So I have tried a lot of different setups and devices and it seems to me that 2d comb filters might be better overall for LD, thoughts?

My current setup is LD player -> Processor #1 (either Crystalio II(3d) or Faroudja DVP-1510(2d))-> Algolith Mosquito -> Lumagen 2144.

So processor #1 does comb filtering and deinterlacing, Algolith does DNR and Lumagen does upscaling plus grayscale / color calibration. I seem to prefer the Faroudja with its 2d comb filter as processor #1 and I absolutely prefer the two processor with Algolith over just using the 2144 for everything. I feel that the Faroudja is sharper and cleaner than the others, really curious what everyone else thinks about 2d vs 3d comb filters for LD since 3d is all the rage now.



post images

From those pictures I feel the lower crystalio is better on the bleeding of the LED letters but then again you have to take into consideration the 3rd image that
is not shown, the one straight with no processes other than the LD itself going into the TV.

Also from my experience a lot has to do with motion rather than still imagery, its nice to get a still picture but these newer and larger TVs have more issues with
motion that you notice more from sitting too close to these larger sets when you should be sitting farther away.

As for me I still haven't had a chance to get my theater room/living room setup yet but I do have a TV hooked up with my LDs in the work room to watch some stuff.

In motion I prefer the Faroudja, obviously difficult to show in any sort of image or video online. I don't have option 3 as my projector only has HDMI in.

That makes sense actually - a 3D comb filter has to fall back to 2D and/or do motion interpolation to "guess", and if the Faroujda does a better job at 2D, it would be better in motion scenes.

People spend a lot looking for the magic 3d comb filter when maybe a relatively cheap Faroudja or Extron YCS-100 is as good or better.

I remember a couple people here making a case for 2D filters over 3D claiming that the 3D processing might actually degrade the picture while trying to clean it up (like how Dolby NR for tape audio degrades the audio while trying to clean it up.)

In my experience I've come across some 2D filters that offer a sharp, bright image with excellent colors but almost no reduction in cross-color or dot-crawl artifacts, and some 3D filters that clean up cross-color and dot-crawl well, but diminish the color and brightness considerably. It's hard to find one of either type that gets it all right (save for the 3D comb filters in higher end Sony WEGA TVs--those just did everything right and I wish I could find it in another device.)

It's all a matter of finding what you prefer really. I'm happy with the 3D comb filter in my Panasonic Plasma TV so I just feed the Runco LJR-II directly into it via composite and enjoying those results (in some ways I prefer how it looks over my previous Sony WEGA KD-36XS955!) It doesn't completely eliminate the cross-color on the S&W test plate (comes close though!) but the colors and sharpness are there.

There's cases to be made for both 2D and 3D filters. 3D will return to 2D when motion is detected and it's usually this change which can cause issues with checkerboarding so if you have a solid 5 line 2D filter then you won't have this issue. However, you will never achieve the level of resolution/detail that you can achieve with a 3D comb filter. It's very dependent on source material, transfer, how much detail and type of detail in a scene etc as to which comb filter may be beneficial and can be subjective down to personal taste.

A real world example of 3D beating 2D is the Fifth Element scene when Leeloo is evading the police and there's a long shot of her at the end of a tunnel/vent pipe while the cops try to talk her down. The concentric circles of the tunnel appear solid, crisp and in full detail with a 3D comb filter but will appear with rainbows/cross-colour with a 2D. If you have this disc (US version) it would be interesting to see a grab from both the Faroudja and the CII.