Basic 3D video FAQs - Page 3 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 81 Old 09-06-2010, 03:56 AM
 
the good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

(...) James Cameron said in an interview with Variety two years ago that he wanted to shoot Avatar at 48 fps or higher, but from a later report Fox Studios wouldn't go along with it so he was forced to shoot the movie at 24 fps. (...)
However with the transition to digital cinema perhaps someone in Hollywood will be willing to take on this long out dated standard and bring movies into the 21st century by setting a new standard for 3D movies using 48 fps or better still 72 fps for both creation and display (either of these frame rate can easily be converted to 24 fps for distribution to theaters that can only support the old standard).

I've read the interview and Cameron said: "The cameras can do it, the projectors can (with a small modification) do it. So why aren't we doing it, as an industry? Because people have been asking the wrong question for years. They have been so focused on resolution, and counting pixels and lines, that they have forgotten about frame rate. Perceived resolution = pixels x replacement rate. A 2K image at 48 frames per second looks as sharp as a 4K image at 24 frames per second ... with one fundamental difference: the 4K/24 image will judder miserably during a panning shot, and the 2K/48 won't. Higher pixel counts only preserve motion artifacts like strobing with greater fidelity. They don't solve them at all."

What Cameron failed to mention (after all he is a [great] filmmaker, but only) is the conversion of film to video which, imho, is an important part of industry.
All over the world this process in achieved, since the beginning of history - sort of speaking, by 2-3 (or 3-2) pulldown for 59.94 Hz systems and 2-2 pulldown for 50 Hz systems. First method use an decrease of film speed of 0.1% slow and has no major effect on the audio part, but the second method use an increase of 4% of film speed and, because of this change, audio pitch correction is necessary.
Those methods are standards for film to video transfer. In order to achieve 48 Hz rate film transfer new standards has to emerge along with the new equipment.
Until then, no producer will agree to shoot any* movie at 48 fps ... or higher.

by "any" I mean a movie which is targeted for international markets.
the good is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 81 Old 09-06-2010, 10:38 AM
Advanced Member
 
peter0328's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
If they are switching framerates they should just go to 30 or 60fps to keep it the same as an HDTV (or 3DTV) without 3:2 pulldown.
peter0328 is offline  
post #63 of 81 Old 09-06-2010, 06:32 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Florida and West Virginia, USA
Posts: 5,689
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by the good View Post

I've read the interview and Cameron said: "The cameras can do it, the projectors can (with a small modification) do it. So why aren't we doing it, as an industry? Because people have been asking the wrong question for years. They have been so focused on resolution, and counting pixels and lines, that they have forgotten about frame rate. Perceived resolution = pixels x replacement rate. A 2K image at 48 frames per second looks as sharp as a 4K image at 24 frames per second ... with one fundamental difference: the 4K/24 image will judder miserably during a panning shot, and the 2K/48 won't. Higher pixel counts only preserve motion artifacts like strobing with greater fidelity. They don't solve them at all."

What Cameron failed to mention (after all he is a [great] filmmaker, but only) is the conversion of film to video which, imho, is an important part of industry.
All over the world this process in achieved, since the beginning of history - sort of speaking, by 2-3 (or 3-2) pulldown for 59.94 Hz systems and 2-2 pulldown for 50 Hz systems. First method use an decrease of film speed of 0.1% slow and has no major effect on the audio part, but the second method use an increase of 4% of film speed and, because of this change, audio pitch correction is necessary.
Those methods are standards for film to video transfer. In order to achieve 48 Hz rate film transfer new standards has to emerge along with the new equipment.
Until then, no producer will agree to shoot any* movie at 48 fps ... or higher.

by "any" I mean a movie which is targeted for international markets.


In the James Cameron interview he also said: "The 48 fps negative or digital master can be skip-printed to generate a 24 fps 35mm DI negative for making release prints, so 48 is the magic number because it remains compatible with the film-based platform which will still be with us for some time, especially internationally."

