Katzenberg Excited About 3D

[Attebery]

Jeffrey Katzenberg spoke recently at Fortune’s Brainstorm: Tech conference on the 3D format for both movies and in the home, and not surprisingly, he’s largely for them. While 3D technology in the home is still up in the air, Katzenberg is optimistic, stating "Blu-ray is a fantastic platform for 3D."

[Lee Stewart]

Of course!

1. Increases BO revenue - they charge more for a 3D movie

2. Decreases piracy - you can't use a camcorder with a 3D movie

[JediFonger]

re:#2: u actually can... .
http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/22/f...-picture-view/

[Lee Stewart]

Originally Posted by JediFonger

re:#2: u actually can... .
http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/22/f...-picture-view/

That camera is used to capture 3D images from real life. It isn't going to be able to capture 3D as projected in a theater because you need glasses to see the 3D which the camera doesn't have.

[taygan315]

Movies like 'Avatar' and 'Tin Tin' will help pave the way for continued consumer demand for 3D...I hope. Getting these type of movies in 3D..in the home..is going to be some time though. I think it is crap though when 'Monsters vs Aliens' get heavily pushed and marketed for the 3D but when they release it for home release, they say the technology is not there to do the 3D justice and release the 2D version only..with a 3D bonus feature.

[Lee Stewart]

Originally Posted by taygan315

Movies like 'Avatar' and 'Tin Tin' will help pave the way for continued consumer demand for 3D...I hope. Getting these type of movies in 3D..in the home..is going to be some time though. I think it is crap though when 'Monsters vs Aliens' get heavily pushed and marketed for the 3D but when they release it for home release, they say the technology is not there to do the 3D justice and release the 2D version only..with a 3D bonus feature.

I think it was a good decision not to release MvA in 3D on home video. They would have had to use the ancient anaglyph 3D method which is not what people saw in the theater.

[taygan315]

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

I think it was a good decision not to release MvA in 3D on home video. They would have had to use the ancient anaglyph 3D method which is not what people saw in the theater.

But dont you think that is misleading the consumer a bit?? I mean, if you pay the $$ to go out and watch this in 3D in theaters your kind of expecting and excited for the home release to be in 3D as well.

[Lee Stewart]

Originally Posted by taygan315

But dont you think that is misleading the consumer a bit?? I mean, if you pay the $$ to go out and watch this in 3D in theaters your kind of expecting and excited for the home release to be in 3D as well.

I believe consumers are well aware of the difference between todays 3D that they see in a theater and the old anaglyph 3D. And I also believe that few people really like anaglyph 3D - especially after seeing true stereoscopic 3D.

[Ciotog]

At the risk of revealing too much ignorance, could someone just describe the 3D method currently used in theaters? I've never been to one. Is it the polarizing method used years ago? I can't think of any other method that could retain colors other than the alternate-frame with synchronized shutter-glasses method used in the good IMax theaters. To me, that seems to be the only way that a good 3D image could ever be viewed at home, but that would require TV's with at least 60p capability, I believe.

[Lee Stewart]

Originally Posted by Ciotog

At the risk of revealing too much ignorance, could someone just describe the 3D method currently used in theaters? I've never been to one. Is it the polarizing method used years ago? I can't think of any other method that could retain colors other than the alternate-frame with synchronized shutter-glasses method used in the good IMax theaters. To me, that seems to be the only way that a good 3D image could ever be viewed at home, but that would require TV's with at least 60p capability, I believe.

For digital cinema there are 2 different types of 3D systems:

Here is the Dolby 3D system:

http://www.edcf.net/edcf_docs/dolby-3d.pdf

Here is the RealD 3D system:

http://www.reald.com/Content/about-reald.aspx

How they do 3D in the cinema will not be the same as how they do 3D in the home because they are working strictly with 24 FPS content. They are stepping up 24 FPS to 144 FPS so each eye sees 72 FPS. There is no proposed home 3D system based on that formula.

Just found this over at AVS. This explains the Panasonic 3D system that is the supposed front runner for BD:

http://www.nabanet.com/nabaweb/docum...P1_PFannon.pdf

[RBTO]

I'd like to see this thread on BD 3D keep going. Numerous manufactures are currently working on 3D for home use, but one of the most impressive displays remains projection. Actually, if a 1080 48p format is adopted, all the information could be easily recorded on BD media. It now has the ability for 1080 60p which requires more bandwidth yet, and all 24 fps cinema content with frames for both eyes could be captured in a 48p format. It would be up to the hardware to present this information and, with exception to resolution and screen size, there is no good reason a home cinema projected presentation couldn't rival a theater presentation. Good silver screens are available now at reasonable costs. The BD player would have to output the two channels (R&L eye) in 1080 24p and these could be multiplexed on the screen at any rate the projection equipment is capable of (higher rates would reduce flicker and strobe effects). By the same token, if those two 24p channels are available, an LCD or plasma screen could be adapted for display as well.
The trick that movie theaters are using is alternating circular polarization to keep the two channel information separate. For projection, this requires an electronic polarizer in front of the lens, and the silver screen, along with good quality circularly polarized glasses as used in theaters at present. Alternately, shutter glasses could be employed, which would do away with the requirement for the silver screen and polarized output from the projector. The projector would still be alternating its image output between channels at some appropriate rate. Keep in mind that no matter what the multiplexing rate, the two images on the screen only change 24 times a second, hence the use of a 48p standard.
Anyway, let's keep the pressure on the home theater industry to develop a useful BD standard. I totally agree with one member. If you go to the theater to see a good 3D movie, when that movie comes out on BD, it should be offered in high quality 3D as well.

[Lee Stewart]

^^^

AFAIK, there is no 48P standard being submitted by any of the 3D system creators.

[RBTO]

Tell me more! What standards are being proposed? Perhaps someone should consider a 48p, but if there's a better standard, by all means share that with the group. I'm all ears and would like to know what progress is being made in 3D BD standards.

[Lee Stewart]

Originally Posted by RBTO

Tell me more! What standards are being proposed? Perhaps someone should consider a 48p, but if there's a better standard, by all means share that with the group. I'm all ears and would like to know what progress is being made in 3D BD standards.

1. Why would they set a standard for a frame rate that is not in use? (48 FPS)

2. Panasonics 3D system is based on 2 standards:

1080x24P and 1080x60i at full 1920 hortizontial resolution

http://www.nabanet.com/nabaweb/docum...P1_PFannon.pdf

3. Here is a link describing the other two 3D systems being looked at; Sensio and Dolby:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1167617

[Favelle]

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

Of course!

1. Increases BO revenue - they charge more for a 3D movie

2. Decreases piracy - you can't use a camcorder with a 3D movie

Yep and yep!