CES 2017: R.I.P. 3DTV? - petition to LG

[Audible_Gold]

Well I am a very recent convert to 3D at home.

I recently purchased the Panasonic TH-58DX900u 4kay HDR THX screen and the matching active glasses, the TY-ER3D5 (not the 3D4, must be a new model).

I have seen 3d in the cinema's, namely the new Star wars/Rogue one movies and was very disappointed with what I saw. Horrible colours, dark, lack of detail. I longed for the first movie to arrive in BD and my copy of Rogue one in 3D should be arriving in the next day or two. :-)

The 3D on the DX900 is simply mind blowing compared to the cinema. The TV adjusts the brightness/colour to compensate for the glasses so it looks very similar to 2d without the glasses. (needs a bit of tweaking though still) Plus you get the full HD resolution and detail.

Now there is a bit of cross talk and loss of detail to begin with. But I think that after a few minutes, your eyes stop trying to "fight" the "trickery" going on with the altenating images and the full 3d effect kicks in. The first movie we watched in 3d was the new ghostbusters movies which had us jumping when something was shot right at you, as it should. We where fully immersed in the 3D effect. That was closely followed by what is i'm sure the benchmark in 3D movies, Avatar.

I think that what is killing 3D is the cinema's. People watch horrible 3D in the cinema and get turned off it and never consider setting up a home theatre for 3D. I personally bought the DX-900 for it's size, 4K, HDR, etc and I only ordered the glasses because the wife insisted that we try them. I thought we'd watch one movie in 3D and then the glasses would probably end up on e-bay but the opposite happened.

3D can be amazing at home on a decent screen/set up and I think this is what the manufacturers should be pushing to move units and promote 3D. Instead it looks like 3D is going to die because people don't know just how good it can be in the home.

PS: I'm number 10,506 to sign the petition. :-)

Edited April 6, 2017 by Audible

[MLXXX]

1 hour ago, Audible_Gold said:

I thought we'd watch one movie in 3D and then the glasses would probably end up on e-bay but the opposite happened.

What, you have ordered extra 3D glasses through ebay?   lol
 

1 hour ago, Audible_Gold said:

PS: I'm number 10,506 to sign the petition. :-)

Thanks for the support! The future for 3D in the home does look quite grim at the moment. The more people who sign up the better.

[CAVX]

I like 3D but unfortunately, only a small percentage of the public can watch it without side effects.  

2D at UHD rez tends to look deeper than 2D at full HD and in a way is like 3D with the glasses.  

[pgdownload]

55 minutes ago, Audible_Gold said:

I think that what is killing 3D is the cinema's. People watch horrible 3D in the cinema and get turned off it and never consider setting up a home theatre for 3D

Maybe. But there was a sustained period where you couldn't really buy a TV without 3D built in. The entry barrier was remarkably low so long as you could afford a TV (Getting into VR on the other hand seems a big step (but one many seem willing to make). A lot of people tried 3D but for whatever reason didn't continue with it. It will be interesting to see how much of your viewing is spent in 3D once the novelty factor has worn off.

Enjoy the set anyway.

Regards

Peter Gillespie

[MLXXX]

44 minutes ago, CAVX said:

I like 3D but unfortunately, only a small percentage of the public can watch it without side effects.  

???

 

What side effects, Mark, and what percentage of people are affected? Can you provide a link to your source of info?

[MrC]

That some people ARE affected, is well documented.  What percentage you get depends on who you survey.

[cwt]

4 hours ago, pgdownload said:

Maybe. But there was a sustained period where you couldn't really buy a TV without 3D built in. The entry barrier was remarkably low so long as you could afford a TV (Getting into VR on the other hand seems a big step (but one many seem willing to make). A lot of people tried 3D but for whatever reason didn't continue with it.

Peter Gillespie

Average Joe wouldn't have a clue about whats needed for proper 1080p/24 frame packed 3d Peter unfortunately ; mention hdmi 1.4 minimum and see how youde go . Tell many their current 2k bluray player doesn't do it and you need another type ..   Then factor in all those who are happy with dvd and you can see where this goes

Hey you never know your luck when hdmi2.1 and 4k/120hz and 8k/60 are next on the bandwagon ; they may rewrite 3d back into the specs  Or do something similar to when they introduced upscaling dvd players ..

