• All the info is in the first 2 posts, the rest of the posts are general discussion.

__________________________________________________________

Why would I care about 3D or 240hz again?

So that watching movies or blu ray documentaries is like seeing it through a window rather than the regular way it is now seen with 2D.

Perfect 3D Tv/BluRay is the same as looking out your window and looking around outside.

There is different quality from parallax value though. Meaning the greater the screen size the greater the window to see through is and so the 3D experience is greater.
A smaller screen will, or rather Should give the same sensation as looking through a window but not so immersed as looking at a big fish at the aquarium.

___________________________________________________________




Dolby 3d
Dolby Laboratories is a provider of a high resolution 3D solution that includes delivery and tool sets for the cinema. The Dolby 3D approach in the home is based on the following:
1.
A logical tiered path from an infrastructure-friendly methodology to full resolution 3D
2.
High resolution 3D that has compatibility with existing product base of players and displays
3.
Forward looking interoperability with LCD, PDP and DLP displays, BD, set-top boxes and media players
4.
Support for multiple distribution methods that include Blu-ray, Broadcast, Internet downloads, VOD and streaming
5.
Use of advanced video codecs (H.264) to minimize bitrates
Dolby claims its 3D approach is flexible and does not require the introduction of new consumer electronics equipment, workflows or distribution channels

Footnotes & Additional Questions:
1 Dolby’s approach can use any one of the frame compatible systems
2 Broadcast excluded, others may require updated firmware.
Considerations/Comments:
The Dolby approach is not stereo display dependent and is compatible to existing 3D display formats.

Panasonic

Panasonic is developing a full-HD(High Definition: 1920x1080) per eye solution for BD (Blu-ray Disc) based on MPEG-4 AVC MVC (Multi View Coding). Panasonic claims that this solution provides the best possible quality for home Stereoscopic viewing
This quality is achieved without requiring a 100 percent increase of bit-rate for 3D video compared to 2D video. Due to the utilization of the MVC video codec, the increase would be roughly 50 percent and is varied depending on the 3D content, therefore this allows that more than 2hrs of 3D movies can be recorded onto one 50GB disc.
This solution is fully backwards compatible and conventional 2D Blu-ray players will be able to play content and provide a full-HD 2D image.

Footnotes & Additional Questions:
* Existing stereoscopic displays would include ‘3D Ready’ 120Hz plasma or DLP, and polarized LCD displays. Appropriate active or passive glasses are required. It depends on capability of output video format conversion functionality on the 3D-BD player.
** New stereoscopic would include as-yet unavailable commercially displays. Appropriate active or passive glasses would be required.
*** Other might include head-mounted displays.

Q: Among various formats of 3D technology, with or without viewing glasses, in half HD, full HD, frame sequential or line by line, which one has Panasonic selected, and why?
A: Panasonic has selected full HD video in frame sequential format. This format is used when showing Hollywood 3D movies in theaters, and has been selected to ensure that the full HD video images for the left and right eyes are displayed on the PDP screen frame by frame, ensuring the same quality as movie theaters at people’s own homes.

"The new system supplies 60 fields per second 1920 x 1080 interlace images for both right and left eyes. Panasonic stored the image data into a 50-Gbyte Blu-ray disc. The system employs the MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 image compression format."
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080925/158469/

Sensio

SENSIO3D is a member of the spatial compression family of stereoscopic codecs. It is based on frames pre-processing (encoding) and a split-screen checkerboard spatial layout coupled with advanced interpolation algorithms at the decoding stage. Encapsulated inside the main video stream already handled by video equipments, a SENSIO3D stream can be distributed, for 3D playback, using the currently deployed 2D infrastructure. Using a scheme similar in concept to DTS-HD Master Audio, SENSIO3D can be extended to support Full Frame L/R eyes data. The main video stream contains a spatially compressed SENSIO3D stream (Core) and a second synchronized stream contains additional information that provides configurable quality increments. At full capacity, the actual complete data for both eyes is available. On systems which do not provide decoding for this additional data, a SENSIO3D frame is available and can be decoded using current algorithms and distributed using the current infrastructure. Full backwards compatibility is therefore provided.

(*) NOTE: 3D format is not compatible with 2D presentation (to provide 2D, separate graphics/subtitles/video/audio need to be provided)

(**) NOTE: supports video/audio only and does not support menu/subtitles in their existing format

Dolby 3d chart

http://thumbnails15.imagebam.com/4894/2db42648935056.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/2db42648935056)

Panasonic 3d chart

http://thumbnails14.imagebam.com/4894/e93d2348935057.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/e93d2348935057)

Sensio 3d chart

http://thumbnails18.imagebam.com/4894/719ff048935058.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/719ff048935058)

Sensio media showing a demo
http://electronicdesign.com/shows/ces/ed-ces09-0120-sensio.html
download link
http://www.mediafire.com/?zfycnwdvytm

Dolby 3d showing a demo
http://www.dolby.com/consumer/technology/dolby-3d-demo.html

Panasonic 3d showing a demo
http://www.panasonic.com/3D/
download link
http://www.mediafire.com/?yzgmdgwlfwq

panasonic q&a pdf
http://www.mediafire.com/?w0gigjzzf34

pdf with original charts and info
http://www.mediafire.com/?itnjdmjgmwj
http://www.dvdinformation.com/pdfs/DEG%203D%20White%20Paper_FINAL.pdf

"The Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) has announced plans to incorporate 3D into the Blu-ray Disc format.

The BDA said it is examining a number of criteria and, at a minimum, the specification will require delivery of 1080p resolution to each eye and backward compatibility for both discs and players. The association further explained that the 3D discs will also include a 2D version of the film that can be viewed on existing 2D players and that 3D players will allow consumers to playback their existing libraries of 2D content."
http://www.edn.com/article/CA6687264.html

The charts show each company offers full resolution 3D Blu Ray.
But which company offers all the requirements? Read the charts to find out. :)

Section a

Hold time is different than refresh rates.
Refresh rate and hold time are different than lcd response time

For a certain refresh rate there is a hold time associated with it.
For higher refresh rates than 60Hz, the lcd response time must be made faster.

These times below are per frame:
60hz hold time is 16.67ms
120hz hold time is 16.67/2 = 8.335ms
240hz hold time is 16.67/4 = 4.1675ms
480hz hold time is 16.67/8 = 2.08375ms

__________________________________________

Section b
In the article "31.2: Crosstalk-Free 3D Display with Time-Sequential OCB LCD".

a.) "The OCB mode is well-known for its fast response. We have
newly developed LC material to improve the response time of
OCB (Fig.3), τr+τd=3ms. The rise time from all gray level to
black is very fast, < 0.26ms (Fig.4). This means display image
can be resetted immediately and it make no influence to next
image. In this case very small 3D crosstalk is achieved."

b.) "The demand for 3D active shutter glasses is the same as that for
the LCD panel, that is, fast response of LC. The slow LC response
shall cause the 3D-crosstalk and shortage of luminance. So we
also applied OCB to active-shutter glasses."

c.) "We have realized high quality 3D display system using timesequential OCB LCD. This is 3D crosstalk-free, no pseudoscopy, no 3D moiré in wide viewing angle. It was achieved by fast response OCB panel, fast response OCB active shutter glasses"

Question: In a.) what is 3ms?
Answer.) In a.) they say the monitor that is 3ms, and in b.) the shutter glasses.

They then say in c.) the thing they had success with was the equipment in a.) and b.).

Now for my third point.
In the second article, the one I used in my second point above. They say for time sequential (which is the same as frame sequential) 3d, that 120Hz is too slow.

Then they say that the 3ms of their ocb monitor is working fine, but it still has crosstalk.
Page 6 in the second article says that they still have crosstalk at 3ms (this is when using a equivalent system to the one panasonic is marketing for blu ray).

http://www42.tok2.com/home/ksatsch/pdf/31_AdvancedTVand3-D(DisplaySystems).pdf

•What does this mean?
Each eye must have a hold time faster than 8.33ms to avoid crosstalk and luminance problems.
That would mean the 4.1675ms hold time is the next fastest hold time and it has no pulldown problems either.

__________________________________________

Section c

The Panasonic promo video said that their 3d blu ray system was the same as the one used in theaters.
That is to say theirs is the same as Digital 3d Cinema.
And I have a pdf explaining Digital 3d Cinema: link (http://mkpe.com/publications/d-cinema/misc/choice_in_3-D.php)

__________________________________________

Section d

DLP technology can project 3-D images with a single projector by presenting the stereoscopic left/right image pairs sequentially.
This means that a left image is presented, and then a right image is presented, and never will both a left and a right image appear on the screen at the same time.
However, presenting left/right images to the audience at a 48 fps rate is less than ideal as the sequential nature of the images are perceivable and distracting.

To overcome this, sequential projection requires that the stereoscopic pair of images are "flashed" on screen.
This involves, within the time frame of 1/24th of second, the repetition of a left/right sequence three times before presenting the next left/right sequence.
This process is called "triple flash."

With triple flash, the rate in which images are presented to the audience is a speedy 3 x 48 fps, or 144 fps.
The triple flash rate is a property of the projector, and is the flash rate employed with all add-on technologies for presenting 3-D images in the theatre.

http://mkpe.com/publications/d-cinema/misc/choice_in_3-D.php

__________________________________________

Section e

•How to calculate HDMI (1920x1200p60) Bandwidth

HSYNC: 1920+280 (horizontal blanking pixel No.)
VSYNC: 1200+50 (vertical blanking line No.)
total pixel per frame = 2200x1250 = 2.75 Mpx/frame
Bit rate = 2.75 Mpx/frame x 24 (= 3x8) bit/px x 60 frame/s = 3.96 Gbit/s
TMDS: 8 bit -> 10 bit
TMDS bit rate = 3.96 Gbit/s x 10/8 = 4.95 Gbit/s

•How to calculate HDMI (1080p60) Bandwidth

HSYNC: 1920+280 (horizontal blanking pixel No.)
VSYNC: 1080+45 (vertical blanking line No.)
total pixel per frame = 2200x1125 = 2.47 Mpx/frame
Bit rate = 2.75 Mpx/frame x 24 (= 3x8) bit/px x 60 frame/s = 3.56 Gbit/s
TMDS: 8 bit -> 10 bit
TMDS bit rate = 3.96 Gbit/s x 10/8 = 4.455 Gbit/s

•maximum TMDS clock rate of hdmi 1.4 = 340MHz

•HDMI Maximum TMDS bandwidth (Gbit/s) 10.2

•3D Over HDMI
The 1.4 version of the specification will define common 3D formats and resolutions for HDMI-enabled devices. The specification will standardize the input/output portion of the home 3D system and will specify up to dual-stream 1080p resolution.

