The general result is that the red/cyan (#7003) really work best with the images I've been creating (with Anaglyph Maker 1.06). The Reel3D site says that they are best for internet images and printed images (specifiaclly, the swimsuit edition of "Sprts Illustrated", which must have had some 3D images). I concur. If I was to buy again from the set that I did get, these would be what I'd buy a lot of (for friends, family, etc.). The red/cyan Q-Dos performed similarly to the paper version, but with stronger contrast and a darker image overall.
All of them clearly showed 3D, but other factors came into play: ghosting, cost, overall color, durability, comfort, viewing area, and image brightness.
Comfort:
The ear "arms" (anyone who wears glasses care to tell me what those are really called?) on the paper 7001 and 7003 models seemed to have been designed for smaller faces, or the nose cutouts for smaller nose bridges. The combination of somewhat short ear armss and shallow nose cutout made the glasses ride pretty high on my nose. So I had to sort of bend my head down and look up, alá Princess Diana. Or I could bow out the center of the glasses to get them to ride lower down, but that will shorten the overall lifespan because of the flexing. They're cheap enough to render that a minor concern. Cutting off the ear arms isn't really an option, because the nose cutout has too wide an angle to grab on to your nose.The hard-rubber 7026 glasses were the most comfortable. The red/cyan Q-Dos glasses are comfortable too, but the wire ear arms had a coating of plastic for padding behind the ears, and the effect was like putting a fairly thick rod of plastic behind my ears. The hard-rubber glasses had ear arms that were more paddle-shaped which was easier on my ears, and distributed the grab pressure across more area on my head.
The mini red/green were surprisingly comfortable, and were quite tenacious in hanging on to my nose. Part of that might be their truly small size (= less mass). For right-handed folks, they also have more carboard frame on that side, giving a grab area.
Image quality:
One of the greatest variabilities in quality comes from the tints in the lenses. This will affect how much of the side that is suposed to be filtered out gets through, resulting in what I call "ghosting". The amount of ghosting was least noticeable in the red/blue paper glasses, but the overall image brightness was dimmed a great deal, and they lent a violet hue to the image.The mini red/green and red/cyan paper were next best, and quite similar to each other regarding ghosting (noticeable) but the red/green lent a distinctly greenish hue to the image. The red/cyan were the most neutral in color of all the glasses.
The Q-dos glasses had ghosting comparable to the red/cyan paper glasses, but deeper contrast and a darker image.
The hard rubber showed the most ghosting, but not so much more as to elicit a categorical rejection. The deep color saturation of the lenses seemed to deliver the most contrast of all.
Aside from these glasses, I also have a pair of red/bluish-green paper glasses. Looking at the right lens, I'd call it green, but there's a distinct blue component. I would not call it cyan. These glasses show almost no ghosting at all, and I attribute it mostly to the red lens. It is distinctly deeper red than any of the other glasses.
Viewing area:
The mini red/green had the smallest windows, but not so small that it was a problem viewing full-screen images on my 17" monitor. The paper glasses with the ear arms had substantially wider and slightly taller windows. The sideways was overkill (great for movie theaters I'll bet), and the extra height wasn't quite enough to compensate for the high ride on my nose - the bottom edge was still too high. Both of the "real" glasses had standard-sized lenses, offering an expansive view of the world.Cost:
At about US$0.40 per set (for lots of 25), the mini red/green were the best deal, and effective enough that you can give them away to casual acquaintance stereo neophytes and not feel embarrassed about showing off your pictures.The red/blue were US$0.50 per set in lots of ten. Considering price and performance, I think the mini red/green are the better choice.
The red/cyan were US$0.63 in lots of ten. With image performance as a factor, their price is still good enough that I would choose the red/cyan for their noticeably superior performance with on-screen imagery. I'd also buy these to give away to more serious stereophile friends. However, I can't see why they should cost so much more than the identical (except for shade of color in the right lens) red/blue version, except that they simply work better, and therefore have a higher demand.
You can buy the red/blue rubber glasses singly for $7.95
You can buy the red/cyan Q-Dos glasses singly for US$9.95.
Other considerations:
Both of the "real" glasses are durable, but I suspect the Q-dos of having a fragile streak in them: the ear arms being the weak link.Some of the great advantages to the paper glasses of course are, you can cut the frames to fit your own face, you can stamp advertising on the arms, and you can mail them easily.
Summary Overviews of this Vendor's Glasses
- Ratings are indicated by the icons shown.
- (
)=Best/Winner
- (
)=Good
- (
)=It works as advertised.