Source output controls - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-28-2010, 12:42 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
StevenZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: third from the left
Posts: 280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
First, some background. When two devices do their HDMI handshake, the source is supposed to learn what the TV can handle, and could then decide what to send down the pipe. For example, if a TV accepts only PCM 2.0 audio, a Dolby-5.1-capable source can decide to send something more compatible. And yet, my Blu-ray player gives me a menu to select among PCM 2.0, multi-channel PCM, DTS-5.1-reconvert, and native bitstream. Some sources have similar selectors to allow 1080p24 or not, even allowing it to be pushed to TVs that don't advertise support for it.

Here's what I'm curious about. New 3D TVs will support several 3D-video formats (e.g., frame compatible, page-flip, etc.). Blu-ray players and STB sources may also support several formats. HDMI (theoretically) will help them agree on a compatible one. But will the sources offer user control menus to let me select between the default format and another supported one? Aside from speculation, I haven't found any user manuals, yet, that describe how new 3D sources will actually work.

This could be important for compatibility with older AVRs that only support frame-compatible 3D video, but which don't even acknowledge any support. If I can select side-by-side video on the source, then it will fit through such an older AVR. But, since that older AVR won't necessarily pass along the metadata to tell the TV the incoming video is side-by-side 3D instead of another 3D flavor or 2D, then I'd need some kind of knob on the TV, too. Will any new 3D TVs have controls like these?

I suspect we might only need controls like these for a couple of years while equipment is in transition, but I'm wondering if any of the new products will have those controls at all.
StevenZ is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 02-28-2010, 02:22 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: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I also am waitiing for the first user manual for 3D Blu-ray player to become available to see what all of the output options will be.
HDMI content contains both flags and I beleive other non display content whiich describes the content the is being trasnsmitted. This is evidences by the fact that all HDMI capable TVs have no problem today in identifying the resolutons, frame rate, or acpect ratio of the content they are receiving.
walford is offline  
Old 02-28-2010, 04:47 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenZ View Post

First, some background. When two devices do their HDMI handshake, the source is supposed to learn what the TV can handle, and could then decide what to send down the pipe. For example, if a TV accepts only PCM 2.0 audio, a Dolby-5.1-capable source can decide to send something more compatible. And yet, my Blu-ray player gives me a menu to select among PCM 2.0, multi-channel PCM, DTS-5.1-reconvert, and native bitstream. Some sources have similar selectors to allow 1080p24 or not, even allowing it to be pushed to TVs that don't advertise support for it.

Here's what I'm curious about. New 3D TVs will support several 3D-video formats (e.g., frame compatible, page-flip, etc.). Blu-ray players and STB sources may also support several formats. HDMI (theoretically) will help them agree on a compatible one. But will the sources offer user control menus to let me select between the default format and another supported one? Aside from speculation, I haven't found any user manuals, yet, that describe how new 3D sources will actually work.

3D BD players will only have a single 3D format called Frame Sequential (AKA Page Flip).

Within that single format they will have two different resolutions and frame rates depending on the source of the 3D (per eye) :

1920x1080x24P for film

1920x1080x60i for HD video

Quote:


This could be important for compatibility with older AVRs that only support frame-compatible 3D video, but which don't even acknowledge any support. If I can select side-by-side video on the source, then it will fit through such an older AVR. But, since that older AVR won't necessarily pass along the metadata to tell the TV the incoming video is side-by-side 3D instead of another 3D flavor or 2D, then I'd need some kind of knob on the TV, too. Will any new 3D TVs have controls like these?

It is most likely that 1.3 receivers will not be able to deal with 3D BD signals:

http://hdguru.com/3d-hdtv-and-hdmi-explained/1336/

Panasonic's 3D BD player will offer 2 HDMI outputs:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1231167

The BDA said that 3D BD players will be "agnostic" meaning that it will be the job of the 3DTV to deal with the 3D BD signal and not the 3D BD player.

It should be the same for 3D from "broadcast." (CBL/SAT).