Certainly a 2K/48 fps video master or a 48 fps film mastered movie could easily be converted to 24fps for film or for release in standard video formats (DVD, Blu-ray, etc.) by simply using every other frame (e.g. 'skip-printed' as Cameron called it). Since Blu-ray uses 1080p/24 as it standard for movies the half frame rate copies can be used directly. For DVDs that are typically recorded at either 25fps (e.g., Europe) or 30 fps (North America) then starting with the half frame rate copy is exactly the same as the situation we have today. So I see no real issues and the only additional complication is the need for the additional step to create the half frame rate version by the very simple process of using only every other frame from the original 48 fps master.

Quote:
Originally Posted by peter0328 View Post

If they are switching framerates they should just go to 30 or 60fps to keep it the same as an HDTV (or 3DTV) without 3:2 pulldown.

Except -

1. Film projectors used in theaters world-wide and much of the existing film-to-video infrastructure is based on 24 fps and a multiple of 24 is the only choice feasible to the movie industry.

2. In much of the world outside of North America the video standards are 25 and 50 Hz (fps) so there is not a perfect world-wide frame rate that's an exact match for video. However, the 25/50 Hz parts of the world have always had to deal with 24 fps source material and they handle it via a slight speed up of the source material and 48 fps mastered sources could be handled the same way. With many new HDTVs refreshing the screen at 120Hz or 240Hz, I suspect in the future most HDTVs will not just refresh the screen at these increased rates but will also accept input signals at multiple input rates (beyond just 24Hz and 60Hz accepted today by most HDTVs sold in North America). For example a future HDTV could accept a 1080p/48 input signal and by applying 5:5 pull-down display at 240 Hz. This would eliminate the judder caused by the need to use 2:3 pulldown with 60Hz displays. This is the same idea as available today on some HDTVs where they apply 5:5 pull-down on 24 Hz sources to refresh the display at 120 Hz (or 3:3 pull-down for display at 72 Hz. or 4:4 pull-down for display at 96Hz.).

Ron Jones
Blog + Reviews + Articles: projectorreviews.com
Ron Jones is offline  
post #64 of 81 Old 09-07-2010, 01:03 AM
 
the good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

In the James Cameron interview he also said: "The 48 fps negative or digital master can be skip-printed to generate a 24 fps 35mm DI negative for making release prints, so 48 is the magic number because it remains compatible with the film-based platform which will still be with us for some time, especially internationally."
(...)

In other words, what he was saying is that: let's make a great progress in film making but, for film to video transfer (because there are no standards available or any equipment) you should stick with the old legacy. Following the same line of thoughts, we can think that Cameron must be thinking: I have the power and the will to change things and, if I'll shoot in 48 fps, the whole industry (in order to see the benefit of 48) shall change.
Ok, this might (and will eventually) happen. Only, imho, not any time soon. In order to support my opinion, we shall have to go back when Titanic shooting start. First, I think that the film was initially budgeted at $135,000,000. At this point, the movie cost more than the Titanic itself. He was able to persuade 20th Century Fox to invest in the film by convincing them that the publicity surrounding a real-life dive to the wreck would be really beneficial to the production. But the costs skyrocket, to a final of $200,000,000 or so. Along the way, he forfeited his $8 million director's salary and his percentage of the gross when the studio became concerned at how much over budget the movie was running, than Paramount Pictures had to contribute an additional $65,000,000 in exchange for U.S. distribution rights. But, in the end, it was the highest grossing film in box office history with a worldwide gross of US$1.8 billion.
After that, he said: give me $280,000,000 and I'll give you something better (i.e. Avatar).
Now, he's asking for a change in the whole industry. In exchange for what?

Don't get me wrong, starting with 48 fps should be great, but what are the odds?

Once, Niccolo Machiavelli said:
"Nothing is more difficult than to introduce a new order, because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new".
the good is offline  
post #65 of 81 Old 09-07-2010, 07:09 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Florida and West Virginia, USA
Posts: 5,689
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by the good View Post

