Blu-ray Disc Association Announces Final 3D Specification

[Lee Stewart]

Yes, however I need to qualify that.

At home, you can adjust the depth settings manually with the Nvidia system to suit your own comfort levels. That means that if you set them to the minimum, the two images are all but right on top of one another.

This creates an image with almost no illusion of depth at all but also causes basically no eyestrain or headaches.

The more you adjust the depth setting up, the further apart the images are set and the greater the illusion of depth. This in turn comes at the cost of increasing the strain on the eyes and increasing the likelihood of generating headaches.

While watching Avatar, for me, the headache didn't start until about an hour and a half into the movie and was very mild until the scenes with the aerial combat started and those pushed the pain from barely noticeable up to the point of mild discomfort.

In the end, it took about 45 minutes for the headache to fade away on its own after the movie ended (no pain killers required).

Maybe this applies to you:

Physiological hindrance to watch 3-D movie

[Lee Stewart]

If a studio can flip a movie over to 3D for under 20M then I absolutely expect boatloads of films to get this makeover. Popular action and scifi films like the ones mentioned in one of the articles (Matrix, Star Wars, LOTR) would make their money back and show a profit during release weekend. Nevermind a few weeks in the cinema and then a brand new 3D Blu-Ray release (likely to coincide with a "new" 2D release to ride the hype). In fact I wouldn't be surprised to see anaglyph versions of these retooled films on standard Blu-Ray and DVD to boost more sales for those formats. And they could plaster them with ads for superior 3D Blu-Ray and TV hardware.

It does open up a bunch of opportunities.

[Elee s]

Your example falls apart because you are using generalization as the foundation of your argument.

It's like saying they used Panavision cameras to shoot both The Wild Bunch and The Dark Knight.

Theres no mystery here lee. The exact cameras, there exact models, the type of lens, the type of configuration(Pace Fusion) are all made public. And according to the links you gave its all been used before.

[Lee Stewart]

Theres no mystery here lee. The exact cameras, there exact models, the type of lens, the type of configuration(Pace Fusion) are all made public. And according to the links you gave its all been used before.

Those lenses were custom built for Avatar:

We’re very committed to the 3D revolution at Pace Technologies – and our system is called Fusion 3D,” Pace continued. “We worked with Fujinon to meet the exacting requirements of stereographic capture. Sony HDC-F950 cameras were used primarily during the Avatar shoot, and Sony HDC-1500 cameras were used for some scenes when it became available. All the Sony cameras were paired with Fujinon lenses.”

[Elee s]

Those lenses were custom built for Avatar:

It doesnt say that anywhere. In your mind this is what youre reading.

“We worked with Fujinon to meet the exacting requirements of stereographic capture exclusively for Avatar and nothing else, even though we've used our Pace cameras on a number of other movies and our relationship with fujinon has been going on for 10 years."

More proof.

They relied on a Cameron/Pace Fusion Underwater HD 3D camera system, as well as an underwater housing system also designed by Pace Technologies. The Fusion system, originally developed in a collaboration between director and producer James Cameron and cinematographer Vince Pace, includes two parallel Sony F950s tethered to a Sony SRW-1 recording deck in a separate underwater housing. The cameras were outfitted with Fujinon HA10X5B-W50 HD Cine Style zoom lenses, encased in specially made lens barrels designed for the Pace rig.

http://www.showreel.org/article.php?...e09da58428b54f

Notice how the above article doesnt even say anything about Avatar...

[Lee Stewart]

It doesnt say that anywhere. In your mind this is what youre reading.

“We worked with Fujinon to meet the exacting requirements of stereographic capture exclusively for Avatar and nothing else, even though we've used our Pace cameras on a number of other movies and our relationship with fujinon has been going on for 10 years."

More proof.

http://www.showreel.org/article.php?...e09da58428b54f

Notice how the above article doesnt even say anything about Avatar...

You missed it:

"Lenses used on the production included the Fujinon HA16x6.3BE (6.3-101mm) and a special design HA5x7B-W50 (7-35mm) model specially developed for Pace/Cameron 3D production."

