What do you think about 3D? Do you like it? Hate it? Think it's better than 4K?

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Zak2000

just a short question from a 3D-newbie:

Will the current 3D BDs still work in the near future when 4k screens and 3D TVs without required glasses comes out? Or is this perhaps a brandnew technology after all?

It's supposed to work, but 3-D was supposed to be totally compatible with 2-D, too. That didn't work out.


I expect a new standard is coming.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Zak2000

just a short question from a 3D-newbie:

Will the current 3D BDs still work in the near future when 4k screens and 3D TVs without required glasses comes out? Or is this perhaps a brandnew technology after all?

They will work just fine. They are UHD tv's (not 4k) and we already now current 3d blu-rays work with them (as we currently can use them on uhd tv's). Glasses free will essentially use the same content and the display device is all that changes, so once again it shall work just fine, just like vhs still works fine on modern tv's etc. Put simply the left and right images remain the same no matter the screen size and display tech used (passive, active, glasses free etc) so as long as the player can feed those two distinct images the display device will certainly support it. The only new 3d format for home may be when/if we get some uhd discs. Which will nearly certainly still be frame packed just like current discs, just with a higher resolution (and hopefully higher bit depth etc).

Originally Posted by Questioner

Sorry if I have confused you guys:

Basically:

There r two types of 3d movies arent they? side by side and the blurry ones. If i get a movie that is side-by-side in 3d, is it possible to change the 3d mode on that movie to blurry?

so can any 3d film be shown in side-by-side and blurry?

As long as your tv supports side be side you shall be able to make the 3d image from it. I have yet to come across a 3d tv that can't do this. The frame packing on 3d blu-rays will look significantly better but it still will work.

Originally Posted by norcal_tomtom707

Hey Everyone, I am new to this 3D stuff. I just updated my TV to a Panasonic 3D TV, It is a 65" Panasonic Plasma, Model #- TC-P65ST30, with a set of Panasonic 3D Shutter Glasses, Model #- TY-EW3D3M. I have already watch one 3D movie in 3D, (Pirates Of The Caribbean), and the movie was just OK, to me. Jsut didnt seem to 3Dish to me, some parts were. But, I read online that you can do certain calibrations or picture settings to your TV to make the 3D pop out even more. Does anybody know how to do that? I have my picture settings right now set to "VIVID" I was told to put in on Cinema, but the picture just seems way to dark when I do that.. Anybody know about this? Thanks so much. Tom

Simply put, that film just doesn't have a high level of depth. Some tv's allow you to move the images (which can increase and decrease the perceived level of depth) but I would strongly recommend against doing this as the film makers have composed the 3d image in such a way for a reason (to me changing this is like cropping a 2.35:1 film so it takes up your whole screen). If you want to see more depth check out the 3d blu-ray disc subforum and look for discs that are said to have stronger depth (some films use weak depth well, some use strong depth poorly simply more obvious 3d is not always better).

As a starting point I would check out Avatar, Pacific Rim and Hugo for medium to strong levels of depth. I would also check out Tron Legacy and Prometheus for example of films that utilize a lower level of depth supremely well.

[sookymonster]

3D is great in every way and is a thousand times better than watching Flat 2d movies, IMO everything should be in 3d.

[Jbug]

When I want to watch a movie at home my first thoughts are my 3D movies. When done right it's a special treat. To be able to see those IMAX films I've seen on trips to IMAX theaters years ago is right up there with owning pinball machines. People who come over like it as well. I've not had one person say they didn't like it. My wife hosted a baby shower a few years ago and I stole the show by letting them watch a 3D movie. Those ladies had a ball.

[Movie Man Don]

I am a huge fan of 3D.....DONE RIGHT.
I've been watching 3D since the days of the dual projector silver screen days. I'm buying every classic 3D Blu Ray I can get my hand on. Keep 'em coming!!!

[Trigen]

Can someone check my understanding as I have never ventured into the 3D video territory.

