Blu-ray 3D Discussion Thread

[ryoohki]

It remind me of Blu-Ray 3-4 years ago... funny

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by ryoohki

It remind me of Blu-Ray 3-4 years ago

unfortunately you are right.

[Warbler]

Originally Posted by rkolinski

With this being said, 3D is the first new technological innovation which I do not intend to embrace for many years, if ever. I simply have no desire to see Lawrence of Arabia, Doctor Zhivago nor other classic films in the new format.

I'm confused, what do 2D movies like Doctor Zhivago and Lawrence of Arabia and other 2D classic films have to do with this? Am I not right in saying that 2D movies would not come out in the new format(BR3D) because they are not 3D movies?

[Uniquely]

Originally Posted by ryoohki

It remind me of Blu-Ray 3-4 years ago... funny

Similar only in that they both require the purchase of a new tv to enjoy. Completely different in that many were quite happy to replace their old CRT with a nice new flat tv. In fact, many people just wanted that new flat tv regardless of hd media, and the blu-ray player was more of an after thought or was purchased later. Not many people bought that flat tv SPECIFICALLY for blu-ray. In fact, I think the HD gaming era was a much bigger boost to HDTV sales than blu-ray or hd-dvd were. OTOH, most of these people who just got new flat tv's in the past few years will not be chomping at the bit to purchase another tv JUST to get 3D. 3D will be a niche item for quite some time. I think that even it's strongest proponents recognize that.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Didn't have to buy new televisions for those.

Yes, you didn't have to buy a new television to enjoy CD, you're absolutely correct.

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

This is definitely a rush job.

Really?

http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/article...081030/160508/

Oct 30, 2008

Panasonic Proposes Blu-ray Disc Standard for 3D Imagery

Panasonic Corp of Japan has disclosed the submission of a proposal to the Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA), for a Blu-ray Disc standard to store three-dimensional (3D) imagery formed of left-/right-eye two-channel full-High Definition (HD) images (1,920 x 1,080 pixels). It is also considering submitting a proposal for a High-Definition Multimedia Interface (HDMI) standard capable of transmitting 3D imagery. The BDA hopes to begin formal discussion on the standard proposal before the end of 2008, with commercial adoption probably in 2010.

There are two reasons why Panasonic moved to propose a standard ahead of other firms: to avoid the same sort of futile standards war that occurred with next-gen Digital Videodiscs (DVD), and to prevent patent conflict related to 3D imagery standards.

US film companies are beefing up their film production stances, preparing to handle the 3D images they hope will provide massive revenues; at the same time they are developing packaged 3D media for the home to create a new revenue stream. This trend has stirred up considerable activity in the background, with many companies scurrying to have their own proprietary 3D imagery standards adopted by the BDA. According to Masayuki Kozuka, general manager in charge of Storage Device Strategy, AVC Networks Company of Panasonic, “Standards wars, patent monopolies and the like would seriously interfere with the widespread adoption of any 3D image standard. We developed a standard based on existing technology, specifically designed for easy acceptance.”


Standard Technology
And, in fact, the technologies proposed by Panasonic for 3D imagery storage, transfer, etc, all utilize existing standard technology. Image encoding uses the two-channel encoding function implemented in Moving Picture Coding Experts Group Phase 4 Advanced Video Coding (MPEG-4 AVC) H.264. The second channel stores only the data different from channel one, holding the increase in data volume to about 1.5 times. The HDMI standard is used to transfer data from the player to the television, with left- and right-eye images alternated in single-field (single-frame) units. “All we have to do is define a flag to identify image data, equipment and other elements supporting 3D imagery. We really don’t need any other major changes,” explained Hiroshi Miyai, director, High Quality AV Development Center of Panasonic.

Panasonic is not planning to standardize the techniques for displaying 3D imagery.

[Halcro 1]

First most I say MOST not all in here are late adapters in the HD world .. I ve had HDTV for 6 years now , when Blu wasent even thought of ...and 3DTV is a couple of years out anyway ...Who complained when they bought a DLP HDTV Like I did 6 years ago ,,, No HDMI No DVI even should I complain about that????How does a late adapter to DVD feel that format will probabally be dead in 5 years ??? I remember when a DVD Player was 1000 ... and my 42 Samsung DLP that was 18 inches deep was 1800 6 years ago...or when CD came out in the 80s and was 1000 for a CD player .... No one said you needed 3DTV ,,, Its not for me at least not yet ... But who knows ??? People get all pissed at this but there are other things in the last few years that have made alot of peoples gear obsolete ....DVI??? HDMI 1.1 Blu profile 1.1 ...Now in 3 years we have HDMI 1.3 Blu profile 2.0 and who even thinks about DLP unless its a projector...

