Will old Blu-Ray players, like my Oppo BDP-83, be 3D compatible via firmware upgrade? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 26 Old 03-15-2010, 03:03 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Something_Soft's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: MN
Posts: 502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Or will I have to buy a new Blu-Ray player? I suspect 3D might only be compatible with HDMI 1.4, but I can't find any information about that.

Anyone?

Edit:

Found wikipedia information stating that all sub versions of HDMI 1.3 support 3D. If anyone can say differently, please do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Version_comparison
Something_Soft is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 26 Old 03-15-2010, 04:00 AM
 
hdblu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,073
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Something_Soft View Post

Or will I have to buy a new Blu-Ray player? I suspect 3D might only be compatible with HDMI 1.4, but I can't find any information about that.

Anyone?

Edit:

Found wikipedia information stating that all sub versions of HDMI 1.3 support 3D. If anyone can say differently, please do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Version_comparison

No sorry older player can not be upgraded for 3D the Only Player on the market right now that can do 3D compatibly is the One and Only PS3.
hdblu is offline  
post #3 of 26 Old 03-16-2010, 05:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
BobearQSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by hdblu View Post

No sorry older player can not be upgraded for 3D the Only Player on the market right now that can do 3D compatibly is the One and Only PS3.

Can you please post some evidence showing why a standalone player is not even possible to be upgraded?

In my opinion its not very likely, but I haven't seen anything suggesting that it is impossible for all current players other than the PS3 to be upgraded.
BobearQSI is offline  
post #4 of 26 Old 03-16-2010, 06:13 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rboster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 17,542
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Home Theater Mag. had an article in their latest edition that confirmed that Sony PS3 was the only current player to be able to be updated.

"Retired" AVS Moderator
rboster is offline  
post #5 of 26 Old 03-16-2010, 06:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GizmoDVD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,019
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 10
But only 1080i IIRC.
GizmoDVD is offline  
post #6 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 05:56 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 GizmoDVD View Post

But only 1080i IIRC.

The data on a 3D BD is frame packed 1080x24P. That is what the PS3 is going to send to the 3DTV. Full HD per eye in the frame sequential 3D format.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #7 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 08:13 AM
Advanced Member
 
BobearQSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by rboster View Post

Home Theater Mag. had an article in their latest edition that confirmed that Sony PS3 was the only current player to be able to be updated.

This matches my findings as well - the PS3 is the only announced player that will do this.

@Something_Soft: While probably technically possible on a good deal of players, my guess would be you won't be seeing this. Manufacturers aren't going to just add features for free. Every year they come out with new standalones with new features, and this is how they make their money.

The PS3 on the other hand doesn't have a new version every year - when 3D comes mainstream they want people to buy a new PS3 and have 3D functionality, which means the current installed base gets it as well.
BobearQSI is offline  
post #8 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 08:16 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 BobearQSI View Post

This matches my findings as well - the PS3 is the only announced player that will do this.

@Something_Soft: While probably technically possible on a good deal of players, my guess would be you won't be seeing this. Manufacturers aren't going to just add features for free. Every year they come out with new standalones with new features, and this is how they make their money.

The PS3 on the other hand doesn't have a new version every year - when 3D comes mainstream they want people to buy a new PS3 and have 3D functionality, which means the current installed base gets it as well.

The PS3 is a software based BD player due to the CELL BE. All BD players are hardware based.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #9 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 12:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
BobearQSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

The PS3 is a software based BD player due to the CELL BE. All BD players are hardware based.

based is correct. PS3 has some hardware components and does not do everything in firmware, likewise players have firmware and are not all hardware.

Based on the 3D spec, there's nothing preventing a player from being upgraded. Some decoder chips and some BR drives may not support being upgraded, but there's nothing in the spec or anywhere else I've seen that prevents ALL decoders/BR drives from being firmware upgradable to handle the new format.

In fact, I'd be willing to bet the new 3D standalone players will be using the same decoder chips and physical BR drives as today's players with upgraded firmware in the drive and firmware in the player itself to handle format negotiation with the TV.
BobearQSI is offline  
post #10 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 03:00 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 BobearQSI View Post

based is correct. PS3 has some hardware components and does not do everything in firmware, likewise players have firmware and are not all hardware.

