"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[Cliff]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

The most amusing thing that I find is that they are so reluctant in their postings to link to this thread (or not allowed to, for all I know) because they realize how much membership they have already lost to Blu-ray.com and they want to stop the bleeding.

Not only have they completely bled out their membership, but they've lost pretty much everyone in a position to give them insight from the studios, filmmakers, and production houses. What's the word for them again? Oh, Insiders. Although those guys (the Kram's of the world) seem happier to be rid of the insiders because the insiders were usually the one's to point out how wrong they generally were about things. To quote The American President (which'll make a fine BD):

"in the absence of genuine leadership, they'll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone."

Run everyone smarter than you out of the room and suddenly you're the brightest guy around (but only by default).

But yes, just looking at their activity over there, there are only 23 (non-sticky) threads that have had comments today while over at Blu-ray.com, triple that number have received comments today. So not only is the discussion fairly useless over there now, but there way less of it.

[Constitution 101]

Originally Posted by uniquetreatone

I just like to say after lurking and reading this thread everyday it's finally starting to make sense. When you and others talk about grain,masters,which camera they used and so on, it flew right over my head. After reading the last couple of pages, i'm really starting to get an idea of what you all are talking about. Sorry it took me about three years to catch on but if it's not something you were taught, it's like reading latin with no translator. Back to reading and learning.

Welcome to the club my friend, you're not alone!

[Jeff Kleist]

The most amusing thing that I find is that they are so reluctant in their postings to link to this thread (or not allowed to, for all I know) because they realize how much membership they have already lost to Blu-ray.com and they want to stop the bleeding.

Memory hazy, but I think AVS at one point was actually blocking posts containing links over here (though that may have been another site)

[Tok]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

CRT television performance when it comes to refresh rates and other timing issues are so close it's virtually identical. The Sega system worked great hooked up to the player because of this. Modern panels are so divergant that this simply isn't practical as you can't set it manually

Sorry but I have to disagree. Syncing up to a relatively low switching rate, 48Hz, can't be that hard.

The CE makers are making this system complex to force unneeded upgrades.

The new system guarantees that 3D will work, but as a consumer I wouldn't mind a option that could be hit or miss without asking me to upgrade over $4k worth of equipment.

[Jeff Kleist]

The new system guarantees that 3D will work, but as a consumer I wouldn't mind a option that could be hit or miss without asking me to upgrade over $4k worth of equipment.

Given that give or take 95% of people never open the manual, and many of them spent years with their DVD players set to 16:9 on a 4:3 TV, how many of them do you think could accomplish a manual sync, something that would have to be done each and every time the glasses the TV or the player were activated? Even being off by 10-20 mlliseconds or so cna lead to big headache problems from mistimings, literally

Seriously, even the kids today don't know how to use their devices. On the whole, kids ten years ago were far more likely to be able to program your VCR for you than the ones today. And in an Apple-centric tech society it's just going to get worse. Hold my hand give me a cookie.

That's the reality we have to face. For every gadget loving tweaker (not meth ) there's 500 who want to press the button on their harmony and have everything turn on like magic.

BTW Penton, my mother and all her future English classes thank you all for Jason and the Argonauts

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Oliver K -
Can you please translate the new updated forum policies from today about the utilization of screenshots...

http://www.bluray-disc.de/
You know that my German is somewhat *specialized* for choice encounters.

I know, I know - you only apply your German skills for CEGFK (choice encounters of the German fraulein kind)

Was that on the site as of today and where was it?
I looked it up in the news and could not find it.

[micks_address]

well i bought the blu-ray if that helps

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I would say 'disappointing' despite all the effort by dedicated technologists as well as executives.
On that note, how do you think The Natural will sell?

[JamesN]

Originally Posted by CraigW

Sorry but I have to disagree. Syncing up to a relatively low switching rate, 48Hz, can't be that hard.

The CE makers are making this system complex to force unneeded upgrades.

The new system guarantees that 3D will work, but as a consumer I wouldn't mind a option that could be hit or miss without asking me to upgrade over $4k worth of equipment.

The CEMs are not making it complex -- it is complex.

Implementing 3D on CRTs was relatively simple because their interlaced nature and the blanking interval between field refreshes could be exploited. The biggest issue there (besides the 1/2 resolution inherent in field-sequential-based 3D) was phosphor decay times which led to image crosstalk.

