1080i 3-D???

[mustang-gt-2002]

ok how about this.

1080i is two interlaced signals right. why cant you have one signal for one side of the glasses. and the other signal on the other side of the glasses. then you can have 1080p 3-D and 1080i 3-D in the same case. forget the dvd copy and digital download copy. that way everyone can have 3-D. no new HDTVs or Blu-ray player only thing would be new glasses. unless you want 1080p 3-D then shell-out $3,000-$4,000

can someone explain why this wouldnt work. thanks

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by mustang-gt-2002

ok how about this.

1080i is two interlaced signals right. why cant you have one signal for one side of the glasses. and the other signal on the other side of the glasses. then you can have 1080p 3-D and 1080i 3-D in the same case. forget the dvd copy and digital download copy. that way everyone can have 3-D. no new HDTVs or Blu-ray player only thing would be new glasses. unless you want 1080p 3-D then shell-out $3,000-$4,000

can someone explain why this wouldnt work. thanks

i don't know if it would work or not[sorry]. i think the they made of there minds and thats the way its going to go.you'll have to shell out the money or wait till prices come down.

another thing,this is the first new format to come out with no software,no tv programming. the studios are not invested in 3d movies yet. or very few.if i was looking for a new hdtv,id think about 3dtv. other then that i think 3dtv will take a while to get going.do you really want to watch everything in 3d?. most polls show people don't because they have to wear those dam glasses.i'm for 3d tv,but i think its got a bigger hill to climb,they blu-ray did.

[AgentBLU]

Originally Posted by mustang-gt-2002

ok how about this.

1080i is two interlaced signals right. why cant you have one signal for one side of the glasses. and the other signal on the other side of the glasses. then you can have 1080p 3-D and 1080i 3-D in the same case. forget the dvd copy and digital download copy. that way everyone can have 3-D. no new HDTVs or Blu-ray player only thing would be new glasses. unless you want 1080p 3-D then shell-out $3,000-$4,000

can someone explain why this wouldnt work. thanks

I don't have the technical answer but they are a business like any other business. They are there to make money. If they did this then there would be no room for money gain. So I do not think that case will happen anytime soon.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by mustang-gt-2002

ok how about this.

1080i is two interlaced signals right. why cant you have one signal for one side of the glasses. and the other signal on the other side of the glasses. then you can have 1080p 3-D and 1080i 3-D in the same case. forget the dvd copy and digital download copy. that way everyone can have 3-D. no new HDTVs or Blu-ray player only thing would be new glasses. unless you want 1080p 3-D then shell-out $3,000-$4,000

can someone explain why this wouldnt work. thanks

I'm sure it will work, and the reason it hasn't been provided is simple: There is no media to play on 3-D, and therefore, no marketplace. 24fps needs to be delivered to each eye; this can easily be handled by the 60Hz input on current televisions.

I'm still trying to figure out why this wouldn't be a 1080p signal. Technically, it's easier to deliver the signal to a 120hz input, as comes with the new sets, but I just can't see any insurmountable hurdle. The new mode is "side by side" display.

Even if, for some reason (3:2 pulldown issues come to mind), 1080i is definitely achievable.

More than likely, a new player would be necessary. 3-D signals are encoded in a variation of the standard Blu format, and this may not be possible to do via firmware upgrade. Even if it is, manufacturers would have no incentive to update older players when they're heavily invested in trying to get new players sold. I don't expect cooperation from them.

My guess is that home theater PC's will be able to do this first; it's absurdly easy to accomplish this. More tricky will be making sure that shutter glasses correctly match whatever the input signal is to the television.

Broadcasters would welcome this, as well as advertisers (I'm sure they're drooling at the opportunity to make 3-D commercials for the Slap-Chop, etc.), and there will be pitifully slow adoption of 3-D when the current base of HDTV's - 71 million strong - won't be replaced for the small amount of recorded content available.

Video quality may not match the dedicated 3-D equipment, as there won't be an interpolation or pulldown issues with the new sets. However, since there is fierce resistance to rebooting perfectly good televisions from the general public, and Blu users will be paying for 3-D content even if they can't view it with older gear, a retrofit option can only spur the spread of 3-D. Once people see it in their own homes, and with a larger user base, upgraders will accelerate purchases, and costs for everyone will come down that much faster.

So, I'm betting this ploy by the manufacturers to get a new market for televisions won't be the real driving force. Rumors of successful retrofitting equipment and software are already circulating. Once there are more than one or two broadcasting stations, and more than a handful of movies, the pressure will be on to release these options.

I wouldn't "early adopt" 3-D at this point. Reports of a wide disparity in quality between the Panasonic and Samsung models, and the incompatibility between them for shutter glasses, shows that current implementation is messy, expensive, and not standardized. The retrofitting option would clean up some of this, and would be a win-win for everybody.