3D gear?

[BMXTRIX]

josten - Sorry man, you're asking the wrong person. I've been following 3D a bit, especially how it applies to BD, but I'm at a loss to know for sure if HDMI 1.3 receivers will accomodate 3D. My feeling is that there isn't a ton of new hardware related to HDMI 1.4, but there are certain protocols which may be firmware upgradable to older HDMI 1.3 systems to allow for proper 3D. But, this just isn't a given, and I'm taking an educated guess, not passing on real knowledge.

So, my real answer: I don't know. And not knowing, I wouldn't be looking to upgrade IF 3D was important to me.

 

[jostenmeat]

Thanks for your candid thoughts, BMX. It doesn't look good. I think 1.4 will be mandatory, as the new spec allows for double the bandwidth.

Of course, it's mostly speculation, but from a few people that seem to be familiar with how current products and company trends work.

However, a couple of work-arounds, after my initial start at researching.

One can use mch analog outputs to the receiver, so long as the user is ok with lack of bass mgmt and post-processing.

Or there is the possibility of using 1080i output, to fit into the 1.3 bandwidth, but I never would do that. That's similar to what you said in this thread, lower res, or 60p. I suppose by 60p, you actually mean two 30p video streams? Which means a lot of flicker, with perhaps other issues when we are talking stereoscopic?

 

[jostenmeat]

I'd like to add that I am, atm, rather skeptical with how this is all going to work out.

Remember those TVs from several years ago that claimed 1080p . . . but simply didn't accept 1080p via the inputs!! (just 1080i or something, deinterlacing). So, a 3D tv . . . that doesn't accept 3D inputs? Ok, that's too much, I know, but I continue:

There seem to be many different types of glasses. Which models of TVs/BDPs will be enabled with one of the competing 3D "formats", or all of them? (There is evidence that different displays may only have one, and others have multiples?). Gosh.

Will it be like HDDVD vs Bluray, or will it be like DTS-MA vs TrueHD vs PCM? IOW, will one format die, or will both/all formats co-exist?

 

[aberkowitz]

I'd like to add that I am, atm, rather skeptical with how this is all going to work out.

Remember those TVs from several years ago that claimed 1080p . . . but simply didn't accept 1080p via the inputs!! (just 1080i or something, deinterlacing). So, a 3D tv . . . that doesn't accept 3D inputs? Ok, that's too much, I know, but I continue:

There seem to be many different types of glasses. Which models of TVs/BDPs will be enabled with one of the competing 3D "formats", or all of them? (There is evidence that different displays may only have one, and others have multiples?). Gosh.

Will it be like HDDVD vs Bluray, or will it be like DTS-MA vs TrueHD vs PCM? IOW, will one format die, or will both/all formats co-exist?

The key to all of it (for us consumers) is deciding when to adopt. People with cash to burn can afford to early-adopt into one tech versus another, some may wait until prices drop initially, while others wait until the tech becomes ubiquitous. Instead of buying the first BD player that came out for around $800, I was an early adopter of the PS3- which only cost around $400. Others have waited until as recently as thanksgiving, and found BD players for $200.

We'll see the same trend with 3D tvs, only maybe on a slightly slower trend given that a tv is a larger ticket item. In the end, those who can afford to buy a losing technology (And then later replace it) will do so, while most of the population will wait 2-4 years until the price goes down.

 

[BMXTRIX]

Remember those TVs from several years ago that claimed 1080p . . . but simply didn't accept 1080p via the inputs!! (just 1080i or something, deinterlacing).

What bugs me, is that most people who did some homework were well aware that the first 1080p TVs didn't accept 1080p resolution. There were no chips to support 1080p at the time, so it didn't exist for the INPUT side, even though the display itself was 1080p.

The key is that people felt misled because they didn't do their homework and ask questions - which had answers out there, pretty readily available from sites like this one.

So, a 3D tv . . . that doesn't accept 3D inputs?

TVs have been anaglyph 3D capable for decades... Once again, it's about the marketing and doing research instead of the knee jerk reaction to go and buy what's cheapest.

There seem to be many different types of glasses. Which models of TVs/BDPs will be enabled with one of the competing 3D "formats", or all of them? (There is evidence that different displays may only have one, and others have multiples?). Gosh.