In other words, what he was saying is that: let's make a great progress in film making but, for film to video transfer (because there are no standards available or any equipment) you should stick with the old legacy. Following the same line of thoughts, we can think that Cameron must be thinking: I have the power and the will to change things and, if I'll shoot in 48 fps, the whole industry (in order to see the benefit of 48) shall change.
Ok, this might (and will eventually) happen. Only, imho, not any time soon. In order to support my opinion, we shall have to go back when Titanic shooting start. First, I think that the film was initially budgeted at $135,000,000. At this point, the movie cost more than the Titanic itself. He was able to persuade 20th Century Fox to invest in the film by convincing them that the publicity surrounding a real-life dive to the wreck would be really beneficial to the production. But the costs skyrocket, to a final of $200,000,000 or so. Along the way, he forfeited his $8 million director's salary and his percentage of the gross when the studio became concerned at how much over budget the movie was running, than Paramount Pictures had to contribute an additional $65,000,000 in exchange for U.S. distribution rights. But, in the end, it was the highest grossing film in box office history with a worldwide gross of US$1.8 billion.
After that, he said: give me $280,000,000 and I'll give you something better (i.e. Avatar).
Now, he's asking for a change in the whole industry. In exchange for what?

Don't get me wrong, starting with 48 fps should be great, but what are the odds?

Once, Niccolo Machiavelli said:
"Nothing is more difficult than to introduce a new order, because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new".

When making Avatar Cameron was not able to convince Fox to allow him to shoot the movie at 48 fps although that's what he wanted to do. Maybe for Avatar 2 or another future 3D project that may change. I saw Avatar in a RealD DLP digital cinema (before I was aware of Cameron's position on 24 vs. 48 fps). While I was watching the movie and during many fast motion sequences I was thinking how much better it could have been at a higher frame rate. The virtual 3D reality was seriously interrupted with the really mediocre quality for fast motion that resulted from the far too low 24 fps frame rate (although no worse that for 2D movies). Back nearly 30 years I saw several of the short subjects John Dskstra shot in the "ShowScan" format (2D movies shot on 70mm film at 60 fps) and they looked fantastic. Since the whole point of 3D is to draw the audience into a virtual world I believe a higher frame rate is now the missing piece of the technology. I'm saying with 3D movies, I don't want nor need the "film look", in part produced by the low 24 fps rate, that so many seem to demand for their 2D movie presentations.

Ron Jones
Blog + Reviews + Articles: projectorreviews.com
Ron Jones is offline  
post #66 of 81 Old 09-07-2010, 10:53 AM
Senior Member
 
scarabaeus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 299
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
A few corrections:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post


Answer - Anaglyph images viewed with glasses using colored lens first became popular to the 1950's and is an inexpensive method to display 3D content with existing TV and video sources (all

That should be "most". There were e.g. field-alternative 3D videos available on standard definition VHS and DVD.

Quote:


DVD, Blu-ray and broadcasts that are in 3D prior to 2010 have used the anaglyph technology for creating the 3D effect).
...

Answer - Generally you will need a new generation of HDTV display that has additional features required to support 3D. The recently approved alternative formats for Blu-ray and broadcast 3D (as defined in the HDMI 1.4a specification)

The HDMI 1.4a spec. only defines the output format between a playback device and the TV. The Blu-ray disc (BD) spec. defines the Blu-ray 3D format, and the broadcasters are free to use whatever they want, even though they would be smart to match one of the video modes with HDMI 1.4a-mandated support for displays.

Quote:


requires the 3D capable HDTV to decode the 3D video information then process this video to put it into a format appropriate for that specific display.

...
[indent]Frame Packing (Blu-ray 3D required full resolution formats)-
  • full 1080p resolution for each right/left images with refresh rates of 23.98/24 Hz
  • full 720p resolution for each right/left images with refresh rates of 23.98/24 Hz. and 59.94/60 Hz. or 50 Hz*

720p23.97/24 Hz is not a mandatory, or even commonly supported format.

Hope this helps...
scarabaeus is online now  
post #67 of 81 Old 09-07-2010, 05:51 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Florida and West Virginia, USA
Posts: 5,689
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 96
QUOTE=scarabaeus;19156620].....
That should be "most". There were e.g. field-alternative 3D videos available on standard definition VHS and DVD.
[quote=scarabaeus;19156620]

Since the statement probably applies to 99+% of all 3D videos sold, I have qualified the statement in the text to say "virtually all"

Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabaeus View Post

............