Based on the 3D spec, there's nothing preventing a player from being upgraded. Some decoder chips and some BR drives may not support being upgraded, but there's nothing in the spec or anywhere else I've seen that prevents ALL decoders/BR drives from being firmware upgradable to handle the new format.

In fact, I'd be willing to bet the new 3D standalone players will be using the same decoder chips and physical BR drives as today's players with upgraded firmware in the drive and firmware in the player itself to handle format negotiation with the TV.

As far as I know:

1. The HDMI chips in BD players cannot be upgraded by firmware. Thus forth they can't deal with the HDMI InfoFrames, the framed packed timing issue and the EDID, all new to 3D BD. Why can the PS3? Because it is software based and not strictly hardware based.

2. It has been reported that 3D BD players will use a 2X speed BD drive versus the 1X speed drive in BD players. Why can the PS3? It already has a 2X speed BD drive in it.

3. As I understand it (??) Dealing with the new AVC-MVC encode that 3D BD will use along with the frame packed nature of the 3D BD frames requires a new SoC. The existing SoC's can't be upgraded. Why the PS3? Because it has the Cell BE and not an SoC.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #11 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 04:08 PM
Advanced Member
 
BobearQSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

As far as I know:

1. The HDMI chips in BD players cannot be upgraded by firmware. Thus forth they can't deal with the HDMI InfoFrames, the framed packed timing issue and the EDID, all new to 3D BD. Why can the PS3? Because it is software based and not strictly hardware based.

The PS3 uses a hardware HDMI solution. The HDMI side of things is not handled by software in the PS3
Quote:


2. It has been reported that 3D BD players will use a 2X speed BD drive versus the 1X speed drive in BD players. Why can the PS3? It already has a 2X speed BD drive in it.

The maximum bitrate for 3D has not been increased over 2D - a current drive, regardless of speed, should be in spec. They may use faster drives, but I don't think this is required.
Quote:


3. As I understand it (??) Dealing with the new AVC-MVC encode that 3D BD will use along with the frame packed nature of the 3D BD frames requires a new SoC. The existing SoC's can't be upgraded. Why the PS3? Because it has the Cell BE and not an SoC.

This may be true. I tried to find technical info on MVC but could not. If it the actual encoding is different than the current Picture-In-Picture and multi-angle encoding currently required by profile 2.0, then this could very well prevent any SoC based players from even having the possibility of being upgraded.
BobearQSI is offline  
post #12 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 04:32 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 BobearQSI View Post

The PS3 uses a hardware HDMI solution. The HDMI side of things is not handled by software in the PS3

It interacts with the Cell BE

Quote:


The maximum bitrate for 3D has not been increased over 2D - a current drive, regardless of speed, should be in spec. They may use faster drives, but I don't think this is required.

Reportedly it has been increased from 40Mbps to 60Mbps - thus the need for the 2X drive.

Quote:


This may be true. I tried to find technical info on MVC but could not. If it the actual encoding is different than the current Picture-In-Picture and multi-angle encoding currently required by profile 2.0, then this could very well prevent any SoC based players from even having the possibility of being upgraded.

Google: 3D Video & The MVC Standard by Nokia. Can't seem to paste PDF links
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #13 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 05:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
BobearQSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Reportedly it has been increased from 40Mbps to 60Mbps - thus the need for the 2X drive.

I remember a lot of people complaining about the loss in bitrate affecting picture quality - I heard the speed was not increased, and people were still upset, but only from this forum. Where did you hear about the 60Mbps?
Quote:


Google: 3D Video & The MVC Standard by Nokia.

Yes, I read that. It offers the 'what' but not the 'how,' and that's all the info I was able to find too. I couldn't find any implementation details (for example, does it exists as a standard numbered MPEG stream, and if so how are the 2 streams linked together, etc).
BobearQSI is offline  
post #14 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 06:32 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 BobearQSI View Post

I remember a lot of people complaining about the loss in bitrate affecting picture quality - I heard the speed was not increased, and people were still upset, but only from this forum. Where did you hear about the 60Mbps?

