3d television standard to be proposed

[smoothy]

http://all3dtv.com/2009/05/3d-televisio ... -proposed/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is very interesting

I would like 1 format to be chosen, then we can all go out and get the right TV's that's compatible with all 3d sources such as consoles, broadcasting and bluray. But unfortunately from the way it's going. It seems we'll all be playing/watching these sources through shutters. James Cameron partnered with Panasonic to promote their 3D Plasma TV's which are using shutters. So it's now very likely when you have a Hollywood top director on board, the format wars is over just like Hollywood chose bluray over HD-DVD. So it's likely all bluray movies will be made for shutters only. This would probably definitely be what would lean towards the likeness of the proposed format for the 3d TV standards alliance. So perhaps the best thing TV manufacturers could do, is build support into all their 3D TV's for shutters and polarized glasses!

[Neil]

I'm sorry, but I can't subscribe to this view at all.

The standard and/or dominant technology will be defined by what customers want above all else. Do you think MTBS and S3DGA could get game developers involved if we were dependent on what some distant Hollywood honcho had to say? I would never sign away our industry on a gamble like that!

I think James Cameron's contributions are being misinterpreted here. Pioneer, yes. Enthusiast, yes. Influential catalyst, yes. Ultimate decision maker, far from it. I credit 100% of the accomplishments in S-3D gaming (EA, Blitz, etc) to the passion demonstrated by end users above all else. With the exception of having an organized gaming body, no individual or individual company has the power you describe.

Some gamers like polarized, other like shutter glasses. Nobody has the power to tell you what you like on your behalf.

Regards,
Neil

[smoothy]

Hi Neil,

Don't get me wrong, I do agree with you. I think we should all be able to watch movies or play the games in the way we want with shutters or polarized. But your going to get to the point where it all get's rather confusing and very costly if there isn't one format. Polarized can be better than shutters if done right. Hollywood chose polarization for 3d cinemas/IMAX over shutters.

The only way I can see this 3d as working is if TV manufacturers make their TV's compatible for shutters and polarization then we have the best of both formats. Then bluray releases should get shutter and polarization compatibility on one disc.

I don't want to go too off topic here, but I have been wanting to ask you something Neil...Do you think now that you have this S3DGA set up if you can create a section on the site which promotes other kinds of stereoscopic 3d hardware? I thought if you could offer polls in this section and get the 3D community interested and the stereoscopic 3d manufacturers (such as head mounted display manufacturers) interested then we could do polls on what the community wants, such as larger field of view, augmented reality, dvi, 1080p, wireless etc etc...Could you see this happening???

[Neil]

Keep in mind that S3DGA has not been completely set up yet because we need the industry to back us up!

For years, we have been plagued with the statement "Chicken and the egg! The game developers don't care about S-3D!". This has now been proven to be a complete myth. The brass ring for the gaming industry has been outstretched to our S-3D tech enablers. Will the S-3D manufacturers attend the meeting to build this up, or will they leave EA and Blitz flapping in the wind? Do they want to make S-3D gaming and their display product lines viable in the long term through gaming?

I'm pleased with our RSVP list so far. If S3DGA takes off the way I expect, we will definitely be able to diversify and move forward on many of your ideas. The end to this story has not been written yet.

Regards,
Neil

[DmitryKo]

I would like 1 format to be chosen, then we can all go out and get the right TV's that's compatible with all 3d sources such as consoles, broadcasting and bluray. But unfortunately from the way it's going. It seems we'll all be playing/watching these sources through shutters.

You are misinterpreting the terminology. SMPTE 3D Task Force defines "3D Home Master" as a device-independent distribution format specifically aimed for stereoscopic home movies, which are conversion of stereoscopic movie formats intended for digital cinema theaters.

It does not dictate any preferred display method - actually, it aims to be compatible with broad range of display devices present on the market, from polarized screens with passive polarized glasses, to frame-sequential screens with active shutter glasses, to multi-view autostereoscopic displays, and also to account for real-life differences in display size and viewing distance across different living room environments, which can distort the viewing experience.