The HDMI 1.4a spec. only defines the output format between a playback device and the TV. The Blu-ray disc (BD) spec. defines the Blu-ray 3D format, and the broadcasters are free to use whatever they want, even though they would be smart to match one of the video modes with HDMI 1.4a-mandated support for displays.

.......

There was never any intent to indicate otherwise. I've updated the text related to HDMI 1.4a to make this a little clearer. As for cable and satellite providers once that claim support for HDMI 1.4a then they are required to support at least one of the mandatory formats from that spec.


Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabaeus View Post

.......

720p23.97/24 Hz is not a mandatory, or even commonly supported format.

.......


I agree that 720/24 is not mandatory (HDMI spec. doesn't actually use the term mandatory) under para. 8.3.2. where it states for 3DTVs (i.e., HDMI sinks) that support a 60Hz 2D mode (i.e., in North American):

An HDMI Sink which supports at least one 59.94 / 60Hz 2D video format shall support
all of ;
  • 1920x1080p @ 23.98 / 24Hz Frame packing
  • 1280x720p @ 59.94 / 60Hz Frame packing
  • 1920x1080i @ 59.94 / 60Hz Side-by-Side (Half)
  • 1920x1080p @ 23.98 / 24Hz Top-and-Bottom
  • 1280x720p @ 59.94 / 60Hz Top-and-Bottom

Which leads one to believe that the only Frame Packing formats that are mandatory are 1080p/24 and 720p/60 (in North America).

However, the HDMI 1.4a spec. in para. 8.2.3.2 also defines 3D formats are "Primary" and "Secondary". The following formats are listed as "Primary":


Primary 3D Video Format Timings
  • 1280x720p @ 59.94/60Hz (Frame Packing, Side-by-Side(Half), Top-and-Bottom)
  • 1280x720p @ 50Hz (Frame Packing, Side-by-Side(Half), Top-and-Bottom)
  • 1280x720p @ 23.98/24Hz (Frame Packing)
  • 1280x720p @ 29.97/30Hz (Frame Packing)
  • 1920x1080i @ 59.94/60Hz (Frame Packing, Side-by-Side(Half))
  • 1920x1080i @ 50Hz (Frame Packing, Side-by-Side(Half))
  • 1920x1080p @ 23.98/24Hz (Frame Packing, Side-by-Side(Half), Top-and-Bottom)
  • 1920x1080p @ 29.97/30Hz (Frame Packing, Top-and-Bottom)
  • 1920x1080p @ 59.94/60Hz (Top-and-Bottom)
  • 1920x1080p @ 50Hz (Top-and-Bottom)

...so 720p/24, 720p/30 and 720p/60 are all listed as "Primary" Frame Packing 3D formats but the spec. does not say what it means to be a "primary" format. What is the real significance of 3D format being listed as "primay" but not mandatory vs. one listed as a "secondary" format?

Although I believe there is some confusion within spec., I do take your point that there is no text that specifically says any frame packing formats other than 1080p/24 and 720p/60 are required to actually be implemented in a 3DTV (ie., HDMI sink).

Ron Jones
Blog + Reviews + Articles: projectorreviews.com
Ron Jones is offline  
post #68 of 81 Old 09-08-2010, 01:20 PM
Senior Member
 
scarabaeus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 299
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Thank you for looking into this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

I agree that 720/24 is not mandatory (HDMI spec. doesn't actually use the term mandatory) under para. 8.3.2. where it states for 3DTVs (i.e., HDMI sinks) that support a 60Hz 2D mode (i.e., in North American):

...

Which leads one to believe that the only Frame Packing formats that are mandatory are 1080p/24 and 720p/60 (in North America).

However, the HDMI 1.4a spec. in para. 8.2.3.2 also defines 3D formats are "Primary" and "Secondary". The following formats are listed as "Primary":


...

...so 720p/24, 720p/30 and 720p/60 are all listed as "Primary" Frame Packing 3D formats but the spec. does not say what it means to be a "primary" format. What is the real significance of 3D format being listed as "primay" but not mandatory vs. one listed as a "secondary" format?

Although I believe there is some confusion within spec., I do take your point that there is no text that specifically says any frame packing formats other than 1080p/24 and 720p/60 are required to actually be implemented in a 3DTV (ie., HDMI sink).

