Is 3D dead? (on 3D Blu-ray and 3D TVs)

[Lee A Stewart]

NTSC color encoding is used with the System M television signal, which consists of ​30⁄1.001 (approximately 29.97) interlaced frames of video per second. Each frame is composed of two fields, each consisting of 262.5 scan lines, for a total of 525 scan lines. 483 scan lines make up the visible raster. The remainder (the vertical blanking interval) allow for vertical synchronization and retrace. This blanking interval was originally designed to simply blank the electron beam of the receiver's CRT to allow for the simple analog circuits and slow vertical retrace of early TV receivers. However, some of these lines may now contain other data such as closed captioning and vertical interval timecode (VITC). In the complete raster (disregarding half lines due to interlacing) the even-numbered scan lines (every other line that would be even if counted in the video signal, e.g. {2, 4, 6, ..., 524}) are drawn in the first field, and the odd-numbered (every other line that would be odd if counted in the video signal, e.g. {1, 3, 5, ..., 525}) are drawn in the second field, to yield a flicker-free image at the field refresh frequency of ​60⁄1.001 Hz (approximately 59.94 Hz). For comparison, 576i systems such as PAL-B/G and SECAM use 625 lines (576 visible), and so have a higher vertical resolution, but a lower temporal resolution of 25 frames or 50 fields per second.

The reason why we use 59.94 Hz is to match the frequency of our alternating current electric system. If we didn't we would see rolling bars on the TV.

[moreorless]

Originally Posted by 8traxrule

3D was sabotaged in plenty of ways, mainly by making people go out of their way to obtain 3D content. There should never have even been any separate 2D-only editions of movies, the smaller companies mostly just released one edition that included 3D whether the buyer needed it or not.

I think that's REALLY pushing it, would be akin to claiming that UHD is being sabotaged because studios are releasing BR only editions still rather than forcing everyone to buy UHD copies with a BR in them too.

I mean UHD disks are arguably being sabotaged MUCH more than 3D ever was because were seeing a lot of content end up as streaming exclusives.

[tripletopper]

no one said that about adding DTS to discs when some people can't play DTS on their discs like me who has a Turtle Beach Dolby Digital to Dolby Headphone converter.

The thing is you can easily make a 3D disc 2D compatible. Just have the 3D disc and have the director pick an eye to poke out when you get rid of one of the two eyes.

I had to sit through unconverted DTS with frankly sounds like s**t if your surround sound system can only decode Dolby which allow Gamers did have surround sound systems that only decoded only thanks to the popularity of those headphone devices.

Another problem with two versions is if you wrongly predict the sale sorry show you'll have a shortage of one in the surplus of another. But if all discs were 3D and having a 2d disc was as easy as playing only one of the two eyes of the disc, then you don't have to predict how many people want 2D how many people on 3D 3D will be in every copy and only in the copies of those who want it.

Why do the Spanish speaking and French speaking people get Dolby digital and the English speaking about 70% of the time gets stuck with DTS?

Here's an interesting factoid that I'm going to prove on a stream on Twitch. I noticed legend of Zelda breath of the wild has great three-dimensional sound. It is natively thought of an lpcm 7.1, but for some such reason Nintendo stereo mix is actually a good headphone mix. Supposedly all two track audio for Nintendo is a headphone mix and not just through the headphone port.

Why isn't the two track mix by default a two track headphone surround mix. What good is a two-track stereo mix? If Nintendo players think the two track mix sounds good in communal sound yet is optimized for headphones to sound, then why can't every two track mix be a two track headphone mix?

At least with 3D solution is simple make a 3D disc, if the Blu-ray player senses that not everything is 3D then poke out one of the two eyes and show just one of the two eyes and voila instant 2D disc on the same disk as a 3D disc.

everyone was trying to premiumize 3D instead of making it a basic standard feature that was unlockable if you got the right stuff or hidden if it wasn't ... kind of like Dolby Surround Sound or DTS.