[Elee s]

You missed it:

"Lenses used on the production included the Fujinon HA16x6.3BE (6.3-101mm) and a special design HA5x7B-W50 (7-35mm) model specially developed for Pace/Cameron 3D production."

And?
Where does it say anywhere that its only been used with Avatar?

It says 'Pace/cameron 3D production.'

[Lee Stewart]

And?
Where does it say anywhere that its only been used with Avatar?

It says 'Pace/cameron 3D production.'

You have the lens models - just find me another 3D movies shot with the Fusion 3D cameras and those lenses.

[luclin999]

Maybe this applies to you:

Physiological hindrance to watch 3-D movie

Page not found.

[Elee s]

You have the lens models - just find me another 3D movies shot with the Fusion 3D cameras and those lenses.

The HA16 is a regular lens thats been used for awhile in 2D movies aswell. The HA5x7B according to the article was made specifically for Pace and has been in use since 2004.
http://www.fujinon.com/NewsAndEvents...pr.aspx?id=115

[Lee Stewart]

TV’s Third Dimension

3D TV Looks Cool — But When Will Viewers Be Ready?

http://www.multichannel.com/article/..._Dimension.php

[Kosty]

Kosty any definitive word whether hdmi 1.3 is fully capable of handling all 3d or is it gonna be gimped at a lower resolution then 1.4?

Talked to Sony guys and others that the HDMI 1.3 in all PlayStation3s would work just fine with the 3D stuff and be full 1920 x1080p120 x 2 video resolution. Audio would be OK too at current BD standards.

No gimping they say. I want to see it though happen when it occurs.

[Tommy]

Thanks Kosty. They way Im reading there recent official comments and advertisments, they seem to be implying all will work IF you bypass your AVR... I dont understand why they would be pawning off the following new dual output players if IDMI 1.3 is fully capable.

Will A/V Receivers Need to Be 3D Compatible?

A/V receivers with HDMI switching could be a hindrance to the adoption of 3D because of their inability to accommodate the necessary extra bandwidth.

3D Blu-ray players such as this recently announced BDC6900 model from Samsung may create problems for A/V receivers and HDMI switchers.

By Grant Clauser
January 08, 2010

A source from the Blu-ray Disc Association told CE Pro at CES 2010 that a possible speed bump in the road to greater adoption of 3D Blu-ray may not come from the TVs, players or content providers; it may come from A/V receivers and HDMI switching devices.

While HDMI 1.4 is in the specification for 3D Blu-ray, it’s not a requirement for sending a 3D Blu-ray signal from a player to a television. That’s why Sony’s Playstation 3 can be firmware upgraded to be 3D Blu-ray compatible while only having HDMI 1.3 built into its hardware. What is required is a minimum bandwidth allowance in order for the player to send the signal out to the TV.

A source told CE Pro that many A/V receivers with HDMI switching cannot accommodate the extra bandwidth. In other words, if you use your receiver for HDMI switching, you may not be able to connect it to a 3D Blu-ray player. The source said the BDA may be working with manufacturers to inform them of the bandwidth problem so they can help customers with questions and problems as well as establish a minimum bandwidth floor for receivers that will allow the 3D signal to pass.

One possible workaround the source suggested would be for Blu-ray players to include two HDMI outputs, one that would go directly to the 3D compatible display, and one to take the high-quality Blu-ray audio formats to the receiver

The Panasonic DMP-BDT350 is the only player with dual HDMI outputs

That's important because 3D Blu-ray players will use the new HDMI 1.4 standard, and existing AV receivers only support HDMI 1.3. That means you won't be able easily connect a new 3D Blu-ray player to an existing AV receiver. With the DMP-BDT350, you can send the high-bandwidth 3D video directly to the display and the audio directly to the AV receiver. It seems like the best option if you don't plan on buying a new HDMI 1.4 receiver.

[Kosty]

AVR switching might be an issue for some if the AVR guts were older or cheaper at the low end of what HDMI required. A second HDMI for audio only to the AVR would help and the fallback is lossy optical or coax audio to the AVR. The PlayStation would not have that issue AFAIK

[Ray Von]

3D TV - Separating the hope from the hype

3D televisions were being hyped all over the show floor at the Consumer Electronics Show last week, with manufacturers gushing about an "Avatar effect" and hoping for a surge in high-end TV sales. But on the sidelines, even executives with a stake in the technology acknowledged there are big challenges to making 3D TV widespread in the home.