I interpret the meaning of primary vs. secondary formats as "technically useful" and "technically possible, but does not make much sense". E.g. 1080i top-and-bottom is possible, but that would leave 1920x270 pixel per eye, which is ridiculous. They have the same primary/secondary separation in chapter 6.3 of the full HDMI 1.4a spec for the 2D video formats, also without clarification as to what it means.

The wording like "A ... Sink ... shall support all of" (chapter 8.3.2) actually means "mandatory". That means, a source can rely on support for all of those 5 formats (1080p24FP, 720p60FP, 1080i60SbS, 1080p24TnB, 720p60TnB), as soon as it discovers general support for 3D in the display's EDID (3D_present = 1). And, by extension, a consumer can rely on support for these 5 formats when purchasing a new "3D TV". (substitute "50" for "60" in europe)

Support for all other formats, "primary" and "secondary", has to be listed in the EDID case by case, and is completely optional for manufacturers. For consumers, it does not affect the labelling of the product in the store as "3D TV", and is probaly only listed in some appendix of the manual, if at all.
scarabaeus is online now  
post #69 of 81 Old 12-27-2010, 10:58 PM
Advanced Member
 
mariner888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

...
Question - What are the mandatory 3D formats that are defined by the HDMI 1.4a specification and what devices must support them?

Answer... The Blu-ray 3D specification (released in December 2009) specifically requires support for the Frame Packing 1080p/24 and 720p/60 formats as defined by the HDMI 1.4 spec.
While to be HDMI 1.4a compliant, 3D sources need only support one of the "mandatory" 3D formats, ...
[indent]Frame Packing (Blu-ray 3D required full resolution formats)-
  • full 1080p resolution for each right/left images with refresh rates of 23.98/24 Hz
  • full 720p resolution for each right/left images with a refresh rate of 50Hz* or 60Hz.
Note: Frame Packing is capable of placing two full resolution HD images into one "super sized" frame for transmission across HDMI. Frame Packing provides full resolution 3D and when used for 1080p 3D video, the right and left images are placed one above the other into a "super sized" frame that is 2205 pixels vertical by 1920 pixels horizontal with a 45 x 1920 pixel active blanking area separating the two images. More information is HERE) Side-by-Side - (example use - satellite or cable 3D broadcast)
  • half horizontal resolution 1080i (i.e., 960h x 1080v pixels) for each right/left image with refresh rates of 59.94/60 Hz or 50 Hz*.

...

Greetings Ron. Thanks for posting the FAQ.

I have a question regarding Blu-Ray 3D player's support for side-by-side1920x1080i 3D format, such as those used by Panasonic TM750 3D camcorder. Take for example the Sony BDP-S570, which only outputs Frame Packing format from what I can gather. Does it support the AVCHD recorded by TM750, and if affirmative, what's the output format used?

Many thanks and best regards.
mariner888 is online now  
post #70 of 81 Old 01-05-2011, 06:40 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Florida and West Virginia, USA
Posts: 5,689
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by mariner888 View Post

Greetings Ron. Thanks for posting the FAQ.

I have a question regarding Blu-Ray 3D player's support for side-by-side1920x1080i 3D format, such as those used by Panasonic TM750 3D camcorder. Take for example the Sony BDP-S570, which only outputs Frame Packing format from what I can gather. Does it support the AVCHD recorded by TM750, and if affirmative, what's the output format used?

Many thanks and best regards.

Blu-ray 3D players are only required to handle the frame packing 3D format. However, such players are evolving to be network media devices and media players for user photos, videos, music. I have not seen anything specific to the Sony BDP-S570 compatiblty with the Panasonic TM750 3D video files. The Sony player does support AVC HD files and since the 1808i side-by-side 3D format is a "frame compatible" format it will probably play OK on the S570 but I have no first hand experience. Perhaps another forum member with the TM750 has actually tried playing a 3D file on the Sony S470 or S570 player.

By the way Sony has just announced today at CES their own 3D camcorders to be available this spring and at least some support full resolution 1080p and I would assume this implies the recordings will be in 1080p frame packing format.