[Halcro 1]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Didn't have to buy new televisions for those.

No one said YOU had to buy a 3DTV either

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

If you can find something on HDMI 1.4 that was mentioned in 2009, I'm interested in seeing it.

HDMI 1.4 press release was May 2009 - http://www.hdmi.org/press/press_release.aspx?prid=101

I hooked up my VCR, DVD, and CD players to a Pioneer SC-1010, vintage 1975, with no problems. Finally got a receiver that decoded Dolby, and another that did DTS, somewhere in there. Didn't need them, but they were cheap.

You had to replace your receiver to get Dolby and then again to get dts? You must have been up in arms that they weren't fully backwards compatible.

[Uniquely]

Originally Posted by Halcro 1

First most I say MOST not all in here are late adapters in the HD world .. I ve had HDTV for 6 years now , when Blu wasent even thought of ...and 3DTV is a couple of years out anyway ...Who complained when they bought a DLP HDTV Like I did 6 years ago ,,, No HDMI No DVI even should I complain about that????How does a late adapter to DVD feel that format will probabally be dead in 5 years ??? I remember when a DVD Player was 1000 ... and my 42 Samsung DLP that was 18 inches deep was 1800

I don't remember what year I got my first HDTV (2002 maybe), but it was $3200 for a 42" Sony LCD RPTV. It had one DVI and two component inputs. The only things remotely HD I had to hook up to it were my PC and an original XBox. Switching from a completely different standard like DVI to HDMI is a bit different than these ever changes HDMI profiles.... but even still... one could to this very day purchase a DVI to HDMI adaptor and use an HDMI device to the TV's full capability.

The thing is that everyone knows that most electronics are in research and developement for years before they reach the consumer market. HDTV had been around for decades before it reached the consumer market. I think many people have the perception that developers could have used much more forsight in future proofing HDMI standards a bit more.... since surely they have been developing this iteration of 3D for years now. Whether or not this perception is accurate is irrelevant. The fact that the perception exists is a problem for 3D tech.

[Warbler]

I'm going to repost this, since my earlier post got largely ignored.

Originally Posted by rkolinski

With this being said, 3D is the first new technological innovation which I do not intend to embrace for many years, if ever. I simply have no desire to see Lawrence of Arabia, Doctor Zhivago nor other classic films in the new format.

I'm confused, what do 2D movies like Doctor Zhivago and Lawrence of Arabia and other 2D classic films have to do with this? Am I not right in saying that 2D movies would not come out in the new format(BR3D) because they are not 3D movies?

[Uniquely]

Originally Posted by Warbler

I'm going to repost this, since my earlier post got largely ignored.



I'm confused, what do 2D movies like Doctor Zhivago and Lawrence of Arabia and other 2D classic films have to do with this? Am I not right in saying that 2D movies would not come out in the new format(BR3D) because they are not 3D movies?

If it works like current 3D ready tv's, anything can be converted to 3D.... like video games and movies; but the results are of course much better for things that are created in 3D.

[Warbler]

but I would think converting a movie originally made in 2D to 3D, would be akin to colorizing a b&w movie.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by robinandtami

I think many people have the perception that developers could have used much more forsight in future proofing HDMI standards a bit more.... since surely they have been developing this iteration of 3D for years now.

But how does that make sense? to paraphrase what was said before where these people up in armes when HDMI 1.3.1 came out because 1.5 was not campatible with DTS HD and DTHD streaming? Let me ask you this simple question, how do you build an interface/solution which will be 100%compatible with a standard that does not exist. You can't. First you need the standard (i.e. what the data will look like for 3D or what DTS-MA /DTHD) then you can add it to the specs of transmitting it. Would you consider it normal to have the roof in place first for a home before the foundation?

I also don't get the issue. Let's say for the sake of argument HDMI is not an issue, do you have a 3D TV? Blu-dog does not, even if the data could get to his TV it could not properly display it for real 3D, so who cares what flavour of HDMI his new TV would need?

Whether or not this perception is accurate is irrelevant. The fact that the perception exists is a problem for 3D tech.

no, if perception is inaccurate then as a forum we should be here to correct it. We should not be pushing BS because someone irrational has some sort of vendetta with it.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Well it wasn't at CES, which is what I was getting at, but at least they were public about it.

If you are counting on CES to tell you everything you need to know about technology you're going to miss a lot.

What bothers me is that the implication of the change wasn't noted by manufacturers, the film industry, or anyone else connected with Blu or broadcast. Why was that? Even with this news, nothing was communicated to the 4.5 million buyers of Blu players during this period.

