying one..
I tried anaglyph on my 24" screen and liked the 3d effect, obviously ignoring the raped colors. I wanted to buy a zm m215w when it becomes available but I'm having doubts because of the "half resolution" I hear all around.

Since your brain compensates for this (seemingly) I can't quite picture how much this would effect the quality of the 3d effect or the detail of the 3d models. Could anyone here shed some light on the 3d experience with the zalman screens? Is the lack of detail truly noticeable?

For now I plan to buy the zalman and put it next to my main screen with a monitor arm but if the lack of detail truly is bad, I might just replace my 24" with a 120Hz model..

[DmitryKo]

[nitpicky on] Zalman uses µPol™ (micropol) filters from VREX.

[BlackShark]

Damn, i had started to use the term Xpol as a generic term for all line interlieaved alternate polarisation filtered displays... (damn that's a long name) Can't we just use Xpol as a generic term, like when you use the word "hoover" for example ?

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

to answer the question Zalman monitors are ideed half resolution and it is visible when playing some types of games, especially racing games (where you have to focus on just a few lines between the horizon and your car) For other types of games, it's not that sensitive and the content looks ok.
The lower resolution is not the biggest issue with zalman displays : the biggest issue is the vertical viewing angle, it's really narrow !

Other than that, Zalman displays are great, i can't talk for the new 21.5" model but the current 22" has very low ghosting and offers really great value for the price.
22" is still quite small and I can't wait to buy a bigger monitor, however I just can't recommend anyone to buy any technology that currently does not work with all GPUs.
If there is one thing stereo3D should teach you is to never buy anything for the future, hoping an update will fix everything, but only to get really well informed and look for what is available and what the hardware can really do at the moment you buy.

[DmitryKo]

Damn, i had started to use the term Xpol as a generic term for all line interlieaved alternate polarisation filtered displays... (damn that's a long name) Can't we just use Xpol as a generic term, like when you use the word "hoover" for example ?

What about "micropolarizers"?

[Likay]

3D Stereo Converter Kit



µPol Technology

The µPol™ (pronounced micropol) is our unique patented technology that has made 3D stereoscopic imaging affordable. The µPol is an optical device that changes the polarization of light on a line by line basis. It is a periodic array of microscopically small polarizers which spatially alternate between one polarization state (direction) and another polarization sate perpendicular to the first. The µPol is produced with a patented process using advanced microfabrication techniques.

This is funny. They say micropolarizers and if it is then the zalman is using a very slight different solution: The zalman uses circular polarization which you can get by simply attach a retarderlayer on the bare lcd-polarizer. The retarderlayer have to be made using a "microfabrication techniques" since this layer makes the circular orientation (clockwise/anticlockwise for odd/even lines). It's of course possible having linear polarization by using micropolarizers (if you manage to actually make them) but you'll get more light using retarders on the bare lcd-polarizer. (hey, finally one position where circular is better than linear btw! )

[cybereality]

I have the 22" Zalman and I'm very happy with it. The loss of resolution is noticeable but its not as bad as it sounds. It mostly makes the games look a little softer but it still looks OK. Its not like you see black lines going through everything or anything like that. But its certainly not as sharp as a full-res page-flipped image. But for the price and the other features I think its a fair trade-off. The main benefit is that it works with multiple drivers so you are not stuck with just Nvidia, for example. The ghosting is also relatively low and there is no flicker. Downside is that the vertical viewing angle is very low and the resolution loss. Still not a bad deal though.

Here is a cross-eye image taken from the Zalman, should give you an idea of the quality:

Zalman_ghosting_04.jpg

Also, I am going to continue to use the term xpol, it just sounds cooler. Sort of like how people call tissues "kleenex" or cotton swabs "q-tips" even though it could be a different brand.

[fildubek]

But what about watching movies on zalman becuase halving resolution on a hd movie seems very bad. I know that the monitor aims mostly at gamers but since 3d blu-ray is comming it would be nice also to watch some 3d movies with the monitor.

[cybereality]

The current Zalman models do not support HDCP so I don't believe 3D BluRay will be possible (the new 21.5" Zalman does though). However I have watched 720P 3D video I recorded myself and it looked OK.

[fildubek]

If a buy a zalman monitor then it will be the new one with the hdcp but I thought it would be less that 720p when halving the resolution from 1080p or am I getting something wrong?

[DmitryKo]

They say micropolarizers and if it is then the zalman is using a very slight different solution: The zalman uses circular polarization which you can get by simply attach a retarderlayer on the bare lcd-polarizer. The retarderlayer have to be made using a "microfabrication techniques" since this layer makes the circular orientation (clockwise/anticlockwise for odd/even lines).

What makes you think that "micropolarizers" and "phase retarders" are two different devices? I'm under impression that phase retardation is the principle which desribes how various crystals change the polarization of light which passes through them, and micropolarizers are specifically made of polarizing materials.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jones_calc ... _retarders" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Likay]

Actually the answer is in your statement: "I'm under impression that phase retardation is the principle which desribes how various crystals change the polarization of light which passes through them, and micropolarizers are specifically made of polarizing materials."

Retarders are not polarizing devices and do not polarize depolarized light. They do affect already polarized light though. In the zalman the alternating retarderlines forms a alternating circular polarizer toghether with the lcd-polarizer. Since it's two units it seems wrong calling it micropolarizers.
It's simple to check: If you need linear glasses with such display then micropolarizers are used and if circular is needed microretarders are used. Calling a retarder a polarizer is totally wrong though hence my assumtion they do use another tech.

[DmitryKo]

I see, so µPol is actually a linear polarizer. However, Zalman itself used this term to descibe their technology in the marketing materials; guess the marketing didn't consult with the engineers beforehand.

I'd think that it's still possible that linear polarizer and quarter-wave plate can be combined into a single micropolarizer device which offers circular polarization instead, and Zalman "phase retardation" may be just a simpler and cheaper version of this approach, since it relies on the properties of LCD displays but is not applicable to other kinds of displays which are not based on LCD technology...

[Likay]

I see, so µPol is actually a linear polarizer. However, Zalman itself used this term to descibe their technology in he marketing materials; guess the marketing didn't consult with the engineers beforehand.

It can very well be a confusion about correct terminology. I'm curious if someone actually managed to make true micropolarizers (linear or circular "microelements").