Ron Jones
Blog + Reviews + Articles: projectorreviews.com
Ron Jones is offline  
post #71 of 81 Old 01-05-2011, 09:46 PM
Advanced Member
 
mariner888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

Blu-ray 3D players are only required to handle the frame packing 3D format. However, such players are evolving to be network media devices and media players for user photos, videos, music. I have not seen anything specific to the Sony BDP-S570 compatiblty with the Panasonic TM750 3D video files. The Sony player does support AVC HD files and since the 1808i side-by-side 3D format is a "frame compatible" format it will probably play OK on the S570 but I have no first hand experience. Perhaps another forum member with the TM750 has actually tried playing a 3D file on the Sony S470 or S570 player.
....

Thanks for the kind reply, Ron.

Here's my confusion. From what I can gather, the 570 (and all other makes apart from Panasonic) only outputs Fame Packing format for 3D. If it also supports and plays 1080i side-by-side format, does it mean it has to convert the output to Frame Packet? But then there is no 1080i Frame Packing format defined in the HDMI 1.4a doc. Appreciate if someone could clarify this.

Many thanks and best regards.
mariner888 is online now  
post #72 of 81 Old 01-07-2011, 01:39 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Florida and West Virginia, USA
Posts: 5,689
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by mariner888 View Post

Thanks for the kind reply, Ron.

Here's my confusion. From what I can gather, the 570 (and all other makes apart from Panasonic) only outputs Fame Packing format for 3D. If it also supports and plays 1080i side-by-side format, does it mean it has to convert the output to Frame Packet? But then there is no 1080i Frame Packing format defined in the HDMI 1.4a doc. Appreciate if someone could clarify this.

Many thanks and best regards.

If the video is in the 1080i side-by-side 3D format it is really no different than standard 2D 1080i as far as the video content goes. If the player were to output it as per HDMI 1.4a then there would be a HDMI header field that identifies it as a 3D video in 1080i side-by-side format. However even if the player doesn't recognize it as being in 3D format, it may still be output but as a std. 1080i 2D video and if your 3DTV allows a user input to force it to display the input as a 3D side-by-side video then that should work. This is just an educated guess on my part as for what the S570 may do, but if any forum member that owns a S570 (S470 should work the same) and has access to a 1080i side-by-side 3D video encoded as AVCHD then perhaps they can test it.

Ron Jones
Blog + Reviews + Articles: projectorreviews.com
Ron Jones is offline  
post #73 of 81 Old 01-07-2011, 04:27 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
walford's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 16,789
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
The HDMI 1.4a 3D video tranmissin standards include the 1980x2025 packed frame format and the 1080i SbS format.
The Blue ray disks are compressd and encoded in H.264/AVC 1080p/24 2D format or for 3D in MVC-MS files which are also encoded in H.264/AVC format.
The player decompresses and decodes the H.264/AVC to a HDMI 1.4a 3D video display format.
walford is offline  
post #74 of 81 Old 01-07-2011, 10:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
mariner888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks again for the reply, Ron.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

If the video is in the 1080i side-by-side 3D format it is really no different than standard 2D 1080i as far as the video content goes. If the player were to output it as per HDMI 1.4a then there would be a HDMI header field that identifies it as a 3D video in 1080i side-by-side format.

This would mean the Sony can output 1080i side-by-side format. But the claim was it could not do this, only in frame packed format. Perhaps this is not true after all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

However even if the player doesn't recognize it as being in 3D format, it may still be output but as a std. 1080i 2D video and if your 3DTV allows a user input to force it to display the input as a 3D side-by-side video then that should work.

That would mean the player can't handle 1080i side-by-side format. This could very well be the case.

Hopefully thing would be clearer with Sony releasing a new batch of blu-ray players and a 3D camcorder supporting 1080i side-by-side format.

Best regards.
mariner888 is online now  
post #75 of 81 Old 01-07-2011, 10:04 PM
Advanced Member
 
mariner888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by walford View Post

The HDMI 1.4a 3D video tranmissin standards include the 1980x2025 packed frame format and the 1080i SbS format.

Thanks for the reply, walford.