And the funny thing is there's only one format of 3D video is not like 3D surround sound which has three different formats lpcm, DTS, and Dolby

[revgen]

Originally Posted by moreorless

I think that's REALLY pushing it, would be akin to claiming that UHD is being sabotaged because studios are releasing BR only editions still rather than forcing everyone to buy UHD copies with a BR in them too.

I mean UHD disks are arguably being sabotaged MUCH more than 3D ever was because were seeing a lot of content end up as streaming exclusives.

While I wouldn't call it sabotage, there is definitely a preference for streaming over physical distribution.

Manufacturing discs and shipping them requires more overhead. It also eliminates a problem that the studios have hated forever. Second hand sales.

[tripletopper]

But in order for that to be everywhere bandwidth has to be everywhere and unlimited. Currently my house gets 1.5 megabits in 400 kilobits out and that's the best we could do with unlimited data. We could go cellular but we get no tethering to our big screen TV or video games.

[moreorless]

Originally Posted by revgen

While I wouldn't call it sabotage, there is definitely a preference for streaming over physical distribution.

Manufacturing discs and shipping them requires more overhead. It also eliminates a problem that the studios have hated forever. Second hand sales.

I suspect the key issue is exclusive content, streaming services want a product that is not available anywhere else and a UHD exclusive can provide that.

[pjb3]

Originally Posted by tripletopper

The thing is you can easily make a 3D disc 2D compatible. Just have the 3D disc and have the director pick an eye to poke out when you get rid of one of the two eyes.

Another problem with two versions is if you wrongly predict the sale sorry show you'll have a shortage of one in the surplus of another. But if all discs were 3D and having a 2d disc was as easy as playing only one of the two eyes of the disc, then you don't have to predict how many people want 2D how many people on 3D 3D will be in every copy and only in the copies of those who want it.

It's not that simple. Lets say you can fit a 2D movie on a single layer BD but you need a double layer disk for the 3D. By now most players can handle dual layer disks but some older players can't. When you sell a 2D disk people expect it to play on all players but instead you would have a disclaimer that the 2D disk only plays on players capable of reading dual layer disks.
You now have a bigger mess because you have to market 2 different 2D versions and people that don't care about 3D have to figure out which disk to buy.

[tripletopper]

That's why anything that certified to play 3D movies will have the 3D Blu-Ray logo. There may be multi-layer Blu-ray players that could happen to read 3D movies.

Also why do you need a separate 2D and 3D layer. I guess you are able to read two layers at once you can have the left eye on one layer the right eye on the other a non-compatible player would default the left eye as the default eye and a compatible player would let you choose either eye or play both in stereoscope.


But remember just because the disc jacket doesn't have a giant 3D painted on it does not necessarily mean it's not a 3D disc. If you put the letters MVC on there that might be the hidden code for compatible with 3D if you choose it or 2D if you don't. And if certain people really hate 3D then that would be the perfect speakeasy look for the symbol for MVC. I guess the only other possible use of MVC is snuggle movies from the male and female perspective. So if it does if the title doesn't contain three x's in a row and has the MVC logo, chances are, it's a 3D movie.

Is an MVC logo the exact speakeasy symbol I am looking for in movies? Now I don't have to go to Europe but by the internet in order to get a 3D copy? If so then why wasn't their industry awareness of this unless my theory is correct that people just hate something being in 3D, even if they choose that to partake.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by tripletopper

That's why anything that certified to play 3D movies will have the 3D Blu-Ray logo. There may be multi-layer Blu-ray players that could happen to read 3D movies.

Nope. If the BD player does not specifically support 3D BD it will not play a 3D BD. It has to have the ability to decode the MVC format properly which is done by a chipset. Put a 3D BD in a regular BD player - nothing will happen. You won't get any images. All you get is a black screen. Sony's newest economy BD player does not support 3D BD.

Also why do you need a separate 2D and 3D layer. I guess you are able to read two layers at once you can have the left eye on one layer the right eye on the other a non-compatible player would default the left eye as the default eye and a compatible player would let you choose either eye or play both in stereoscope.