You will have to go The Official 3D Thread in the HDM Forum and look there. It was discussed.

Quote:


Yes, I read that. It offers the 'what' but not the 'how,' and that's all the info I was able to find too. I couldn't find any implementation details (for example, does it exists as a standard numbered MPEG stream, and if so how are the 2 streams linked together, etc).

The way MVC works is on a predictive basis - that not every scene has two totally different views. Some are redundant. That is how the storage is kept at a typical 50% over a 2D encode. The 2 streams from the stereo cameras enter the encoder, but once in, they are no longer. Or else the storage would be 100% over a 2D encode (1 view)

3D BD uses a frame packed construction. Each frame looks like this:



There aren't two seperate streams. Just a single stream at 24 FPS. It is the job of the 3DTV to unpack the L & R frames and present them seperately in the frame sequential aka page flip 3D format.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #15 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 06:52 PM
Member
 
tallen94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

It interacts with the Cell BE

No more so than any other CPU. There's nothing magic about the Cell or the PS3- it's just a software based blu-ray player (like a PC) instead of SoC player. Sony wasn't even able to upgrade the non-Slim PS3's to bitstream HD audio via firmware because its HDMI 1.3 chip was too early. That feature required a new HDMI chipset that's in the Slims. Note that Nvidia was also able to get its exisiting gfx cards (with HDMI 1.3 chipsets) to output the new framepacking format. The reason this works is (I'm guessing) the HDMI chips don't bother looking at the video frame format they are sending- only receiving. Since the additional bandwidth requirements for 3D don't exceed what HDMI 1.3 could already do, it's all just data down the pipe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Reportedly it has been increased from 40Mbps to 60Mbps - thus the need for the 2X drive.

A 1X BDROM drive's data rate is 36Mbps. A consumer Blu-ray PLAYER requires a 1.5X drive because the Blu-ray spec was changed mid-way through development to allow a max data rate of 54Mbps. The max video data rate is 40Mbits/sec, and that hasn't changed for 3D. I think the confusion lies in a statement made about MVC's efficiency only causing the video size to grow by an additional 50% (instead of doubling the size as one might expect in order to contain both left and right images). People mistook that to mean they were increasing the max data rate. 40Mbps was plenty of space of space when using MPEG2 and most AVC or VC-1 don't even average half that data rate, so 40Mbps would be plenty for 3D MVC movies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Google: 3D Video & The MVC Standard by Nokia. Can't seem to paste PDF links

Unless there is a consumer player out there that DOESN'T use a System-on-Chip, there shouldn't be any other standalone players that can be upgraded to 3D. They simply would not know how to handle an MVC datastream or even have the extra RAM to decode two sets of frames simultaneously. Were any of the very earliest Blu-ray players really disguised PCs (like Toshiba's first HD-DVD player)?
tallen94 is offline  
post #16 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 07:01 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 tallen94 View Post

No more so than any other CPU. There's nothing magic about the Cell or the PS3- it's just a software based blu-ray player (like a PC) instead of SoC player. Sony wasn't even able to upgrade the non-Slim PS3's to bitstream HD audio via firmware because its HDMI 1.3 chip was too early. That feature required a new HDMI chipset that's in the Slims. Note that Nvidia was also able to get its exisiting gfx cards (with HDMI 1.3 chipsets) to output the new framepacking format. The reason this works is (I'm guessing) the HDMI chips don't bother looking at the video frame format they are sending- only receiving. Since the additional bandwidth requirements for 3D don't exceed what HDMI 1.3 could already do, it's all just data down the pipe.



A 1X BDROM drive's data rate is 36Mbps. A consumer Blu-ray PLAYER requires a 1.5X drive because the Blu-ray spec was changed mid-way through development to allow a max data rate of 54Mbps. The max video data rate is 40Mbits/sec, and that hasn't changed for 3D. I think the confusion lies in a statement made about MVC's efficiency only causing the video size to grow by an additional 50% (instead of doubling the size as one might expect in order to contain both left and right images). People mistook that to mean they were increasing the max data rate. 40Mbps was plenty of space of space when using MPEG2 and most AVC or VC-1 don't even average half that data rate, so 40Mbps would be plenty for 3D MVC movies.


