Meant to be Seen

Check out our interview with JVC at NABSHOW 2009!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYHg1eTESjM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Share your thoughts!

Regards,
Neil

Great interview, Neil! The camera work isn't bad, either.

Yeah, nice interview
He didn't answer to the vertical resolution question, but we do know the answer...
4K would be the solution, but that's way too expensive... is the shutterglasses way the only real solution available in the short time?
Shutterglasses are great, but with polarized glasses you don't have to worry when you lend glasses to little kids...even if they break it, whatever... I believe polarized glasses are more suitable for the mass market.
But I want 3D TV standards now... so, for me, shutterglasses are fine! They should get cheaper though.

p.s. I was learning from a movie theatre owner the shutterglasses solution has less ghosting and more brightness (with new XpanD glasses!) than realD solution (which, in fact, uses ghostbusting methods to reduce ghosting). Is it going to be the same for 3D TVs? Do shutterglasses represent high quality, while realD glasses represent mass market? Is cost the only downside of shutterglasses? Are shutterglasses absolutely headache-free (also in videogaming)??? Why are then polarized glasses considered to be more comfortable for viewing (headache-free)?
I know it's a lot of questions, but Neil, could you please answer?
Thank you

koshien wrote:Is it going to be the same for 3D TVs? Do shutterglasses represent high quality, while realD glasses represent mass market? Is cost the only downside of shutterglasses? Are shutterglasses absolutely headache-free (also in videogaming)??? Why are then polarized glasses considered to be more comfortable for viewing (headache-free)?
I know it's a lot of questions, but Neil, could you please answer?
Thank you

There are down sides about shutters too. In TV sets you have a LOT more light output, and the flicker will become noticeable. You can see the difference today also between passive (iZ3D, Zalman) and active (Samsung, etc) glasses. Flicker will be very hard to get rid of. Also, the light output of shutters is much less.
In short, the answer is too complicated for a simple answer.

funkee wrote:

koshien wrote:Is it going to be the same for 3D TVs? Do shutterglasses represent high quality, while realD glasses represent mass market? Is cost the only downside of shutterglasses? Are shutterglasses absolutely headache-free (also in videogaming)??? Why are then polarized glasses considered to be more comfortable for viewing (headache-free)?
I know it's a lot of questions, but Neil, could you please answer?
Thank you

There are down sides about shutters too. In TV sets you have a LOT more light output, and the flicker will become noticeable. You can see the difference today also between passive (iZ3D, Zalman) and active (Samsung, etc) glasses. Flicker will be very hard to get rid of. Also, the light output of shutters is much less.
In short, the answer is too complicated for a simple answer.

Thanks!