Quote

It is believed that the Ultra HD Blu-ray specification, as well the ITU specification for the HEVC UHD encoding, used by Ultra HD Blu-ray, include extensibility provisions that are intended to allow certain potential future enhancements, such as support for 2160p resolution 3D video, to be added in a future version of the specification.  The goal would be to allow future players and discs to support these advanced capabilities while allowing such advanced future disc releases to still be playable on the first generation of Ultra HD Blu-ray players as well as allowing advanced future Ultra HD players to play all pervious and current generation Blu-ray discs 

 

[pgdownload]

5 minutes ago, cwt said:

they may rewrite 3d back into the specs  

Not sure it ever left them. Based on how 3D was included in every set for essentially free its either a couple of $2 chips or even just a firmware upgrade away. IMO the industry genuinely sort to make 3D a thing this time around. It was just that for whatever reason the punters didn't want it. 

Regards

Peter Gillespie

[cwt]

7 minutes ago, pgdownload said:

Not sure it ever left them. Based on how 3D was included in every set for essentially free its either a couple of $2 chips or even just a firmware upgrade away. IMO the industry genuinely sort to make 3D a thing this time around. It was just that for whatever reason the punters didn't want it. 

Regards

Peter Gillespie

That's a reference to the UHD bluray specs Peter ; there is no 3d spec for UHD Bluray unfortunately ; to the chagrin of many enthusiast who have seen how good it looks on a 4k oled as it retains 1080p per eye with only passive glasses [with extra nits compared to active ] And no alternating frame flicker ..  Imagine the UHD tweaks on top of this ..

Just when it matured it was on too the next big thing ; just like the hdmi go round they use to force upgrades .. not to mention the yearly avr upgrade cycle with another useless app   rant over

[pgdownload]

11 hours ago, cwt said:

Just when it matured it was on too the next big thing ; just like the hdmi go round they use to force upgrades .. not to mention the yearly avr upgrade cycle with another useless app   rant over

I think its a fair rant. We seem to be on a definite round of small improvements but if you want some feature you need to upgrade perfectly good stuff to meet the new 'spec'.

My comment on the spec was not to suggest 3D is still referenced (although it did do that) more that it seemed that 3D functionality only requires a few extra chips (that may even already be sitting unused in all TVs still) Like MPEG 4 tuners in STBs before MPEG 4 became a thing. Perhaps down the line they'll decide to have another marketting push and just switch it all back on again.

Regards

Peter Gillespie

[MrC]

5 minutes ago, pgdownload said:

I think its a fair rant. We seem to be on a definite round of small improvements but if you want some feature you need to upgrade perfectly good stuff to meet the new 'spec'.

Regards

Peter Gillespie

Agreed .... I am contemplating my HDMI 2.whatever 4K upgrade path.  Every time I start thinking about it, the $$$ signs roll over and over in front of my eyes and I say "time to wait for all the dust to settle"

[MLXXX]

17 hours ago, MrC said:

That some people ARE affected, is well documented.  What percentage you get depends on who you survey.

i imagine that if people leaving a RealD public cinema screening of Avatar in 2010 had been surveyed, the percentage of them reporting adverse "side effects" would have been low. It was largely perceived as a remarkable, positive, experience. It fostered a rebirth of 3D in public cinemas. 

I do recall that the high frame rate (48fps) of the first instalment of The Hobbit (48fps) in 3D resulted in widespread condemnation in media reports. HFR did not take off, despite occasional use in cinema releases (as in Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk released a few months ago and shot at 120fps).

[JSmith]

13 hours ago, pgdownload said:

even just a firmware upgrade away

It's more than just firmware/internal hardware...

JSmith 

Edited April 7, 2017 by jsmith
spelling

[cwt]

5 hours ago, pgdownload said:

I think its a fair rant. We seem to be on a definite round of small improvements but if you want some feature you need to upgrade perfectly good stuff to meet the new 'spec'.

My comment on the spec was not to suggest 3D is still referenced (although it did do that) more that it seemed that 3D functionality only requires a few extra chips (that may even already be sitting unused in all TVs still) Like MPEG 4 tuners in STBs before MPEG 4 became a thing. Perhaps down the line they'll decide to have another marketting push and just switch it all back on again.

Regards

Peter Gillespie

That's where the bean counters come in Peter and why SOC's [ system on a chip] are where manufacturers are going . Used to be different chips for different applications but its all  about size now to make TV's chassis smaller .  Just like the average avr as everything gets plunked on 1 pcb and you see all the empty space . That's just 1 opinion though and Ime no engineer that's  for sure..