Currently the 3D BD are sequentially packed with alternating L and R eye 1920x1080p images.

Current active TV's are able to represent this sequential image using shutter glasses.

Current passive TV's use either over-under or side-by-side.
For OU, if fed sequential 1080p -> 2 x 1920x540p
if fed OU -> 2 x 1920x540p
if fed SBS -> 2 x 960x540p

For SBS, For OU, if fed sequential 1080p -> 2 x 960x1080p
if fed OU -> ??
if fed SBS -> 2 x 960x1080p

[UFAlien]

Blu-ray 3D titles are not field sequential; they're "frame-packed." Basically each frame includes a "main" frame and a second frame representing the other eye's view, specially formatted so that only the differences between that view and the other needs to be encoded. So an active 3D set's method of flashing back and forth isn't any more faithful to the encoding process than a passive TV.

On a passive, 1080p 3D TV, a Blu-ray 3D title will always display at 1920x540 per eye. Passive 4K 3D TVs can display the full 1920x1080 per eye. Active 3D TVs will always display the full 1920x1080 per eye.

The only way you'll ever end up with 960x540 on a passive TV is if the source itself is actually encoded in side-by-side format, which is not part of the Blu-ray 3D standard. Some "3D" Blu-rays are encoded this way, but as far as I know it's only a handful of budget niche titles like nature documentaries and such. The primary sources of side-by-side 3D would be on demand 3D programs from cable or satellite services.

I'm not aware of any 3D TVs separated into vertical pixel rows instead of horizontal ones.

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by UFAlien

Blu-ray 3D titles are not field sequential; they're "frame-packed." Basically each frame includes a "main" frame and a second frame representing the other eye's view, specially formatted so that only the differences between that view and the other needs to be encoded. So an active 3D set's method of flashing back and forth isn't any more faithful to the encoding process than a passive TV.

On a passive, 1080p 3D TV, a Blu-ray 3D title will always display at 1920x540 per eye. Passive 4K 3D TVs can display the full 1920x1080 per eye. Active 3D TVs will always display the full 1920x1080 per eye.

The only way you'll ever end up with 960x540 on a passive TV is if the source itself is actually encoded in side-by-side format, which is not part of the Blu-ray 3D standard. Some "3D" Blu-rays are encoded this way, but as far as I know it's only a handful of budget niche titles like nature documentaries and such. The primary sources of side-by-side 3D would be on demand 3D programs from cable or satellite services.

I'm not aware of any 3D TVs separated into vertical pixel rows instead of horizontal ones.

Thanks UFAlien for the technical breakdown. Still don't fully understand how active 3D TVs can alternate the full 1920x1080 on-screen while 3D-headsets show the two L&R images simultaneously as 2D direct-view images without flicker or any stuttering for the format time-lapse differences. The same should apply for glasses-free TVs when they become available.

Also, I've read on some sites that the electronics in most current Passive 4K 3D TVs that won't let them display full 1920x1080 per eye. Is this true where only a few models can?

[UFAlien]

Originally Posted by Paul H

Thanks UFAlien for the technical breakdown. Still don't fully understand how active 3D TVs can alternate the full 1920x1080 on-screen while 3D-headsets show the two L&R images simultaneously as 2D direct-view images without flicker or any stuttering for the format time-lapse differences. The same should apply for glasses-free TVs when they become available.

Also, I've read on some sites that the electronics in most current Passive 4K 3D TVs that won't let them display full 1920x1080 per eye. Is this true where only a few models can?

The flashing is just so fast that your brain can't perceive it. If you look at an active screen without the glasses on, you see what looks like a double image - no flashing at all.

As to your 4K question, I THINK I've heard that as well - though to be honest I haven't paid much attention to 4K, so I don't know for sure.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Paul H

Also, I've read on some sites that the electronics in most current Passive 4K 3D TVs that won't let them display full 1920x1080 per eye. Is this true where only a few models can?