You're talking in the past tense, I don't follow. Are there several HDMI 1.4 devices already out or something? Do you think that every CE should contact every registered owner of an HDMI 1.3 product to let them know what their equipment cannot do in the future?

Actually, that wasn't the driver for it - there were so few DTS releases at that time, it didn't really matter.

Kind of like good old 3D Blu-ray eh?

[blacklion]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8447432.stm

3D TV is being billed as a possible saviour for recession hit manufacturers looking to boost sales.


"It's a challenging market. We need something to kick us out of this," said Panasonic's Elsuke Tsuyuzaki.

"To me, the thing that's going to get us there is 3D," added the firm's chief technology officer.

However Mr Shapiro noted that lower average selling prices for TVs will be a drag. CEA expects TV revenues to decline 2% in this sector to $22.1bn (£14bn) even though unit sales will go up 5% to 37.7m (£24m)

"The TV industry is desperate and they are latching onto 3D as hard as they can" Gartner research's principal analyst Van Baker told BBC News.

"They have done the flat panel upgrade. It will be a hard sell to get people to spend big bucks again on 3D TV so soon after paying out for an HDTV."

Just about sums it up. This whole 3D thing is driven not by a desire for technical innovation or, as some fanboy mopes here seem to believe, an altruistic desire to give the consumer better technology. Its the plain old revenue cycles and planned obsolescence thing again.

HDTVs and blu rays not selling as profitably as before? Solution - force the consumer to 'upgrade' to 3D before finalizing the specs and ironing out the kinks. Just like they did with blu ray and HDMI. Turn consumers into unpaid beta testers. And we consumers even get to pay serious coin for the privilege of doing unpaid quality control for CE companies.

[ariakon]

blacklion, what's with the name calling? Of course companies want to be profitable, but that means I should stop wanting them to design cool technology so that one day that tech comes out at a price everyone can afford? Don't pull the trigger on calling other people fanboys. So, if 3d looks interesting to someone, that makes them a mope? Maybe they just thought Avatar was great. The way technology advances is that companies try to make goods they think people will buy. What are they supposed to do when their products stop making money? Throw up their hands and just keep doing the same thing even as losses mount? 3d might not be that next thing, and might fail for the short term, but in a decade or so it will probably be standard, and early adopters will, as you said, serve as beta testers so that, when 3d goes mainstream, the public will receive a cheaper, better product. Sucks for early adopters, true, but good for the rest of us.

[blacklion]

OK, I take back 'fanboy' and 'mope'. Apologies to all offended. Peace!

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

I still don't think you'd need to feed it 1080p120. 1080p48 is two separate 1080p24 streams, so each one would go to 1080p60 via 3:2 pulldown the same way most 60Hz sets that accept a 1080p24 signal work.

I also hesitate to use "lower-bandwidth transmission" because it implies that the original signal was of a higher-bandwidth and with 3D Blu-ray it is not.

If the HDMI 1.3 interface of the PS3 will be capable of transmitting a proper 1080p48 signal from 3D Blu-ray Discs then why won't other HDMI 1.3 interfaces be capable? Just curious, because I don't know the answer.

Im guessing processing power.

[Halcro 1]

Originally Posted by blacklion

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8447432.stm




Just about sums it up. This whole 3D thing is driven not by a desire for technical innovation or, as some fanboy mopes here seem to believe, an altruistic desire to give the consumer better technology. Its the plain old revenue cycles and planned obsolescence thing again.

HDTVs and blu rays not selling as profitably as before? Solution - force the consumer to 'upgrade' to 3D before finalizing the specs and ironing out the kinks. Just like they did with blu ray and HDMI. Turn consumers into unpaid beta testers. And we consumers even get to pay serious coin for the privilege of doing unpaid quality control for CE companies.

Kind of like having to upgrade an IPod every other year. How many versions of a MP3 player does a company have th release??? Oh yes I have to upgrade?? Talk about obsolescence ..Or what about a Computer and internet speeds ... First a B speed modem the G and N....Its in everything we do...Like I said no one says YOU have to buy 3DTV

[NiKRuLeZ]

Well now that Sky has announced that it will be broadcasting 3D football games in 9 Pubs accross the UK, here is a statment from one of the sky staff: "The good news is that all Sky+HD customers already have the set-top box they need to enjoy 3D, meaning they simply need to buy any new 3D TV, all of which will work seamlessly with Sky's ground breaking new service,".

Hmm...im pretty sure the current Sky HD boxes dont have HDMI 1.4 chipsets in them...isnt this statment a bit inaccurate?