If they can save some programming on that chip and simplify its component parts and you multiply that saving by sets sold .. A good example of this is Onkyo avr's . They wanted to incorporate dolby atmos in their avr's but their chips didn't have enough mips for that and audyssey so they saved on the chips by ditching audyssey for the crap accu-eq . The bean counters 1 engineers 0  The likes of denon did put in more powerful chips ; cost a bit more with all the audyssey license fees but retained audyssey

I too hope the capability is lying dormant on there chipsets and there is little research and development for 3d on 4k sets  With or without WCG and HDR ; beggars cant be choosers

[IviewHD]

3D was always going to be a deadset failure right from the start.Why?Because wearing glasses to watch it was never ever in the wide world going to fly in a mainstream market.A  petition from a niche market to keep alive a format that has no commercial dollars in it is pretty pathetic guys.GET OVER IT!

[MrC]

1 minute ago, IviewHD said:

3D was always going to be a deadset failure right from the start.Why?Because wearing glasses to watch it was never ever in the wide world going to fly in a mainstream market.A  petition from a niche market to keep alive a format that has no commercial dollars in it is pretty pathetic guys.GET OVER IT!

Can only agree with this.  I do, though, have sympathy with those who like/want 3D, in that they were led to believe that there was going to be plenty of content etc.  However I wish them well with their petition - they will need plenty of luck to get anything to happen.

[MLXXX]

8 minutes ago, IviewHD said:

3D was always going to be a deadset failure right from the start.Why?Because wearing glasses to watch it was never ever in the wide world going to fly in a mainstream market.A  petition from a niche market to keep alive a format that has no commercial dollars in it is pretty pathetic guys.GET OVER IT!

What you say may have a degree of validity for television in the home but it has not proved to be the case at public cinemas. I think that is because at a public cinema you have to sit upright in a seat for the duration of the movie anyway, and it is no great additional hassle to put on 3D glasses. (As easy as putting on sunglasses for a walk along the beach, I'd suggest.) 

I also happen to believe that the lull in production of 3D capable home displays is only a temporary hiatus, partly related to the difficulty in achieving good subjective 3D cross-talk performance at the same time as high picture brightness and contrast. HDR is a big challenge for maintaining little or no visible 3D ghosting.

I note that this petition (which currently has  10,531 supporters) may be just what is needed to encourage LG to provide a 3D capable OLED display in 2018! 

[CAVX]

On 06/04/2017 at 5:28 PM, MLXXX said:

???

 

What side effects, Mark, and what percentage of people are affected? Can you provide a link to your source of info?

Sorry no links on hand.

You have never heard comments like "I don't like 3D, it gave me a head ache"  or "I felt nauseous last time i watched it".???

As it turns out, these symptoms (at least 90% of them anyway) can be attributed to undiagnosed eye conditions.  For some reason, people who don't wear corrective eyewear on a daily basis, seem to have the idea that wearing glasses somehow makes them disabled or something silly and will actually be in denial about needing glasses.   I dealt with in in a daily basis when I worked at Todds HiFi.  

As you would know, to see 3D properly, we need both our eyes to not only focus at the same strength, but also have stereoscopic alignment.  This seems to be a bigger problem than many of us know and unless you ask your optometrist to test this, it may just get missed.  There are 6 small muscles that control the movement of our eyeballs and sometimes, the weaker or stronger than they should be and they tend to pull the eyeball up or down.    

Everyone with two working eyes sees in 3D anyway, so the comments of people saying they don't like it is really odd to me.  
When the Aussie film BAIT was about to be released into cinemas, there was a live talk by the director and some other guys at the Palace Cinemas in the city.  Whist they didn't give us any 3D demos, just a talk, it was interesting to hear them talk about how and why they have used this tool the way they have.  You might remember TRON 2 starts in 2D and turns 3D once he enters the grid.  BAIT is fairly flat until the big wave washes in.  Other films just give us the full 3D depth from start to finish.    

So what they explained is that 3D in video is 2x 2D images combined.  Each has a different eye perspective and to make it work, both images are aligned 100% vertically, only moving the image horizontally to either converge or diverge the image in reference to the zero plain - the screen.  If the images are not 100% vertically aligned, it can feel like your head is being ripped apart because our eyes are side by side on our heads.  So when people with misaligned stereoscopic vision watch 3D, there is strain placed on their eyes and as a result, discomfort.      