Quote:


I suspect we might only need controls like these for a couple of years while equipment is in transition, but I'm wondering if any of the new products will have those controls at all.

There isn't going to be a single 3D format in use for all 3D content.
Lee Stewart is offline  
Old 02-28-2010, 06:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Florida and West Virginia, USA
Posts: 5,964
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 208 Post(s)
Liked: 212
It appears that at least some 3D HDTVs will offer a user setting to select the 3D mode of the input. This is a means of allowing AVRs or HDMI switchers to be used that only support HDMI 1.3. There will also be some 3D sources that only have HDMI 1.3 (e.g., existing satellite receivers) and will use such modes as side-by-side images sent in a standard 1080p format. Also I suspect that some BD players (with HDMI 1.4 outputs) will allow the option to output dual 1080p/60 video streams in addition to the required (by the Blu-ray 3D spec.) native dual 1080p/24 or dual 1080i video streams. Finally, for 3D BD players they may also have a user setting to force the type of 3D output to use in order to allow for HDMI 1.3 AVRs or even 3D HDTVs that only use HDMI 1.3 (in which case the same 3D mode would need to be set in both the source device and in the HDTV).

Bottom line seems to be to look for HDTV models that have user settings to force the 3D mode that is being used for the input and for any source device (e.g., BD player) that supports multiple output modes, look for models that have a user setting to force the 3D output mode.

Ron Jones
Blog + Reviews + Articles: projectorreviews.com
Ron Jones is offline  
Old 02-28-2010, 07:09 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
StevenZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: third from the left
Posts: 280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

Bottom line seems to be to look for HDTV models that have user settings to force the 3D mode that is being used for the input and for any source device (e.g., BD player) that supports multiple output modes, look for models that have a user setting to force the 3D output mode.

That's what I'll continue to suspect until some of the manuals/product arrive. In the meantime, I've got an image in my head of a switchboard operator from years ago plugging in from & to cables to connect a call.
StevenZ is offline  
Old 02-28-2010, 07:57 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
StevenZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: third from the left
Posts: 280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

3D BD players will only have a single 3D format called Frame Sequential (AKA Page Flip).

While frame-sequential may be the format on the disc, I'm guessing that 3D BD players will have to at least know how to "drop one eye" to provide a 2D-compatible output for non-3D TVs. And current 2D players allow reselection of output resolution. So I'm expecting next-gen BD players to have at least this much video processing before output, maybe more. Have you heard manufacturers saying their 3D BD players will only output 3D video in the same format as what was placed on the disc?
Quote:
The BDA said that 3D BD players will be "agnostic" meaning that it will be the job of the 3DTV to deal with the 3D BD signal and not the 3D BD player.

I took the "agnostic" comment to mean that the BDA didn't care whether the TV had active shutter glasses, passive ones, or magic in terms of how the 3D eventually gets to viewers' eyes. Yes, it will be the 3D TV's job to deal with rendering. I'm just curious about how the video signal gets from one box to the next, long before the rendering happens.
StevenZ is offline  
Old 02-28-2010, 09:42 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenZ View Post

While frame-sequential may be the format on the disc, I'm guessing that 3D BD players will have to at least know how to "drop one eye" to provide a 2D-compatible output for non-3D TVs. And current 2D players allow reselection of output resolution. So I'm expecting next-gen BD players to have at least this much video processing before output, maybe more. Have you heard manufacturers saying their 3D BD players will only output 3D video in the same format as what was placed on the disc?

1. What would be the purpose of owning a 3D BD player, a 3D BD and attaching it to a HDTV (and not a 3DTV)?

2. The EDID will probably prevent you from getting an image on the HDTV if the player was in 3D mode. Or . . .

3. The EDID may automatically switch the 3D BD into a 2D BD if it isn't sensing a 3DTV at the other end.

Quote:


I took the "agnostic" comment to mean that the BDA didn't care whether the TV had active shutter glasses, passive ones, or magic in terms of how the 3D eventually gets to viewers' eyes. Yes, it will be the 3D TV's job to deal with rendering. I'm just curious about how the video signal gets from one box to the next, long before the rendering happens.

