Which 3D format do you think the BDA will pick for Blu-ray? - Page 4

Originally Posted by 3Dkid

Sensio as well as Panasonic are capable of this. The issue with Panasonic seem to be that the broadband requirement is limiting this standard to Blu-Ray usage. If my understanding is good, Panasonic does not sound like a standard candidate for anything else than BD.

Originally Posted by 3Dkid

I am confused by everyone's reaction on this board. From my research I have a very different conclusion and I woud be interested in your feedback. From my reading about a 3D transmission standard requirements from the BD:

- BD or any broadcasting standard as it is not true anymore that HD3D will be transmitted through Blu-ray only (as Panasonic claim, a nice marketing approach), especially after the multiple 3D projects announcements such as Sky, ESPN and other heavyweights -

1. Must be Full HD for each eye

Sensio as well as Panasonic are capable of this. The issue with Panasonic seem to be that the broadband requirement is limiting this standard to Blu-Ray usage. If my understanding is good, Panasonic does not sound like a standard candidate for anything else than BD.

Sensio is the only technology capable of broadcasting a full 1080P 3D or 2D image on conventional infrastructure because of the compression method that preserve image quality.

The image quality from Sensio and Panasonic is HD3D for both of them (1080P). Sensio seem to lose some quality in the compression process but it seems to be very limited and that we would not perceive the loss (a normal human being would not, according to what I read).

2. Must be backwards compatible

A Sensio encrypted image would be compatible with any of the existing method used to transport (Blu-Ray, DVD, cable, satellite, internet,...) a signal without having to make any change or upgrade to the equipment for as long as there is a 3D TV (Sensio compatible at the other end). This mean that I would not have to upgrade my set top box or my Blu-ray player to watch a Sensio3D movie in full 3DHD, if I buy a 3DTV with Sensio built in. This is real backward compatibility: people would not have to upgrade their entire set of electronic equipments like it would be the case with the Panasonic transmission standard. Only the TV would have to integrate the Sensio decoder, this is the only change that has to be made by the customers who will buy a 3DTV anyways. I don't think that customers will want to change their TV and their BD and their cables and their set-top box,...etc... the change of the television will be important enough and it has to be easy for customers.

Sensio also has the advantage of being compatible with the transmission of live 3D events in 1080P. If my understanding is good, Panasonic would not because of the broadband issues they have. This sound like backward compatibility with the existing distribution networks.

3. Ready for 2010: Only Sensio is a ready now solution. Panasonic would only be ready for... Panasonic... as no one else have the technology to manage the signal and display it appropriately. That sounds more like a monopolistic approach than a standard. Would that serve consumers? Would that serve anybody else than Panasonic?

4. High quality cinema HD: Both Panasonic and Sensio are capable of this. I agree that the Panasonic image is mathematically better but can we really tell the difference between the two? The choice has to be logical, not mathematical.

Please jump in this discussion if you think any of my assumptions are wrong.

3Dkid

Originally Posted by 3Dkid

Back to my comments, from what I read the system that is:

1) Offering HD image quality in 3D: Sensio3D is offering a loss-less compressed signal that allows the transmission of dual 1080P pictures. They even have been integrated in a broadcast product that was demonstrated at IBC last week for the transmission of 2D or 3D 1080P60/50 signals. It is the first and only 1080P60/50 product on the market (IDC is offering the product).

There are some articles on the high quality offered by Sensio. I found one on the web some time ago and it demonstrated that it was not really possible to tell that the quality is not optimal with Sensio 3D compression.

2) Offering backward compatibility: This is the biggest advantage for Sensio: The fact that the consumers would not have to upgrade anything else than their TV to watch 3D.

This is real backward compatibility to me and no other transmission standard offer that feature.

3) With a robust technology that has a proven track record, Sensio seem to be the one that is the easiest to integrate. If they want 3D to become mainstream in 2010 and 2011 they have to go with such a technology that would allow 3DHD transmission through DVD, Blue-Ray, cable, sat., etc...

This goes beyond what Blu-Ray has to offer and they have to consider this aspect when selecting a standard, in my opinion.

4) On image quality, Sensio has been demonstrated at various conventions and covered by multiple articles and studies. Is this good enough?