So far, SMPTE have only nailed the basic requirements for this "3D Home Master" format - whatever final form it may take, such as "simple" two-view stereoscopic H.264/AVC streams coded with SVC and MVC extensions, or entirely different approach like 2D + depth, multi-view with occlusions etc., the evaluation of technology just started as of now.


See this presentation, Report of the SMPTE Task Force on 3D to the home, and be sure to check slides from EBU-ITU-SMPTE 3DTV Workshop presentations.

[martinlandau]

"So it's now very likely when you have a Hollywood top director on board, the format wars is over just like Hollywood chose bluray over HD-DVD."

Smoothy I really appreciate your thoughts on this, and I know when people think hollywood they think massive amounts of money, power and influence. Please let me indulge you in some history though. The early days of movie making itself many thought were going to be controlled by Edison in New York because he had all the patents and it was a no brainer. Many people did not like Thomas Edison and decided to move to california and leave new york to escape his burdensome control and thus hollywood was founded. This meme has played out so many times in history, Jesus subverting all of roman society. The founding fathers of the USA subverting the AWESOME british empire of that time. My ancestor Braveheart gaining FREEDOM for the scots. Let me give you some history a little more recent, one of my old bosses at IBM, Tom Bryan, he was part of the team who released the original IBM PC. Everyone within the company knew this was a no brainer, after all we are talking 1970's IBM culture, one of the most powerful international corporations ever to exist. Certainly who could challenge this awesome force and might that were going to set the standards and direct the industry! The political connections and government friends alone ASSURED IBM was going to seize VICTORY! Well we all know how that turned out (I used amigas, atari st's and commodores for the next 10 years after IBM's standards were ensured - hehe). Neil is giving you good insight Smoothy, the demands of 7 billion humans and growing is a force of NATURE FAR BEYOND the control of one James Cameron, or even the control of an entire NATION or even many multi national corporations combined. We are hurtling towards the future in a simulcrum futureshock republic and what is coming nobody can even envision or control and will probably surprise us all 10 years from now how different it was from what we expected. Like patrick mcgoohan from THE PRISONER, you are a free man Smoothy, and the future I see is one like spock preached, IDIC (infinite diversity, infinite combinations)

PS I too want things to be easy as possible and I think Neils efforts will go a long way to help that, but the world is constantly changing and innovating as Billy G said, and you have to go with the flow. As for blu-ray or hd-dvd - at siggraph they had 2kby2k stereo3d NASA animations that I can get over fiberwire - how does bluray control me in that regard? I honestly don't expect hard physical media to be the distrubution mechanism of choice for humanities future.

One of my most favorite movies - DUNE - every revolution bears the seeds for the next

[cybereality]

@Smoothy: I think you are confusing things. The entire point of the standard is to decouple the delivery format from the display format. There are already at least 3 different formats: passive, active and multi-view. Within that there are even differences like linear/circular polarized (interlaced or custom like iz3d), shutters via full-frame page-flipping or checkerboarding, multi-view with 4-8 distinct sources or 2D+depth. So there is a lot out there already and surely new technology and formats will arrive in the coming years. The idea is that a 3D standard, like a Blu-Ray encoded with 1080P dual-video streams (which the format does indeed support) could be viewed on any display type. Then via custom hardware/software you could decode this standard format into whatever is native to your display type. You won't have to buy a different TV for every movie/game that comes out. That wouldn't make sense.

[smoothy]

@Smoothy:The idea is that a 3D standard, like a Blu-Ray encoded with 1080P dual-video streams (which the format does indeed support) could be viewed on any display type. Then via custom hardware/software you could decode this standard format into whatever is native to your display type. You won't have to buy a different TV for every movie/game that comes out. That wouldn't make sense.