• Meaning that the hdmi 1.4 can stream 48p 2d blu ray video, or 24p 3d video

_____________________________________________________

Section f


24p........................ = 23.976024 FPS.. = 41.7083333 Milliseconds Time between frames
NTSC's....................... 29.97003......... = 33.3666666 Milliseconds Time between frames
48p........................ = 47.952048 FPS.. = 20.8541666 Milliseconds Time between frames
NTSC's....................... 59.9400599 FPS..... = 16.6833333 Milliseconds Time between frames


1000 / 23.976024 = 41.7083333
1000 / 29.97003 = 33.3666666
1000 / 47.952048 = 20.8541666
1000 / 59.9400599 = 16.6833333

There's 1000 milliseconds in a second.
MS / FPS = MS: 1000 ms / FPS = Time between frames

"The REAL D system uses triple flash to provide the best motion rendition possible. Use of triple flash puts the refresh rate above the normal flicker fusion threshold for humans, providing smoother motion. The triple flash approach also makes the left and right eye images to appear closer in time, giving significantly less motion induced parallax errors and therefore more comfortable motion rendition."

http://www.edcf.net/edcf_docs/real-d.pdf

Flicker fusion threshold

"If the frame rate falls below the flicker fusion threshold for the given viewing conditions, flicker will be apparent to the observer, and movements of objects on the film will appear jerky. For the purposes of presenting moving images, the human flicker fusion threshold is usually taken as 16 hertz (Hz)."
LINK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flicker_fusion_threshold)

MS / HZ = MS: 1000 / 16 = 62.5

• What does this mean?
1000ms / fps = ms > 1000ms / 16hz = 62.5ms = fps:ms faster than 62.5ms: No flicker
1000ms / fps = ms < 1000ms / 16hz = 62.5ms = fps:ms slower than 62.5ms: flicker

• In Actual practice though, for 3D, the Hz to use is the one Real D uses: "triple flash" (6.94444444ms), as this is standard in digital cinema = 72Hz 2D per eye (13.8888889ms).
1000ms / fps = ms > or = 1000ms / 72hz
1000ms / fps = ms > or = 1000ms / 72hz = 13.8888889ms = fps:ms faster than or equal too 13.8888889ms: if equal too it's decent quality 3D(but can be better).

On a 240Hz monitor, 60p video using 2:2 pulldown making it 120p video
1 000ms / 119.88012fps = 8.34166666ms
8.34166666ms is faster than 13.8888889ms so there should be no flicker when using a 240hz monitor and 60p tv in stereoscopic 3D.

__________________________________________

Section g: Various monitor refresh rates and video source fps list

3:2 pulldown

a = 4 frames = (120th of a second x 20)

= 1 progressive frame for each eye (Left eye = (120th of a second x (pulldown = 3) )) + (Right eye = (120th of a second x (pulldown = 3) ))
= 1 frames from 23.976 fps video source

= 1 progressive frame for each eye (Left eye = (120th of a second x (pulldown = 2) )) + (Right eye = (120th of a second x (pulldown = 2) ))
= 1 frames from 23.976 fps video source

= 1 progressive frame for each eye (Left eye = (120th of a second x (pulldown = 3) )) + (Right eye = (120th of a second x (pulldown = 3) ))
= 1 frames from 23.976 fps video source

= 1 progressive frame for each eye (Left eye = (120th of a second x (pulldown = 2) )) + (Right eye = (120th of a second x (pulldown = 2) ))
= 1 frames from 23.976 fps video source

b: 24p 3D = (a x 6)
= 2p frames (Left eye = (120th of a second x 60)) + (Right eye = (120th of a second x 60))
= 1Hz = 1 second

__________________

240Hz monitor

a: 24p 3D Movie frame
= 1 progressive frame for each eye (Left eye = (240th of a second x (pulldown = 5) )) + (Right eye = (240th of a second x (pulldown = 5) ))
= 1 frame from 23.976 fps video source

b: 30p 3D tv frame
= 1 progressive frame for each eye (Left eye = (240th of a second x (pulldown = 4) )) + (Right eye = (240th of a second x (pulldown = 4) ))
= 1 frame from 29.97 fps video source

c: 60p 3D tv frame
= 1 progressive frame for each eye (Left eye = (240th of a second x (pulldown = 2) )) + (Right eye = (240th of a second x (pulldown = 2) ))
= 1 frame from 59.94 fps video source

d: 3D: 24p, 30p, 60p
= 2p frames (Left eye = (240th of a second x 120)) + (Right eye = (240th of a second x 120))
= 1Hz = 1 second

__________________

480Hz monitor

a: 24p 3D Movie frame
= 1 progressive frame for each eye (Left eye = (480th of a second x (pulldown = 10) )) + (Right eye = (480th of a second x (pulldown = 10) ))
= 1 frame from 23.976 fps video source

b: 30p 3D tv frame
= 1 progressive frame for each eye (Left eye = (480th of a second x (pulldown = 8) )) + (Right eye = (480th of a second x (pulldown = 8) ))
= 1 frame from 29.97 fps video source

c: 48p 3D tv frame
= 1 progressive frame for each eye (Left eye = (480th of a second x (pulldown = 5) )) + (Right eye = (480th of a second x (pulldown = 5) ))
= 1 frame from 47.952 fps video source

d: 60p 3D tv frame
= 1 progressive frame for each eye (Left eye = (480th of a second x (pulldown = 4) )) + (Right eye = (480th of a second x (pulldown = 4) ))
= 1 frame from 59.94 fps video source

e: 3D: 24p, 30p, 48p, 60p
= 2p frames (Left eye = (480th of a second x 240)) + (Right eye = (480th of a second x 240))
= 1Hz = 1 second

__________________________________________

Section h

144hz displays one frame every................. 6.94444444ms
24p video................................... = 41.7083333Ms Time between frames
6:6pulldown
...............................................41.7083333 / 6.94444444 = 6.00600


______________________



120hz displays one frame every................. 8.33333333ms
24p video................................... = 41.7083333Ms Time between frames
5:5 pulldown
...............................................41.7083333 / 8.33333333 = 5.00500


120hz displays one frame every................. 8.33333333ms
NTSC's 29.97 video.......................... = 33.3666666Ms Time between frames
4:4 pulldown
...............................................33.3666666 / 8.33333333 = 4.00399999


120hz displays one frame every................. 8.33333333ms
NTSC's 59.95 video.......................... = 16.6833333Ms Time between frames
2:2 pulldown
...............................................16.6833333 / 8.33333333 = 2.00200


______________________


240hz displays one frame every................. 4.16666667ms
24p video................................... = 41.7083333Ms Time between frames
10:10 pulldown
...............................................41.7083333 / 4.16666667 = 10.01


240hz displays one frame every................. 4.16666667ms
NTSC's 29.97 video.......................... = 33.3666666Ms Time between frames
8:8 pulldown
...............................................33.3666666 / 4.16666667 = 8.00799998


240hz displays one frame every................. 4.16666667ms
NTSC's 59.95 video.......................... = 16.6833333Ms Time between frames
4:4 pulldown
...............................................16.6833333 / 4.16666667 = 4.00399999


______________________


480hz displays one frame every................. 2.08333333ms
24p video................................... = 41.7083333Ms Time between frames
20:20 pulldown
...............................................41.7083333 / 2.08333333 = 20.02


480hz displays one frame every................. 2.08333333ms
NTSC's 29.97 video.......................... = 33.3666666Ms Time between frames
16:16 pulldown
...............................................33.3666666 / 2.08333333 = 16.01600


480hz displays one frame every................. 2.08333333ms
48p video................................... = 20.8541666Ms Time between frames
10:10 pulldown
...............................................20.8541666 / 2.08333333 = 10.01


480hz displays one frame every................. 2.08333333ms
NTSC's 59.94 video.......................... = 16.6833333Ms Time between frames
8:8 pulldown
...............................................16.6833333 / 2.08333333 = 8.00800

"The refresh rate of the shutter glasses has to be the same as the refresh rate of the display since each shutter has to either open or close every time the 3D display refreshes." - Richard Paul

Examples

(1000ms/59.94fps=16.68335Ms) = 1Hz = 1 second

59.94*2=119.88fps
(1000ms/119.88fps=8.34167501ms) = 1Hz = 1 second

__________________________________________

Section i

I have made some stereoscopic test files for use with shutter glasses.
I forget which eye each frame belongs too: in each folder is two video files, one for each eye when using shutter glasses.
There are different fps video files: 24p, 30p, 48p, 60p. Each video files has no more frames than their name implies, so they are all one second long.
They are at 1080p resolution, 2.35 aspect ratio, encoded in mp4.
Since I forget which frame belongs to which eye when you put them to work with the shutter glasses it might be wrong, but then just switch the frames the eyes see and it should be ok.

With these test files you can see if there is crosstalk and if pulldown helps the 3d be more comfortable.

link (http://www.mediafire.com/?igmwydfwzde)
backup link (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=5RYUW0Q8)

If I had the test equipment to do the test myself I would, but I don't so I made these test files and posted them here so people who have the field-sequential encoder equipment can encode it and test it, hopefully posting their results here.
You will need to loop the video since the video files are only 1 second long.

I have made a second set of test files: mpeg-2 this time.
The frame rates of the video: 23.976, 29.97, 50 from 48 frames, 59.94
link (http://www.mediafire.com/?tmdonnnttyl)
backup link (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=0NMIZ8I3)

__________________________________________

Section j

Ok, I read the good about this fancy "3D Blu Ray", but whats the catch?
What's the dirt on this fancy new tech that nobodies telling us? :p

"occlusion"

What is occlusion? I will quote a article on it:

"In IMAX, in which people are sitting close to a giant screen, the periphery of the screen is more difficult to discern and the rectangle becomes relatively unimportant.

The idea behind IMAX is to immerse you in the experience. So people who shoot IMAX movies have to think about a different kind of composition. I’m concerned with the stereoscopic cinema so my remarks are predicated on that interest.

In the stereoscopic cinema, the rectangular boundaries are important because of the well-known effect of the conflict of stereoscopic cue of parallax and the extra-stereoscopic cue called interposition. If off-screen (negative) parallax values are occluded by the screen edges–and this is especially true for the vertical edges of the screen–there will be a conflict of cues, which some people (possibly most people) interpret as a region of confusion.

Some people may say that the image looks like it’s pulled back into the plane of the screen; some will report that the image looks odd. In any event, it’s something that has to be dealt with in the conventional stereoscopic cinema and doesn’t need to be dealt with in IMAX because the screen is so large that it’s hard to see the edges of the surround.

(Another thought to put into the mix that might further confusion rather than understanding is that we are in a time of transition in which people are learning how to look at stereo movies and maybe with the passage of time the screen edge conflict will come to be accepted.)"

link (http://lennylipton.wordpress.com/2008/03/20/compositional-differences-real-d-vs-imax/)

The other annoying thing is the glasses.

Please explain to me what exactly are; "motion induced parallax errors."

Below is what is Motion Parallax

"If the man above fixates on the single tree in the middle and starts walking to the right, the four trees in the back will appear to move to the right while the two trees in the front will appear to move to the left. This phenomenon is called motion parallax and is one of the cues to depth."

http://www.yorku.ca/eye/Motion%20Parallax.htm

If you have a cup that might be dirty you tilt it to look inside.
Same as if a pop can rim may be dirty, you tilt it and look at it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeF-kCr_vyo

A error is when the brain tells the eyes it can't work out what's happening, so the eyes work harder and after a while the eyes tire then the brain works the problem out itself, then it too gets tired of piecing together the Motion Parallax and the viewer feels sick.

So now you know the stuff they don't tell you. :p

__________________________________________

Section k. Kids and eye strain

"Depth in or out of the screen is created when the left eye and right eye views cause viewers’ eyes to cross at a point in front of or behind the screen.

Adult eyes are separated by about 2.5 inches."

"If the parallax ranges from say -5 inches to +2 inches then the cinematographer has created the content for families. (Kids eyes are separated by about 2 inches; as a result, adult 3D content may be uncomfortable for them.)"

Inches of Parallax___Distance from Viewer to Screen (%)
2.5__________________Infinity
2____________________500

link (http://www.in-three.com/3dwithoutglasses.html)

This means that kids has different 3D than adults do.
The child benefits from 500, the adult from infinity.
The adult viewing 500 see's a muted 3d.

The child viewing infinity can't see it comfortably, so needs to mute the 3d so it's not overwhelming. This means the monitor size would need to be smaller so the 3d is muted.
The child see's 500 as beautiful 3d due to their small size.
So a very tiny adult, a child size adult, may view adult oriented 3d and think it's overwhelming.