This is true on the TV side, but the claim was Sony (perhaps this is also true of all players except the Panasonic ) only outputs the frame packed format.
mariner888 is online now  
post #76 of 81 Old 01-08-2011, 10:11 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Florida and West Virginia, USA
Posts: 5,689
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by mariner888 View Post

Greetings Ron. Thanks for posting the FAQ.

I have a question regarding Blu-Ray 3D player's support for side-by-side1920x1080i 3D format, such as those used by Panasonic TM750 3D camcorder. Take for example the Sony BDP-S570, which only outputs Frame Packing format from what I can gather. Does it support the AVCHD recorded by TM750, and if affirmative, what's the output format used?

Many thanks and best regards.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mariner888 View Post

Thanks for the reply, walford.

This is true on the TV side, but the claim was Sony (perhaps this is also true of all players except the Panasonic ) only outputs the frame packed format.

HDMI 1.4a certified 3D sources, such as a BD player, are only required to output in one of the mandatory formats defined by the HDMI 1.4a spec. and the Blu-ray 3D spec. requires that the frame packing format be supported. If a given manufacturers wants to also provide a user option for an additional output 3D format(s) then that is also OK. This is what Panasonic has elected to do with their Blu-ray 3D players offering the required frame packing format and also the optional checkboard 3D format. If someone can give me the URL where I can download a 3D clip in 1080i side-by-side format made with a TM750 camcorder then I will attempt to play it on my BDP-S470 and see what it does. Alternatively if you want to create a very short 3D video clip (e.g., 3-5 sec.) with your TM750 then perhaps you could send it to me as an email attachment, but the file size would need to be keep to under 5 MB (send me a PM and I will provide my email address).

Ron Jones
Blog + Reviews + Articles: projectorreviews.com
Ron Jones is offline  
post #77 of 81 Old 01-08-2011, 05:37 PM
Advanced Member
 
mariner888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
That's very kind of you, Ron.

TM750 samples can be found here:

http://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/s...15_393883.html
mariner888 is online now  
post #78 of 81 Old 01-09-2011, 09:16 PM
Advanced Member
 
mariner888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Update on Sony HDR-TD10 3D specificatins:

Quote:
Video Format : 3D HD: MVC (original format)
Video Resolution : 3D HD: 2x 1920x1080/60i
Video Signal : 3D HD: HDTV 1080/60i

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...specifications

It seems the 1920x1080/60i 3D signal is stored in MVC format, and output in Half side-by-side format?

Also looks like there will be no 24p 3D.
mariner888 is online now  
post #79 of 81 Old 01-10-2011, 02:17 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Florida and West Virginia, USA
Posts: 5,689
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by mariner888 View Post

That's very kind of you, Ron.

TM750 samples can be found here:

http://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/s...15_393883.html

I downloaded one of the files and put it on a USB stick. I plugged it into the front panel USB port on my S470 and under the player's Video menu selected the source as "USB Front" then selected the file. It played as if it were a standard 2D video with the side-by-side images displayed when connected to a display operated in 2D mode. The S470 could be set to 1080i or 1080p and the video was output at the selected resolution. This would work OK as long as your 3DTV allows you to force it to recognize the input as being a side-by-side 3D video (most 3DTVs do allow for this) or if it is able to automatically detect this is actually a side-by-side 3D video.

Ron Jones
Blog + Reviews + Articles: projectorreviews.com
Ron Jones is offline  
post #80 of 81 Old 01-13-2011, 01:35 AM
Advanced Member
 
mariner888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

..
It played as if it were a standard 2D video with the side-by-side images displayed when connected to a display operated in 2D mode
....

Is the 470 connected to a 3D TV?
mariner888 is online now  
post #81 of 81 Old 01-16-2011, 10:31 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Florida and West Virginia, USA
Posts: 5,689
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by mariner888 View Post

Is the 470 connected to a 3D TV?

Not when I reported by initial test results, but I have since then connected the S470 to my new JVC RS40 front projector and it displays the video correctly in 1080i side-by-side 3D mode. However, I had to manually select the 3D mode as my projector did not automatically detect this as a 3D video.

Ron Jones
Blog + Reviews + Articles: projectorreviews.com
Ron Jones is offline  
Reply 3D Displays

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off