Here you go:

http://hdguru.com/3d-hdtv-and-hdmi-explained/1336/
Lee Stewart is offline  
Old 03-01-2010, 01:23 PM
Member
 
Blambert007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
In order to take advantage of what 1.4 has to offer is it a firmware update to the components? Or is it a different internal device? I understand new cables, but was just curious if I need to wait to purchase a new receiver that has HDMI 1.4?
Blambert007 is offline  
Old 03-01-2010, 01:33 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blambert007 View Post

In order to take advantage of what 1.4 has to offer is it a firmware update to the components? Or is it a different internal device?

Can older HDMI (v.1.0 - 1.3) devices be firmware-upgraded to take advantage of the new features introduced in HDMI 1.4?

Quote:


Probably not. Most of the new features introduced in HDMI 1.4 will require a new HDMI chip to enable, and cannot be upgraded via firmware.

http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdm...1_4_faq.aspx#7

If you have a 1.3 receiver then you should look at this thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1231167

Quote:


I understand new cables, but was just curious if I need to wait to purchase a new receiver that has HDMI 1.4?

No new cables required as long as you are using an HDMI Cat 2 high speed rated cable.

A 1.4 receiver would be desireable if you wanted to do all of your switching through it which includes 3D video from BD.
Lee Stewart is offline  
Old 03-01-2010, 02:08 PM
Member
 
Blambert007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So, if I purchase a AVR that is 1.3 (network ready) and a new LED (with 3D)that is 1.4 i can switch the 3D through the TV for that function only? Then switch everything else through the AVR? Is it better to not switch through the AVR?
Blambert007 is offline  
Old 03-01-2010, 02:35 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blambert007 View Post

So, if I purchase a AVR that is 1.3 (network ready) and a new LED (with 3D)that is 1.4 i can switch the 3D through the TV for that function only? Then switch everything else through the AVR? Is it better to not switch through the AVR?

The Panasonic 3D BD player is the only one that can direct 1.3 HD audio only from one of it's HDMI outputs and 3D video (plus HD Audio) from the other which would be attached to the 1.4 HDMI Input on the 3DTV to get 3D video.

This is for people who already have a 1.3 receiver and don't want to buy a new 1.4 receiver. It's a work around. There is some information on the internet that is saying that a 3D video signal will not pass through a 1.3 receiver:

http://hdguru.com/3d-hdtv-and-hdmi-explained/1336/

If you are are considering a 3DTV in the next year or so and are in the market for a new receiver and don't already have a 1.3 HD Audio decoding receiver, then it might behove you to wait to see what develops with 1.4 receivers.

I just started this thread a few minutes ago:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1231425
Lee Stewart is offline  
Old 03-01-2010, 07:26 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
StevenZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: third from the left
Posts: 280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

1. What would be the purpose of owning a 3D BD player, a 3D BD and attaching it to a HDTV (and not a 3DTV)?

Either 1) a misunderstanding that a newfangled player and disc will make everything on my (2D) TV look 3D, just like the salesdude promised, or 2) the hope that there's a 2D-compatible playback mode that will let me enjoy a movie before I buy the new 3D TV. Why do you ask?
Quote:
2. The EDID will probably prevent you from getting an image on the HDTV if the player was in 3D mode.
Or . . .
3. The EDID may automatically switch the 3D BD into a 2D BD if it isn't sensing a 3DTV at the other end.

Yeah, those are pretty much the alternatives: the source will choke on the TV's EDID, or throttle itself back to accommodate the TV's limitations.