I'm not sure this will be display driven, but the more I think about it, the more likely it is.

Panasonic, who is an EXTREMLY major player in this, has pushed their standard as the one which Blu-ray will be using for their players. Active shutter glasses will be the norm, and I expect a technology like Bluetooth will drive the shutter glasses to accuracy.

XpanD is the major manufacturer of active shutter glasses, and Panasonic was the main technological force behind Avatar's 3D. Count on these two behemouths of 3D to step up big time this year with some standards which companies really will fall in line behind. While there are many ways to trigger the glasses, the Sony Bluetooth patents and their high interest likely will make it a reliable and typical solution.

Will it be like HDDVD vs Bluray, or will it be like DTS-MA vs TrueHD vs PCM? IOW, will one format die, or will both/all formats co-exist?

That's a really good question, and I would say that I think that the standard will be active shutter glasses. The control of those glasses may be in differring camps, but I think it will push back to what works best. Where Blu-ray and HD DVD were actually very comparible products for quality, 3D of this form for residential use is brand new and it's likely that a few companies will try something other than what Panasonic and XpanD manufacture, but I think they will fall in line with those two, who I would bet are going to be putting out the best products on the market. Someone may improve upon them, but it will still be using their patents. This will be a short lived races to see what works best I think.

 

[BMXTRIX]

We'll see the same trend with 3D tvs, only maybe on a slightly slower trend given that a tv is a larger ticket item. In the end, those who can afford to buy a losing technology (And then later replace it) will do so, while most of the population will wait 2-4 years until the price goes down.

I think this is just a bit off. Not that people will be adopting at different rates, but this isn't like Blu-ray. If you want a new disc player, you have a choice between BD and DVD. If you choose BD, you pay a fair bit more for the player relatively speaking, and you may be buying far more expensive discs.

With 3D capable displays, in 2-4 years you won't have a choice. If you are getting a display it WILL be 3D capable. I expect that things like Panasonic and Epson, who are major projector players (and more obviously) will release their 'standard' home theater projectors as 3D capable models this year. That means EVERYONE who buys a projector from them for home theater will have a 3D capable model.

Displays will follow suit, regardless of consumers. People won't buy in this year because there are so many non-3D options for less. But, in 2-4 years not only won't there be a price difference, it will be only the low quality displays which don't have a 3D capable processing chip on board.

I feel very strongly that 3D will be in all displays even if the technology doesn't take off immediately. 3D sports networks plus BD-3D and a real industry push towards quality 3D films is really what sets this push apart from 3D of years before. This time it's not just a gimmick to get more people into theaters, it's a gimmick to sell more TVs, BD players, movies, and more. A real, globalized, industry push.

Like it or hate it, when there is this much push of a technology by the industry it typically has a good chance for success.

 

[Boerd]

I got my 1080p HDTV in 2007 (or was it 2008??) and now less than 3 years later is "old" technology... I will not upgrade in the next 5 years; 3D might/may be cool but I haven't won the lottery to upgrade every 3 years. Plus - I am not sure if it will even take off. We'll see but my guess is that it will be like the BD - slow acceptance from buyers.
For all I care cable/satellite is still sending 720p or 1080i - how about we get true HD (1080p) for a change?
Netflix has only few titles in BD... I'll wait and see.

 

[jostenmeat]

The key to all of it (for us consumers) is deciding when to adopt. People with cash to burn can afford to early-adopt into one tech versus another, some may wait until prices drop initially, while others wait until the tech becomes ubiquitous. Instead of buying the first BD player that came out for around $800, I was an early adopter of the PS3- which only cost around $400. Others have waited until as recently as thanksgiving, and found BD players for $200.

Of course. I bought my Panasonic BD30 in '07 for about $300, and it came with either 5 or 7 free blurays, I don't remember exactly.

I only first posted in this thread to know how pre/pros were going to handle "1.4" bandwidth. Now, it's one thing to wait for some "ironing-out" of the technology, but with bluray we didn't have to wait to know that a pre/receiver would at least work. See, even the HDMI 1.0 spec allowed for mch PCM (which meant your receiver was already fine with PS3 from day 1). But, it's another thing if a new purchase of a 2.5k pre/pro with 1.3a today cannot handle the new 3D video (not even talking audio!).