Converged images can be a bit harder to focus on and why studios are now being careful with the amount of "pop out" used.  Everyone loves divergence which gives us that deep look into the 3D world of the film.     

I learned a lot of about this by simply telling my optometrist that I work with 1080 and now 4K rez, single lines and I also have a lot to do with 3D.   They tested everything and the explained and even had the eye model.    

     

[betty boop]

purchased passengers 4k uhd from the us and it indeed does come with not only the standard blu0-ray and also a 3D version which has had some good reviews as adds well to the movie.

 

also purchased rogue one locally and it comes with both the 2D blu-ray and the 3D blu-ray

 

so am not sure where this thinking is coming from since thats atleast 2 studios colombia and disney who feel it warrants to bring out new releases with 3D as an option.

[MLXXX]

23 hours ago, CAVX said:

So what they explained is that 3D in video is 2x 2D images combined.  Each has a different eye perspective and to make it work, both images are aligned 100% vertically, only moving the image horizontally to either converge or diverge the image in reference to the zero plain - the screen.  If the images are not 100% vertically aligned, it can feel like your head is being ripped apart because our eyes are side by side on our heads.  So when people with misaligned stereoscopic vision watch 3D, there is strain placed on their eyes and as a result, discomfort.   

I guess such people would likely experience eye strain even when watching in 2D. They would need to fuse together left and right images that were misaligned. And such people could very well experience eye strain in everyday life trying to fuse together misaligned left and right views of things around them.

It may interest you to know that my right eye  left eye vertical alignment has been out since I was about 25yo. It was around that time that I first started wearing very mild prescription glasses to assist with distance vision. These days, using my right eye view as a reference, my left eye view shows things lower down, and slanting slightly further down on the left. However when I use both eyes for viewing I am not conscious of any disparity whatsoever. My brain fuses the left and right eye images giving me a very clear 3D landscape out to 200m, and even beyond. If I close either eye, while driving, what I see collapses to a 2D image with quite a limited sense of distance.  It seems remarkable to me that the vertical misalignment of my left vision and its slight rotation [relative to my right eye vision] can be fully compensated for when my brain fuses the images.   

Perhaps because of the above natural vertical misalignment in my vision I am fairly tolerant of vertical misalignment in amateur 3D photography. However I have had to point out on AVS forum that parts of certain footage were misaligned vertically. This was something the poster had not noticed himself but it was sufficiently marked to look wrong with my vision.

Despite the vertical misalignment in my vision I do not experience eye fatigue when watching stereoscopic footage at 144Hz or with a passive 3D flat panel display, unless the 3D is particularly exaggerated (unnaturally so). Similarly I do not experience eye fatigue when using both eyes in real life(!). 

My stereoscopic vision is very sensitive to timing differences, so much so that active glasses operating at 100Hz for 50i 3D footage are a real trial for me to use (creating mirage effects and a jumbled look), and active glasses operating at 120Hz are annoying. Active glasses operating at 144Hz are ok. I note that RealD cinema uses 144Hz to project 24fps 3D footage but projected light levels are generally relatively dim.

At the risk of repeating myself on this forum too many times, I will say again that I believe there are technical reasons why 3D is not available in most 2017 model flat panel displays (quite distinct from any "lack of popularity of 3D" reasons):

1. Active glasses operating at 120Hz when used to view HDR images would be more likely to cause flicker fatigue than active glasses used to watch SD images. Also, visible cross-talk would tend to be higher.

2. Passive glasses require critical alignment* of the film-patterned retarder on the screen and require the viewer to sit with their head in a critical viewing zone to minimize cross-talk but even then the cross-talk with high contrast Left and Right content may be too obtrusive.

 

23 hours ago, CAVX said:

You have never heard comments like "I don't like 3D, it gave me a head ache"  or "I felt nauseous last time i watched it".???

One friend has said they can't watch 3D (I believe that friend does have an eyesight problem). Another has said they don't like it. Most people at my place have simply watched the 3D  (projector, or flat panel) without reporting any issues. (Perhaps they were just being polite!)

I have  read reports about certain people getting a headache and I've read numerous reports about the nuisance and/or discomfort of wearing 3D glasses. Some active 3D glasses were very heavy and led to discomfort. Some people have not been able to fit 3D glasses over their usual spectacles.

Why I queried you was that you said "only a small percentage of the public can watch it without side effects". I had never seen such a claim before.

