Beware of these early 3D projectors... they will need HDMI 1.4 to work with PS3 in 3D - Page 2

Interesting. My onkyo preamp will only output on one of its wo HDMI outs at a time, as will most of the other preamps and receivers that I am aware of. Everything I have read gave that as the reason. From looking at Octava's site, they don't appear to be one of the "skirting the rules" electronics firms.

I wonder if it is actually just difficult (=expensive to engineer and implement) handshaking requirements for HDCP that are actually the reason for this.

I think it depends on the content's flag.

For instance, I have a VAIO Sony laptop with a built-in blu-ray player. I can play a blu-ray Disc and watch on the laptop screen. And with the normal desktop I can hook an HDMI cable (yes, HDMI!) from the laptop to an HDTV and also see my desktop on the TV. But the minute I put in a blu-ray Disc, the HDTV gives an error of "content protected" or something like that, and I have to configure the laptop to *only* send the image to one screen at a time... either my laptop screen or the HDTV. Basically, it's the content of the blu-ray Disc that's flagged to only allow one device to show it. Similar to region flagging.

The Mitsubishi rear projection DLP sets (ditto for the Mitsu Lasers and some plasmas) that use the checkerboard 3-D encoding have compromised resolution in 3-D. Checkerboarding uses diagonal compression to present the left and right images, so the average resolution would be roughly 1440x810 per eye instead of 1920x1080. Not too bad..

HDMI 1.3 has always been spec'd for 120hz, so full rez 1080p 3-D per eye has been possible. It's if they will "allow it" to be used for Blu 3-D is the question. They could always keep that option off and keep it for just for 1.4 compliant devices.

But for those nit pickers, full 1920x1080p 3-D at 120hz still has visual compromises. HDMI 1.4 will allow one to overcome this with the right 3-D set-up .. and in most aspects, supercede the Real-D theatrical experience. This, of course, is .. another subject.

If you have a 720P projector, HDMI 1.3 will be just fine. So much misinformation and hysteria out there.

Checkerboard 3-D with the 720p spec you listed would be close to 1020x540 per eye. When watched in stereoscopic 3-D, this minor loss is less noticable.

I used to watch NTSC field-sequential 3-D video all of the time. Because the odd and even fields were used to carry the left and right views, the resulting resolution was 720x240 per eye. But when watching both fields together in 3-D, you would never think it was that big of a hit.

So GregK, you mentioned that the Mitsu RP DLPs use checkerboard 3D, which compromises/reduces the resolution overall. What about the Samsung DLPs; same story as Mitsu or not? Got any links on either (as I haven't been able to find any, unless they're buried somewhere in the middle of the owner's threads here-which wouldn't be surprising now that I think of it! :P)


Hehe, since I'm one of those nitpickers, would you mind elaborating on that? I had thought getting full 1920x1080p at 120Hz would *actually* be true 3D (hence thinking that if my Samsung DLP would support that over HDMI 1.3, I'd be set once I got one of those kits), so please fill me in or point me to somewhere that does elucidate this if you don't mind; thank you!

This is a limitation of your preamp and most other receivers and amps and is not because of HDCP limitations. Those are poor excuses by the companies.

How do I know - besides splitters and switches that will accomplish this Pioneer would not break the rules.

Pioneer SC-07 and SC-27 has 2 HDMI outs. They can output the exact same source (actually only the same source) at the same time. Now then on the other hand Pioneer says that they can't send sound to both the speakers and through the HDMI at the same time claiming that is a HDMI limitation (I guess money is the issue).

Either way splitting an HDMI signal to two is not limited by HDCP

HDMI 1.4 defines the way that the left/right images are *identified* in the video stream (probably sent as basic 1080p48). Since the display knows what is really left and what it really right, it can get fancy rather than just "slaving" to an incoming 120Hz stream.

For instance, if you have a set with 480Hz refresh, rather than just getting 60Hz per eye (still some flicker) the display could up-sample to 120 Hz per eye since it really knows which is the left and which is the right to keep the 480Hz total signal synced properly with your LCD glasses. That would be 120Hz for each eye... totally flicker free.

So, Dave, are you saying that an HDMI device like the PS3 would likely introduce some flicker into the display, because it would send only a 120hz signal (60hz to each eye)? And I'm not sure what you mean by flicker in this context. Are you talking about 3:2 judder? Or are you saying a 48hz signal to each eye would create a flicker? Any links where I can read the details?

Hey Joe,

the "flicker" issue has to do with the LCD shutter glasses and how many times a second they need to "black out" the image feed to each eye. Most people can detect the flicker produced by an on/off image alternating at 60 times a second... basically what you have when you think of a "stereo" image running at 120 Hz since that's 60 Hz per eye... meaning 60 times a second each eye is turned off while the other eye is turned on. That's good but not great.