Progressive displays are different beasts altogether, and each technology has it's own challenges when it comes to 3D. (And it's not really syncing per se that is the issue, it's crosstalk -- when part of the image intended for one eye is leaked into the opposite eye.)

LCDs have limited response times and plasmas have phosphor trails, both of which contribute to crosstalk. 3D simply will not work on such displays unless they are specifically re-designed from the ground up for 3D support. And CEMs are approaching those re-designs in creative ways. Samsung's new LCD/LEDs up their refresh rate to 240Hz in 3D mode and insert black frames between each image refresh in order to give the liquid crystals time to return to a neutral state before switching left/right views. Panasonic worked with their plasma panel manufacturers to develop quicker decaying phosphors.

DLP seems to be the only display technology inherently well suited to 3D, and Mitsubishi is supporting backward-compatibility for many of their older RPTV DLPs as well as introducing new 3D models in their 2010 lineup.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by JamesN

The CEMs are not making it complex -- it is complex.

Implementing 3D on CRTs was relatively simple because their interlaced nature and the blanking interval between field refreshes could be exploited. The biggest issue there (besides the 1/2 resolution inherent in field-sequential-based 3D) was phosphor decay times which led to image crosstalk.

Progressive displays are different beasts altogether, and each technology has it's own challenges when it comes to 3D. (And it's not really syncing per se that is the issue, it's crosstalk -- when part of the image intended for one eye is leaked into the opposite eye.)

LCDs have limited response times and plasmas have phosphor trails, both of which contribute to crosstalk. 3D simply will not work on such displays unless they are specifically re-designed from the ground up for 3D support. And CEMs are approaching those re-designs in creative ways. Samsung's new LCD/LEDs up their refresh rate to 240Hz in 3D mode and insert black frames between each image refresh in order to give the liquid crystals time to return to a neutral state before switching left/right views. Panasonic worked with their plasma panel manufacturers to develop quicker decaying phosphors.

DLP seems to be the only display technology inherently well suited to 3D, and Mitsubishi is supporting backward-compatibility for many of their older RPTV DLPs as well as introducing new 3D models in their 2010 lineup.

You're missing the point. For the best possible 3D you need what is describe above, but again I would like some cheaper options that may or may not work with current displays.

[JamesN]

Originally Posted by CraigW

You're missing the point. For the best possible 3D you need what is describe above, but again I would like some cheaper options that may or may not work with current displays.

I don't think I am missing the point. There are options, and CEMs are providing solutions that will work with legacy hardware when possible.

The "cheapest" option using current display technology would be a DLP RPTV specifically labeled as "3D Ready", meaning it will accept 3D input in a "checkerboard" format. Some of the new 3D BD players (e.g. Panasonic) support output in this format. For players that don't (and for broadcast 3D in side-by-side 3D format) Mitsubishi has announced a format converter due out later this year that will convert frame-packed or side-by-side 3D to checkerboard.

There are also options using DLP pjs and a HTPC. Such a configuration could be made to work with software players that support the new 3DBD formats.

However, if you have an LCD or plasma display, and it's not specifically designed for 3D, there is simply nothing that can be done to make it work. It's not just a matter of "the best possible 3D" -- it's a matter of not being able to reduce crosstalk to a level that will provide any kind of perceptual depth in the image.

[Blaumann]

Originally Posted by Oliver K

I know, I know - you only apply your German skills for CEGFK (choice encounters of the German fraulein kind)

Was that on the site as of today and where was it?
I looked it up in the news and could not find it.

Hi,
they've recently updated their forum policy about posting screenshots, i guess this is what Penton meant. They sent a pm to every member about it. This is the message, it's also posted publicly in a sticky thread:

Hallo,

aus aktuellem Anlass möchten wir darauf hinweisen, dass Screenshots von Szenen in Filmen nur unter ganz bestimmten Voraussetzungen im Forum verwendet werden dürfen:

1. Der Screenshot muss auf dem Bild selbst mit einer eindeutigen Quellengabe versehen sein (z.B. Angabe des Studios als Rechteinhaber: "Quelle: Paramount Pictures" ö.ä.).

2. Aus dem Text des Beitrags muss klar hervorgehen, dass der Screenshot als Zitat verwendet wird, also zum Beispiel als Beleg für eine Behauptung im Text dient.

3. Screenshots von Filmszenen dürfen ausschließlich in Originalgröße und ohne jede Bearbeitung gepostet werden (die Angabe der Quelle auf dem Bild gilt dabei natürlich nicht als Bearbeitung).

