-

Jump to content



Photo

Final 3-D Blu-ray Specification Announced


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
17 replies to this topic

#1 of 18 OFFLINE   RolandL

RolandL

    Screenwriter

  • 2,335 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 11 2001
  • LocationCromwell, CT

Posted December 17 2009 - 03:29 AM

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=3924

http://marketsaw.blogspot.com/2009/12/s3d-blu-ray-standard-is-complete-ces.html


Roland Lataille
Cinerama web site

 


#2 of 18 OFFLINE   Paul Hillenbrand

Paul Hillenbrand

    Screenwriter

  • 1,263 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 16 1998
  • Real Name:Paul Hillenbrand

Posted December 17 2009 - 05:17 AM

I like the part in www.blu-ray.com/news/ where it states that the final 3D blu-ray specification is designed to allow the PS3 to play back Blu-ray 3D content in 3-D! /img/vbsmilies/htf/smile.gif

Paul

Avatar: "The Annunciation to the Shepherds" Painting by Nicolas Berchem (1680-1683)
BD 3D, BD, HD DVD, DVD collection


#3 of 18 OFFLINE   Felix Martinez

Felix Martinez

    Screenwriter

  • 1,455 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 27 2001
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted December 17 2009 - 07:44 AM

From the story:
Quote:
MPEG4-MVC compresses both left and right eye views with a typical 50% overhead compared to equivalent 2-D content
Does this mean the content's avg or peak bitrate will be halved to accommodate the two streams?

if so, that would be disappointing, especially for backwards compatibility (2D).  I wouldn't want to see content viewed on standard 2D blu-ray players take a hit in quality.



#4 of 18 OFFLINE   Chuck Anstey

Chuck Anstey

    Screenwriter

  • 1,569 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 10 1998
  • Real Name:Chuck Anstey

Posted December 17 2009 - 08:12 AM


Quote:
Does this mean the content's avg or peak bitrate will be halved to accommodate the two streams?
Unless they are playing with the math incorrectly, a 50% overhead implies a movie would take up 150% of the space it currently does, not 200% as if the two streams were encoded independently.  So to fit a 3-D movie in the same space as a 2D encode, it would have to be 67%, not 50%.  This implies for a movie only 50 Gig disc, up to the equivalent of 33 Gigs could be used for the 2D version minus audio tracks.  I am assuming they are encoding both the left and right eye within a single stream to take advantage of the commonality between the two images so it is hard to exactly state how much is used for a single eye.


#5 of 18 ONLINE   dana martin

dana martin

    Screenwriter

  • 1,920 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 28 2003
  • Real Name:Dana Martin
  • LocationNorfolk, VA

Posted December 17 2009 - 08:36 AM

reading this for the more current films is ok, but i am wondering how they are going to work around the older titles that were shot stereoscopic,and in other formats. i am thinking mostly eary 50's movies,the golden age this would be a good reason to see what kind of material is ready to be presented this way, as the announcment states that possibly 2nd Qtr of next year the players could be on the market.

this also for a classic film lovers point of view could work out well, john wayne in HONDO 3D, tis has the posibility of affecting a lot of films that would never have gotten attention, and i have fingers crossed that somone at universal goes wait wasnt creature from the black lagoon in 3D, and then trys to do it right, before the remake it 
Playing at the Drive In

Quote:Welles, Kubrick, Hitchcock, Spielberg, Jackson, Wood ?? a true Auteur should be one who follows his artistic vision

#6 of 18 OFFLINE   Felix Martinez

Felix Martinez

    Screenwriter

  • 1,455 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 27 2001
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted December 17 2009 - 08:45 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuck Anstey 


Unless they are playing with the math incorrectly, a 50% overhead implies a movie would take up 150% of the space it currently does, not 200% as if the two streams were encoded independently.  So to fit a 3-D movie in the same space as a 2D encode, it would have to be 67%, not 50%.  This implies for a movie only 50 Gig disc, up to the equivalent of 33 Gigs could be used for the 2D version minus audio tracks.  I am assuming they are encoding both the left and right eye within a single stream to take advantage of the commonality between the two images so it is hard to exactly state how much is used for a single eye.
Interesting - thanks for that clarification, Chuck.