My comments are based on the following article that I found useful: Bringing 3D to the home (Widescreen review, issue 138, January 2009). The last press releases from the company are probably a good indication of what they can achieve. What do you think?

Let me know if I am in the left field. It seems to me that the only system compatible with the BD requirements and what we should expect from the other standard body is Sensio (in the short term).


3Dkid

SENSIO Technologies Inc., inventor of the SENSIO® 3D technology, and Sagem Communications have joined forces to premier a new 3D video solution at IBC (International Broadcasting Convention). Sagem Communications' digital set-top box, with integrated SENSIO® 3D technology, will enable consumers to view 3D content at home in full HD. The Demo at Sagem Communications’ booth (4.A080) is a first step towards commercial availability of the product planned for 2010.

Thanks to this integrated solution, service providers will soon be able to reach all subscribers, equipped with 3DTVs or not, via one and unique signal, regardless of the type of broadcast network. Since the set-top box is agnostic to any type of 3D display technology implemented within TVs, it can support any type of 2D or 3D TVs thus allowing service providers to easily migrate from 2D to 3D services. Furthermore, service providers will not require duplicating the broadcast of content in order to address various subscriber TV sets. All that will be required is to broadcast the content in 3D over their existing network while the set-top box processes the incoming signal and adapts it to the type of TV which is connected to it.

Originally Posted by 3Dkid

Exactly, this is backward compatibility. This is in my opinion the biggest strength for Sensio. You do not need to upgrade everything you have if it is integrated.

You get a HD3D signal and you do not need to buy a new BD player. If you have a 2D TV you can watch a 1080P signal (no other 2D formatr allow that) and if you have a 3D TV you can enjoy a 3D 1080P visual experience.

This seems to be a very versatile technology and from what they say it is compatible with all 3DTV technology and all the display method that exist (and all resolutions).

3DKid

Originally Posted by lgans316

At first, BDA should commercialize production of BD-100s.

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

Panasonic and Sony want 3D in the marketplace by Q4 2010. Too soon for a BD with more than 2 layers to be put into production.

Originally Posted by 3Dkid

Good point. Do you think that this by itself is a good enough reason to select Sensio format for Blu-Ray disk as you do not need to produce new Blu-Ray with the Sensio standard.

With Sensio, you simply have to put your 3D Blu-Ray disk in the existing Blu-Ray machines and it gets to the decoder in the TV. Easy integration with the TV makes quick market access to 3D. With Sensio, 3D could be mainstream in a few months, don't you think?

3Dkid

(I think that Sensio format for broadcast is a no brainer, with what you are saying I think that Sensio would also make quicker mass production 3D entry into home.. no brainer for Blu-Ray as well)

Originally Posted by 3Dkid

Are you suggesting that the decision by the BD association was made?

Originally Posted by kjack

Yes. The work is now in the details.

Originally Posted by 3Dkid

1) Offering HD image quality in 3D: Sensio3D is offering a ... signal that allows the transmission of dual 1080P pictures. They even have been integrated in a broadcast product that was demonstrated at IBC last week for the transmission of 2D or 3D 1080P60/50 signals. It is the first and only 1080P60/50 product on the market (IDC is offering the product).

Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs

When the BDA are filling in the details of the spec, will they be able to do what the Sensio 3D system can do (highlighted in bold above)? Are they going to include what the directors of the biggest budget 3D productions have been asking for and producing in re: frame rates? (JC 48p, PJ 60p, IMAGO members 60p)?

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

Panasonics 3D system is the front runner for the 3D standard for BD. They are also a major patent holder in BD.

Originally Posted by 3Dkid

If I understand correctly they will decide to go with the Pana standard even if the technology is not ideal for the consumers and will not allow a quick market adoption with the reason being nothing else than Pana being a major patent holder in the Blu-ray technology. They have to be smarter than this.

To illustrate how bizarre that is: I paid close to $2000 for my Marantz Blu-ray player and I will have to buy another one for my 3D viewing? That would not be the case with the Sensio standard and the quality would be the same.

I have a hard time following how they take decisions and I still don't understand why they would ask for Pana. There has to be something else than Pana being a patent holder, there must be something I don't get. 3Dkid

Originally Posted by 3Dkid

Where are they in the details? What is left for them to decide if they know in which direction to go?