I'd read that article before, but I think it's neither clear nor comprehensive. One example: he uses "over/under" to describe what others are calling "page flip" or "frame sequential", and then uses it again to describe the top/bottom frame-compatible format.
StevenZ is offline  
Old 03-01-2010, 07:53 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenZ View Post

Either 1) a misunderstanding that a newfangled player and disc will make everything on my (2D) TV look 3D, just like the salesdude promised, or 2) the hope that there's a 2D-compatible playback mode that will let me enjoy a movie before I buy the new 3D TV. Why do you ask?

You can simply buy a 3D BD and stick in any legacy BD player and see 2D on your 2D HDTV. The AVC-MVC encode allows this.

As far as anything else - we will have to wait umtil players and content get into the hands of reviewers to find out all the in's and out's of what can and can't be done

Quote:
Yeah, those are pretty much the alternatives: the source will choke on the TV's EDID, or throttle itself back to accommodate the TV's limitations

See above.

Quote:
I'd read that article before, but I think it's neither clear nor comprehensive. One example: he uses "over/under" to describe what others are calling "page flip" or "frame sequential", and then uses it again to describe the top/bottom frame-compatible format.

Over/Under and Top/Bottom are the same thing. Just different wording.

Frame Sequential (AKA Page flip) is a 3D format used by a display in conjunction with active shutter glasses that allows Full HD per eye (the only 3D format that does}. Here is a helpful link on the different 3D formats:

http://www.jvc.eu/3d_monitor/technology/video.html

Don't confuse the storage/encode method on BD (one "block frame" with L & R Full HD frames in Over/Under configuration) to the Over/Under 3D format which results in full H res but half V res.
Lee Stewart is offline  
Old 03-02-2010, 05:42 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
StevenZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: third from the left
Posts: 280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Don't confuse the storage/encode method on BD (one "block frame" with L & R Full HD frames in Over/Under configuration) to the Over/Under 3D format which results in full H res but half V res.

That's exactly my point that HDGuru needlessly did confuse the two.
StevenZ is offline  
Old 03-02-2010, 06:02 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenZ View Post

That's exactly my point that HDGuru needlessly did confuse the two.

I don't see that.

He first mentions O/U when describing the configuration of the 1920x2205 "block frame" (my wording). That is correct - one frame on top of another only they are both Full HD (1920x1080)

Then 3 pargraphs latter he is discussing the 3D format that ESPN/Cable Labs wanted to have added to the 1.4 3D specs - 720P O/U which is a 3D format. He is referencing that against the Checkerboard 3D format that the Mits DLP RPTVs have to use.

There are two O/U formats in that article with each "block frame" having a total resolution of:

3D BD = 1920x2205

3D CBL = 1280x720

The difference is that with 3D BD, the display deconstructs the O/U 3D BD block frame then presents it in the Frame Sequential 3D format
Lee Stewart is offline  
Old 03-02-2010, 08:34 AM
Senior Member
 
mbrennem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Perhaps 3D display manufacturers should include an HDMI 1.3 output which can be sent to your receiver for audio. So you would run HDMI 1.4 from the 3D BD player to your TV, then HDMI 1.3 (audio-only) from your TV to your legacy audio receiver. The TV would effectively be "splitting" the HDMI signal so no external splitter would be required.

This would give maximum flexibility and compatibility in the short term since many will still have HDMI 1.3 audio equipment.
mbrennem is offline  
Old 03-02-2010, 08:37 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbrennem View Post

Perhaps 3D display manufacturers should include an HDMI 1.3 output which can be sent to your receiver for audio. So you would run HDMI 1.4 from the 3D BD player to your TV, then HDMI 1.3 (audio-only) from your TV to your legacy audio receiver. The TV would effectively be "splitting" the HDMI signal so no external splitter would be required.

This would give maximum flexibility and compatibility in the short term since many will still have HDMI 1.3 audio equipment.

Done!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1231167
Lee Stewart is offline  
Old 03-02-2010, 01:04 PM
Member
 
Blambert007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Or can you run 1.4 out to your TV from the BD player (video) and the other out of your BD player in to your 1.3 receiver (audio)?
Blambert007 is offline  
Old 03-02-2010, 04:56 PM
Senior Member
 
scarabaeus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 331
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

3D BD players will only have a single 3D format called Frame Sequential (AKA Page Flip).