__________________________________________

Section L: 240Hz tv's need to be affordable for 3D Blu Ray to take

Blu Ray tv is $2300.00 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=17360655#post17360655)
Same tv but 60Hz is $1500 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16889102261)

This is using 60fps video
Millisecond/Hz=Millisecond
1000 / 59.9400599 = 16.6833333 Milliseconds

This is using 120fps video
Millisecond/Hz=Millisecond
1000 / 119.88012 = 8.34166666 Milliseconds

If we take the 144fps of digital theater 3D, and divide that by two (one for each eye), we have the milliseconds number that people see in the theaters when watching 3D. This is the standard that must be met or exceeded when talking about quality 3D.
If the milliseconds of the video is slower than this than the quality of the 3D is not as good as the one seen in the movie Theater when watching movies like Disney's Up.

This is the milliseconds standard of excellence
Millisecond/Hz=Millisecond
1000 / 71.9280719 = 13.9027778 Milliseconds

(Stats from section f)

As we can see, the 120fps is faster than the standard of excellence used by Real D theater 3D. So the quality is very good 3D.

If we have a 240Hz tv, the tv can output 120fps 3D per eye when using shutter glasses. The milliseconds speed of this 120fps video is so fast there would be no "flicker fusion threshold artifact/jerkiness".

The reason the tv would need to accomodate 60fps video is for sports tv, namely the nba which shoots video at 60fps.
If the nba wanted to show 3D video at 60fps a true 240Hz tv could do this properly whereas a 120Hz or 60Hz tv could not.

The price of a 60Hz tv must be met by the 240Hz tv and not only that but the 240Hz tv must be made in great enough quantity it saturates the tv market, then 3D 240Hz tv would be at a premium that would be within reach of the average consumer.

Right now at 240Hz lcd tv is 2300.00, and a 60Hz tv with the same features is 1500.00.
This is too much since the cheap 3D tv's need to be 240Hz as well, so the tv necessary for proper 3D is at a acceptable premium when compared to regular 240hz tv's.
What does this mean, what am I saying: that tv manufactures need to abandone 120Hz and 60Hz tv's and move to 240Hz tv's and this means not milking the market for 60hz and 120Hz tv's.
This is a Necessary expense and it will be the Only thing to nsure the future sucess of 3D tv.

__________________________________________

Section m: Eye exam to see if your eyes can view 3D

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4133/eyeub.jpg

http://thumbnails18.imagebam.com/5318/87758f53175110.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/87758f53175110)

Eye exam 1: The Eye Hop
• Center your nose over the brown eye below.
• Close one eye and put your thumb several inches in front of your nose. Position your thumb so it completely hides the brown eye on the screen.
• Now switch eyes. Close your open eye and open the other.
• Watch the eye hop!

Eye exam 2: THE FRAMING GAME

• Center your nose over the brown eye below.
• Focus your eyes on the single brown eye.
• Put your free thumb in front of your nose.
• Continue to focus on the eye. If both eyes are on, you will see two thumbs framing one eye.
• Now, switch your focus to your thumb. You should see two eyes framing one thumb.

Link to where I got the eye exam tests (http://www.vision3d.com/whycant.html)

__________________________________________

Section n

- How far to sit from your Display matters.

For 1080P content, on a 1080P Monitor.
I find that measuring the actual height of the monitor, not including the case,
and multiplying this height by 3, will tell you how far you should sit from your monitor.

So if your monitors height if 21" high, then you would sit 63" from the tv.

For 720p or 480i, regular tv the distances are different.
You can sit further away and where your comfortable.
I don't know any rules of thumb for these resolutions.

And I mean bottom to top height, not diagonal height.

- The monitor height off the ground is set to your seated position.
When sitting down looking at the tv, your eyes should be facing the center of the tv without looking down or up to do so.
To look at the center of the tv you just look straight ahead, not up or down.

Looking up is harder than looking down, so if a different person has to look up where you just have to look straight ahead, then putting it lower so it is set to their eye level would be the best accommodation.

- How far to sit from your Display matters: What is the Biggest tv you should get?
As shown above, the distance you sit from your tv dictates how big the tv should be.
But I am now talking about the Biggest tv that should be used at a certain sitting or viewing distance.

What you should know is that there is a "Visual Cue" called "Interposition".
Interposition is defined as:
a. To insert or introduce between parts.
b. To place (oneself) between others or things.
c. To Intervene

When the edges of the screen are viewed they may create a interposition: seeing the film, and also seeing the edges of the screen with the background of the room.
But movies are a entertainment where there should be no need for "Intervention" toning down the experience.
In order to remove this Intervention that tones down the entertainment you increase the monitor size.

What is the biggest size monitor? It's not a exect science and this is only from what I have tested and found to be the best method.
How I found this recommendation I'm going to show below is I sat very close to my monitor and relaxed my eyes while watching a movie.
My eyes were not alert and wide, but relaxed and slightly squinting intently looking at the screen (The movie was Babylon A.D.).
While I was watching the movie I closed one eyelid, the right one, and with my left eye I looked to see if the full picture from the top left corner to the bottom right corner was visable diagonally, if it wasn't I moved back a bit.
This way the largest I could make the picture by sitting close and still see the full diagonal resolution with relaxed studying eyes was found.

What is the formula?
Measure the height of your monitor, top to bottom, not including the frame, just the actual physical screen when the tv is turned off.
Then multiply this height by 1.5 and that is how far you need to sit from the screen to get the biggest picture you can see easily.
So if your tv is 60" high, you would sit so your eyes would be 90" away from it.

With 3D tv and blu ray the need for a large tv with little interposition artifact is increased much more than it is for 2D movies.
But with all thing moderation is key and this means you don't have a tv that's too big! If it's too big you can't see the picture.
But this begs the question of how to get such a big monitor since this would create much electricity and emf radiation.
How to get such a big picture safetly with little to no emf radiation: a movie projector.
For the biggest picture viewed safely you need a movie projector.

Dolby 3d


The charts show each company offers full resolution 3D Blu Ray.
But which company offers all the requirements? Read the charts to find out. :)

It is pretty clear from my reading of your summary that Sensio is the only company that offers all the requirements on top of being backward compatible with the DVD format, the existing infrastructure, gaming as well as BD. Do I get your conclusion right?

3Dkid

** Also, since Sensio is the easiest to integrate (once you decompress the signal you get back your home master and you can display it with the method you want. Since the home master is well define already this sounds like a pretty quick integration of a robust technology that offers a full HD3D quality)

It is pretty clear from my reading of your summary that Sensio is the only company that offers all the requirements on top of being backward compatible with the DVD format, the existing infrastructure, gaming as well as BD. Do I get your conclusion right?

3Dkid

Sensio is really viable, but they want Blu Ray to use "Split Frame Checkerboard" Image Format.

What the Blu Ray 3d requires is "Full Frame L/R eyes" Image format.
And Sensio doesn't want too even though the chart says they can.

"The Sensio approach is not necessarily the perfect approach to 3D transmission standards. One additional requirement must be met by the ideal standard:

4. Backward compatibility so a consumer with a 3D TV sees 3D and a consumer with a 2D TV sees a normal 2D image.

Sensio does not meet this requirement.

Viewing a Sensio 3D image on a 2D TV gives you two rather low quality images side-by-side. Other transmission schemes such as the 2D+depth approach of Philips and the MPEG-style image difference approach of TDVision can meet all four requirements.
Nevertheless, the Sensio approach provides a quick path to 3D TV.

2D movies have been released on two versions of the DVD for years: full screen and wide screen. Perhaps 3D will follow a similar path: normal 2D DVDs and Sensio-encoded 3D DVDs released simultaneously. "

link (http://displaydaily.com/2007/09/05/sensio-squeezes-3d-into-the-existing-video-system/)

Here's a slide show showing the original versus Sensio compressed video.
It is so you can see if the picture is degraded using the Sensio method:
link (http://www.slideshare.net/sensio3D/sensio3-d-quality-slideshow-side-by-side-presentation)

You can go back and forth between pictures and so see how much Sensio Split Frame Checkerboard technich gores the picure.

If either Dolby or Sensio has the "Full Frame L/R eyes" Image format, and they want to use "Split Frame Checkerboard" Image Format instead. They don't deserve to be the standard. Use "Full Frame L/R eyes" Image format or don't ask to be the standard for 3D blu ray.

Here's a folder with two sub folders with 2 pictures each sub folder.
The two pictures are comparison pictures from the slideshow I linked too above.
link (http://www.mediafire.com/?yndlmnnclnm)

When I saw the artifacts in the comparison pictures my desktop resolution was 800x600 on my 1680x1050 monitor.
Going back to full resolution and the pictures were really small with really no artifact visable. They are only avatar size pictures really.

Section J

The Panasonic promo video said that their 3d blu ray system was the same as the one used in theaters

What that means is that it offers S3D = Stereoscopic 3D. They are talking about the quality and to tell consumers that it is not like the old Anaglyph 3D which is still used today for home video.

As Keith said - best not to take things literally when they make marketing statements.

And the theater S3D systems are front projection only on large screens so the needs are different than S3D for the home

Sensio is really viable, but they want Blu Ray to use "Split Frame Checkerboard" Image Format.

"The Sensio approach is not necessarily the perfect approach to 3D transmission standards. One additional requirement must be met by the ideal standard:

4. Backward compatibility so a consumer with a 3D TV sees 3D and a consumer with a 2D TV sees a normal 2D image.


Here's a slide show showing the original versus Sensio compressed video.
It is so you can see if the picture is degraded using the Sensio method:
link (http://www.slideshare.net/sensio3D/sensio3-d-quality-slideshow-side-by-side-presentation)

You can go back and forth between pictures and so see how much Sensio Split Frame Checkerboard technich gores the picure.

.

To your point on backward compatibility, this is probably why the set-top box that Sagem is making under a Sensio license is offering to decode and provide the choice to the viewer between 2D and 3D. With such a simple solution, Sensio is easily be backward compatible (as long as something can decode the images and produce 2 feeds)

I had seen the slideshow on image quality and it demonstrate how good and clear is the Sensio image quality after compression. Please note that the first 2 images had been enlarged and this is how you lost the quality. The quality loss in the first 2 pictures was caused by the enlargemnet for the comparaison with the side by side, not by the loss of quality in the compression. The reduced quality cannot really be seen with the eyes only, unless you are a cinema image expert (and even then, I wonder if they notice that much).

I think if Sensio used the "Full Frame L/R eyes" in Blu Ray, then with the Sagem solution for 2D Sensio would be the ideal solution.

Now to convince Sensio to use "Full Frame L/R eyes" for Blu Ray is another thing all together as they probably will lose to Panasonic for Blu Ray 3D because they won't budge on their insistance to use "Split Frame Checkerboard" Image Format.

INow to convince Sensio to use "Full Frame L/R eyes" for Blu Ray is another thing all together as they probably will lose to Panasonic for Blu Ray 3D because they won't budge on their insistance to use "Split Frame Checkerboard" Image Format.They lost a long time ago...

Keith:

I have been studing this sentence:

"Panasonic is not planning to standardize the techniques for displaying 3D imagery. At CEATEC Japan 2008, the company exhibited a 103-inch plasma display panel (PDP) television displaying 3D pictures (see Fig). It featured dual drive integrated circuits (IC) to achieve a high 120 frames/s, and modified phosphors to shorten plasma emission rise/fall times.

I understand the need for the dual drive IC to get to 120 FPS. What I could use a little (OK - a lot :D) of help with is the shorter rise/fall times - which I understand (?) is a product/measurement of the response time of the pixels. Either BTB or GTG depending on how the manufacturer makes the measurement with BTB being the hardest to accomplish.

PDPs have very fast response times - in the order of .002ms. (Do not know if this is BTB or GTG)

Does the size of a panel affect the response time of the pixels?