But I would assume as James Cameron has gone for Panasonic's 3D TV tech that uses shutters then bluray release of Avatar may look best for shutter setups. Of course all the other releases of bluray may work well on any display format but for Cameron he may focus all his talent into making the 3d look best on shutters.

[Neil]

Assume, assume, assume! Never assume!

It weakens our industry to put so much dependence and credence on a single movie or product. I think Jim Cameron would be horrified with the idea that a whole industry is dependent on his three hour movie. I'm horrified by the idea. Completely bizarre, and completely untrue.

Regards,
Neil

[martinlandau]

Smoothy, Cameron was a pioneer with some of this stuff, but please go read some of the comments by me and cyber reality and yuri and neil and so many other great people here at mtbs3d talking about shutter glass solution over the past years. There is a REASON a lot of us went with iz3d and other passive solutions like zalman and not a shuttered solution. I have posted my personal eyestrain and headache issues with shutters at least a billion times now in various threads here and other websites. Also there are threads all over mtbs3d where a shuttered solution, although practical possibly for a single user at home, will never break the hometheater and family enviornment at current prices - NO WAY! Imagine you are an uncle like me with many nieces who have friends, and they come over and break your 600 dollar pair of crystaleyes shutters like just happened to me!!!, versus breaking a 5 dollar pair of polarized glasses - kids break stuff my man!!

Still if none of that convinces you, go watch AVATAR at the theater, and if you can show me one movie house that hands you a pair of shutter glasses to watch it instead of a pair of polarized glasses to watch it - I will be surprised - as far as I am aware here in Tampa - the reald, and dolby3d houses and imax that will be showing Avatar are all going to be using passive polarized glasses - now why in the WORLD would Cameron allow that if he was backing shutter glasses? Explain it to me........ Neil is right, assumptions are dangerous!

[Neil]

Actually...XpanD shutter glasses are very popular in European theaters.

Regards,
Neil

[DmitryKo]

But I would assume as James Cameron has gone for Panasonic's 3D TV tech that uses shutters then bluray release of Avatar may look best for shutter setups.

Smoothy, why don't you please take your time to actually read the replies?


As an end user, you should not even be concerned that "3D" content will only be playable on a specific device; the choice of 3D TV display is only a matter of price and convenience.

"3D television" in its current state means stereoscopic, two-view displays currently on the market, which are designed to display footage captured with two-view cameras (as opposed to futuristic "holographic" displays shown in sci fi movies).

There are also many coding schemes, like two independent streams, inter-view compressed coding, frame seqiential coding, or interleaved, subfield or quincunx incapsulation of stereo views into a single stream (for compatibility reasons), but in the end, all they do is produce stereoscopic pictures, that is two different views for display.

Any stereoscopic 3D display, no matter line interleaved or dual-projection (passive glasses) or frame interleaved (shutter glasses), will be perfectly compatible with any coding scheme which can deliver these two separate stereoscopic views, including theoretical future schemes based on multiview compression with pre-computed scene depth and occusions (which can be used to render a compatible two-view representation).


The real problem is not with display or storage technologies, but with movie capture techniques. Stereoscopic footage intended for cinema theaters need to take some very specific assumptions about the viewing angles and scene depth (or, in comparable terms, screen size and viewer's distance to the screen). These parameters dictate maximum eye separation, and they do not necessarily translaste well into smaller TV screens and viewing rooms used in homes.

If the real viewing environment does not match this ideal cinema theater, this can be a source of great discomfort for your brain, because you will not be able to converge the pictures into a proper 3D world. This is the area where movie producers should take a great cauition, not the end-customer display technology or coding shceme.

http://www.siggraph.org/publications/ne ... g-it-right" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[martinlandau]

Actually...XpanD shutter glasses are very popular in European theaters.

Uh! And I lived for 5 years in Germany as a child at baumholder and nuremberg, sheesh my USA centric biases sure came through on this one I stand corrected Smoothy, please forgive me. DKO that is some great info. I will have to look into these xpands some more, I jumped the gun.