A relative dearth of content, the higher cost and complexity of 3D production, the fact that consumers will have to wear special glasses, and that millions of people have just shelled out for large HDTVs were all cited as factors that could make the technology slow to take off.

"If it took 10 years for HD to go from one home to reach more than half the U.S. population, it will take 3D just as long," Forrester analyst James McQuivey wrote in a blog post on the topic.

He expects less than a million U.S. households to be viewing 3D shows this year, far short of the Consumer Electronics Association's estimate that 4.3 million 3D-capable sets will ship in 2010.

That's not to say things aren't moving forward. Dozens of 3D TVs and Blu-ray players will go on sale this year. Broadcasters ESPN, Discovery and BSkyB have all announced plans to roll out 3D channels this year, and Hollywood studios have promised new and classic titles in 3D.

At a CES panel discussion that asked the question, "3D: Hope or hype?" Ahmad Ouri, chief marketing officer at Technicolor, said his company will release 16 features in 3D this year, adding to the 25 it already offers.

But with titles being counted in the tens rather than the thousands, it may not be enough to persuade large numbers of consumers to ditch their HDTVs for 3D.

ESPN has committed to showing 85 sporting events this year on its new channel, starting in June. It will carry only live events, however, and the rest of the time screens will "go black," said Anthony Bailey, ESPN vice president for emerging technology, which means there will be long stretches when there is nothing to see.

3D gear will also carry a price premium, though manufacturers haven't announced specifics yet. "It will not be a very high, astronomical price," was the best that Eisuke Tsuyuzaki, Panasonic's CTO, could manage.

"It's not going to be cheap. We are all in this to make money," said Brian Lenz, director of product design and TV product development at BSkyB. But it will not be "exorbitant," he added.

Most people who love sports, movies and gaming -- the content most suitable for 3D -- have just bought large HDTVs, Forrester's McQuivey said.

"Now we're going to ask those same people to spend between $2,000 and $4,000 to get a good 3D TV set with just two sets of active shutter glasses? Sorry, the credit card is going to stay in the wallet for this one," he wrote.

There are also technical challenges. Producing 3D requires "fundamentally new skills," Lenz said. "Things like panning and how you zoom and frame; there's going to be a fairly steep learning curve that everyone who's new to 3D is going to go through. So for all the excitement, expect some speed bumps in the road."

Like other broadcasters, ESPN's commitment to 3D will depend on finding a cost-effective way to produce it alongside 2D content.

"The biggest deal for us is to get 3D and 2D produced from the same truck. If we can't do that it might be a long putt for us to stay with it," Bailey said.

Lenz argued that the relative scarcity of content may actually be an advantage, because it will help ensure what's available is of high quality. "The idea isn't to watch every show in 3D, just the content that will benefit from it, such as movies, games and big sporting events."

"Once you see it, you get it," Panasonic's Tsuyuzaki promised. "It will take off a lot more quickly than a lot of people expect."

But there's consumer education to be done first. Some people are under the mistaken impression that they'll need special glasses to watch even 2D content on a 3D TV, said Rick Dean, chairman of the 3D Home Consortium. "There's every opportunity for massive confusion," he acknowledged.

"The biggest misconception is that this is our grandfather's 3D," added Lenz. "It's not 'Jaws' 3D, it's 'Avatar' 3D."

Consumers may also worry about standards, and whether they can mix equipment and services from multiple providers. Dean insisted it is "perfectly safe" to go out and buy 3D products now. The standard for 3D Blu-ray was finalized last month, he noted.

But no one on the panel offered an unequivocal guarantee that all products will work together equally well. Standards will "continue to evolve," Dean said, while Tsuyuzaki said that while all products will work together, there may be a "difference in quality."

One sure thing is that the electronics industry, reeling from a disastrous 2009, is determined to make 3D happen.

"We need top-line growth right now, we need something to kick us out of where we are today, and the thing that's going to get us there is 3D," Tsuyuzaki said.

Ray Von