LCD's have a much slower response time - like 4ms. (GTG)

Is response time that much of an issue when displaying 3D versus 2D (both HD of course)?"

Interesting, in this article they tested traditional 2D Plasma displays for 3D use and it notes that 3D crosstalk was between 9.9% and 38.3% depending on the Plasma display they tested.

"Most of the plasma displays tested exhibited significant amounts of crosstalk when viewing time-sequential 3D images using LCS 3D glasses. The main reason for the excessive crosstalk is the significant amount of phosphor afterglow."

"in early January 2008, when this technical paper was being completed, that Samsung will be releasing several consumer “3D Ready” plasma displays in March 200810. The displays use LCS 3D glasses to view the time-sequential 3D image which updates at 120Hz. As yet we have not been able to test one of these new Samsung “3D Ready” plasma displays, but obviously Samsung have been able to successfully implement 120Hz synchronous operation in a plasma display, and presumably they have also been able to minimize phosphor afterglow which was identified as a problem with most of the commercial plasma displays that we tested."

link to pdf article (http://cmst.curtin.edu.au/publicat/2008-01_3d-plasma_woods_karvinen.pdf)
page 7 and 9

Then divide that 120Hz tv by 2 and that is the speed of the shutter glasses: 16.67ms.

1.) Crosstalk and luminance. These are directly affected by rise time from all gray level to black, with the ideal being 3ms.3 ms was what Toshiba got with a 120 Hz LCD with a blinking backlight compared to 8.33 ms with a normal 120 Hz LCD.


3.) the minimum monitor refresh rate for 3D Must not be less than 480Hz for the reason described above.Considering that Toshiba went from 8.33 ms to 3 ms with a 120 Hz LCD by using a blinking backlight if you really want to lower the 3D crosstalk wouldn't it be even better to use a 240 Hz LCD with a blinking backlight?

8:13, why perform pulldown with a 60p source? The only reason for pulldown is for film (24fps) to be displayed evenly on a display with a different refresh rate. If it's not an even multiple, you need pulldown. With a 60fps source, that's an even multiple of 120hz or 240hz.

It shows that 3ms was for one eye. And they compared that time to 120Hz hold time: 8.33Toshiba went from 8.33 ms to 3 ms by using a 120 Hz LCD with a blinking backlight (http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20090604/171259/). I have explained before (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=17170144&postcount=79) that this is because you can decrease hold time either by motion interpolation (which requires a higher refresh rate) or by changing the duty cycle of the backlight. Toshiba explained in this article (http://www42.tok2.com/home/ksatsch/pdf/31_AdvancedTVand3-D(DisplaySystems).pdf) that:

In time-sequential 3D display, sequential images’ mixture causes 3D crosstalk. To reduce 3D crosstalk, we applied black insertion driving and blinking backlight control technology. When the display images are changed from right to left (or left to right), the images are resetted to black state completly and the backlight is turned off . Then the response of LC starts and reaches up to the image data state. After that the backlight is turned on again. At that time the previous images are not observed and only the correct images can be seen. In this way the reduction of the images’ mixture can be realized and we can achieve small 3D crosstalk.


You need 480Hz monitor and 240Hz shutter glasses: 240Hz per eye, hold time 4.17.The 3D shutter glasses have to run at the same refresh rate as the display. Remember that the 3D shutter glasses have to turn on and off with every refresh rate of the display since every other image will be from the opposite eye. If the shutter glasses worked at half the refresh rate each eye would see both the left and right images as shown:

LRLRLRLRLRLR
112211221122

When the display images are changed from right to left (or left to right), the images are resetted to black state completly and the backlight is turned off . Then the response of LC starts and reaches up to the image data state. After that the backlight is turned on again.


This means that three steps happen:
step 1.) the screen goes black.
step 2.) the ocb lc at 3ms starts up, but the backlight is not yet on.
step 3.) the backlight goes on.

I don't see how this makes the lc in step 2 8.33ms (meaning this is a 120Hz monitor), when figure 4 shows it to be 3ms.

This means that three steps happen:
step 1.) the screen goes black.
step 2.) the ocb lc at 3ms starts up, but the backlight is not yet on.
step 3.) the backlight goes on.Okay, I think we have both confused the issues of hold time and response time. I went back and read the article (http://www42.tok2.com/home/ksatsch/pdf/31_AdvancedTVand3-D(DisplaySystems).pdf) and will explain how a 120 Hz LCD can have lower 3D crosstalk than a 240 Hz LCD. With the Toshiba 120 Hz LCD both the 3 ms response time and the blinking backlight system reduces the 3D crosstalk. The blinking backlight system also reduces the MPRT to 2 ms which compares to the 4.7 ms MPRT of the 240 Hz LCD that Samsung made. The MPRT is the motion picture resolution time of the display which is affected by the hold time of the display.


I don't see how this makes the lc in step 2 8.33ms (meaning this is a 120Hz monitor), when figure 4 shows it to be 3ms.The duty cycle of a display (in the case of LCD the backlight) can effect the MPRT which is why a 60 Hz CRT, a 60 Hz Plasma, and a 60 Hz LCD do not have the same MPRT. Now with CRT and Plasma the phosphor decay affects the 3D crosstalk (as explained in this article (http://cmst.curtin.edu.au/publicat/2008-01_3d-plasma_woods_karvinen.pdf)) but from what I have read with LCD the main issues are MPRT and response time. As for how I know that Toshiba is using a 120 Hz LCD it is because in this article (http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20090604/171259/) it says that:

Toshiba Mobile Display Co Ltd (TMD) exhibited three types of three-dimensional (3D) displays at SID Display Week 2009, an academic conference that runs from May 31 to June 5, 2009, in Texas, the US.
...
The remaining two types were exhibited for the first time, according to TMD. They are (1) the "Time Sequential Autostereoscopic 3D OCB Display," which provides the same level of resolution even if it is viewed with the naked eye and (2) the "Crosstalk-free 3D Display," which is viewed using glasses equipped with liquid crystal shutters.
...
The 3D display described in item (2) is a combination of an LCD panel that is operated at 120Hz and glasses equipped with liquid crystal shutters.
...

Richard Paul,

That's a sound reasoning.

Now about the shutter glasses being the same Hz speed as the monitor.

a: The tv's 1 frame.) LLL_RRR_
b: The left or right eye's 1 frame.) LLL_
A + b are not equal. Since a + b are not equal with a having twice as much hz as b for 1 frame, how can they have the same amount of hz for 1 frame?

Now about the shutter glasses being the same Hz speed as the monitor.

a: The tv's 1 frame.) LLL_RRR_
b: The left or right eye's 1 frame.) LLL_
A + b are not equal. Since a + b are not equal with a having twice as much hz as b for 1 frame, how can they have the same amount of hz for 1 frame?That looks at how many times you would see a frame through each shutter but not how many times each shutter has to open and close. The refresh rate of the shutter glasses has to be the same as the refresh rate of the display since each shutter has to either open or close every time the 3D display refreshes. Here is a simple diagram showing that:


3D Display Hz______1___________2__________3___________4__________
3D Display Frames____Left Frame__Right Frame__Left Frame___Right Frame
Left Shutter_______O+++++++++C------------O+++++++++C------------
Right Shutter______C------------O+++++++++C------------O+++++++++

The monitor and glasses still need to be 480Hz.
Look at post #15 for my reasoning: 4:4 pulldown of 60Hz sports on cable tv.
Digital cinema uses 3:3 pulldown, so for the 60fps basketball game it would be 4:4 pulldown.

DC uses 3:3 because they are working with content shot at 24 FPS. They need to get the frame rate high enough so there is no flicker.

HD-CAM at 60 FPS doesn't need to be 4:4. It can be 2:2 due to the high frame rate to begin with.

Lee Stewart,

Post #14 shows that for 96Hz 3D, you need 480Hz for 5:5 pulldown.
The problem is the math for 48p 3D won't allow you to use lower than 480Hz.

Lee Stewart,

Post #14 shows that for 96Hz 3D, you need 480Hz for 5:5 pulldown.
The problem is the math for 48p 3D won't allow you to use lower than 480Hz.

Simple solutilon . . .

Multi-Scan display:

144 Hz for 3D content shot at 24 FPS

120 Hz for 3D content shot at 60 FPS and all 2D applications.

Simple solutilon . . .

Multi-Scan display:

144 Hz for 3D content shot at 24 FPS

120 Hz for 3D content shot at 60 FPS and all 2D applications.
But it should handle 50hz and 48hz stereo too :cool: and 48 & 50hz 2D and others.

But it should handle 50hz and 48hz stereo too :cool: and 48 & 50hz 2D and more!

My design is for the USA/NTSC regions. You can design one for Europe and the 50 Hz issue.:D

And I see you are still riding the higher frame rate Unicorn into your posts. :p

My design is for the USA/NTSC regions. You can design one for Europe and the 50 Hz issue.:D

But this discussion is talking about making sure that things are shown correctly with no judder. If that is the case, surely you will want people in the USA to be able to watch things shot in Europe correctly too, with no judder/pull-down or conversions that aren't needed?

And I see you are still riding the higher frame rate Unicorn into your posts. :p
Well I've got the director of the biggest budget motion picture in history on my side :) (which happens to be a 3D movie)
Since this discussion is about not adding pull-down judder and you have previously said how you can't believe they would be adding more judder to 3d movies where they will be more obvious (which is what will happen for 24p 3D movies with 120hz HDTVs using the shutter glasses method), I can't see why you aren't in favour of higher frame rates too, if you are against judder (since James Cameron himself has said panning at 24p gives you judder/strobing which he dislikes enough to continue to say that the frame rates of movies should be increased - ie. doubled).

But this discussion is talking about making sure that things are shown correctly with no judder. If that is the case, surely you will want people in the USA to be able to watch things shot in Europe correctly too, with no judder/pull-down or conversions that aren't needed?

The last time I looked - they made HDTV's for 60 Hz countires and different HDTV's for 50 Hz countries.

So why would the inclusion of 3D change anything?

Well I've got the director of the biggest budget motion picture in history on my side :) (which happens to be a 3D movie)

Nope - Pirates At Worlds End had a higher budget.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_films

Since this discussion is about not adding pull-down judder and you have previously said how you can't believe they would be adding more judder to 3d movies where they will be more obvious (which is what will happen for 24p movies with 120hz HDTVs using the shutter glasses method), I can't see why you aren't in favour of higher frame rates too, if you are against judder (since James Cameron himself has said panning at 24p gives you judder/strobing which he dislikes enough to want to double frame rates of movies).

There is a difference bwteen what you/me may want, what a director(s) may want and what Hollywood studios want.

They won't go to 30 FPS which solves the frame judder issue and improves the PQ. So what makes you think they will go to 48 FPS?

The last time I looked - they made HDTV's for 60 Hz countires and different HDTV's for 50 Hz countries.

You are incorrect. They are the same TVs, just altered by the sellers in the USA.

So why would the inclusion of 3D change anything?
Seeing as you want things shown correctly, without any (pull-down) judder - or I guess other conversions, why are you against allowing them to be shown correctly?

Also I don't believe that 30p would solve the judder/strobing issue. It would judder/strobe less, but not solve it. To (mostly) solve it I think you'd need at least 48p (which includes 50p and 60p). Higher would be better I think, with 60p being the best of those three. Even higher than 60p might be even better - eg. 120hz.

You are incorrect. They are the same TVs, just altered by the sellers in the USA.

:rolleyes:

It's that altercation we are talking about.


Seeing as you want things shown correctly, without any (pull-down) judder - or I guess other conversions, why are you against allowing them to be shown correctly?

I am not against it. I have my opinion based on reality - not fantasy.