...

The BDA said that 3D BD players will be "agnostic" meaning that it will be the job of the 3DTV to deal with the 3D BD signal and not the 3D BD player.

It should be the same for 3D from "broadcast." (CBL/SAT).

There isn't going to be a single 3D format in use for all 3D content.

This is wrong. The Storage format (e.g on the BD) has no relevance for the output format (e.g. on HDMI). And the HDMI output format has one common format: Frame Packing for progressive formats.

The BD 3D format provides two 1080p24 streams to the player. The player can then reformat these two images into any "full" or "half" 3D formats that are supported by the display device.

The output formats can be:
- frame packing for progressive or interlaced formats
- field sequential
- side-by-side
- over-under
- line interleaved
- column interleaved
- pixel interleaved (checkerboard)
- anaglyph

The sequential, side-by-side, over-under and interleaved formats can be used in one of two ways:
- "half": frame compatible to the original format, dropping half of the original pixels
- "full": extended frame structures, holding all pixels of the two source images

Frame packing for progressive formats is similar to "full" over-under, but with an additional gap inbetween the two images in the extended frame. Frame packing for interlaced formats is a strange creature, that sequences 4 fields in one extended progressive frame, with gaps inbetween.

The HDMI 1.4 standard specifies a number of these combinations as optional formats, but not all of them. HDMI 1.4a is expected to add a few more. Other display devices might support custom formats, usually in the frame compatible "half" version, such as TI's checkerboard for DLPs, or RealD's line interleaved format for specially prepared LCD TVs.

HDMI provides for two signalling features around the supported formats:
- EDID extensions, so that the TV can list the 3D formats it supports on the input
- InfoFrames in the HDMI signal blanking area, so that the player can tell the TV which 3D format is being sent.

HDMI also makes two of three formats mandatory for displays:
- Frame packing for progressive formats, 1080p24, for all displays
- Frame packing for progessive formats, 720p50, for all displays supporting 50 Hz modes
- Frame packing for progessive formats, 720p60, for all displays supporting 60 Hz modes

A player only needs to support one of the three to be "HDMI 1.4 3D ready".

Of course, if the TV supports one of the optional frame compatible formats, such as "half" side-by-side, and this also happens to be the source format (for e.g. a cable or sat box), then the player does not need to reformat the video signal and can pass it right through, with the addition of the respective InfoFrame. This would allow 3D support with existing hardware and only a firmware update, as long as the HDMI transmitter chip in the set top box supports the additional InfoFrame.

The keyword here is "optional" for the side-by-side(half) 3D format in the TV. We don't know, yet, which 3D TVs will support what formats, HDMI 1.4 or otherwise. So, it might be that your DirecTV box works with Sony 3D TVs, but not with Samsung (just an example).

The only way 3D support can currently be ensured by the consumer, is by the HDMI 3D label, which mandates support for frame packing in the player and the display. For this, a sat box would have to reformat the incoming side-by-side(half) format to frame packing on the HDMI output, which will most likely require new set top box hardware. The Sony Playstation, on the other hand, seems to have enough hardware ressources to do frame packing with the existing hardware.
scarabaeus is offline  
Old 03-02-2010, 08:16 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
StevenZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: third from the left
Posts: 280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Great writeup, scarabeus. Thanks!
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabaeus View Post

This is wrong. The Storage format (e.g on the BD) has no relevance for the output format (e.g. on HDMI).

I was wondering about that. Thanks for clearing it up.
Quote:
The BD 3D format provides two 1080p24 streams to the player. The player can then reformat these two images into any "full" or "half" 3D formats that are supported by the display device.

This gets back to my original post: what controls will the source offer the user to reselect the output format? I think we still have to wait & see.
Quote:
The Sony Playstation, on the other hand, seems to have enough hardware ressources to do frame packing with the existing hardware.