[smoothy]

Still if none of that convinces you, go watch AVATAR at the theater, and if you can show me one movie house that hands you a pair of shutter glasses to watch it instead of a pair of polarized glasses to watch it - I will be surprised - as far as I am aware here in Tampa - the reald, and dolby3d houses and imax that will be showing Avatar are all going to be using passive polarized glasses - now why in the WORLD would Cameron allow that if he was backing shutter glasses? Explain it to me........ Neil is right, assumptions are dangerous!

From your comments guys I can see that I have touched a nerve, I apologize for that. I don't mean to offend your views which come with a lot of experience in this field. I am no expert just a consumer with some ideas and a love for stereo 3d and just want to see it done right.

Anyway in reply

I am well aware that all the cinemas are using polarized glasses, and I prefer polarized to shutters. But it is fact that Cameron is supporting shutters with it's bluray release. He has partnered with Panasonic to promote their new TV's which use shutters. Here is the youtube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuQ8pXVCrXU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; if you watch the whole video you will see at 1:30 into it that Cameron talks about why he partnered with Panasonic and why their system is so good.

I found this article http://marketsaw.blogspot.com/2009/01/c ... hd-3d.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

the writer at the end of the article is optimistic that there will be a de-facto standard soon, and he says that shutters seems to be the way to go, and the fact that Panasonic have chosen to do so and the fact that Cameron is happy with that shows that possibly it might be the de-facto standard for watching bluray movies. If Cameron wanted polarized he would of partnered with a TV manufacturer that was making a polarized display but he didn't.

The article even says that polarized solutions only offer half the resolution which I find hard to believe, the cinemas are not half the resolution. I always found that polarized solutions allow you to see the actual picture with it's full color. But not with shutters, as the glasses seem to be a bit dark and when they flicker showing one side dark for a brief second and then other dark in an alternating pattern that makes the viewing experience dark very briefly. So polarization is the way to go for me, but this article differs.

[martinlandau]

Hehe smoothy, you haven't touched a nerve, I am wild and nutz all the time, not just now I do see your points, and read the article you linked. They did say Sony was backing something else. Can you tell me Smoothy at your home, are there more sony products or panasonic? At my house I have nothing panasonic and a sony AV receiver, a sony 1272 crt projector, a sony am/fm walkman, and a sony radio in one of my vehicles. Also I have scoured that website you linked, where is the news about Electronic Arts backing the stereo3d Industry - I would think that would be HUGE news to be released by a site like that talking about stereo3d gaming and tv's and standards no? Smoothy do you have kids? My nieces just broke my 600 dollar pair of shutter glasses, I do have a little cash stashed back, but how long at 600 dollars a pop before I go broke do you think? This was a problem I had with the new cd-rom and dvd - and now blu-ray distribution media - they could have chosen to encase the disk in a hard case so it would be much more durable - instead I have to buy a new copy of Disney's Monsters Inc for my nieces practically every month. Also smoothy I was at siggraph and nasa was showing 2kby2k stereo3d content. And at infocomm there were stereo3d solutions showing 4kby4k and up to 8k stereo3d solutions, I asked them how do I get this at home - they said do you have high speed internet - I said yes. How does blu - ray let me get these 2kby2k stereo3d files from Nasa that I love and helped pay for with my tax dollars? These are not rhetorical questions, I would love to talk more with you and maybe we both can meet each other in the middle about ideas we are passionate about. I already apologized and want to understand where you are coming from and why you think the way you do and maybe I will learn more in the process, like I just learned xpand is all over europe - I didnt know that.

[Neil]

Hi Smoothy!

No offense taken here. We like a healthy debate!

For me, I like to work from strength, and our industry has a lot of strength to work with.

Be that as it may, individual companies will always promote their own weirs because they want to sell their lines of product. They will flash their brands with partnered products, and they will try to come across as the only show in town. It's an illusion. We know this, they know this. Using Avatar as an example, once it comes and goes, what next?

