BD 3-D Spec. We know it's here. But what is it?

[whbinder]

There are a plethora of articles here and elsewhere that say the Blu-ray 3-D spec has arrived. The articles always list some of the features. But the actual spec doesn't seem to be available to the public yet.

Now that CES has arrived, each manufacturer is also putting out lots of hype, but no specifics on tech. And there's a lot of misinformation on all sides.

So... what is it? And please - not to be rude - but I'm looking for specifics and facts, not things that have been kind of generally agreed upon on these forums.

- 120/240 Hz. This "seems" to be the way most of the annoucnements are inferring this will work. Implying the glasses will studder to pick up the sub frames. Sony for example mentions that Motionflow (their version of 120Hz) is integral to the system. If it's not true, then where are the two separate 1080p signals coming from.

- HDMI 1.4. Is it required or not? There are claims that the PS3 can support 3-D and that some Mitsubishi and Panasonic players can do 3-D without it.

- Along those lines, are there 2 version of 3-D? There's lots of discussion of this, but I've yet to see any specifics. By two versions, I mean a version which can go over existing systems with an adapter and one that can only work on 3-D sets.

- Is it agnostic or not. Panasonic claims plasma is the only way to go despite Sony etc announcing LCD sets

==
OK, and here's the kicker. I'm using Sony for this example, but they're not alone. You can go to a Sony Store to see 3-D in action. If you go down there, they are using a PS3 and a current Bravia set with polarized glasses. (Forgot the model number, but it's not a LX900, HX900 or HX800). I assume they have an advance copy of the promised firmware update for PS3.

Now, two of the announced TVs for 2010 from Sony are labeled 3-D ready. It appears this existing XBR is "3-D ready". So what's the difference?

Further, if you go to the Sony site, they talk about the dawn of 3-D coming with their 2010 models and then say you can see it in action today with existing models. What?

Now of course the guys at the store, don't really know much except what your average store clerk knows. But this is existing technology. What's so special about the upcoming 3-D TVs that is different than the existing sets.

In other words, what makes the LX900 different than the existing XBR9? (Sorry for the Sony specificity here). Can someone please post an actual link to what "exactly" the new 3-D TVs are, and what the 3-D spec is, and

If I buy Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, run it from my PS3 with firmware upgrade to a current XBR, what specifically will be different than if I use a LX900 and a 3-D Blu-ray player.

Not intending to be a dick. There is just a lot of hype over very expensive equipment with absolutely no explanation of what it is.

In contrast, when Blu-ray came out. There was all the "hype" that said it was six times better than DVD and looked great and blah, blah, blah. But if you were curious. You could find out that specifically that meant it could do 1080p signals and uncompressed audio and supported java, etc. So far, I haven't seen one single spec.

Whew. OK, sorry for the rant. Any links to specifics on this?

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by whbinder

Not intending to be a dick. There is just a lot of hype over very expensive equipment with absolutely no explanation of what it is.

This whole 3-D stampede is so chaotic and frantic, you won't get clear information for a long, long time. Basically, you need a new, as yet unreleased television, a new Blu player, new HDMI cables, and if you're going to send signals through it, a new receiver. All must meet the HDMI 1.4 standard.

Further, there are no holy oaths that the new Blu standard is how 3-D films will be released. With just about everybody balking at buying expensive 3-D glasses for the best mode for 3-D playback, many releases will probably be in old-school 3-D with the 1950's polarized cardboard crap they've been releasing for years.

One movie - Avatar - is the trigger for this frenzy. Most folks have pretty expensive flat screen TV's, purchased in the last two or three years, capable of 1080P playback. The idea that the screen, the player, the receiver, and the cables must all be repurchased for this - with pretty much zero content to play back, probably for many many years - relegates this to "gee whiz but no thanks" status.

It's going to be a long wait, this isn't something you'll be getting in 2010, I'm pretty sure.

[whbinder]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

=It's going to be a long wait, this isn't something you'll be getting in 2010, I'm pretty sure.

Well, when your house is robbed and you get a check from insurance to replace your entire system at once, the question becomes a bit more immediate. Anyway, got some interesting info from Sony.