Originally Posted by 3Dkid

Where are they in the details? What is left for them to decide if they know in which direction to go?

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

Joe:

What are the approved frame rates currently in the BD specs? Aren't they 24P and 60i (in the USA)?

How many Hollywood movies have been shot in 48 or 60 FPS?

The BDA has already said they are fast tracking the 3D standard for BD. That means they are going by the KISS principal.

If in the future, movies start to be filmed in frame rates higher than 24, I am sure that the BDA will revisit the BD specs. Just like they are revisiting the specs to include 3D.

For three-fourths of a century of 2-D cinema, we have grown accustomed to the strobing effect produced by the 24 frame per second display rate. When we see the same thing in 3-D, it stands out more, not because it is intrinsically worse, but because all other things have gotten better. Suddenly the image looks so real it's like you're standing there in the room with the characters, but when the camera pans, there is this strange motion artifact. It's like you never saw it before, when in fact it's been hiding in plain sight the whole time. Some people call it judder, others strobing. I call it annoying.

...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.
"I would vastly prefer to see 48 frames per second as a new display standard, than 24 frames per second."

Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs

Why do you want to limit the Blu-ray 3D specs? I thought in the past you said you wanted the Panasonic system to be selected because it was technically the best. The Sensio system can apparently use 1080p50 and 1080p60. From a technical perspective isn't that better than 1080i50/1080i60 and 1080p24?

I've talked about the directors and cinematographers who are either using or asking for higher fps (and the cinematographers who fought hard to get 1080p60 added to the digital cinema specs - and succeeded). Obviously TV work is going to go 1080p50/60. The Sensio 3D system can do that. These has been added to the digital cinema specs.

Nine Inch Nails: Beside You in Time: recorded at 1080p30. Not in Blu-ray specs.
Various HD Scape titles on Blu-ray claim to be shot at "1080p60".
Oklahoma! shot at 30fps.
Around the World in 80 Days shot at 30fps

Many TV series shot 1080p25. In Blu-ray spec: no.

Obviously concerts and stuff currently shot at 1080i will in future be at 1080p60 etc. Why would consumers want a lower technical standard?

James Cameron has said he would like films shot at 48fps and "maybe on Avatar 2". He has said given his opinions on frame rates multiple times, before even Avatar 1 has been released, before the 3D Blu-ray standards have been set, so now is the time to be setting these standards.

Peter Jackson has shot his King Kong thing in 60fps 3D. I know it's not a full length feature film, but what if he wanted to have clips of it in bonus features of a later re-release of King Kong on Blu-ray

Why do you want the BD upgrade (3D) system to have lower technical standards than it could have (not having capabilities that the Sensio system has)?

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

Do you understand the phrase "fast track?"

All you mention are directors.

I don't see any STUDIOS that are asking for higher frame rates - do you?

Colleen Lynch of ESPN and confirmed the new equipment is designed for 1080p at 60 frames per second

Originally Posted by Richard Paul

For the Sensio 3D method to do that the source device has to be capable of decoding 1080p50/60.

Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs

So now you don't want a system with the best technical specs - you want the one that can be made the fastest?

I didn't just mention directors, I mentioned cinematraphers too. The people who make the films, etc.

I could give more quotes from studios/broadcasters if you want. Or are you only looking for quotes from film studios? Isn't it the directors and cinematographers who make those sort of decisions about how their production is shot/how it will look and the studios give them the go-ahead or not? If Avatar is successful why wouldn't they let the director shoot the way he wants?

Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs

Do you mean the TV? My 2D TV can accept both of those uncompressed. Or do you mean the TV has to decode a compressed signal

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

It is not what I want - it is what the powers that be want. And the Panasonic 3D system does offer the highest quality 3D for BD.

Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs

Maybe. Maybe not. The Sensio 3D system can do 1080p50 & 1080p60. The Panasonic 3D system can do half that at 1080i25 & 1080i30. The ability to have double the number of pixels/lines per second is a higher technical standard than one that can only do half the number of pixels/lines per second. The BDA could create a 3D system that had the best capabilities of all systems and more - eg. Take the capabilties of of the Panasonic system (full HD per eye), add the capabilitiies of the Sensio 3D system (capability of decoding 1080p50 and 1080p60 stereoscopic) and create the best 3D system. Success!