Also I don't believe that 30p would solve the judder/strobing issue. It would judder/strobe less, but not solve it. To (mostly) solve it I think you'd need at least 48p (which includes 50p and 60p). Higher would be better I think, with 60p being the best of those three. Even higher than 60p might be even better - eg. 120hz.

Have you ever seen 30 FPS film shown at 60 FPS? I have - years ago. It is a big difference from 24/48. And it fits with the 60 Hz electrical standard of NTSC countries. No 3:2 pulldown required.

Europe chose to go with PAL. You are living with that decision years later.

The monitor and glasses still need to be 480Hz.
Look at post #15 for my reasoning: 4:4 pulldown of 60Hz sports on cable tv.
Digital cinema uses 3:3 pulldown, so for the 60fps basketball game it would be 4:4 pulldown.The 3 frame repetition that is used with 144 Hz 3D DLP movie theater projectors is done to avoid flicker with the 24 fps 3D video since the projector flickering was noticeable at 96 Hz. 120 Hz 3D DLP consumer displays have been released so it sounds like display flickering stops being an issue with 3D DLP displays somewhere between 96 Hz and 120 Hz. As such with 60 fps 3D video what advantage would there be in showing each frame four times instead of showing each frame once?

Nobody can say for sure unless they look at it for a few hours.
Just a few minutes and the eyes and brain are making it look pretty, but watch it for 3 or 4 hours and see if it makes you sick or not.

Nobody has shown they did this with 60p source in stereoscopic in any web site info I read so far.Well if there isn't any evidence that frame repetition improves video quality than why advocate for 480 Hz 3D displays? If someone came out and posted that 2400 Hz displays were needed to do 3D video properly would you simply accept that? I am just saying that I don't see any evidence that there would be any benefit in going beyond 240 Hz for 3D displays.


We know we don't know enough concerning the points above.Now that you know that 3 frame repetition was done with DLP projectors to avoid flicker why continue to advocate for something that might not provide any benefit? 240 Hz 3D displays are well past the point of flickering, which is only an issue with certain types of displays, and unlike 120 Hz 3D displays they can display 24 fps 3D video without 3:2 frame repetition. Why than advocate for 480 Hz 3D displays?

"DLP technology can project 3-D images with a single projector by presenting the stereoscopic left/right image pairs sequentially.
This means that a left image is presented, and then a right image is presented, and never will both a left and a right image appear on the screen at the same time.
However, presenting left/right images to the audience at a 48 fps rate is less than ideal as the sequential nature of the images are perceivable and distracting."
Quote from the first page.

The sequential nature of going left to right is distracting. Pulldown removes this distraction.

I have said before, nobody said anything about how the sequential nature of shutter glass using no pulldown was not distracting.
Not for 120Hz, not for 96Hz, etc.
Your inventing info that has no proof if what I just said is true.

If there is a need for 60p stereoscopic, then how much pulldown is needed?
Only by sitting down and watching a 60p stereoscopic at various pulldown would you know.

Except the 3D systems used in Digital Cinema (RealD and Dolby 3D) don't use Active Shutter Glasses.

So why are you comparing 3D DC to 3D BD? :confused:

Except Digital Cinema don't use Active Shutter Glasses.

So why are you comparing 3D DC to 3D BD?

That's not true.

"Several add-on kits and glasses for 3-D presentation are now available.
These can be categorized by technique: polarization, spectral division, and shutter glasses.

While all three techniques can be used with DLP Cinema projectors, only polarization and spectral division work with dual-projection systems.
Where the 3-D add-on technologies differ is in the method employed to direct left images to left eyes and right images to right eyes."

link (http://mkpe.com/publications/d-cinema/misc/choice_in_3-D.php)

That's not true.

"Several add-on kits and glasses for 3-D presentation are now available.
These can be categorized by technique: polarization, spectral division, and shutter glasses.

While all three techniques can be used with DLP Cinema projectors, only polarization and spectral division work with dual-projection systems.
Where the 3-D add-on technologies differ is in the method employed to direct left images to left eyes and right images to right eyes."

link (http://mkpe.com/publications/d-cinema/misc/choice_in_3-D.php)

That link is old. In the real world RealD and Dolby 3D are used in 3D DC because all of the 3D DC's are single PJ installations. Even IMAX 3D got rid of ASG years ago.

That link is old.

It applies to the method the picture is delivered.
The method is still relevant.

Maybe you should have said digital cinema doesn't want to use that method so it doesn't apply to 3d bd.

It applies to the method the picture is delivered.
The method is still relevant.

The picture is delivered by a single PJ. Neither RealD nor Dolby 3D use active shutter glasses.

That link is talking about dual PJ installs which with the cost of a DC PJ was WAY too expensive.

So again - why are you comparing 3D DC to 3D BD?

Got a link from 2009?

Well - this blew away part of your link:

Sony and RealD to Provide Complete 3D Digital Cinema System for Exhibitors

Solution Uses Single Sony 4K Projector and RealD Technology

http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/02-25-2009/0004978546&EDATE=

a: polarization
b: spectral division
c: shutter glasses.

1.) a=b=c
2.) but you only want a or b
3.) therefore c is unequal to a and b.

That's a illogical argument.

Is that illogical to you as well?

a: polarization
b: spectral division
c: shutter glasses.

1.) a=b=c
2.) but you only want a or b
3.) therefore c is unequal to a and b.

That's a illogical argument.

Is that illogical to you as well?

OK - which 3D system that is installed in DC's uses shutter glasses?

The problem with your "equation" is that there is NO "C." Only A and B.

OK - which 3D system that is installed in DC's uses shutter glasses?

The problem with your "equation" is that there is NO "C." Only A and B.

There is a c.

"Several add-on kits and glasses for 3-D presentation are now available.
These can be categorized by technique: polarization, spectral division, and shutter glasses.

While all three techniques can be used with DLP Cinema projectors, only polarization and spectral division work with dual-projection systems.
Where the 3-D add-on technologies differ is in the method employed to direct left images to left eyes and right images to right eyes."

Just because it's not used or wanted does not mean it is unequal to a or b.

There is a c.

"Several add-on kits and glasses for 3-D presentation are now available.
These can be categorized by technique: polarization, spectral division, and shutter glasses.

While all three techniques can be used with DLP Cinema projectors, only polarization and spectral division work with dual-projection systems.
Where the 3-D add-on technologies differ is in the method employed to direct left images to left eyes and right images to right eyes."

Just because it's not used or wanted does not mean it is unequal to a or b.

:rolleyes:

That link is talking about dual projection systems. That idea has been LONG abandoned because of the cost factor. That is why I said your link and it's data are outdated.

And all you do is keep posting it like it means something. It doesn't.

There are no active shutter glasses 3D DC installs.

RealD - the largest provider of 3D systems uses the Polarized method:

Polarized 3D glasses create the illusion of three-dimensional images by restricting the light that reaches each eye, an example of stereoscopy. To present a stereoscopic motion picture, two images are projected superimposed onto the same screen through orthogonal polarizing filters. The viewer wears low-cost eyeglasses which also contain a pair of orthogonal polarizing filters. As each filter passes only that light which is similarly polarized and blocks the orthogonally polarized light, each eye sees only its separately polarized image, producing a three-dimensional effect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarized_3D_glasses

That is not that same way shutter glasses 3D is viewed. They use the Alternate-Frame Sequencing method.

You are comparing apples to oranges.

The same holds true for Dolby 3D versus ASG 3D:

http://www.edcf.net/edcf_docs/dolby-3d.pdf

Again an apples to oranges comparison.

I have said before, nobody said anything about how the sequential nature of shutter glass using no pulldown was not distracting.Once you get to a high enough refresh rate flickering is no longer an issue and if 24 fps 3D video looked great on a 240 Hz display why exactly do you think that 60 fps 3D video would not look great? You are stuck on the idea that you need frame repetition but they did that for a specific reason with 3D DLP movie projectors. Here is an article from Real D (http://www.edcf.net/edcf_docs/real-d.pdf) that explains this issue:

The REAL D system uses triple flash to provide the best motion rendition possible. Use of triple flash puts the refresh rate above the normal flicker fusion threshold for humans, providing smoother motion.Considering that 144 Hz is above the normal flicker fusion threshold for humans how exactly would a 480 Hz 3D display be better than a 240 Hz 3D display?

Once you get to a high enough refresh rate flickering is no longer an issue and if 24 fps 3D video looked great on a 240 Hz display why exactly do you think that 60 fps 3D video would not look great? You are stuck on the idea that you need frame repetition but they did that for a specific reason with 3D DLP movie projectors. Here is an article from Real D (http://www.edcf.net/edcf_docs/real-d.pdf) that explains this issue:

Considering that 144 Hz is above the normal flicker fusion threshold for humans how exactly would a 480 Hz 3D display be better than a 240 Hz 3D display?

That seems reasonable. Let's hope that if they use 240Hz that's it's good enough. :)

RealD - the largest provider of 3D systems uses the Polarized method:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarized_3D_glasses

That is not that same way shutter glasses 3D is viewed. They use the Alternate-Frame Sequencing method.

You are comparing apples to oranges.

The same holds true for Dolby 3D versus ASG 3D:

http://www.edcf.net/edcf_docs/dolby-3d.pdf

Again an apples to oranges comparison.

I see. Very interesting. :)

That seems reasonable. Let's hope that if they use 240Hz that's it's good enough. :)From what I have read I think that 240 Hz is the perfect refresh rate for 3D displays though of course there are other factors that determine 3D display quality. In the case of LCD it is MPRT and response time (http://www42.tok2.com/home/ksatsch/pdf/31_AdvancedTVand3-D(DisplaySystems).pdf), in the case of Plasma it is phosphor decay (http://cmst.curtin.edu.au/publicat/2008-01_3d-plasma_woods_karvinen.pdf), and in the case of sequential frame displays (which can be LCD, DLP, Plasma, etc...) the shutter glasses. Because of those other factors it is possible that some 120 Hz 3D displays could look better than some 240 Hz 3D displays even though they would have the issue of 3:2 judder when playing 24 fps 3D video. I mention this just to make clear that it is a combination of factors that determine 3D display quality.

"If the frame rate falls below the flicker fusion threshold for the given viewing conditions, flicker will be apparent to the observer, and movements of objects on the film will appear jerky"

link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flicker_fusion_threshold)
...
link (http://www.scribd.com/doc/19252841/Flicker-Modulation-Brain)
...
The above data shows that the flicker fusion threshold is 8hz.The second article you linked to (http://www.scribd.com/doc/19252841/Flicker-Modulation-Brain) doesn't even mention the flicker fusion threshold and instead deals with the flicker frequency that causes the fMRI signal to peak. Considering we are talking about displays that operate at 120 Hz and above why link to an article which talks about a flicker frequency of 8 Hz?

As for the the first article you linked to (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flicker_fusion_threshold) it says that:

If the frame rate falls below the flicker fusion threshold for the given viewing conditions, flicker will be apparent to the observer, and movements of objects on the film will appear jerky. For the purposes of presenting moving images, the human flicker fusion threshold is usually taken as 16 hertz (Hz). In actual practice, movies are recorded at 24 frames per second, and TV cameras operate at 25 or 30 frames per second, depending on the TV system used.
Even though motion may seem to be continuous at 25 or 30 frame/s, the brightness may still seem to flicker objectionably. By showing each frame twice in cinema projection (48 Hz), and using interlace in television (50 or 60 Hz), a reasonable margin of error for unusual viewing conditions is achieved in minimising subjective flicker effects.