But remember just because the disc jacket doesn't have a giant 3D painted on it does not necessarily mean it's not a 3D disc. If you put the letters MVC on there that might be the hidden code for compatible with 3D if you choose it or 2D if you don't. And if certain people really hate 3D then that would be the perfect speakeasy look for the symbol for MVC. I guess the only other possible use of MVC is snuggle movies from the male and female perspective. So if it does if the title doesn't contain three x's in a row and has the MVC logo, chances are, it's a 3D movie.

Look at the packaging. It CLEARLY states that it's a 3D Blu-ray.

Is an MVC logo the exact speakeasy symbol I am looking for in movies? Now I don't have to go to Europe but by the internet in order to get a 3D copy? If so then why wasn't their industry awareness of this unless my theory is correct that people just hate something being in 3D, even if they choose that to partake.

There is NO MVC Logo. You theory is nothing but bullshit.

[pjb3]

Originally Posted by tripletopper

Also why do you need a separate 2D and 3D layer. I guess you are able to read two layers at once you can have the left eye on one layer the right eye on the other a non-compatible player would default the left eye as the default eye and a compatible player would let you choose either eye or play both in stereoscope.

There is not a separate 2D and 3D layer. Look at Titanic and some of the Lord Of Ring movies, they are on 2 disks and you swap disks in the middle. Early DB players may not support dual layer disks so if the movie exceeded the capacity of a single layer disk they had to split it. Later they could put the entire movie on a dual layer disk but then you would have to have two separate packages and the average person would not know which to buy.

If the size if the movie plus the MVC exceeds the size of a single layer then a dual layer disk must be used. Once again, all DB players will not be able to play it which is a problem if it is marketed as a standard BD.

[8traxrule]

I can't believe some of the things I'm reading here. There are NO DVD or BD players that cannot play dual-layer discs. Dual-layer was part of the standards from the beginning. Some dual-layer discs have had more problems on some machines for a variety of reasons, but aside from burned discs there are no dual-layer discs that will not play on a machine due to their being dual-layer.

If the BD player does not specifically support 3D BD it will not play a 3D BD. It has to have the ability to decode the MVC format properly which is done by a chipset. Put a 3D BD in a regular BD player - nothing will happen. You won't get any images. All you get is a black screen.

Inaccurate- every 3D-only disc will show a message saying that you need a 3D-compatiable player and display to view the disc. Besides that, you CAN make a 3D disc 2D-compatible. There are many single-disc 3D releases (such as any Kino title) which will simply play back in 2D on equipment that doesn't support 3D. The first 3D disc put out for regular sale was Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs, and I bought it before I had any 3D equipment. The main menu gave the options to play in 3D or 2D, but when selecting 3D it showed a message saying my equipment was not compatible and to play in 2D instead. These discs also do not have a separate 2D version on the disc, they just show the left eye of the 3D movie.

I think that's REALLY pushing it, would be akin to claiming that UHD is being sabotaged because studios are releasing BR only editions still rather than forcing everyone to buy UHD copies with a BR in them too.

Nope, because regular BR players cannot read UHD discs at all. They CAN however play 3D discs in 2D if the disc is authored for it (or show the onscreen message if it isn't.)

[Peachfuzz]

I loved 3D Blu-Ray, but it's gone. On a good display, it looked great. Sadly, a lot of displays had terrible ghosting and gave you headaches, which is what I think killed it. Having two display formats - passive and active - didn't help. I'm fortunate enough to own a Samsung 65" UHD TV that does active 3D (the last they produced). It's near perfect at it. I also have a projector that does active 3D flawlessly. Now and then, I'll still pick up a 3D film at a budget price. I suppose TV manufacturers could do full 1080p passive on 4K sets if they wanted. I'd like that, but maybe cost is an issue. 3D will probably come back one day in a 'glasses free' form.

I appreciate we got to have classics like Creature from the Black Lagoon and House of Wax while it lasted.