Unless there is a consumer player out there that DOESN'T use a System-on-Chip, there shouldn't be any other standalone players that can be upgraded to 3D. They simply would not know how to handle an MVC datastream or even have the extra RAM to decode two sets of frames simultaneously. Were any of the very earliest Blu-ray players really disguised PCs (like Toshiba's first HD-DVD player)?

Thank you for the corrections - I was close . . sorta
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #17 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 08:19 PM
Senior Member
 
HokeySmoke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
The MVC Stereo High profile used in 3D Blu-rays was designed to be backward compatible with existing dual stream decoders. It was specifically created for this purpose and differs from the more generic profiles. This is why the H.264 spec was updated late last year. The buffers still need to be compatible but it gives some hope for an upgrade path. The HDMI transmitter probably doesn't care too much since it doesn't buffer anything, and the bandwidth is well within version 1.3.
HokeySmoke is offline  
post #18 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 09:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Milpitas, CA, USA
Posts: 2,458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
There is a reason new SoCs were introduced to support 3D...lots of little tweaks to the SoC design is needed. Lot more changes than just MVC decoding is needed. Also, some SoCs also couldn't handle the 2x vertical timing HDMI frame packing uses.

Keith Jack
Sigma Designs
BD, IPTV, HDTV decoder supplier
Blog: http://www.keithjack.net
kjack is offline  
post #19 of 26 Old 03-17-2010, 09:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Milpitas, CA, USA
Posts: 2,458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

3D BD uses a frame packed construction. Each frame looks like this:



There aren't two seperate streams. Just a single stream at 24 FPS. It is the job of the 3DTV to unpack the L & R frames and present them seperately in the frame sequential aka page flip 3D format.

You are confusing the bitstream format and the HDMI output format (after decoding and processing). You're drawing is for the latter, and can be generated by any 3D SoC, not just a BD decoder SoC...

Keith Jack
Sigma Designs
BD, IPTV, HDTV decoder supplier
Blog: http://www.keithjack.net
kjack is offline  
post #20 of 26 Old 03-18-2010, 08:11 AM
Advanced Member
 
BobearQSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjack View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

3D BD uses a frame packed construction. Each frame looks like this:


You are confusing the bitstream format and the HDMI output format (after decoding and processing). You're drawing is for the latter, and can be generated by any 3D SoC, not just a BD decoder SoC...

Correct, that image is only for transmission over HDMI - it has nothing to do with how the data is physically stored on the BR disc. Does anyone here know the details of how the 3D part is stored in MPEG-4 format on the disc? I assume it is just an additional numbered stream, but AFAIK there's nothing in the MPEG-4 spec that allows you to say 'stream y is a difference stream from x' etc.
BobearQSI is offline  
post #21 of 26 Old 03-18-2010, 08:47 AM
Senior Member
 
HokeySmoke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
The AACS specification (http://www.aacsla.com/specifications/) has some info on the file.

"In addtion to the Clip AV stream file described in Section 3.9.1.1 of this specification, the Stereoscopic Interleaved file is defined for the 3D feature. The Stereoscopic Interleaved File is composed of two Clip AV stream files, one is for left view and the other is for right view. The two Clip AV stream files are interleaved inside the Stereoscopic Interleaved file. Note that the same sectors on the 3D disc are shared by the Stereoscopic Interleaved file and the two Clip AV stream files. The File System layer enables a set of files to share the same sector data."
HokeySmoke is offline  
post #22 of 26 Old 03-18-2010, 08:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Milpitas, CA, USA
Posts: 2,458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobearQSI View Post

Correct, that image is only for transmission over HDMI - it has nothing to do with how the data is physically stored on the BR disc. Does anyone here know the details of how the 3D part is stored in MPEG-4 format on the disc? I assume it is just an additional numbered stream, but AFAIK there's nothing in the MPEG-4 spec that allows you to say 'stream y is a difference stream from x' etc.

It's the MVC extension that does that. Anything beyond that can't say due to NDAs...