When the 24p is shown on the 240Hz monitor the frame Hz for a single frame is 10.
When 60p is shown the frame hz for a single frame is 4.If the display has a refresh rate of 240 Hz than it is 240 Hz regardless of the frame rate of the video. Once again this is what Real D said (http://www.edcf.net/edcf_docs/real-d.pdf) about the flicker fusion threshold for 144 Hz 3D DLP movie projectors:

The REAL D system uses triple flash to provide the best motion rendition possible. Use of triple flash puts the refresh rate above the normal flicker fusion threshold for humans, providing smoother motion.

"presenting left/right images to the audience at a 48 fps rate is less than ideal as the sequential nature of the images are perceivable and distracting."

"The REAL D system uses triple flash to provide the best motion rendition possible. Use of triple flash puts the refresh rate above the normal flicker fusion threshold for humans"

24 3D frames = 2p frames (L + R) x 24 = 48Hz
1 3D Movie frame = 2p frames (L x 3) + (R x 3) = 6 Hz
(144Hz / (6Hz = 1 Movie frame) = 24)
(24 3D Movie frames = ((L x 3) x 24) + ((R x 3) x 24) = 144Hz)

To me this shows that the stimulus of 48Hz (first quote) is reduced by increasing the pulldown.

"The triple flash approach also makes the left and right eye
images to appear closer in time, giving significantly less motion induced parallax errors
and therefore more comfortable motion rendition."

Of note is it does not say NO errors, it says LESS errors.
hence the stimulus is still present that gives a disturbing sensation.
meaning the Hz of triple flash is not enough fps so the errors are totally negligible.

Please explain to me what exactly are; "motion induced parallax errors."

Please explain to me what exactly are; "motion induced parallax errors."

Below is what is Motion Parallax

"If the man above fixates on the single tree in the middle and starts walking to the right, the four trees in the back will appear to move to the right while the two trees in the front will appear to move to the left. This phenomenon is called motion parallax and is one of the cues to depth."

http://www.yorku.ca/eye/Motion%20Parallax.htm

If you have a cup that might be dirty you tilt it to look inside.
Same as if a pop can rim may be dirty, you tilt it and look at it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeF-kCr_vyo

A error is when the brain tells the eyes it can't work out what's happening, so the eyes work harder and after a while the eyes tire then the brain works the problem out itself, then it too gets tired of piecing together the Motion Parallax and the viewer feels sick.

The brain reacts to stimulus at 8Hz.Of course 8 Hz would produce a great deal of flicker but do you not understand why there is a huge difference between an 8 Hz display (which refreshes at 1/8th of a second) and repeating a frame several times with a 240 Hz display (which refreshes at 1/240th of a second)? There is a huge difference between the two.


c: The brain detects stimulus at 8Hz.Which has nothing to do with 240 Hz displays regardless of how many times you divide the refresh rate by the frame rate.


a: The shutter glasses uses fps to create a single fps, and is distracting when it is one shutter frame per eye makes one frame.No, that assumption is the root of this issue since it assumes that frame repetition is needed when the issue is actually the refresh rate.


Of note is it does not say NO errors, it says LESS errors.
hence the stimulus is still present that gives a disturbing sensation.
meaning the Hz of triple flash is not enough fps so the errors are totally negligible.Read carefully what it says:

The REAL D system uses triple flash to provide the best motion rendition possible. Use of triple flash puts the refresh rate above the normal flicker fusion threshold for humans, providing smoother motion. The triple flash approach also makes the left and right eye images to appear closer in time, giving significantly less motion induced parallax errors and therefore more comfortable motion rendition.Note that it is referring to two different issues with the first issue being the normal flicker fusion threshold for humans and the second issue being "motion induced parallax errors". Now that you see that it is two different issues could you carefully explain exactly what Real D means when they say "motion induced parallax errors"? Also without knowing which refresh rate gives no "motion induced parallax errors" for 3D displays all this proves is that they exist to some degree with 144 Hz 3D displays but it doesn't tell us the refresh rate at which they are no longer noticeable.

Below is what is Motion Parallax

"If the man above fixates on the single tree in the middle and starts walking to the right, the four trees in the back will appear to move to the right while the two trees in the front will appear to move to the left. This phenomenon is called motion parallax and is one of the cues to depth."

http://www.yorku.ca/eye/Motion%20Parallax.htm

If you have a cup that might be dirty you tilt it to look inside.
Same as if a pop can rim may be dirty, you tilt it and look at it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeF-kCr_vyo

A error is when the brain tells the eyes it can't work out what's happening, so the eyes work harder and after a while the eyes tire then the brain works the problem out itself, then it too gets tired of piecing together the Motion Parallax and the viewer feels sick.

That sounds like the relationship between the camera and the objects it is capturing. Errors can occur if not done properly.

There are no active shutter glasses 3D DC installs.



Third largest world wide 3D DC cinema system, (with about 1200 installs to date, virtually monopoly in China) XpanD (http://www.xpandcinema.com/) uses active shutter glasses.

The only 3D DC system where you don't need to modify the projector or the screen.
The simplest of the 3D DC installs; XpanD coder/media block, IR sender for sync of shutterglasses and active shutterglasses for the audience.

XpanD acquired shutterglass manufacturer NuVision earlier this year and these glasses are probably the best shutterglasses made today.

Panasonic used these glasses at their Cedia demo recently, as can be seen in this post by Cineramax pic 4&5. (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=17223828&postcount=58) and in the Xpand News page; Panasonic demonstrates 3-D television with XpanD Glasses at a recent technology expo in Atlanta. (http://www.xpandcinema.com/news/23/)

XpanD 3D system is very similar to Panasonic 3D system, which basically is the simplest basic of 3D displaying.
What RealD and Dolby3D have been trying to do is to make a system that avoids active glasses for fear of cost of glasses to cinema owners.

The fact is that active glasses have not only become very good, but as both XpanD 3D DC and all HT 3D systems will use active glasses, the cost of glasses will become a non issue.

(And if it is not clear; Xpand uses single projector.
Sony 4K RealD 3D system can only display 2x2K (two images above each other simultaneously) while XpanD and Dolby3D will be able to utilizes DLP 4K full 3D resolution when 4K DLP is available. )
Sony "4K" 3D system Demo video. (http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/mkt-digitalcinema/resource.demos.bbsccms-assets-mkt-digicinema-demos-digitalcinema3d.shtml)

The XpanD technology (http://www.xpandcinema.com/products/) (not much tech details.)
XpanD World Map (http://www.xpandcinema.com/world-map/) (see if you have an XpanD equiped cinema close to you)
XpanD News through the year. (http://www.xpandcinema.com/news/21/)

http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/3545/3dsystemcomparison.jpg

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/7906/xpandlogosmall145.jpg

OK . . . . :o

There are active shutter 3D DC's.

That sounds like the relationship between the camera and the objects it is capturing. Errors can occur if not done properly.The fact that increasing the refresh rate decreased the amount of "motion induced parallax errors" does indicate though that it relates to the refresh rate of the display. Just based on that combination of words my guess is that "motion induced parallax errors" could be the apparent change in speed of moving objects in 3D video as they change their depth. The moving objects would relate to the "motion induced" part of the statement and the apparent change in speed depending on their depth in 3D video would explain "parallax errors". That is just a guess though and the only article I could find using Bing, Google, and Yahoo that uses the exact phrase of "motion induced parallax errors" is the Real D article (http://www.edcf.net/edcf_docs/real-d.pdf).

Parallax is an apparent displacement or difference of orientation of an object viewed along two different lines of sight, and is measured by the angle or semi-angle of inclination between those two lines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax

Are you talking about stereoscopic? What kind?Sequential frame 3D displays in which each eye has a flicker rate that is half the refresh rate of the display. For a 240 Hz 3D display that gives 120 Hz flicker per eye and each frame is shown for a period of 1/240th of a second. That is a lot different than an 8 Hz display which flickers at 8 Hz and each frame is shown for 1/8th of a second.


Are you talking about stereoscopic with and without pulldown or 2D fps?I was referring to 3D video since you seem to be under the mistaken assumption that frame repetition is needed for 3D video.


b: Use of triple flash puts the refresh rate above the normal flicker fusion threshold for humans, providing smoother motion.
c: The triple flash approach also makes the left and right eye images to appear closer in time, giving significantly less motion induced parallax errors and therefore more comfortable motion rendition.Do you not understand that once the refresh rate gets high enough that those issues go away? There is nothing magical about 3D video that would require each frame to be repeated multiple times and it was done with 24 fps 3D video so that 3D DLP movie projectors would have a high enough refresh rate. Do you honestly believe that 72 fps 3D video would look worse than 24 fps 3D video if both were shown on a 144 Hz 3D DLP movie projector?

In my previous post I showed why I thought that.
To argue against the data I showed after showing it would be silly of me.No, that would be just admitting that you made a mistake and everyone makes mistakes. The reason I asked that question is that it would provide a clear position on whether you believe that frame repetition is essential for 3D video. The fact that you can't simply say yes to that question shows that you know something is wrong with the belief that 72 fps 3D video would look worse than 24 fps 3D video if both were shown on a 144 Hz 3D DLP movie projector.


The data I showed says it is but that's not good enough, somebody has to make a test and look at it with their eyes to be sure.The problem with your calculations is that they are fundamentally mistaken. For example you posted that a 240 Hz 3D display has a refresh rate of 4 Hz when playing 60 fps 3D video but that it would have a refresh rate of 10 Hz when playing 24 fps 3D video. That is just plain wrong and for some reason you thought that as the frame rate increased that it somehow decreased the refresh rate. A 240 Hz 3D display has 120 Hz flicker per eye and refreshes at 1/240th of a second. It doesn't matter if the frame rate is 24 fps 3D video, 30 fps 3D video, 60 fps 3D video, or 120 fps 3D video.


Let's just leave it for now, ok, it's stressful to me. :)Not trying to cause any stress but I don't want people to think they need 480 Hz displays when there is currently no evidence that 3D displays would benefit from having a refresh rate higher than 240 Hz.

The 60 fps source video (120Hz in stereoscopic) has a pulldown of 2:2 in the 240Hz monitor and a different pulldown for 24 fps source video.

This difference in pulldown affect how the 3d frame is constructed when using shutter glasses.
2:2 pulldown means the 3d frame is constructed with less pulldown than a source that has 5:5 pulldown.How exactly would 60 fps 3D video look worse than 24 fps 3D video if both were shown on a 240 Hz 3D display? You are trying to claim that having a lower frame rate is better for 3D video than having a higher frame rate but that defies logic and I have seen no evidence for that.


Hence one 3d frame is constructed with a different Hz rate than another 3d frame that uses a different pulldown.No, that is wrong. The frame rate does not change the refresh rate of the display and this one very large assumption is the reason that all of your calculations and posts about this subject have been wrong. A 240 Hz 3D display has 120 Hz flicker per eye and refreshes at 1/240th of a second regardless of the frame rate the display receives. This is why 60 fps 3D video would look better than 24 fps 3D video on a 240 Hz 3D display.


(see post #67)I don't see any evidence in that post.


Why would people think that they need 480Hz monitors when you don't want them too?That is a strange accusation to make and all I have said is that you have never provided any evidence that there is a benefit in having a refresh rate higher than 240 Hz for a 3D display. Despite the lack of evidence you have been stating as a fact that a 480 Hz would be needed and in the first page of this thread alone here are some of the statements you made:

So for 24p blu ray what is needed is 480hz lcd tv.
...
So now we see that Sony and other lcd tv manufactures should sell only 480Hz or faster tv's for 3d if they use frame sequential technology.In the lcd tv to not have judder in ntsc cable tv or blu ray the refresh rate would be 480Hz per eye in the shutter glasses.So for the 60P 60 fps ntsc cable tv basketball game on the espn channel you need the shutter glasses going at 480Hz Each Eye to have similar quality to what the cinema has when showing 3D movies.