If anything, Avatar will serve as a proof of concept for something else. I'm a bit troubled that our industry spends as much hype energy on this because it creates a false weakness: the idea that our industry is dependent on one product or one configuration of product. There is nothing further from the truth.

This website that you referred to, same problem. So much energy on Avatar, when the most important stories happening in the here and now are being missed.

Regards,
Neil

[cybereality]

@Smoothy: You are not looking at the situation from the right perspective. I respect that you are somewhat confused, so please don't be shy in asking questions. However, people here have been very helpful and I think you should look real hard at what has been said. I will be blunt: you have not seen Panasonic's new 3D solution and are making unqualified speculation about the quality. You cannot make broad generalizations about which 3D technology is better (say between active or passive) because there are so many nuances between implementations. The bottom-line is that Panasonic is the first brand-name in electronics to achieve *FULL 1080P* in stereoscopic 3D. Does Samsung have a set that does that: NO; Mitsubishi: NO, Sony: NO, JVC: NO, Phillips: NO, Hyundai: NO, Viewsonic: NO, Zalman: NO, IZ3D: NO, Miracube: NO, and not to mention all the other companies that don't even have a single 3D television (even in prototype stages). Where all these companies have failed, Panasonic has succeeded. It is no wonder why Cameron is endorsing their product.


I agree that, all things being equal, passive polarized is the better solution than shutter glasses. However, all things are not equal. In reality, polarized solutions always seem to sacrifice something. Usually this means the resolution is cut in half (like with the popular xpol based interlaced solution) and viewing angle is limited. This means an instant loss in quality, plus its not much good for the living room setting due to the narrow viewing angles. This is the case with pretty much every polarized based consumer product. I am not talking about the theaters, that is professional quality hardware that costs probably close to $100k. That is a different conversation altogether. And don't tell me you can buy two 1080P projectors with polarizing filters and a silver screen and DIY a setup. Yeah, you can do that, but that is not a mainstream solution. Only die-hard enthusiasts are going to go down that road. Its not like Cameron is going to tell audiences if they want to see his movie at home here is a list of parts to buy and you have to build a friggin' theater. That is not going to fly. He chose a solution that is market viable.

Really what this boils down to is how are you so sure this Panasonic set isn't just the best 3D HDTV ever made?

[craylon]

2 throw in my 2c I pretty much agree with dimitry

the method of viewing has to be looked at separated from the transport medium

besides the shutter vs polarized fights for method of viewing I can also imagine viewing devices beyond a TV screen like video glasses that like hmd produce 1 screen per eye or mini beamers that directly send images into your eyes.

the standard we should be talking about 1st is how the pictures should be stored/ send to the device that decodes them to a polarized or shutter glasses display. for now I'm happy if they find a standard (like side by side) that delivers the full 1080p for both eyes instead of delivering us blurays with anaglyph version of "bloody valentine" or "ice age"

[DmitryKo]

Dear Smoothy,

James Cameron endorses Panasonic 3DTV sets because they are the best steroscopic solutuion on the market, period. All other products can give you heachache, nausea, and disoritentation, and will steal your milk. This is the reason why Mr. Cameron optimises his upcoming Avatar movie for shutter glasses only.

Please ignore anything say on these "enthusiasts" sites. They are evil and outright refuse to shamelessly promote our products over competition. Commercials are one single source of viable unbiased information - especially when thay end with our motto, "Panasonic. Ideas for life".

Sincerely yours,
Panasonic Corporation of North America,
Marketing Department

PS. Did you know that if you chant our motto as a daily mantra, it can singificatly improve your digestion?

[smoothy]

the standard we should be talking about 1st is how the pictures should be stored/ send to the device that decodes them to a polarized or shutter glasses display. for now I'm happy if they find a standard (like side by side) that delivers the full 1080p for both eyes instead of delivering us blurays with anaglyph version of "bloody valentine" or "ice age"

This is exactly what I have been saying from the start and this seems to be what Cameron is doing, it seems that the standard is going to be side by side that delivers 1080p per eye.

