Blu-ray 3-D players on the way

[Oddiophile]

Originally Posted by Oddiophile

VIDEO: IFA 2009 - Panasonic Full HD 3D Tech

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bmOz...e=channel_page

Phil looks at Panasonic's full HD 3D Technology which was being promoted alongside a preview of AVATAR



VIDEO: IFA 2009: Sony 3D Tech

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJ-7z...e=channel_page

We take a look at Sony's approach to 3D TV.




VIDEO: IFA 2009: LG "Live Borderless" and 3D TV

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_L2IU...e=channel_page

George Mead explains the new "Live Bordless" slogan for LG and their approach for 3D TV.



VIDEO: 2009: JVC 3D Technology

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbm0V...e=channel_page

Steve Carter gives us a tour of the 3D technology stand at IFA, including unique 3D projection with two HD950 models.

Originally Posted by syncguy

Not sure whether 3D front panel technology could use polarization. That is possibly a reason for shutter glasses.

You didn't watch the four videos I posted from IFA did you?

JVC is using polarized glasses with LCD's & dual polarized DiLA projectors for front projection.

[syncguy]

Originally Posted by Oddiophile

You didn't watch the four videos I posted from IFA did you?
JVC is using polarized glasses with LCD's & dual polarized DiLA projectors for front projection.

Thanks, I will check this.

[philwell]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

3D now uses the old anaglyph method, there is one video stream but the single image has both a (traditionally) red and green image on it, in essence it is just like a normal BD but the image is messed up, like
you watch such an image with glasses with colour filters, what is white will be seen by both eyes, what is black by none, but what is red will only pass through the red filter and what is blue through the blue one.

With real 3D (or what ever it is called) the BD will have two images (the equivalent of what you see through the blue and what you see through the red filter) that are colour accurate, once you have the two images on the disk, the rest gets trickier because now it needs to get to the display and there could be different solutions at how the two images are brought to you.

displays will be an issue and most are definitely incapable of anything other then anaglyph (so to see real 3D you would need a new TV) but maybe different players will come to market, so if, for example, you want to keep your display which is not real 3D compatible the player will take both images , red shift one and blue shift the other and then compose a combined image to show an anaglyph image (i.e. like the old BDs). The good thing about this is that when you update your display and equipment then you could watch the same BD but now in real 3D instead of anaglyph.

Does this mean that a one eye person will not be able to see 3D?

[Jeff Kleist]

Does this mean that a one eye person will not be able to see 3D?

A one-eyed person doesn't really see 3-D to start with. You need 2 eyes for true depth perception. While the brain adjusts and learns to recognize characteristics of depth, it's not "real"

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by wallendo

From what I understand, the BDA will require that each 3-D BD will also need to have a 2-D version on the disc readable on current players. If this is the case, a lot of video compression would be required and few people would be happy with the results. Hopefull putting seperate 2-D and 3-D disks in the same box would meet that standard.

I agree, like they did with the Australian release of Journey to the Center of the Earth or My Bloody Valintine 3d (disc one contains the 2d version, disc two contains the 3d version).

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by philwell

Does this mean that a one eye person will not be able to see 3D?

yup, no 3D, not even in real life.

Depth is determined two ways, one is what we call 3D, which is difference in perspective between the two eyes, that person won't have that benefit in real life and it might be hard for him to grab something.

the second is comparable size, that someone will have even if he has one eye, that is why optical illusions like
work so well. your brain assumes that the two long lines are close to parrallel and the angle is caused by distance, since the bottom one is much further from the sides, it must be shorter, so when you look at it, the two horizontal lines look as if they are different size even though they are drawn the same size.

that aspect of depth a one eyed person will have.

PS you can easily test the first aspect, just cover an eye and try and grab something nearby.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

A one-eyed person doesn't really see 3-D to start with. You need 2 eyes for true depth perception. While the brain adjusts and learns to recognize characteristics of depth, it's not "real"

Retinal disparity isn't the only thing that gives us an understanding of depth. The mind's understanding of depth can be affected surprisingly effectively with just things like texture gradient and motion parallax.

More information here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_p...Monocular_cues

ps this is what Anthony P is talking about. It's another useful tool for understanding depth without using both eyes.

[[1080-p]]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

3D now uses the old anaglyph method, there is one video stream but the single image has both a (traditionally) red and green image on it, in essence it is just like a normal BD but the image is messed up, like
you watch such an image with glasses with colour filters, what is white will be seen by both eyes, what is black by none, but what is red will only pass through the red filter and what is blue through the blue one.