Diese Kriterien müssen erfüllt sein, sonst müssen wir den Forenbeitrag leider löschen, um rechtliche Konsequenzen für bluray-disc.de zu vermeiden.

Vielen Dank!
Sonnige Grüße vom bluray-disc.de Team

In short, they say any screenshots posted must meet three requirements to be acceptable:

1. There has to be a "copyright by" overlay as part of the screenshot.
2. Screenshots have to be posted in context with a written message, as to illustrate a point [e.g. "you can clearly see the sepia tone of the movie"]
3. Screenshots may only be posted in their original size and without any further processing [like Photoshop etc.]

It also states, that they will delete any screenshots/posts that don't meet these requirements.

I am not aware, what led them to restrict posting screenshots this way.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by iceman

You have ash-covered mail

Like I said, I have no sympathy for a studio whose actions led to the selective censoring of this forum’s reviewer because of the faults of *the usual suspects* on other forums that have a long history of being Blu-ray malcontents, if not outright rabid HD-DVD fanboys in the past with not just the condoning but, some would say the sponsorship of the administration there…given perks and such.

And neither does it appear that Peter Jackson has much sympathy for them either (scroll down to the last paragraph, after reading his comments about 3D )-

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2010/...d-conversions/

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by CraigW

You're missing the point. For the best possible 3D you need what is describe above, but again I would like some cheaper options that may or may not work with current displays.

Very cheap -
http://www.3dstereo.com/viewmaster/tri-gla.html

and it will work with what you’ve got–
http://www.digitalcinemareport.com/node/1345

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by JamesN

The CEMs are not making it complex -- it is complex....

LCDs have limited response times and plasmas have phosphor trails, both of which contribute to crosstalk. 3D simply will not work on such displays unless they are specifically re-designed from the ground up for 3D support. And CEMs are approaching those re-designs in creative ways. Samsung's new LCD/LEDs up their refresh rate to 240Hz in 3D mode and insert black frames between each image refresh in order to give the liquid crystals time to return to a neutral state before switching left/right views. Panasonic worked with their plasma panel manufacturers to develop quicker decaying phosphors.

Correct and it’s not just that.
The R,G,B phosphors just do not decay at the same rates.

This discrepancy has been reduced on some 3D displays in order to avoid the crosstalk between the right and left eye captures. It's another fringe benefit for eagle eyed 2D viewers that desire the best that state of the art displays can offer, even if they plan on never watching any 3D content at home.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Blaumann

Hi,
they've recently updated their forum policy about posting screenshots, i guess this is what Penton meant.

Yes, that's what I meant.
Thanks for the translation.

[Jeff Kleist]

Progressive displays are different beasts altogether, and each technology has it's own challenges when it comes to 3D. (And it's not really syncing per se that is the issue, it's crosstalk -- when part of the image intended for one eye is leaked into the opposite eye.)

Well, I was trying to simplify . Please read the rest of James's posts though for the more complete answer

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

And neither does it appear that Peter Jackson has much sympathy for them either (scroll down to the last paragraph, after reading his comments about 3D )-

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2010/...d-conversions/

Doesn't that completely contradict the statements given by Jackson and DVD producer Michael Pellerin?

[Jeff Kleist]

He's talking about bonus material production, not the mastering process

[uniquetreatone]

The WB guys must wear body armor and ear plugs because they keep getting hit and talked about from all angles. Well atleast we have lossless now.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Like I said, I have no sympathy for a studio whose actions led to the selective censoring of this forum’s reviewer because of the faults of *the usual suspects* on other forums that have a long history of being Blu-ray malcontents, if not outright rabid HD-DVD fanboys in the past with not just the condoning but, some would say the sponsorship of the administration there…given perks and such.

And neither does it appear that Peter Jackson has much sympathy for them either (scroll down to the last paragraph, after reading his comments about 3D )-

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2010/...d-conversions/

Hmmm. His comments seem to contradict what we had previously heard about him overseeing multiple new masters.

"I was heavily involved in the DVD process when the films were being released through New Line, but now that Warner Brothers has taken control over the releasing of the films, they just tell me what they’re doing and don’t involve me in the process"

He says DVD eight times, and even when questioned about the Blu-ray, he responds with DVD. Semantics? Or, is he not as "in touch" as we would want to believe?