That's a relative opinion that is one you made based one the belief 60p 2d in stereoscopic won't be affected by only using 2:2 pulldown, which has no bases in reality until a test is done to prove it is a fact.Since you are the one who is stating that a certain amount of frame repetition is required for 3D video you are the one that has to prove it.

I have made some stereoscopic test files for use with shutter glasses.
I forget which eye each frame belongs too: in each folder is two video files, one for each eye when using shutter glasses.
There are different fps video files: 24p, 30p, 48p, 60p. Each video files has no more frames than their name implies, so they are all one second long.
They are at 1080p resolution, 2.35 aspect ratio, encoded in mp4.
Since I forget which frame belongs to which eye when you put them to work with the shutter glasses it might be wrong, but then just switch the frames the eyes see and it should be ok.

With these test files you can see if there is crosstalk and if pulldown helps the 3d be more comfortable.

link (http://www.mediafire.com/?igmwydfwzde)
backup link (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=5RYUW0Q8)

If I had the test equipment to do the test myself I would, but I don't so I made these test files and posted them here so people who have the equipment can test it and see and hopeful post their results here. :)
You will need to loop the video since the video files are only 1 second long.

I could not encode the files together so they would look 3D, so to join them for use with shutter glasses you'll need to do that yourself.
Unless somebody knows a good free/trial sw I can use to do this? :)

"Since you are the one who is stating that a certain amount of frame repetition is required for 3D video you are the one that has to prove it."
As I said before if I could use these test files myself so I could say with total testable proof one way or the other I would.
As it is all I can do is ask somebody else to do the test and post their results (hopefully they aren't somebody lying for fun or they are a reliable source who can run the test.)

8:13:

You started this thread with this title:

3D Blu Ray: Charts, Videos, Q&A pdf's, brief overview, (and the dirt too...shh...)

So IMO - it is supposed to be about 3D BD.

And as far as we know - the Panasonic 3D system is going to be picked by the BDA as the standard for 3D on BD. And that system offers two different HD formats (per eye):

1920x1080x24P for film based content

1920x1080x60i for HD-CAM based content

http://www.nabanet.com/nabaweb/documents/agms/2009/P1_PFannon.pdf

So can we keep the thread on topic and stay with those two HD formats, as opposed to injecting frame rates of 30, 48 or 120 which are not within the specs of the Panasonic 3D system.

Thank you.

24p source with 5:5 pulldown results in 120p.
For 120p source 5:5 pulldown does not give the same result as above (120p).

If you have a pulldown it applies to one fps, not multiple different ones so they all give the same result with the same pulldown.
2:2 pulldown with 120Hz source video isn't going to give you the same result as 2:2 pulldown with 24P video.

Do you agree with that?Are you asking me if a refresh rate of 240 Hz is different than a refresh rate of 48 Hz? Yes, and I have been explaining that the issue is refresh rate and not frame repetition in my last several posts. The reason frame repetition was done with 24 fps 3D video on 3D DLP projectors was so that the refresh rate would be high enough so it wouldn't flicker and so that the left/right frames would appear closer together in time. The frame rate doesn't change either of those which is why I have been saying that the issue is one of refresh rate.


This premise of yours that 2:2 pulldown on 120Hz source is the same as 2:2 pulldown of 24p source confuses me as to why you would think that.I have never said that and I have no idea why you think that. Now you have said in the past that frame repetition is necessary for 3D video which is why I have been asking for evidence of that. That is why I asked you to explain how exactly would 60 fps 3D video look worse than 24 fps 3D video if both were shown on a 240 Hz 3D display?


"Since you are the one who is stating that a certain amount of frame repetition is required for 3D video you are the one that has to prove it."
As I said before if I could use these test files myself so I could say with total testable proof one way or the other I would.Okay, but I am telling you that your basis for believing that frame repetition is necessary for 3D was built on false logic. You heard that 3 frame repetition was done with 24 fps 3D video when being shown at the movie theaters. You made the assumption that frame repetition was somehow needed for 3D since you didn't know that it was being done to increase the refresh rate. You went out and said that for 60 fps 3D video you would need 4 frame repetition to have similar quality to the movie theater. Since you thought that was needed you than told people that they would need 480 Hz 3D displays. All of your actions make sense based on what you thought was needed for 3D. Considering this thread was designed to educate people about 3D and could be read by thousands of people I think that accuracy is important.

And as far as we know - the Panasonic 3D system is going to be picked by the BDA as the standard for 3D on BD. And that system offers two different HD formats (per eye):That is the two resolutions that Panasonic mentioned in their press release document but Keith has said (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=17184547&postcount=196) that 720p60 3D video will be part of the 3D Blu-ray specs and it is also a mandatory 3D format (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=17191732&postcount=600) for HDMI 1.4 3D displays.

That is the two resolutions that Panasonic mentioned in their press release document but Keith has said (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=17184547&postcount=196) that 720p60 3D video will be part of the 3D Blu-ray specs and it is also a mandatory 3D format (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=17191732&postcount=600) for HDMI 1.4 3D displays.

720P isn't Full HD and that is what both Sony and Panasonic mentioned at their IFA demos.

AFAIK, 720P has never been used for BD.

Maybe it will be used for 3D HD-CAM content as Panasonic Pro Video uses that HD format.

Pulldown = 10Hz = figure a = 1 frame
pulldown = 10Hz = figure b = 1 frame
...In your calculations you keep stating that the refresh rate is 10 Hz but that is not logical. Each frame is still being displayed for 240th of a second and it is not being displayed for a 10th of a second. For example with a 240 Hz 3D display that means that you see the left image for 240th of a second than the right image for 240th of a second and it keeps repeating like that. I have already said that a 240 Hz 3D display has 120 Hz flicker per eye and refreshes each frame at 240th of a second.

Since it might help I will show you why these figures you posted are illogical:

frame 1 = 10th of a second
frame 1 = 10th of a second
frame 1 = 10th of a second
frame 1 = 10th of a second
frame 1 = 10th of a second
frame 1 = 10th of a second
frame 1 = 10th of a second
frame 1 = 10th of a second
frame 1 = 10th of a second
frame 1 = 10th of a second
= figure a = 1 second (since you have stated that each figure is equal to 10 Hz)

L1___R1 = 5th of a second
L1___R1 = 5th of a second
L1___R1 = 5th of a second
L1___R1 = 5th of a second
L1___R1 = 5th of a second
= figure b = 1 second (since you have stated that each figure is equal to 10 Hz)

Since the refresh rate is the number of times the display refreshes per second this is what you have been stating. It doesn't add up now does it? Well now let us look at my figures:

240 Hz 2D display 1 frame of 24 fps video

frame 1 = 240th of a second
frame 1 = 240th of a second
frame 1 = 240th of a second
frame 1 = 240th of a second
frame 1 = 240th of a second
frame 1 = 240th of a second
frame 1 = 240th of a second
frame 1 = 240th of a second
frame 1 = 240th of a second
frame 1 = 240th of a second

Now this means each frame is being shown for 240th of a second and 240 Hz flicker per eye. There is no reason to add up the frame repetitions since they don't change the refresh rate. It doesn't matter if the frame is being repeated 10 times or 1 time the refresh rate remains the same. For smoother motion in the video a higher frame rate would be better but that is a different issue.

240 Hz 3D display 1 left and right 3D frame pair of 24 fps 3D video

L1 = 240th of a second
R1 = 240th of a second
L1 = 240th of a second
R1 = 240th of a second
L1 = 240th of a second
R1 = 240th of a second
L1 = 240th of a second
R1 = 240th of a second
L1 = 240th of a second
R1 = 240th of a second

Notice that they are still displayed every 240th of a second and going from a 2D display to a 3D display doesn't change that. Now let us see what the left eye would see:

240 Hz 3D display 1 left 3D frame of 24 fps 3D video

L1 = 240th of a second
L1 = 240th of a second
L1 = 240th of a second
L1 = 240th of a second
L1 = 240th of a second

Notice that the time each frame is displayed for the left eye remains the same. Now we see though that each eye only sees half the number of frames with a 3D display and that means that 240 Hz 3D display would have 120 Hz per eye flicker. That though is a very high flicker frequency and is higher than the 72 Hz per eye flicker of 144 Hz 3D DLP movie projectors.

And as far as we know - the Panasonic 3D system is going to be picked by the BDA as the standard for 3D on BD. And that system offers two different HD formats (per eye):Nobody said that the Panasonic 3D system was picked without modification...

720P isn't Full HD and that is what both Sony and Panasonic mentioned at their IFA demos.

AFAIK, 720P has never been used for BD.

Maybe it will be used for 3D HD-CAM content as Panasonic Pro Video uses that HD format.

Living Temples
http://www.blu-raystats.com/Stats/Details.php?ifb=LivingTemples_798304013214

Tenacious D: The Complete Masterworks 2
http://www.blu-raystats.com/Stats/Details.php?ifb=TenaciousDTheCompleteMasterworks2_8869733537 90

http://www.blu-raystats.com

Pulldown = 10Hz = figure a = 1 frame
pulldown = 10Hz = figure b = 1 frame
...= figure a = one frame of 23.976fps source video
= figure b = one frame of 23.976fps source video but in 3D framesDo you see now that you have been stating that each figure is equal to 1 second? When you say that each frame is 10 Hz that is what it means since the definition of Hz (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Hertz) is "A unit of frequency equal to one cycle per second". That means that your calculations are literally impossible since you keep stating that a fraction of a second is equal to a second. Consider the entire second and you will see that with a sequential frame 240 Hz 3D display each frame is shown for 240th of a second and the flicker frequency is 120 Hz per eye. Once you understand that you will see that this remains true whether it is showing 24 fps 3D video or 60 fps 3D video.

Thank you for correcting my error in the use of the term "Hz". :)

Thank you for correcting my error in the use of the term "Hz". :)I was happy to help and the reason I knew what Hz meant was because I have read a few books on the subject of video that explained terms such as that.

I have deleted the posts that had misinformation in them so they wouldn't be used as information.

I have deleted many or my posts in this thread and joined them all into the second post, so it's easy to find and read.

In the second post is the new math I wrote after I understood my previous error that Richard Paul pointed out.
Richard Paul would you please look at the math in post#2, section e and see if it's correct? :)

I was happy to help and the reason I knew what Hz meant was because I have read a few books on the subject of video that explained terms such as that.

I am glad this exchange is coming to an end. People should realize that source frame rate and display refresh rate are two totally different concepts.

Source frame rate has nothing to do with a display's refresh rate, refresh rate is key to a flicker free 3D stereo visualization (for that matter, for 2D visualization too, if refresh rate is too low, 2D visualization flickers too). You can look at a stereo still picture (let's say 2 FPS (1 for left eye, 1 for right eye) as far as source frame rate is concerned), if the display's refresh rate is anyway below 80 Hz, people would see flickering. 120Hz is sufficient, I am not sure there is much real value in 240 Hz as far as flicker free 3D stereo visualization is involved.

Also, there is really no such thing as 3D frame, every frame is 2D, with slightly different viewing angle for left/right eye.