With real 3D (or what ever it is called) the BD will have two images (the equivalent of what you see through the blue and what you see through the red filter) that are colour accurate, once you have the two images on the disk, the rest gets trickier because now it needs to get to the display and there could be different solutions at how the two images are brought to you.

displays will be an issue and most are definitely incapable of anything other then anaglyph (so to see real 3D you would need a new TV) but maybe different players will come to market, so if, for example, you want to keep your display which is not real 3D compatible the player will take both images , red shift one and blue shift the other and then compose a combined image to show an anaglyph image (i.e. like the old BDs). The good thing about this is that when you update your display and equipment then you could watch the same BD but now in real 3D instead of anaglyph.

barf to the photo the tv should do all the work

rather have 3d holographic imagery

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Oddiophile

Would you be willing to buy a new HDTV to experience high-quality 3D movies in your living room? Or are HD movies "good enough" without 3D gimmicks?

They lost me with special glasses. I wear glasses watching TV, most times; do I need to get prescription 3D glasses?

This whole rodeo is ridiculous. The technology simply isn't there yet. If they get off their dead behinds and build true holographic projection sets, we'll be onto something. Otherwise, it's an expensive gimmick.

I bet there's a huge off-viewing-axis price to be paid, too...and never discussed.

[[1080-p]]

hope when newer blu-ray that the new consoles that people need 1.4 3d hdmi •3D Over HDMI – defines standards for 3D video formats that pave the way for more realistic 3D games and home theater experiences.

well technology is advancing and people should have newer cables if people want to view newer movies

[[1080-p]]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

They lost me with special glasses. I wear glasses watching TV, most times; do I need to get prescription 3D glasses?

This whole rodeo is ridiculous. The technology simply isn't there yet. If they get off their dead behinds and build true holographic projection sets, we'll be onto something. Otherwise, it's an expensive gimmick.

I bet there's a huge off-viewing-axis price to be paid, too...and never discussed.

thats why i keep insisting the tv and cables do all the 3d work and not
special glasses

[tron3]

Glasses aside, watching anything 3-D for long periods of time can give people headaches. I was watching the Coraline extras last night on 3D. In my own words, they intentionally didn't want the super depth as you see with a Viewmaster viewer. It is much more subtle and natural.

So if you think that 3D movies "suck" because the depth isn't there as it used to be, it is probably because they want to bring it to the masses without causing nausea. Marketers can sell anything but nausea.

I would expect new 3D movies to be less pronounced but much easier to watch for hours.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by tron3

Glasses aside, watching anything 3-D for long periods of time can give people headaches.

Every day, I see things in 3D for around 14 hours per day. I never get headaches from stereoscopic vision. I feel sorry for anyone who does!

[[1080-p]]

Originally Posted by tron3

Glasses aside, watching anything 3-D for long periods of time can give people headaches. I was watching the Coraline extras last night on 3D. In my own words, they intentionally didn't want the super depth as you see with a Viewmaster viewer. It is much more subtle and natural.

So if you think that 3D movies "suck" because the depth isn't there as it used to be, it is probably because they want to bring it to the masses without causing nausea. Marketers can sell anything but nausea.

I would expect new 3D movies to be less pronounced but much easier to watch for hours.

blu-ray 3d stinks because it uses anaglyph which gives you ghosting and red and blue around objects

[[1080-p]]

wonder what these sets look likehttp://www.digitimes.com/news/a20091102PR201.html

[john_1958]

you mean this http://images.google.ca/imgres?imgur...2B3d%26hl%3Den

as long as its glasses free i'm all for it
to bad i think this needs polarized glasses

http://blogs.zdnet.com/home-theater/?p=1571
http://www.vizworld.com/2009/11/dave...ampaign=layout

http://www.hdi3d.com/pdf/HDI-SF%20Chronicle.pdf be great if it didn't need glasses
why can't the tv screen have polarized lens
to me that would make more sense

[john_1958]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

Fantastic! I am looking towards Real 3D in glorious Blu-ray. Hopefully, sooner than later.

sort of like this http://www.reald.com/Content/in-the-home.aspx
but what if they get it wrong and still use anaglyph

[Kino-Chan fan]

Guess I am of those who likes new stuff like this, but yes; I feel uncertain with the idea to buy another bluray player with 3d over the normal one, making that one look obsolete.

[john_1958]

Originally Posted by Kino-Chan fan

Guess I am of those who likes new stuff like this, but yes; I feel uncertain with the idea to buy another bluray player with 3d over the normal one, making that one look obsolete.

thats the thing about technology there is always updating

[bandit29]

Wow.. 3D blu-ray players just what the world needs right now... Good luck selling them..