I found it adds depth to the scene rather than popping out from the screen if that makes sense, ie the bezel would be the front of the scene with all the action going back behind the screen.

Be warned, SD does not look good in 3D, you really need an HD source or upscaled DVD. or sometimes a bit crap, depending on the film (or whatever, it works for TV broadcasts, media files, DVD, bluray, games etc). Images are always clear and easy on the eye which makes it really relaxing to watch.Ĭan't comment on LG TV conversion but they do seem to get good feedback on the Forum (and once again it's difficult to know if this is a direct result of them being passive sets or not - although I suspect it could well be).Įffectively every film is now watched in 3D.ĢD to 3D is surprisingly good.

Panasonic use a different technique which creates less strong 3D (still with good depth though) but never makes a mistake. As you say, it does make mistakes but overall is quite impressive and, crazy as it sounds, does a better job than the budget brigade with their super fast workstations. Samsung conversion is quite strong and matches exactly that of many of the budget converted films (not to be confused with professionally converted main stream films) and provides that tell tale give away on end credits (bottom titles push forward and top titles lean back). I've not seen this side by side with an active set so can't truthfully say if it's only a passive phenomenon or not. Somewhat bizarrely, I've also noticed it tends to sharpen up the image on lower quality video (you get a clear image AND in 3D ).

Passive only comes into the discussion because it's now almost universally accepted as being quite a bit easier on the eye - and therefore the clear choice for extended 3D viewing. Click to expand.Actaully I agree completely (see my sig to prove that point )

2d to 3d video converter reviews