DISCLAIMER: I have nothing to back this up other than several conversations with Sony on the phone and at 3-D demos. This is what Sony claims, nothing more.

OK, so I looked up the HDMI 1.3 spec, just to be sure. HDMI 1.3 can carry 1080p at 120Hz. According to Sony, the PS3 specifically will send info at 120Hz over HDMI alternating between views. This means 1080p (not i) picture at 60Hz.

So, the claims that the PS3 will only send 3-D in 1080i is discredited by Sony. Also, I was told (but take this with salt) that the LX series (as well as HX and NX series) will contain only 1.3 ports. This sounds ridiculous, but I'm passing it along.

The question then becomes, if HDMI 1.3 can send 1080p at 120Hz and TVs can seperate these two 60Hz 1080p signals, why couldn't more televisions decode this info?

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by whbinder

Well, when your house is robbed and you get a check from insurance to replace your entire system at once, the question becomes a bit more immediate.

Burglars would never find my stuff; I got it completely wrapped in barbed wire.

Originally Posted by whbinder

Anyway, got some interesting info from Sony.

Cool.

Originally Posted by whbinder

DISCLAIMER: I have nothing to back this up other than several conversations with Sony on the phone and at 3-D demos. This is what Sony claims, nothing more.

OK, so I looked up the HDMI 1.3 spec, just to be sure. HDMI 1.3 can carry 1080p at 120Hz. According to Sony, the PS3 specifically will send info at 120Hz over HDMI alternating between views. This means 1080p (not i) picture at 60Hz.

Wonder if my Sony S-550 can do that.

Originally Posted by whbinder

So, the claims that the PS3 will only send 3-D in 1080i is discredited by Sony. Also, I was told (but take this with salt) that the LX series (as well as HX and NX series) will contain only 1.3 ports. This sounds ridiculous, but I'm passing it along.

The question then becomes, if HDMI 1.3 can send 1080p at 120Hz and TVs can seperate these two 60Hz 1080p signals, why couldn't more televisions decode this info?

Very good question. I have an HDMI 1.1 receiver (Pioneer Elite 84TXsi) connecting all my gear, and have no problem with what's supposed to be an HDMI 1.2 standard...there's a lot of voodoo going on with this stuff.

I'm not sure what kind of ports are on my Kuro 151, have to look; and what's on my 52" XBR4. I think both are 1.2.

But something has to give, here. If this standard was designed to make current gear obsolete (or at least, obsolescent, driving imaging down to 1080i) the manufacturers, and studios, will lose the trust of the public for years. The format wars made people skittish enough about Blu adoption, long after HD-DVD pooped out.

Stunts with signal transmission standards willl have everyone on the sidelines for a very long time.

[ronjones]

I've heard (but cannot confirm) that the new BD 3D spec. will allow players to output the two video streams at either 1080p/24 (48 Hz total) or at 1080p/60 (120 Hz total). I would suggest for maximum display flexibility the dual 1080p/24 streams would be the best choice for basicially the same reasons that it is generally the best choice for the output from 2D players. Ideally the display would then process the dual 1080p/24 streams to display each at a integer multiple of 24Hz (eg. 72Hz, 96Hz, 120Hz). Also the display could offer the option to provide frame interoplation (smooth motion, frame insertion, or whatever a given manufacture wants to call it). While many feel that frame insertion schemes destroy the "film look" of 2D movies, I for one believe it could be a real benefit for 3D if implemented correctly. If you look at the HDMI 1.3a spec. (link below) in section 6.3 you will find that 1080p/120 is not listed as a supported format while 1080i/120 is listed. 1080p, at full 1920 horz. resolution, is only listed at refresh rates of up to 60Hz.

FYI -

HERE is a summary on what's new with HDMI 1.4.

HERE is a good paper on HDMI 1.4

The actual HDMI 1.4 spec. is only available for download to manufacturers that have an account with the HDMI organization.

HERE is the HDMI 1.3a spec. (pdf file)

[gonk]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

I have an HDMI 1.1 receiver (Pioneer Elite 84TXsi) connecting all my gear, and have no problem with what's supposed to be an HDMI 1.2 standard...there's a lot of voodoo going on with this stuff.