Section f


24p........................ = 23.97600 FPS.. = 41.708375 Milliseconds Time between frames
NTSC's....................... 29.97......... = 33.3667 Milliseconds Time between frames
48p........................ = 47.95200 FPS.. = 20.8541875 Milliseconds Time between frames
NTSC's....................... 59.94 FPS..... = 16.68335 Milliseconds Time between frames


1000 / 23.97600 = 41.708375
1000 / 29.97 = 33.3667
1000 / 47.95200 = 20.8541875
1000 / 59.94 = 16.68335

There's 1000 milliseconds in a second.
MS / FPS = MS: 1000 ms / FPS = Time between frames

"The REAL D system uses triple flash to provide the best motion rendition possible. Use of triple flash puts the refresh rate above the normal flicker fusion threshold for humans, providing smoother motion. The triple flash approach also makes the left and right eye images to appear closer in time, giving significantly less motion induced parallax errors and therefore more comfortable motion rendition."

http://www.edcf.net/edcf_docs/real-d.pdf

Flicker fusion threshold

"If the frame rate falls below the flicker fusion threshold for the given viewing conditions, flicker will be apparent to the observer, and movements of objects on the film will appear jerky. For the purposes of presenting moving images, the human flicker fusion threshold is usually taken as 16 hertz (Hz)."
LINK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flicker_fusion_threshold)

MS / HZ = MS: 1000 / 16 = 62.5

• What does this mean?
1000ms / fps = ms > 1000ms / 16hz = 62.5ms = fps:ms faster than 62.5ms: No flicker
1000ms / fps = ms < 1000ms / 16hz = 62.5ms = fps:ms slower than 62.5ms: flicker

• In Actual practice though, for 3D, the Hz to use is the one Real D uses: "triple flash", as this is standard in digital cinema = 72Hz 2D (71.928fps) per eye..
1000ms / fps = ms > or = 1000ms / 72hz
1000ms / fps = ms > or = 1000ms / 72hz = 13.8888889ms = fps:ms faster than or equal too 13.8888889ms: if equal too it's decent quality 3D(but can be better).

On a 240Hz monitor, 60p video using 2:2 pulldown making it 120p video
1 000ms / 119.88fps = 8.34167501ms
8.34167501ms is faster than 13.8888889ms so there should be no flicker when using a 240hz monitor and 60p tv in stereoscopic 3D.

This is from post #2.

Richard Paul would you please look at the math in post#2, section e and see if it's correct? :)Sure, and here are some of the things I noticed:

•How to calculate HDMI Bandwidth

HSYNC: 1920+280 (horizontal blanking pixel No.)
VSYNC: 1200+50 (vertical blanking line No.)
total pixel per frame = 2200x1250 = 2.75 Mpx/frame
Bit rate = 2.75 Mpx/frame x 24 (= 3x8) bit/px x 60 frame/s = 3.96 Gbit/s
TMDS: 8 bit -> 10 bit
TMDS bit rate = 3.96 Gbit/s x 10/8 = 4.95 Gbit/sThat looks good and here is how you would calculate the bandwidth for 1080p60:

HSYNC: 1920+280 (horizontal blanking pixel No.)
VSYNC: 1080+45 (vertical blanking line No.)
total pixel per frame = 2200x1125 = 2.47 Mpx/frame
Bit rate = 2.75 Mpx/frame x 24 (= 3x8) bit/px x 60 frame/s = 3.56 Gbit/s
TMDS: 8 bit -> 10 bit
TMDS bit rate = 3.96 Gbit/s x 10/8 = 4.455 Gbit/s (most of the articles I have seen round it to 4.46 Gbit/s)


•Maximum refresh rate of hdmi 1.4 = 340HzIt is 340 MHz (340 million Hz) which is the maximum TMDS clock rate (http://www.cepro.com/article/why_hdmi_speed_is_confusing/K330) supported by HDMI 1.3 and 1.4 while 165 MHz was the maximum TMDS clock rate supported by HDMI 1.0, HDMI 1.1, and HDMI 1.2. A TMDS character is 10 bits and there are 3 data links with HDMI. As such with every TMDS clock rate 30 bits of TMDS data is transferred. Here are three examples showing the TMDS clock rate and the TMDS data rate:

27 MHz (TMDS clock rate) x 30 bits (3 data links each carrying a 10-bit TMDS character) = .81Gbits (480p60)

148.5 MHz (TMDS clock rate) x 30 bits (3 data links each carrying a 10-bit TMDS character) = 4.455 Gbits (1080p60)

165 MHz (TMDS clock rate) x 30 bits (3 data links each carrying a 10-bit TMDS character) = 4.95 Gbits (1920x1200p60)

Richard Paul,

Ok, I have updated post #2. Thank you. :)

Richard Paul,

Ok, I have updated post #2. Thank you. :)Just to mention this but 340 MHz is 340 million Hz.

Just to mention this but 340 MHz is 340 million Hz.

Thanks, I have corrected that in post #2.

Section k. Kids and eye strain

"Depth in or out of the screen is created when the left eye and right eye views cause viewers’ eyes to cross at a point in front of or behind the screen.

Adult eyes are separated by about 2.5 inches."

"If the parallax ranges from say -5 inches to +2 inches then the cinematographer has created the content for families. (Kids eyes are separated by about 2 inches; as a result, adult 3D content may be uncomfortable for them.)"

Inches of Parallax___Distance from Viewer to Screen (%)
2.5__________________Infinity
2____________________500

link (http://www.in-three.com/3dwithoutglasses.html)

This means that kids has different 3D than adults do.
The child benefits from 500, the adult from infinity.
The adult viewing 500 see's a muted 3d.

The child viewing infinity can't see it comfortably, so needs to mute the 3d so it's not overwhelming. This means the monitor size would need to be smaller so the 3d is muted.
The child see's 500 as beautiful 3d due to their small size.
So a very tiny adult, a child size adult, may view adult oriented 3d and think it's overwhelming.

I added this to the second post.

I added a section L to the second post.

__________________________________________

Section L: 240Hz tv's need to be affordable for 3D Blu Ray to take

Blu Ray tv is $2300.00 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=17360655#post17360655)
Same tv but 60Hz is $1500 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16889102261)

This is using 60fps video
Millisecond/Hz=Millisecond
1000 / 59.9400599 = 16.6833333 Milliseconds

This is using 120fps video
Millisecond/Hz=Millisecond
1000 / 119.88012 = 8.34166666 Milliseconds

If we take the 144fps of digital theater 3D, and divide that by two (one for each eye), we have the milliseconds number that people see in the theaters when watching 3D. This is the standard that must be met or exceeded when talking about quality 3D.
If the milliseconds of the video is slower than this than the quality of the 3D is not as good as the one seen in the movie Theater when watching movies like Disney's Up.

This is the milliseconds standard of excellence
Millisecond/Hz=Millisecond
1000 / 71.9280719 = 13.9027778 Milliseconds

(Stats from section f)

As we can see, the 120fps is faster than the standard of excellence used by Real D theater 3D. So the quality is very good 3D.

If we have a 240Hz tv, the tv can output 120fps 3D per eye when using shutter glasses. The milliseconds speed of this 120fps video is so fast there would be no "flicker fusion threshold artifact/jerkiness".

The reason the tv would need to accomodate 60fps video is for sports tv, namely the nba which shoots video at 60fps.
If the nba wanted to show 3D video at 60fps a true 240Hz tv could do this properly whereas a 120Hz or 60Hz tv could not.

The price of a 60Hz tv must be met by the 240Hz tv and not only that but the 240Hz tv must be made in great enough quantity it saturates the tv market, then 3D 240Hz tv would be at a premium that would be within reach of the average consumer.

Right now at 240Hz lcd tv is 2300.00, and a 60Hz tv with the same features is 1500.00.
This is too much since the cheap 3D tv's need to be 240Hz as well, so the tv necessary for proper 3D is at a acceptable premium when compared to regular 240hz tv's.
What does this mean, what am I saying: that tv manufactures need to abandone 120Hz and 60Hz tv's and move to 240Hz tv's and this means not milking the market for 60hz and 120Hz tv's.
This is a Necessary expense and it will be the Only thing to nsure the future sucess of 3D tv.

I added this info to post #1.

Why would I care about 3D or 240hz again?

So that watching movies or blu ray documentaries is like seeing it through a window rather than the regular way it is now seen with 2D.

Perfect 3D Tv/BluRay is the same as looking out your window and looking around outside.

There is different quality from parallax value though. Meaning the greater the screen size the greater the window to see through is and so the 3D experience is greater.
A smaller screen will, or rather Should give the same sensation as looking through a window but not so immersed as looking at a big fish at the aquarium.

I added a section m to the second post. I'll post below what I added:

Section m: Eye exam to see if your eyes can view 3D

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4133/eyeub.jpg

http://thumbnails18.imagebam.com/5318/87758f53175110.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/87758f53175110)

Eye exam 1: The Eye Hop
• Center your nose over the brown eye below.
• Close one eye and put your thumb several inches in front of your nose. Position your thumb so it completely hides the brown eye on the screen.
• Now switch eyes. Close your open eye and open the other.
• Watch the eye hop!

Eye exam 2: THE FRAMING GAME

• Center your nose over the brown eye below.
• Focus your eyes on the single brown eye.
• Put your free thumb in front of your nose.
• Continue to focus on the eye. If both eyes are on, you will see two thumbs framing one eye.
• Now, switch your focus to your thumb. You should see two eyes framing one thumb.

Link to where I got the eye exam tests (http://www.vision3d.com/whycant.html)

I added this to the second post:

__________________________________________

Section n

- How far to sit from your Display matters.

For 1080P content, on a 1080P Monitor.
I find that measuring the actual height of the monitor, not including the case,
and multiplying this height by 3, will tell you how far you should sit from your monitor.

So if your monitors height if 21" high, then you would sit 63" from the tv.

For 720p or 480i, regular tv the distances are different.
You can sit further away and where your comfortable.
I don't know any rules of thumb for these resolutions.

And I mean bottom to top height, not diagonal height.

- The monitor height off the ground is set to your seated position.
When sitting down looking at the tv, your eyes should be facing the center of the tv without looking down or up to do so.
To look at the center of the tv you just look straight ahead, not up or down.

Looking up is harder than looking down, so if a different person has to look up where you just have to look straight ahead, then putting it lower so it is set to their eye level would be the best accommodation.

- How far to sit from your Display matters: What is the Biggest tv you should get?
As shown above, the distance you sit from your tv dictates how big the tv should be.
But I am now talking about the Biggest tv that should be used at a certain sitting or viewing distance.

What you should know is that there is a "Visual Cue" called "Interposition".
Interposition is defined as:
a. To insert or introduce between parts.
b. To place (oneself) between others or things.
c. To Intervene

When the edges of the screen are viewed they may create a interposition: seeing the film, and also seeing the edges of the screen with the background of the room.
But movies are a entertainment where there should be no need for "Intervention" toning down the experience.
In order to remove this Intervention that tones down the entertainment you increase the monitor size.

What is the biggest size monitor? It's not a exect science and this is only from what I have tested and found to be the best method.
How I found this recommendation I'm going to show below is I sat very close to my monitor and relaxed my eyes while watching a movie.
My eyes were not alert and wide, but relaxed and slightly squinting intently looking at the screen (The movie was Babylon A.D.).
While I was watching the movie I closed one eyelid, the right one, and with my left eye I looked to see if the full picture from the top left corner to the bottom right corner was visable diagonally, if it wasn't I moved back a bit.
This way the largest I could make the picture by sitting close and still see the full diagonal resolution with relaxed studying eyes was found.

What is the formula?
Measure the height of your monitor, top to bottom, not including the frame, just the actual physical screen when the tv is turned off.
Then multiply this height by 1.5 and that is how far you need to sit from the screen to get the biggest picture you can see easily.
So if your tv is 60" high, you would sit so your eyes would be 90" away from it.

With 3D tv and blu ray the need for a large tv with little interposition artifact is increased much more than it is for 2D movies.
But with all thing moderation is key and this means you don't have a tv that's too big! If it's too big you can't see the picture.
But this begs the question of how to get such a big monitor since this would create much electricity and emf radiation.
How to get such a big picture safetly with little to no emf radiation: a movie projector.
For the biggest picture viewed safely you need a movie projector.