We'll see but my guess is that it will be like the BD - slow acceptance from buyers.
For all I care cable/satellite is still sending 720p or 1080i - how about we get true HD (1080p) for a change?

I'd rather a good, as in not-incredibly-overcompressed 720p or 1080i, over any kind of 1080p I would expect with cable/sat providers. Ok, some say to get Fios since it is "uncompressed", but to the best of my knowledge the content owners themselves already compressed it before Fios even gets it. But, at least it's not compressed twice!

Netflix has only few titles in BD... I'll wait and see.

HUH?! What do you consider few?? There are presently 2266 blurays available today, and nearly a year ago (last March) Netflix stated that they already had over 1,300 blurays, and that the number was quickly growing. Heck, they even have The Karajan Memorial Concert now . . . My guess is that they have the great majority of all the titles available for purchase!

Netflix has particularly saved me money with Criterion titles, as they are typically more expensive. Trust me, I was disappointed when I went through their Kurosawa collection (never saw his stuff before owning bluray), as well as Truffaut's collection (which I also never saw before bluray), because I incorrectly thought they didn't carry enough of their bluray selection. I then discovered the real issue, unfortunately for me, was that the bluray releases themselves just don't come fast enough for me!! IOW, Netflix already had all of the available titles, so far as I knew at the time of browsing.

 

[Boerd]

...
HUH?! What do you consider few?? There are presently 2266 blurays available today, and nearly a year ago (last March) Netflix stated that they already had over 1,300 blurays, and that the number was quickly growing. Heck, they even have The Karajan Memorial Concert now . . . My guess is that they have the great majority of all the titles available for purchase!
...

As of today Netflix has in the blu ray section they have 77 pages;
76 with 24 titles = 1824
On the last page 17
Total 1841 blu rays from Netflix.
Now let's say they have a total of 50,000 titles (I hope they have more than that)
Blu ray would be 3.6% of the total.
Even if they had 2266 out of 50k titles it would be less than 5%.
I'll wait until this becomes more like 30-50%.
Probably by then 3% will be 3D and so on...
Don't get me wrong - I really like the HD and I think Avatar is cool - I just don't have the money to upgrade so often.

 

[BMXTRIX]

As of today Netflix has in the blu ray section they have 77 pages;
76 with 24 titles = 1824
On the last page 17
Total 1841 blu rays from Netflix.
Now let's say they have a total of 50,000 titles (I hope they have more than that)
Blu ray would be 3.6% of the total.
Even if they had 2266 out of 50k titles it would be less than 5%.
I'll wait until this becomes more like 30-50%.
Probably by then 3% will be 3D and so on...
Don't get me wrong - I really like the HD and I think Avatar is cool - I just don't have the money to upgrade so often.

Why'd you buy a HDTV? Over 90% of your channels are SD?

Don't get me wrong, but you don't have to upgrade, but unless you bought a Pioneer Kuro display, the DAY you bought what you have now, it was inferior technology. By the time it got to your car it was outdated, by the time you turned it on, it was antiquated.

That's just how technology works.

But, for two years plus your TV keeps working, so apparently even though 3D is out there, people's existing displays keep working.

Now, Blu-ray hasn't taken off with the steep curve that DVD did, but it most certainly has taken off seeing revenue basically triple year-on-year, so while BD is drawing from a few years of history, and needs titles worthy of being presented at 1080p, and studios willing to do them justice, 3D will all be new and will be very limited.

If you don't want 3D, nobody will force it on you.

If you don't want BD, then get rid of your HDTV. At $130 for a Panasonic BD player and a regular Netflix account with basically EVERY new major release available, anyone who loves high quality movies is losing out by not owning a BD player at this point. I certainly find that there are more movies to watch than I can keep up with.

Consider: If you watched 3 movies a day on BD, you wouldn't watch all the titles which will be released this year. Not sure there are more than about 30 movies I want to even see in a year.

But, 3-5 titles will likely be released in theaters in 3D and if I can get that effect at home, then I certainly would want it and when I decide to upgrade - whenver that is for myself - I will be looking for 3D.

If you choose to wait 5 years - or 10 years - that's your choice, as it is for everyone. But, half the USA doesn't own a HDTV... Seems like there is a lot of market out there for this tech.