[martinlandau]

The bottom-line is that Panasonic is the first brand-name in electronics to achieve *FULL 1080P* in stereoscopic 3D. Does Samsung have a set that does that: NO; Mitsubishi: NO, Sony: NO,

Ahh the misconceptions abound, although I currently only have a 1272 sony CRT projector with crystaleyes 3 sterescopic shutters with 1600x1200 - there has actually been a better than 1080P for decades now. 2500x2000P - and the deals you can find on ebay the past 10 years or so on these old beauties - AMAZING! Curt used to get some of the old barco's, nec's and sony's for cheap, put it in a tv box and do back projection with fast refresh green phosphor and s3d slap all the folks over at avsforum years ago.

http://www.curtpalme.com/PJSpecs_Sony.shtm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

VPH-G90U 9" LC P19LQF6 Digital 1300 30,000 15-150 38-150 135 90-300 2500X2000p

I thought Sony had demoed a passive polarized solution at CES?

Where all these companies have failed, Panasonic has succeeded.

I could not believe several of the crt projector folks doing s3d at sony 20 years ago did not merge over into the digital group - they already had the people with the experience. Politics and unforeseen circumstances, amazing! Barco too, but I just don't think home entertainment when thinking Barco.

And don't tell me you can buy two 1080P projectors with polarizing filters and a silver screen and DIY a setup. Yeah, you can do that, but that is not a mainstream solution.

I won't tell you that, but many people are doing it, stewart screens and dalite screens at infocomm told me the orders were flying in for thier stereo3d silver screens so people could do home theater stereo3d. I think there are more people doing it than you are giving credit for.

He chose a solution that is market viable.

TI and many dlp projector companies were at infocomm pushing a home consumer solution, certainly they think stereo3d projection in the home is market viable no?

Really what this boils down to is how are you so sure this Panasonic set isn't just the best 3D HDTV ever made?

It could be, but there are many people all over the world that like big 10 foot screen in thier house, and I don't see a 10 foot TV that can compete on price with projection in my living room, but I will keep my mind open and would love to be corrected and informed.

[martinlandau]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8Ddb5FHzmM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Mitsubishi is a company I think of when thinking home entertainment. I currently have a mits dlp tv, but this projector looks nice. Yuri said open your mind

Notice this EXECUTIVE asks at the end - ARE YOU A 3D GAMER - come on Cyber!! Mits making a projector for 3D GAMERS - you should be beside yourself with JOY!

[cybereality]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8Ddb5FHzmM Mitsubishi is a company I think of when thinking home entertainment. I currently have a mits dlp tv, but this projector looks nice. Yuri said open your mind

Notice this EXECUTIVE asks at the end - ARE YOU A 3D GAMER - come on Cyber!! Mits making a projector for 3D GAMERS - you should be beside yourself with JOY!

4:3? 1024x768? What year is it again? Talk to me when they have a 16:9 widescreen Full HD projector solution.

[smoothy]

After sony showed their 3D 1080p demo at IFA 2009, I did some reading and found this article:

This article says it seems that the standard from the bluray association will be shutter glasses for 3d bluray playback: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia ... o_PCs.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[DmitryKo]

The standard will most probably be based on the "Stereo High" profile, and will be just as much shutter glasses-based as passive glasses-based or autostereoscopy-based, but you can safely continue to ignore this.

[cybereality]

This article says it seems that the standard from the bluray association will be shutter glasses for 3d bluray playback: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia ... o_PCs.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That dude doesn't know what he's talking about (big surprise!). I don't feel like rehashing all that has been said, so just re-read this entire thread from start to finish. Where you continue to go with this makes about as much sense as someone asking if Xbox360 games will work with a Plasma TV since he heard they only work on LCD.