[spider-neil]

If my 3D TV gives out I will look into getting a 3D projector. It odd that TV makers don't make 3D TVs for the niche market.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Peachfuzz

I loved 3D Blu-Ray, but it's gone. On a good display, it looked great. Sadly, a lot of displays had terrible ghosting and gave you headaches, which is what I think killed it. Having two display formats - passive and active - didn't help. I'm fortunate enough to own a Samsung 65" UHD TV that does active 3D (the last they produced). It's near perfect at it. I also have a projector that does active 3D flawlessly. Now and then, I'll still pick up a 3D film at a budget price. I suppose TV manufacturers could do full 1080p passive on 4K sets if they wanted. I'd like that, but maybe cost is an issue. 3D will probably come back one day in a 'glasses free' form.

I appreciate we got to have classics like Creature from the Black Lagoon and House of Wax while it lasted.

It hasn’t gone at all. We are still getting 3DFA releases next year and one or two boutique labels are starting to release 3D Blu-ray. (Indicator and Vinegar Syndrome). As long as the flat version is included, I don’t see why that can’t continue as long as they sell (which they will)

[8traxrule]

You just KNOW that by now they could have included passive 3D capability on ALL flat panels and made it standard rather than a feature you had to seek out, and everyone would have been OK with that whether they used it or not. I've been checking the specs on projectors and most are still including 3D, though those are a pain to set up they will be what I buy next when the time comes.

With the movie industry in the shape it's in now who can say how much new 3D material will be produced in the future, but I want to be able to enjoy all the 3D material that exists regardless.

[ckenisell]

Originally Posted by 8traxrule

You just KNOW that by now they could have included passive 3D capability on ALL flat panels and made it standard rather than a feature you had to seek out, and everyone would have been OK with that whether they used it or not. I've been checking the specs on projectors and most are still including 3D, though those are a pain to set up they will be what I buy next when the time comes.

With the movie industry in the shape it's in now who can say how much new 3D material will be produced in the future, but I want to be able to enjoy all the 3D material that exists regardless.

I'd like to find a good projector that supports 4K, HDR10+, Dolby Vision & 3D. Is that too much to ask?

[BLMN]

Originally Posted by 8traxrule

You just KNOW that by now they could have included passive 3D capability on ALL flat panels and made it standard rather than a feature you had to seek out.

But what if i don't want passive ? i want the freedom of choice

Originally Posted by ckenisell

I'd like to find a good projector that supports 4K, HDR10+, Dolby Vision & 3D. Is that too much to ask?

yes, unless dolby comes out with a "vanilla" version of dolby vision just for home projectors. Dolby Vision requirements for contrast ratio and peak luminance is too high and home projectors can't achieve that.

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by BLMN

But what if i don't want passive ? i want the freedom of choice

There is no consumer choice anymore. It's active 3D now. An added expense; and I hate the fact accessory glasses need maintenance, and can wear out.
Batteries need replacement and/or scheduled recharging, and polarized lense synchronization can become irregular/faulty and/or fail.

Passive 3D glasses came a dime-a-dozen and IMO, provided 3D perfection.

[ckenisell]

Originally Posted by BLMN

yes, unless dolby comes out with a "vanilla" version of dolby vision just for home projectors. Dolby Vision requirements for contrast ratio and peak luminance is too high and home projectors can't achieve that.

The "vanilla" version of Dolby Vision is HDR10. 😂

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by ckenisell

I'd like to find a good projector that supports 4K, HDR10+, Dolby Vision & 3D. Is that too much to ask?

Yes

No projector is certified as HDR capable. How do you increase the light level that is called for in the HDR metadata?

Even professional cinema projectors aren't certified Dolby Vision. The way Dolby Cinema shows Dolby Vision encoded movies is to have two top of the line Christie Laser Projectors. One shows the SDR images and the other uses the metadata from the DV encode to project the HDR highlights.

That would be the only way to have HDR at home: use two projectors. The problem is no consumer priced "box" exists that would separate the HDR metadata from the consumer DV video stream.