Keith Jack
Sigma Designs
BD, IPTV, HDTV decoder supplier
Blog: http://www.keithjack.net
kjack is offline  
post #23 of 26 Old 03-18-2010, 11:42 AM
Advanced Member
 
BobearQSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by HokeySmoke View Post

The AACS specification (http://www.aacsla.com/specifications/) has some info on the file.

"In addtion to the Clip AV stream file described in Section 3.9.1.1 of this specification, the Stereoscopic Interleaved file is defined for the 3D feature. The Stereoscopic Interleaved File is composed of two Clip AV stream files, one is for left view and the other is for right view. The two Clip AV stream files are interleaved inside the Stereoscopic Interleaved file. Note that the same sectors on the 3D disc are shared by the Stereoscopic Interleaved file and the two Clip AV stream files. The File System layer enables a set of files to share the same sector data."

Looking over this, it appears almost certain that any existing players whose MPEG decoder chips do not already support MVC will not be firmware-upgradable to 3D. My guess would be that this means all standalone players. The PS3 does not have a MPEG decoder chip, it decodes in software much like many PC software players can.

Standalone units do have CPUs, but none are nearly powerful enough to handle realtime decoding plus their other functions.
BobearQSI is offline  
post #24 of 26 Old 03-18-2010, 11:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Milpitas, CA, USA
Posts: 2,458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobearQSI View Post

Looking over this, it appears almost certain that any existing players whose MPEG decoder chips do not already support MVC will not be firmware-upgradable to 3D.

It's much more involved than that. In addition to decoding MVC, you need to process the baseline and enhancement frames to generate normal video frames for the second eye. Two subtitle decoders/buffers and two graphics decoders/buffers are now needed to be able to position those in 3D space. The L and R frames then have to be formatted properly before being output, and output with the new video timings specified in HDMI 1.4 (even if an HDMI 1.3 output is used). Many players are also adding 3D OSD so if you do something that puts player-generated graphics (not movie-generated graphics) on the screen (say a pause indicator or contrast adjustment bar), they also fit into the 3D space so as not to cause viewing issues.

Keith Jack
Sigma Designs
BD, IPTV, HDTV decoder supplier
Blog: http://www.keithjack.net
kjack is offline  
post #25 of 26 Old 03-18-2010, 12:13 PM
Advanced Member
 
BobearQSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjack View Post

It's much more involved than that. In addition to decoding MVC, you need to process the baseline and enhancement frames to generate normal video frames for the second eye. Two subtitle decoders/buffers and two graphics decoders/buffers are now needed to be able to position those in 3D space. The L and R frames then have to be formatted properly before being output, and output with the new video timings specified in HDMI 1.4 (even if an HDMI 1.3 output is used). Many players are also adding 3D OSD so if you do something that puts player-generated graphics (not movie-generated graphics) on the screen (say a pause indicator or contrast adjustment bar), they also fit into the 3D space so as not to cause viewing issues.

Excellent! These are the kind of details I was looking for, and you also bring up a point I missed: even though current hardware can probably handle sending the frame out over HDMI, they likely lack the ability to pack the 2 frames into the new format in the first place.

So, you are saying that the concept of the second frame being a 'difference' or 'enhancement' frame is not part of MVC?
BobearQSI is offline  
post #26 of 26 Old 03-18-2010, 01:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Milpitas, CA, USA
Posts: 2,458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobearQSI View Post

So, you are saying that the concept of the second frame being a 'difference' or 'enhancement' frame is not part of MVC?

That is what MVC is about, but it may take additional processing power and memory bandwidth to do it.

Then their is further additional processing such as limiting the 3D effect based on screen size, edges, etc. If video post processing is then done, it must be done identically to both the L and R streams. Then you may want to do some tricks to improve the 3D quality. You may also want to be able to output several different 3D formats over HDMI to ensure any 3DTV will work.

Then if you're going to do all that, might as well make sure you can decode all the various 3D formats since 3D content may now come from anywhere, not just the BD movie.

Keith Jack
Sigma Designs
BD, IPTV, HDTV decoder supplier
Blog: http://www.keithjack.net
kjack is offline  
Reply 3D Source Components

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