Well some quick math suggests the "mandatory" 1080p24 and 720p50/60 formats wouldn't tax PS3 hardware more than 1080p60 2D video would. I don't know what all is required for HDMI 1.4 compliance, but maybe the PS3 could add some 1.4 features, even if it can't get an official certificate.
StevenZ is offline  
Old 03-02-2010, 08:28 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabaeus View Post

This is wrong. The Storage format (e.g on the BD) has no relevance for the output format (e.g. on HDMI). And the HDMI output format has one common format: Frame Packing for progressive formats.

The BD 3D format provides two 1080p24 streams to the player. The player can then reformat these two images into any "full" or "half" 3D formats that are supported by the display device.

The output formats can be:
- frame packing for progressive or interlaced formats
- field sequential
- side-by-side
- over-under
- line interleaved
- column interleaved
- pixel interleaved (checkerboard)
- anaglyph

The sequential, side-by-side, over-under and interleaved formats can be used in one of two ways:
- "half": frame compatible to the original format, dropping half of the original pixels
- "full": extended frame structures, holding all pixels of the two source images

Frame packing for progressive formats is similar to "full" over-under, but with an additional gap inbetween the two images in the extended frame. Frame packing for interlaced formats is a strange creature, that sequences 4 fields in one extended progressive frame, with gaps inbetween.

The HDMI 1.4 standard specifies a number of these combinations as optional formats, but not all of them. HDMI 1.4a is expected to add a few more. Other display devices might support custom formats, usually in the frame compatible "half" version, such as TI's checkerboard for DLPs, or RealD's line interleaved format for specially prepared LCD TVs.

HDMI provides for two signalling features around the supported formats:
- EDID extensions, so that the TV can list the 3D formats it supports on the input
- InfoFrames in the HDMI signal blanking area, so that the player can tell the TV which 3D format is being sent.

HDMI also makes two of three formats mandatory for displays:
- Frame packing for progressive formats, 1080p24, for all displays
- Frame packing for progessive formats, 720p50, for all displays supporting 50 Hz modes
- Frame packing for progessive formats, 720p60, for all displays supporting 60 Hz modes

A player only needs to support one of the three to be "HDMI 1.4 3D ready".

Of course, if the TV supports one of the optional frame compatible formats, such as "half" side-by-side, and this also happens to be the source format (for e.g. a cable or sat box), then the player does not need to reformat the video signal and can pass it right through, with the addition of the respective InfoFrame. This would allow 3D support with existing hardware and only a firmware update, as long as the HDMI transmitter chip in the set top box supports the additional InfoFrame.

The keyword here is "optional" for the side-by-side(half) 3D format in the TV. We don't know, yet, which 3D TVs will support what formats, HDMI 1.4 or otherwise. So, it might be that your DirecTV box works with Sony 3D TVs, but not with Samsung (just an example).

The only way 3D support can currently be ensured by the consumer, is by the HDMI 3D label, which mandates support for frame packing in the player and the display. For this, a sat box would have to reformat the incoming side-by-side(half) format to frame packing on the HDMI output, which will most likely require new set top box hardware. The Sony Playstation, on the other hand, seems to have enough hardware ressources to do frame packing with the existing hardware.

Which 3D format allows for Full HD per eye?

Frame Sequential (AKA Page Flip)

How about . . .

Side by Side
Top/Bottom (AKA Over/Under)
Checkerboard
Line By Line

All Half HD per eye

Lee Stewart is offline  
Old 03-03-2010, 05:23 AM
Senior Member
 
scarabaeus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 331
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Which 3D format allows for Full HD per eye?

Frame Sequential (AKA Page Flip)

How about . . .