 

[Ares]

Why'd you buy a HDTV? Over 90% of your channels are SD?

Don't get me wrong, but you don't have to upgrade, but unless you bought a Pioneer Kuro display, the DAY you bought what you have now, it was inferior technology. By the time it got to your car it was outdated, by the time you turned it on, it was antiquated.

That's just how technology works.

But, for two years plus your TV keeps working, so apparently even though 3D is out there, people's existing displays keep working.

Now, Blu-ray hasn't taken off with the steep curve that DVD did, but it most certainly has taken off seeing revenue basically triple year-on-year, so while BD is drawing from a few years of history, and needs titles worthy of being presented at 1080p, and studios willing to do them justice, 3D will all be new and will be very limited.

If you don't want 3D, nobody will force it on you.

If you don't want BD, then get rid of your HDTV. At $130 for a Panasonic BD player and a regular Netflix account with basically EVERY new major release available, anyone who loves high quality movies is losing out by not owning a BD player at this point. I certainly find that there are more movies to watch than I can keep up with.

Consider: If you watched 3 movies a day on BD, you wouldn't watch all the titles which will be released this year. Not sure there are more than about 30 movies I want to even see in a year.

But, 3-5 titles will likely be released in theaters in 3D and if I can get that effect at home, then I certainly would want it and when I decide to upgrade - whenver that is for myself - I will be looking for 3D.

If you choose to wait 5 years - or 10 years - that's your choice, as it is for everyone. But, half the USA doesn't own a HDTV... Seems like there is a lot of market out there for this tech.

What do you mean by the time you get to the car, more like after you pay for it at the checkout. We forgot one group what about those people who bought a converter box to avoid buying a new TV? Just an opinion, when 3D TV's start coming out and the price of HDTV's drop a little more we will see more people buying HDTV's.

 

[Boerd]

Why'd you buy a HDTV? Over 90% of your channels are SD?

Don't get me wrong, but you don't have to upgrade, but unless you bought a Pioneer Kuro display, the DAY you bought what you have now, it was inferior technology. By the time it got to your car it was outdated, by the time you turned it on, it was antiquated.

That's just how technology works.

But, for two years plus your TV keeps working, so apparently even though 3D is out there, people's existing displays keep working.

Now, Blu-ray hasn't taken off with the steep curve that DVD did, but it most certainly has taken off seeing revenue basically triple year-on-year, so while BD is drawing from a few years of history, and needs titles worthy of being presented at 1080p, and studios willing to do them justice, 3D will all be new and will be very limited.

If you don't want 3D, nobody will force it on you.

If you don't want BD, then get rid of your HDTV. At $130 for a Panasonic BD player and a regular Netflix account with basically EVERY new major release available, anyone who loves high quality movies is losing out by not owning a BD player at this point. I certainly find that there are more movies to watch than I can keep up with.

Consider: If you watched 3 movies a day on BD, you wouldn't watch all the titles which will be released this year. Not sure there are more than about 30 movies I want to even see in a year.

But, 3-5 titles will likely be released in theaters in 3D and if I can get that effect at home, then I certainly would want it and when I decide to upgrade - whenver that is for myself - I will be looking for 3D.

If you choose to wait 5 years - or 10 years - that's your choice, as it is for everyone. But, half the USA doesn't own a HDTV... Seems like there is a lot of market out there for this tech.

I guess I'm just upset at the pace you have to upgrade these days.
To your point - I already have an HD and Netflix and I am planning to buy a BD player.
Just whining away ... - didn't mean to upset you.
If half US doesn't have an HDTV - they'll most likely buy a 3D and then I am in the other half stuck with my non 3D HDTV for a few years (financial reasons)
I'd love a 3D HDTV but can't afford now (not really a choice)
Again - didn't mean to upset you (sorry if I did).

 

[BMXTRIX]

I guess I'm just upset at the pace you have to upgrade these days.
To your point - I already have an HD and Netflix and I am planning to buy a BD player.
Just whining away ... - didn't mean to upset you.
If half US doesn't have an HDTV - they'll most likely buy a 3D and then I am in the other half stuck with my non 3D HDTV for a few years (financial reasons)
I'd love a 3D HDTV but can't afford now (not really a choice)
Again - didn't mean to upset you (sorry if I did).