_______________

* There have been numerous reports of dissatifaction with 3D passive flat panel screens as regards cross-talk. This appears to be on a unit by unit basis; some units of a particular model have performed well; and others badly..

Edited April 8, 2017 by MLXXX

[CAVX]

21 hours ago, MLXXX said:

I guess such people would likely experience eye strain even when watching in 2D. They would need to fuse together left and right images that were misaligned. And such people could very well experience eye strain in everyday life trying to fuse together misaligned left and right views of things around them.

Ignorance is bliss to many.  If they don't what 100% clarity is because they've never seen it, then they don't miss it.  And I am amazed how many people my age think glasses is not OK.  Yet kids for time wanted glasses because fictional heroes like Harry Potter wore them.

Quote

It may interest you to know that my right eye  left eye vertical alignment has been out since I was about 25yo. It was around that time that I first started wearing very mild prescription glasses to assist with distance vision. These days, using my right eye view as a reference, my left eye view shows things lower down, and slanting slightly further down on the left. However when I use both eyes for viewing I am not conscious of any disparity whatsoever. My brain fuses the left and right eye images giving me a very clear 3D landscape out to 200m, and even beyond. If I close either eye, while driving, what I see collapses to a 2D image with quite a limited sense of distance.  It seems remarkable to me that the vertical misalignment of my left vision and its slight rotation [relative to my right eye vision] can be fully compensated for when my brain fuses the images.  

Maybe you have a higher pain threshold.  I know that if I look at those crosseyed 3D puzzles I can feel the strain in my left eye.  Some people just have no tolerance to slightest bit of "different" and tend to write things off forever.  Which is sad because the technology did evolve.  

Quote

Perhaps because of the above natural vertical misalignment in my vision I am fairly tolerant of vertical misalignment in amateur 3D photography. However I have had to point out on AVS forum that parts of certain footage were misaligned vertically. This was something the poster had not noticed himself but it was sufficiently marked to look wrong with my vision.

Despite the vertical misalignment in my vision I do not experience eye fatigue when watching stereoscopic footage at 144Hz or with a passive 3D flat panel display, unless the 3D is particularly exaggerated (unnaturally so). Similarly I do not experience eye fatigue when using both eyes in real life(!). 

My stereoscopic vision is very sensitive to timing differences, so much so that active glasses operating at 100Hz for 50i 3D footage are a real trial for me to use (creating mirage effects and a jumbled look), and active glasses operating at 120Hz are annoying. Active glasses operating at 144Hz are ok. I note that RealD cinema uses 144Hz to project 24fps 3D footage but projected light levels are generally relatively dim.

At the risk of repeating myself on this forum too many times, I will say again that I believe there are technical reasons why 3D is not available in most 2017 model flat panel displays (quite distinct from any "lack of popularity of 3D" reasons):

1. Active glasses operating at 120Hz when used to view HDR images would be more likely to cause flicker fatigue than active glasses used to watch SD images. Also, visible cross-talk would tend to be higher.

2. Passive glasses require critical alignment* of the film-patterned retarder on the screen and require the viewer to sit with their head in a critical viewing zone to minimize cross-talk but even then the cross-talk with high contrast Left and Right content may be too obtrusive.

 

One friend has said they can't watch 3D (I believe that friend does have an eyesight problem). Another has said they don't like it. Most people at my place have simply watched the 3D  (projector, or flat panel) without reporting any issues. (Perhaps they were just being polite!)

I have  read reports about certain people getting a headache and I've read numerous reports about the nuisance and/or discomfort of wearing 3D glasses. Some active 3D glasses were very heavy and led to discomfort. Some people have not been able to fit 3D glasses over their usual spectacles.

Why I queried you was that you said "only a small percentage of the public can watch it without side effects". I had never seen such a claim before.

_______________

* There have been numerous reports of dissatifaction with 3D passive flat panel screens as regards cross-talk. This appears to be on a unit by unit basis; some units of a particular model have performed well; and others badly..

3D at 144Hz is good.  The older 96Hz (or 100 or 120), not so.  Yes Real D takes a massive hit to light output with the shutters in the light path.  Part of that is the optics used, but also the amount of dust and finger prints on them.  And they don't ever seem to clean them.    

I am glad that I told my optometrist about what I needed the corrected eye wear to do.  It can be a PITA to have to wear 3D glasses over my corrective eyewear, but I get so much more immersion for the effort.  