I spent a lot of time looking at 4K sets, and every one of them said they could show 3-D only in 1080p mode. They were quite explicit about it.


This doesn't mean that it won't work, just that no one is saying that it will. I think it was still cloudy about what 3-D specs were going to be in that time frame (late 2014). There is no 3-D spec for 4K at this time, and no one wanted legal snags, I think.

[UFAlien]

Blu-Dog; the question wasn't about whether it would upscale 3D content to 4K or show full 4K per eye, just if each eye would get the full 1080 lines from the source. At least some 4K sets do that.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by UFAlien

Blu-Dog; the question wasn't about whether it would upscale 3D content to 4K or show full 4K per eye, just if each eye would get the full 1080 lines from the source. At least some 4K sets do that.

I think they all do. Sony and LG are passive, Samsung is active (for the most part); all of those display in full 1080p to each eye.

[Trigen]

Originally Posted by UFAlien

Blu-ray 3D titles are not field sequential; they're "frame-packed." Basically each frame includes a "main" frame and a second frame representing the other eye's view, specially formatted so that only the differences between that view and the other needs to be encoded. So an active 3D set's method of flashing back and forth isn't any more faithful to the encoding process than a passive TV.

On a passive, 1080p 3D TV, a Blu-ray 3D title will always display at 1920x540 per eye. Passive 4K 3D TVs can display the full 1920x1080 per eye. Active 3D TVs will always display the full 1920x1080 per eye.

The only way you'll ever end up with 960x540 on a passive TV is if the source itself is actually encoded in side-by-side format, which is not part of the Blu-ray 3D standard. Some "3D" Blu-rays are encoded this way, but as far as I know it's only a handful of budget niche titles like nature documentaries and such. The primary sources of side-by-side 3D would be on demand 3D programs from cable or satellite services.

I'm not aware of any 3D TVs separated into vertical pixel rows instead of horizontal ones.

Thank you. That explains it.

[callmeoz]

I just bought a new LG 3D TV and want to know the best dimensions? How how far away and how high it should be? My living room is 1,464 sqft.

Thanks

[callmeoz]

I just bought a new LG 3D TV and want to know the best dimensions? How how far away and how high it should be? My living room is 1,464 sqft.

Thanks

[Ray O. Blu]

Originally Posted by callmeoz

I just bought a new LG 3D TV and want to know the best dimensions? How how far away and how high it should be? My living room is 1,464 sqft.

Thanks

Welcome to the forum!

What size is the TV?

The height you mount/place it at is entirely subjective.
I find that the 3D effect is at its best when the TV is at eye-level.

[callmeoz]

i have the tv about 9ft back and place it higher on the wall. the picture is blurred around the edges

[Ray O. Blu]

Originally Posted by callmeoz

i have the tv about 9ft back and place it higher on the wall. the picture is blurred around the edges

9 feet back is a good distance to watch a 52-60" TV.

tumblr_mgmxqrrwou1qij315o1_1280.jpg

[Zivouhr]

Strong 3D, as others have suggested, increases the immersion in the movie and also the entertainment value.
With stereo 3D, the characters are brought to life with 3D dimension, as we see in real life with a pair of normal functioning eyes. It's an ultimate way to give your favorite movie more impact.
A fan of 3D since I was a little kid and glad to see it's still reappearing throughout time in different formats and home media.

Back when it first came out, I bought the Sega 3D Glasses from the Sega Master System from the 80's. The console itself didn't fare well against Nintendo's NES, and was soon replaced by the very successful Sega Genesis in 1989, so there weren't many 3D games like there are today.

Nintendo has just released the updated Nintendo 3DS XL handheld console into the market, with face tracking 3D technology. Though I don't play much Nintendo, it's nice to see they're still supporting their 3D system for a few years now.

[partridge]

If you stand up does the picture improve? You may need to tilt the set down slightly so you are looking "straight and centre" at it