Side by Side
Top/Bottom (AKA Over/Under)
Checkerboard
Line By Line

All Half HD per eye


If you read my post carefuly, I mention that:

Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabaeus View Post

The output formats can be:
- frame packing for progressive or interlaced formats
- field sequential
- side-by-side
- over-under
- line interleaved
- column interleaved
- pixel interleaved (checkerboard)
- anaglyph

The sequential, side-by-side, over-under and interleaved formats can be used in one of two ways:
- "half": frame compatible to the original format, dropping half of the original pixels
- "full": extended frame structures, holding all pixels of the two source images

So, you can retain all original pixel from both, the left and the right eye view, in those "full" formats. In particular:
- frame packing for progressive or interlaced formats: vertically expanded frame (twice the total height than the original frame)
- field sequential: time expanded frame (twice the frames per second than the original format)
- side-by-side: horizontally expanded frame (twice the width of the original frame)
- over-under: vertically expanded frame (twice the height of the original frame)
- line interleaved: vertically expanded frame (twice the height of the original frame)
- column interleaved: horizontally expanded frame (twice the width of the original frame)
- pixel interleaved (checkerboard): either vertically or horizontally expanded frame (twice the height, or the width of the original frame)

Of course, each of these methods creates a brand new video timing, which has to be agreed upon, and has to be known, by the player and the display device, and all devices inbetween. This was where HDMI 1.4 came in and standardized a number of these new frame formats, so that all HDMI devices, including amplifiers that would only pass them through, can implement them.

The "Frame Sequential" / "Page Flip" you keep on mentioning is not a viable transmission format, because the left/right parity signalling would be complicated. It is a format that is being used inside those displays that use shutter glasses. The TV or projector is extracting the left and right eye views from the HDMI signal, then present them frame by frame, alternating. At the same time it operates the IR or RF transmitter to synchronize the shutter glasses with the left/right eye parity.

In the past, this has been used with computer displays, e.g. the NVidia solution, where the IR transmission to the shutter glasses was done by the player device (in that case, the computer), and the transmission to the display was done at a double frame rate (e.g. 120 Hz). The problem with that system, on a general basis, is that the display latency has to be known. Your HDTV delays video by up to 3 frames, depending on the internal processing for de-interlacing and noise filtering. A computer DVI screen does not do that, it displays simple VGA resolutons and emphasises on short input-to-output delays. The player would have to apply this same (unknown) delay to the IR signal, otherwise your shutter glasses might show you the opposite frames, or only show you the moment when the display changes from one view to the next.
scarabaeus is offline  
Old 03-03-2010, 05:33 AM
Senior Member
 
scarabaeus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 331
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenZ View Post

This gets back to my original post: what controls will the source offer the user to reselect the output format? I think we still have to wait & see.

This is completely up to the manufacturer. Just like the selection of output resolutions is not standardized, where you would see the whole range from simple "480i/480p/720p/1080i" selections to elaborate "soure direct/fixed format/auto", "24/50/60 Hz", "RGB/YCbCr", "8/10/12 bit deep color" selections in players. This can be hidden in some setup menu, or they can add a new button on the remote to change 3D formats on the fly.

We really have to wait and see.
scarabaeus is offline  
Old 03-03-2010, 05:55 AM
Senior Member
 
scarabaeus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 331
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 26
I don't mean to be rude, but I think you fail to distinguish between the storage/transmission formats, the output formats, and the display systems.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

There are two O/U formats in that article with each "block frame" having a total resolution of:

3D BD = 1920x2205

3D CBL = 1280x720

The difference is that with 3D BD, the display deconstructs the O/U 3D BD block frame then presents it in the Frame Sequential 3D format

Storage:
- The 3D BD stores 1920x1080x2
- JPEG ".jps" files: side-by-side(full)
Transmission:
- 3D cable and sat will do 720p60 and 1080p24 in side-by-side(half) and over/under(half)

Output:
- DLPs accept checkerboard(half)
- RealD LCDs accept line interleaved(half)
- HDMI specifies frame packing(full) as mandatory, and field alternative(full), line interleaved(full), side-by-side(full and half), and two L+depth formats as optional.