It's just one of those things I don't think people should get upset about. Or more accurately, it makes sense for you to get upset if you want the technology and just missed out on it. I guess I'm of the 'interested, but not ecstatic' crowd. I will wait for a few reviews to come out to see how it stacks up, but I'm not buying a display until I figure out if 3D is worth spending a bit more on.

Just enjoy it is my philosophy, and if you can't get the latest and greatest, then be happy that when it is time for an upgrade whatever you buy will just be that much cheaper and have that many newer and cooler features. For BD, for example, you missed out on spending $500 on a player that had half the features of what you get for $150 today. Wait a year, and it'll be $100 or less. Waiting isn't bad, for sure, and the techs we've got are just getting cooler, but we all certainly can't stay on top of ownership of them. Way to much $$$.

 

[s162216]

3D is a subjective medium though - when I saw Avatar for instance, I saw the obvious sense of depth that the 3D gave, but I hardly saw anything actually come out of the screen, my mum on the other hand, said that she saw lots of things coming out of the screen. 3D only works perfectly if you have perfect vision - it will end up being the same with TV, it'll be better for some than others.

I do see the point of having 3D as Avatar was amazing but not everything is really suitable for it IMO like the studios and TV channels are saying it is. Sport for instance would look good and so would many action films but quiz shows , romance films etc would not really benefit from it IMO and you could end up buying all this expensive 3D gear only to watch perhaps less than half of the things you watch in 3D.

 

[JerryLove]

Again: the exact same critiques could be leveled against HD or indeed, color. Is Cassablanca hurt by being low-def and gray?

Though as one person somewhere pointed out: it's really "stereoscopic" vision. We use a lot of things to determine depth, and "3D" only adds one above 2D.

Finally: I don't think had anything come "out". It seemed all "in".

 

[Ares]

Found this article from Wired thought it seemed interesting.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/10/3d-tv-explainer/

 

[Nugu]

Here's my question.

What are those of us who rely on corrective lenses supposed to do? Will there be absurd "goggles" we can strap over our glasses or will we be expected to wear contacts or not participate? I have never seen this addressed, and it is definitely a valid point seeing as over half of America uses some kind of vision correction.

I don't think technology will be the failing of anything "3D" at home, I think the glasses will.

Edit: yes I saw that glasses-less TVs are in prototype stages, but they have a tiny sweet spot

 

[JerryLove]

If we are discussing the stereoscopic tech used in theaters, it's just a polarizing filter. It could be placed on snap-ons, or over or under your glasses.

I suspect that "over half of Americans" have vision problems signifigant enough that it interferes with a properly sized theater screen.

There's no reason I can think of that the tech couldn't be added to corrective lenses.

 

[BMXTRIX]

Here's my question.

What are those of us who rely on corrective lenses supposed to do? Will there be absurd "goggles" we can strap over our glasses or will we be expected to wear contacts or not participate? I have never seen this addressed, and it is definitely a valid point seeing as over half of America uses some kind of vision correction.

I don't think this is likely to be an issue at all. There will be tons of different shutter glasses on the market as things move forward and the ability to market to those who wear glasses will be a huge part of their marketing capability. So, not only will you likley see clip on or glasses-covering versions, I think for those willing to spend a bit more, you may even see prescription models.

I don't think technology will be the failing of anything "3D" at home, I think the glasses will.

The technology itself, for the displays, is likely to be ridiculously inexpensive. The glasses will be the part that costs some cash and also the one with the most personalized varieties.

 

[BMXTRIX]

If we are discussing the stereoscopic tech used in theaters, it's just a polarizing filter. It could be placed on snap-ons, or over or under your glasses.

I suspect that "over half of Americans" have vision problems signifigant enough that it interferes with a properly sized theater screen.

There's no reason I can think of that the tech couldn't be added to corrective lenses.

I have not heard of a way to setup polarizing with traditional flat panel LCD/plasma displays to this point. Theaters either use two projectors, a dual lens projector, or a single lens projector/polarizing wheel in CONJUNCTION with a special screen to deliver the stereoscopic polarized image which makes those polarized glasses work properly.

Active shutter glasses are the technology expected to be used by the vast majority of 3D manufacturers.