Glasses-free 3D gets a step closer to reality with Ultra-D (1 Viewer)

[Ronald Epstein]

I just can't imagine any glasses-free technology being able to provide us with the same quality 3D as we have been enjoying with glasses. How the hell would it work? Will we be watching a hologram? Could it possibly be even as good as what 3D displays give us when converting 2D images in the set? Is there a way to explain this process to a layperson?

It doesn't and I am vehemently against the technology.

I have seen glasses-free TV from Dolby. It's okay. There is some depth, but there is absolutely no forward projection and you can't even hope for something like that without eyewear.

Stay away!

 

[Ronald Epstein]

This isn't Dolby and saying "it doesn't [work]" is an unfounded statement since you haven't actually been invited to see the technology be demonstrated.

It works.

And it is very impressive.

Does it do forward projection? I think I already know the answer to that so basically no improvement.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Yes it does. And no, you don't.

Impossible. Forward projection like "in your face" projection?

I have to see it to believe it and I am not taking the word of one person at this point.

If I do see it, and I truly believe it, I'll promote this technology from the hilltops. However, basically, from what I have been told, it can't be done.

 

[Brian Dobbs]

I think any tech that gets us closer to glasses-free 3D projection is a benefit for all of us. I'm assuming this tech is just for TVs now, but hopefully it'll make it's way into projectors.

FWIW, I rarely get the feeling that my current active 3D projection setup pops out at me. I remember the 3D of the '80s, and what I got ain't that. So I really can't see how this would be a step in the wrong direction.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

It's a step in the wrong direction depending on whom you are talking to.

For many die-hard 3D film fans like myself, this is only dumbing down the format further.

There is just no way that, without eyewear, a manufacturer can claim that they can provide the same 3D realism of the 1950s that current technology can. For that kind of blatant pop-out, you need to give the appearance of a holographic-like image in front of your eyes, coming inches from your nose.

I talked to one of the engineers at Dolby a few years back. I was told that it could not be accomplished without eyewear.

Furthermore, when an unnamed executive backing the format says to me, "I don't think pop-out is important," then for many us on this forum, the future of this technology is already dead news.

I went to the Ultra-D webpage and read their press release. Nowhere does it talk about this technology able to achieve the same kind of forward projection that you would get with eyewear. If that technology actually did exist, it would be headline news -- and I mean news you would be reading about everywhere. It would be revolutionary. Alas, the press release only mentions the word "pop" as a reference to its picture quality.

However, all that being said....

The normal consumer will think it's the best thing since sliced bread. I am certain the level of depth that these new displays provide will be quite enjoyable for most people. After all, Hollywood movies don't have blatant pop-out. They have killed the thrill of what the format was all about.

But please don't try to fool those of us that know better and cherish what the 3D format is really all about.

Once again, I'll be the first to apologize and spend a lot of time promoting this product if it is as truly revolutionary as is being suggested. I just don't believe for a second that technology has evolved to the point that we can do honest-to-goodness 50s style 3D without the need for glasses.

 

[DFurr]

[QUOTE="Ronald Epstein, post: 4570748, member: 269895" I just don't believe for a second that technology has evolved to the point that we can do honest-to-goodness 50s style 3D without the need for glasses.[/QUOTE]

I agree.

 

[John Sparks]

Whoa...

 

[TJPC]

I have actually never seen the extreme pop out talked about here on 3D Blu ray, even in the paddle ball sequence in “House of Wax”, mind you I only have a 65” Sony LCD tv with active glasses. This has not stopped me from collecting 100s of 3D discs.

If a new technology has arrived which lets me play my library, I am all for it, even if it is not perfect. What is the alternative, unless manufacturers come to their senses and turn back the clock to 2016?

 

[John Sparks]

I have actually never seen the extreme pop out talked about here on 3D Blu ray, even in the paddle ball sequence in “House of Wax”, mind you I only have a 65” Sony LCD tv with active glasses. This has not stopped me from collecting 100s of 3D discs.

If a new technology has arrived which lets me play my library, I am all for it, even if it is not perfect. What is the alternative, unless manufacturers come to their senses and turn back the clock to 2016?

I had my Mit 3D DLP 65" and Panny 3D player for 3 years before I bought glasses. We are so accustomed to 2D, that seeing the picture in 3D was very odd, just didn't look right...tiny people in 3D.