Display:
- Frame alternating with shutter glasses (Plasma, LCD or projector)
- Line alternating differing polarisation (LCD panel) and polarized glasses
- Frame alternating differing polarisation (projector) and polarized glasses
- Concurrent differing polarisation (dual projectors) and polarized glasses

(I left out Anaglyph in this, because, shouldn't we all?)
scarabaeus is offline  
Old 03-03-2010, 10:26 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabaeus View Post


Storage:
- The 3D BD stores 1920x1080x2
- JPEG ".jps" files: side-by-side(full)

Your description doesn't match this picture. It shows Over/Under and not SbS:

http://hdguru.com/3d-hdtv-and-hdmi-explained/1336/
Lee Stewart is offline  
Old 03-03-2010, 11:14 AM
Senior Member
 
scarabaeus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 331
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Your description doesn't match this picture. It shows Over/Under and not SbS:

http://hdguru.com/3d-hdtv-and-hdmi-explained/1336/

That picture shows the HDMI output format of a Blu-ray player. It says so clearly in the article under the image: "Transmission" over "HDMI". The image shows the frame structure of 1080p in a "frame packing" version, as defined by the HDMI standard.

The article makes no statement about the storage format on 3D Blu-rays, which is the H.264 version of "2D plus Delta", as implemented in the "Multi View Codec". The decoding process from this format results in two 1080p streams, one for each eye.

By the way, "Frame Packing" differs from "Over/Under(full)" in that one has a gap between the two images, and the other does not.

Also, the "side-by-side" format I mention is for JPEG images, not Blu-ray.
scarabaeus is offline  
Old 03-03-2010, 12:04 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabaeus View Post

That picture shows the HDMI output format of a Blu-ray player. It says so clearly in the article under the image: "Transmission" over "HDMI". The image shows the frame structure of 1080p in a "frame packing" version, as defined by the HDMI standard.

The article makes no statement about the storage format on 3D Blu-rays, which is the H.264 version of "2D plus Delta", as implemented in the "Multi View Codec". The decoding process from this format results in two 1080p streams, one for each eye.

By the way, "Frame Packing" differs from "Over/Under(full)" in that one has a gap between the two images, and the other does not.

Also, the "side-by-side" format I mention is for JPEG images, not Blu-ray.

OK - thanks for the clarification
Lee Stewart is offline  
Old 03-03-2010, 01:57 PM
Senior Member
 
scarabaeus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 331
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 26
On a more industry political note, even though there all these different "full" and "half" formats, HDMI is making an effort to promote "frame packing" of progressive formats as the one and only 3D output format.

It would be great if this succeeds, it would practically eliminate interconnection problems for 3D devices. And maybe would generally kill interlaced formats as well. Two birds, one stone.

And true to this discussions topic, it would remove the need for a 3D output format selection in 3D players.
scarabaeus is offline  
Old 03-04-2010, 03:04 PM
Senior Member
 
scarabaeus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 331
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabaeus View Post

On a more industry political note, even though there all these different "full" and "half" formats, HDMI is making an effort to promote "frame packing" of progressive formats as the one and only 3D output format.

It would be great if this succeeds, it would practically eliminate interconnection problems for 3D devices. And maybe would generally kill interlaced formats as well. Two birds, one stone.

And true to this discussions topic, it would remove the need for a 3D output format selection in 3D players.

Just one day later, and my hopes are squashed.

HDMI released version 1.4a today, and now they make *THREE* modes mandatory:
Frame Packing, Side-by-Side(half) and the new Top-and-Bottom, AKA Over/Under(half)

More specific, for 60Hz displays, these 5 modes are all mandatory:
FP 720p60 and 1080p24
SBS 1080i60
TB 720p60 and 1080p24

For 50 Hz displays, it's:
FP 720p50 and 1080p24
SBS 1080i50
TB 720p50 and 1080p24

This means, the first batch of HDMI 1.4 3D TVs will most likely not meet these 1.4a requirements, and won't support Top-and-Bottom at all. Make sure before you buy of them that it's at least upgradable to the 1.4a requirements by firmware!
scarabaeus is offline  
 
Thread Tools


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