On 08/04/2017 at 10:58 AM, said:

purchased passengers 4k uhd from the us and it indeed does come with not only the standard blu0-ray and also a 3D version which has had some good reviews as adds well to the movie.

 

also purchased rogue one locally and it comes with both the 2D blu-ray and the 3D blu-ray

 

so am not sure where this thinking is coming from since thats atleast 2 studios colombia and disney who feel it warrants to bring out new releases with 3D as an option.

Hoefully that becomes the trend.  I still buy 3D titles so that when I finally get a 3D projector, I will have a tonne of stuff to watch all over again.  I am now buying UHD titles so that when I get my UHD player, I will have software.  Having a 3D version thrown into the mix would cover all my bases.  

I did something wrong as I I can't get rid of this quote box. 

21 hours ago, MLXXX said:

 

Edited April 9, 2017 by MarkTecher

[MLXXX]

On 4/9/2017 at 0:09 PM, CAVX said:

Maybe you have a higher pain threshold.  I know that if I look at those crosseyed 3D puzzles I can feel the strain in my left eye.  

Well cross-eyed 3D viewing does do me in very quickly! My eyes feel a strain and get sore. It is amazing to me though that one can perceive such a clear and powerful 3D effect this way. I find that tall narrow image pairs work best for my vision, such as this pair of images:

Note: for instructions on how to view the above see the webpage http://www.starosta.com/3dshowcase/ihelp.html   In addition to the tip given on that webpage "If you have trouble, one helpful trick is to use your index finger as a guide for your eyes: hold it up about halfway between your eyes and the screen, and focus your eyes on the fingertip. This helps you to cross your eyes.", I find it can help to frame the outer edges of your field of view with the palms of your hands upright. 

 

On 4/9/2017 at 0:09 PM, CAVX said:

 Some people just have no tolerance to slightest bit of "different" and tend to write things off forever.  Which is sad because the technology did evolve.  

Yes, some people seem to have a very low tolerance, and are not prepared to give a new technology a second go.

As for TV manufacturers, they will miss out on a certain number of sales unless and until they make 3D models available again. I see that JB are currently offering the Samsung KU6000 70" 4K UHD HDR Smart LED LCD TV at a sale price of $2296 ($700 off the usual price) expiring tomorrow. I've been very impressed with various Samsung displays I've seen in showrooms and might have considered this offer very seriously. However there is no 3D functionality. That puts this model completely out of contention for a buyer like me who wants 3D.

[CAVX]

I can look at those two images all day.  They just focus easy for me.  I love the depth and more importantly, how clear that looks as a 3D image compared to either image as a 2D image.  

[MLXXX]

On 2/6/2017 at 9:15 AM, MLXXX said:

I think 3D will re-emerge in TV sets of major manufacturers in the not too distant future but I don't think it's only about marketing. I think it is in part because it is proving technically very difficult to provide a good quality 3D picture using High Dynamic Range displays. It is challenging to reduce ghosting (3D crosstalk) to acceptable levels if the image contains very bright content immediately adjacent to very dark content.  

I'm a bit slow off the mark posting this, but not everyone interested in a 3D TV may be aware that Panasonic released the EX780 range of 3D LCD TVs in Australia in April   ( https://blogs.panasonic.com.au/consumer/2017/05/29/introducing-new-premium-panasonic-4k-ultra-hd-tvs/   and  http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/panasonic-tvs-2017-4k-hdr-2952995 ).

The models in this range use active glasses 3D. That is not my favourite technology (as I dislike the flickering/alternation) but it may be necessary to control the crosstalk of an HDR screen.

I see the 75" model is currently listed by major retailers in Australia at a bit under $5k.  I've been struggling to find a detailed review in English.  However what I have seen in various forums and in brief formal reviews indicates that the crosstalk issue has not been fully solved.

A detailed review in French (at http://www.audiovideohd.fr/tests/489-Panasonic-EX780-TX-58EX780E--1.html ) of the European 58" model states [as translated into English]:- 

3D:

At a time when TV manufacturers collectively are turning their backs on 3D, the Panasonic EX780 is an exception to the rule, and is one of the latest 3D (active) TVs available on the market along with Sony's ZD9, a move appreciated by fans of 3D Blu-ray who wish to enjoy their collection of movies on their TV. Although the overall picture quality is satisfactory, with a bright 3D and beautiful colour, a slight crosstalk and a bit of judder still exist.

Edited July 24, 2017 by MLXXX