Last year my projector was going bad along with the screen and hence, a new Epson 6040 3D/4K, Sammy 3D/4K player (made it Region Free) and a new screen.

Screen size has everything to do with viewing 3D. At the theater, it envelopes you, at home it has to try to equal that.

My 110" screen in my dedicated HT comes close. I was sitting 12' back from the screen viewing regular BDs, but then I got into 3D and I moved the chairs forward towards the screen 2'...watch out!!!

Now, the 3D picture really envelopes you...from train cowcatchers (POLAR EXPRESS) smashing over your head to a huge knife (SILENT HILL) sticking you in the forehead...3D has finally arrived for me...7 years late and I'm enjoying every single frame!!!

 

[John Sparks]

Yes screen size and viewing distance go hand-in-hand. I sit at 1.5x screen Height. How about you?

110" and my eyeballs (forehead) are exactly 11' from the screen surface.

 

[John Sparks]

I know that may be the right distance from 3D, but what does that do to 2D? I have a shit load of BD/SDs that I watch?

 

[John Sparks]

I think I'll stay at 11' from the screen for now. Thanks for the help!

 

[Mark-P]

Yes screen size and viewing distance go hand-in-hand. I sit at 1.5x screen Height. How about you?

I think I'll stay at 11' from the screen for now. Thanks for the help!

My 2.35:1 screen is 45" X 105". I sit 10' back which is 1.1x screen width or 2.6x screen height. Lordy if I were to sit 1.5x screen height I would only be 5 1/2 feet from the screen. My peripheral vision wouldn't even be able to see the far sides of the screen that close!

 

[John Sparks]

Immersion is the key word...nose to screen!!!

 

[ScottPlant]

If this technology helps resurrect 3D in the US, then I'm all for it. We can't even buy most new-release 3D titles now without importing them, and how long will the overseas market sustain 3D? Making 3D possible without the use of glasses is the only way I see the format surviving long-term. And extreme pop-out isn't important to me. Realistic depth is what I want to see.

 

[John Sparks]

If this technology helps resurrect 3D in the US, then I'm all for it. We can't even buy most new-release 3D titles now without importing them, and how long will the overseas market sustain 3D? Making 3D possible without the use of glasses is the only way I see the format surviving long-term. And extreme pop-out isn't important to me. Realistic depth is what I want to see.

All of us want 3D, at least in this thread, no matter the effects. Pop-outs, to me, are the icing on the cake. If it's not there, that's okay, as long as the rest shows some depth.

STAND TALL AND DO ANYTHING TO KEEP 3D!!!

 

[Moleman X]

If you've been to Las Vegas lately, you may have seen 3D video slot machines. I played a few and the 3D effects are impressive. Hit a jackpot and gold coins fly out at your face! The pop-out effect is very good. Resolution is good, if not 4K good. I believe it relies on the same eye-tracking technology that the Nintendo 3DS does, and because it's one person sitting in a fixed position directly in front of the screen the effects are tailor made for that perspective (slot reels, for example, look quite real because they are rendered from the exact point of view you are sitting at). Obviously this is quite different from a display that can accommodate numerous viewers at various angles, but "never say never" may be the best philosophy at this point.

 

[John Sparks]

I'll take $20 gold pieces hitting me in the face over nickels coming out of a slot.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Removed by ownership

I would slow down a bit, Sir, with your remarks.

Until there is a real recognition that the technology is there -- not just from one individual who has offered no substantial proof -- then we can agree to disagree. However, it will be done respectfully.

Consider this a warning.

 

[Richard V]

I have actually never seen the extreme pop out talked about here on 3D Blu ray, even in the paddle ball sequence in “House of Wax”, mind you I only have a 65” Sony LCD tv with active glasses. This has not stopped me from collecting 100s of 3D discs.

If a new technology has arrived which lets me play my library, I am all for it, even if it is not perfect. What is the alternative, unless manufacturers come to their senses and turn back the clock to 2016?

You should check out The Bubble, the "pop out" effect or "forward projection" effect (whichever term you like to use) is OUTSTANDING. There are moments in the film where objects seem to be literally "floating" just a few inches from your eyes. Just Amazing. Better than Avatar, IMHO.