#7 of 18 OFFLINE   AaronMK

AaronMK

    Supporting Actor

  • 768 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1999
  • Real Name:Aaron Karp
  • LocationOrlando, FL

Posted December 17 2009 - 09:30 AM

I was glad to see bitrates and required overhead as part of the announcement.  That at least indicates that they realized it was an issue, instead of just assuming people don't notice the artifacts of inadequate bitrates on detail.

I am still not clear on the 50% overhead. More specifically, is that the overhead for a 3D stream vs a 2D stream, or is that the overhead of a 3D stream with 2D backwards compatibility vs a 2D only stream?  The video peak for Blu-ray is currently 40 Mbps.  All things being equal, that would mean the peak is now 27 Mbps, and average bitrates will fall because there are still only 50 GB.  Some 2D encodes hover a little above 30 Mbps and have higher spikes. 

Think of the additional hits bitrates will take if it is a separate 2D stream.  In that case, that leaves only 20 GB for the 2D version and 30 GB for the 3D version.  They made a big point of backward compatibility, so I don't think we will be seeing separate releases just to accommodate higher bitrates.

I remember talk of a 2x drive being required to accommodate higher peak bitrates, but this was not addressed in the announcement.  The PS3 has a 2x drive, so the announcement confirming its eventual support of Blu-ray 3D does not preclude that still being the case.  That might address some bitrate issues.  Also, since most 3D material these days is not film based, I suspect lack of grain will enable lower bitrate encodes to still be faithful to the source material.

Thoughts?


#8 of 18 OFFLINE   Yumbo

Yumbo

    Screenwriter

  • 2,243 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 1999

Posted December 17 2009 - 09:37 AM

 Will there be separate 2D only vs. 3D combo 2D editions?

#9 of 18 OFFLINE   Craig_Ehr

Craig_Ehr

    Second Unit

  • 326 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 15 2002

Posted December 17 2009 - 11:42 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Yumbo 

 Will there be separate 2D only vs. 3D combo 2D editions?
Hopefully no as 3D discs are (according to the new spec) backwards compatible with 2D players.

And, re: on the PS3...  My understanding is that the PS3 will only be able to handle 3D at half vertical resolution so you won't be getting full 1080P 3D, but still it's pretty impressive that it has the horsepower to be upgraded to 3D via firmware update.  (That's okay for me anyhow because my 3D Samsung HLT6187S LED DLP display is only half-resolution too.)



#10 of 18 OFFLINE   RickER

RickER

    Producer

  • 5,130 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 04 2003
  • Real Name:Rick
  • LocationTulsa, Oklahoma

Posted December 17 2009 - 12:17 PM

 OK, let me ask the stupid question?

I need a new TV too? Or will my Sony 52" XBR LCD do the job?

New Blu-ray player, sure, no problem. But new TV too, not anytime soon...i hope.


#11 of 18 OFFLINE   cafink

cafink

    Producer

  • 3,038 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999

Posted December 17 2009 - 02:23 PM

Unless a television is specifically designed for 3D, the only technique that will work is anaglyph--the old red/green method.  I don't see any reason a Blu-ray player couldn't output the video as a single anaglyph image, but anything other than that will require a new television.

 

 


#12 of 18 OFFLINE   GregK

GregK

    Supporting Actor

  • 960 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 22 2000

Posted December 17 2009 - 03:38 PM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuck Anstey 


Unless they are playing with the math incorrectly, a 50% overhead implies a movie would take up 150% of the space it currently does, not 200% as if the two streams were encoded independently.  So to fit a 3-D movie in the same space as a 2D encode, it would have to be 67%, not 50%.  This implies for a movie only 50 Gig disc, up to the equivalent of 33 Gigs could be used for the 2D version minus audio tracks.  I am assuming they are encoding both the left and right eye within a single stream to take advantage of the commonality between the two images so it is hard to exactly state how much is used for a single eye.
 

This is correct, and given the left and right eye images share so much common information with only a slightly different perspective, the encoded "difference" channel (the secondary perspective shot, which would be the left eye or the right eye view) won't take up too much additional bandwidth. This is far more efficient vs encoding two independent Left/Right 1080p streams. And at those times when the perspective (stereoscopic parallax) is minor, I'm guessing we could often see this ratio under the "50% more" ratio that is quoted.


#13 of 18 OFFLINE   EricW

EricW

    Screenwriter

  • 2,309 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 01 2001

Posted December 17 2009 - 05:20 PM

will any tv that's 120 Hz or higher be "3D ready"?