You don't need v1.2 or v1.3 for Blu-ray. You only need v1.3 if you want to bitstream audio to your receiver, but v1.1 will handle multichannel PCM and 1080p. A player that will decode internally and a v1.1 receiver will get you in the game. That's why Anthem rolled out their AVM40, AVM50, and Statement D2 processors years ago and were successful with them.

3D looks like it may be a different situation, and articles like this one are the first indication that v1.4 through the entire video signal path may be necessary for "optimal" 3D implementations. Frankly, though, we need a lot more information still. There's a ton of uncertainty at this point.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by gonk

You don't need v1.2 or v1.3 for Blu-ray. You only need v1.3 if you want to bitstream audio to your receiver, but v1.1 will handle multichannel PCM and 1080p. A player that will decode internally and a v1.1 receiver will get you in the game. That's why Anthem rolled out their AVM40, AVM50, and Statement D2 processors years ago and were successful with them.

I've been running Blu-Ray with HDMI 1.1 for about three years, without major issues. My first player was the Sony S-300, which was lossy until firmware upgrades allow Tru-HD to be internally decoded, and there were no problems there. My home theater PC has always been lossy; I haven't purchased an HDMI capable video/audio card yet, since they've just reached the market. (I have two Elite receivers of the same model).

Being suspicious of standards, I got the Sony S-550 to do internal decoding of both the Dolby and DTS HD audio standards, and also made sure it had external audio analog outputs - which I'm not using yet. So having a 1.1 receiver hasn't raised any issues, up to this point, where video is now an issue.

Originally Posted by gonk

3D looks like it may be a different situation, and articles like this one are the first indication that v1.4 through the entire video signal path may be necessary for "optimal" 3D implementations. Frankly, though, we need a lot more information still. There's a ton of uncertainty at this point.

This uncertainty stems from the rush job by the industry to implement a solution I think is half-baked. In an instant, they've made obsolete every television, every receiver, and every player that's been sold to date. I'd add that every cable or satellite box that is not HDMI 1.4 is also now dead weight.

Thinking of all the gear that has to be replaced to implement this "solution", along with expensive glasses, strikes me as being a complete misfire. Added to that, the uncertainty that you mention continues right into this CES rollout phase that just started - manufacturers are blithely spouting a new "3D Ready" line, totally different from the "3D Ready" equipment touted as recently as last summer, fall, and through the Christmas sales season.

I wonder how people who just purchased Sony's 400 disc player, or one of the new Oppo units, or someone considering purchasing Krell's new $15,000 player are feeling about this debacle.

Something needs to give. It's sure not going to be my wallet.

[Bluyoda]

Blu-Dog: I have just recently purchased the Oppo BDP-83SE, and before I did I went to see A Christmas Carol and Avatar in 3-D to make sure that I wouldn't regret it later.
I am fine with it, and I certainly don't want this feature at home.

Still, it's sad that the studios are kind of shooting in their own legs now, because finally Blu-ray is picking up mass adoption, finally players have 2.0 profile, and all the lossless audio codecs as standard features, and now they introduce a new HDMI 1.4 spec which makes every single TV and player out there obsolete, if you want full HD 3-D.

That's just stupid!

I just hope people will ignore this nonsense, and keep buying regular players, BDs and HDTVs, and not wait several years until this has matured into sth. remotely worthwhile. This could be a disaster for Blu-ray!!!
I hope it will work out alright though.

[whbinder]

Interesting, so it seems that all the evidence posted here implies that a HDMI 1.3 cable can in fact carry a full 3-D signal.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by whbinder

Interesting, so it seems that all the evidence posted here implies that a HDMI 1.3 cable can in fact carry a full 3-D signal.

I'm hard-pressed to accept that a 1.2 cable couldn't carry the signal. The real issue is switching, in the player, monitor, and whatever is doing the switching (receiver, manual switch, whatever).

If they make the standard for 1.4 a requirement, through some kind of wiring test, school is out - 1.4 will be the only choice.