"now, if that's a fact, tell me... am i lying?"

#14 of 18 OFFLINE   Jesse Skeen

Jesse Skeen

    Producer

  • 4,023 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 1999

Posted December 17 2009 - 08:09 PM

Tell me when the equipment will be out for sale and what its price will be, before I go buy a new TV soon!

Home video oddities, old commercials and other junk: http://www.youtube.com/user/eyeh8nbc

#15 of 18 OFFLINE   ManW_TheUncool

ManW_TheUncool

    Producer

  • 5,863 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001
  • Real Name:ManW

Posted December 17 2009 - 11:15 PM


Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig_Ehr View Post

And, re: on the PS3...  My understanding is that the PS3 will only be able to handle 3D at half vertical resolution so you won't be getting full 1080P 3D, but still it's pretty impressive that it has the horsepower to be upgraded to 3D via firmware update.  (That's okay for me anyhow because my 3D Samsung HLT6187S LED DLP display is only half-resolution too.)

 
Where did you get that "understanding"?  I didn't see that mentioned in the 2 linked articles above (although I did see one mention of that possibility by one of the posters).

I too have a PS3 and a (more recent) 61" Samsung LED DLP that should be capable of 1/2-res 3D.  Would be nice to have that option w/out springing for another new display so soon.

But I too am quite concerned that 2D playback would not be compromised *both* in terms of PQ/AQ *and* the overall playback experience -- BD-J/BD-Live clunkiness anyone?

_Man_

Just another amateur learning to paint w/ "the light of the world".

"Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things..." (St. Paul)

#16 of 18 OFFLINE   RolandL

RolandL

    Screenwriter

  • 2,335 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 11 2001
  • LocationCromwell, CT

Posted December 18 2009 - 12:39 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by dana martin 

reading this for the more current films is ok, but i am wondering how they are going to work around the older titles that were shot stereoscopic,and in other formats. i am thinking mostly eary 50's movies,the golden age this would be a good reason to see what kind of material is ready to be presented this way, as the announcment states that possibly 2nd Qtr of next year the players could be on the market.

this also for a classic film lovers point of view could work out well, john wayne in HONDO 3D, tis has the posibility of affecting a lot of films that would never have gotten attention, and i have fingers crossed that somone at universal goes wait wasnt creature from the black lagoon in 3D, and then trys to do it right, before the remake it 
Universal 3-D titles Taza Son of Cochise and Jaws were recently released in 3-D on DVD in the Sensio 3-D format. Other Universal titles Creature From The Black Lagoon, It Came From Outer Space and Revenge of The Creature are listed as "Coming Soon" on Sensio's web site http://www.sensio.tv...soon/default.3d . I would think all studios will be releasing there 3-D titles from the 1950's and current 3-D movies with this new 3-D format on Blu-ray.



Roland Lataille
Cinerama web site

 


#17 of 18 OFFLINE   RolandL

RolandL

    Screenwriter

  • 2,335 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 11 2001
  • LocationCromwell, CT

Posted December 18 2009 - 12:45 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Man-Fai Wong 



Where did you get that "understanding"?  I didn't see that mentioned in the 2 linked articles above (although I did see one mention of that possibility by one of the posters).

I too have a PS3 and a (more recent) 61" Samsung LED DLP that should be capable of 1/2-res 3D.  Would be nice to have that option w/out springing for another new display so soon.

But I too am quite concerned that 2D playback would not be compromised *both* in terms of PQ/AQ *and* the overall playback experience -- BD-J/BD-Live clunkiness anyone?

_Man_
With a PS3 and the current 3-D TV's you will probably be getting 540p or 540i for each eye. I have seen 3-D demo's with these TV's and the 3-D is excellent. With a new 3-D Blu-ray player and new specific 3-D TV's in 2010 (whenever they come out) you would have 1080p for each eye.


Roland Lataille
Cinerama web site

 


#18 of 18 OFFLINE   RolandL

RolandL

    Screenwriter

  • 2,335 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 11 2001
  • LocationCromwell, CT

Posted January 05 2010 - 12:50 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse Skeen 

Tell me when the equipment will be out for sale and what its price will be, before I go buy a new TV soon!
Optoma Announces the 3D Ready HD66 Projector

http://www.avrev.com...-projector.html

Its only 720p but for $699 sounds like the new 1080P 3-D front projectors might not be that expensive.

Roland Lataille
Cinerama web site