Think about this: can you see flicker in a movie-theater? that's a good example of 48 Hz flicker as the film shutter shows each image twice but has to close in between to advance the film frame.

PAL TV viewers typically see flicker with the 50Hz cycle of their PAL sets as well. 60Hz is good but not great either... which is why computer monitors typically start at 72 Hz. None of this is unique to 3D issues... just google about flicker and frames per second.

Back to 3D... so assuming that some folks will see flicker with only 60 Hz per eye...

By upping to 240 Hz total, you could give each eye 120 Hz.

By upping to 480 Hz total, you could give each eye 240 Hz.

At that level there should be no perceived flicker of any kind by any viewer.

Now... the way this is affected by HDMI 1.3 versus HDMI 1.4 all depends on the TV set... you see, using HDMI 1.4 the 3D signal is sent at the lowest bandwidth needed to send the original 1080p24 image pair... which means 1080p48 since 48 is 2 x 24 (left and right 24 = 48 total). Then the TV does with that whatever it wants to give you the best image, since HDMI 1.4 3D TVs will be sure to "know" the left and right video stream contained in that 1080p48 HDMI 1.4 signal.

What is not sure is how older "3D ready" sets will work with a signal over HDMI 1.3. Some of these sets are "dumb" and will basically just show you what you give them... so one way to make some of them work is to feed them a left/right/left/right image at 120 Hz and they'll just blindly sync to it. That only gives you 60 Hz per eye.

However, if the "3D ready" set is "smart" and can actively identify the left/right stream and then apply its own internal up-sampling, you could end up with the same high qualtiy result as with an HDMI 1.4 TV.

The other issue is resolution: some "3D ready" sets aren't really able to provide full 1920 x 1080 resolution per eye when in 3D mode... others will.

Thanks. That's pretty clear for HDMI 1.4. I doubt I'd perceive much if any flicker at 60hz, but at that rate judder would be introduced, right? (That is, each eye would see 3:2 pulldown.) The only way to eliminate judder in a max 120hz set would be to go down to a 48hz frame rate per eye, right? And that runs the risk of increased flicker? (Not to mention eliminating any trick play features like frame interpolation - although many people don't even want that.)

How about the PS3? Since it's an HDMI 1.3 device, does that mean it can't send a signal such that a "smart" HDMI 1.4 display will recognize it's right eye/left eye sequences? Is that why I've read some posts that seem to indicate that the PS3, upgraded to 3D, won't be fully compliant with the new spec? Would that mean that a PS3's signal would be displayed at 60fps per eye, and thus be unable to eliminate 3:2 judder for film content?

Not that this matters too much to me. I'm almost certainly an early adopter with 3D. If I have to buy a new Blu-ray player, the PS3 will go into another room. I'd just like to understand the technology as well as I can. I will wait for user reports before buying. There are always buyers here on AVS who are even more impatient than I am. Regardless, I'll be in the first wave, unless the reports are devastatingly bad. I've wanted a 3DHD standard for a long time.

Hey Joe,

"Judder" is completely different from "Flicker"... which you seem to already know. And yes, just like with any 60 fps display of a 24 fps native signal... you'd be introcuding 3-2 judder into the signal to show it at 60 Hz per eye... yet another reason to opt for 120 Hz per eye!

So Judder is a different issue than flicker, but it's relevent for discussion because only "smart" 3D displays would be able to motion-interpolate 3D video since they'd need to run a separate interpolation engine for each eye individually... and really you'd need 120 Hz minimum per eye so you could do even math (120 is an interval of 24 since it's 5 times 24... trying to interpolate 24 fps to 60 fps wouldn't given an even interval so it's not worth bothering).

A "smart" 3D device could either frame-interpolate to smooth out motion or keep the 24 fps native film-judder in tact for a "movie feel".


The PS3 will be upgradable to "1.4" performance/specs as far as the 3D protocols are concerned, but because of chip-limiations with the 1.3 physical interface won't include some 1.4 features like ethernet and 2-way audio streaming. But as far as 3D is concerned, basically the PS3 will be a 1.4 device. This was confirmed at CES by Steve Venuti from HDMI. Details about even HDMI are still not 100% clear to all of us non-industry folks, but it sounds like this means that the PS3 will output 3D as 1080p48 (at least one option for it).

Thanks, again - it's getting much clearer now. My first 3D player may be the PS3. The other big, unanswered question, though, has to do with sound. I'm not sure if my Denon 3808 will even pass a 3D HDMI signal straight through to a 3D display, while playing the HD audio from the PS3. Since it ordinarily overlays its GUI onto whatever video signal goes through its HDMI ports, I suspect it won't. Is there any word about an adapter for the PS3 that will allow it to send its 3D HDMI signal to the display, while splitting the HDMI audio signal off to an AVR? (I suspect such a device, even if available, would be too costly.)

I've read that some of the new 3D Blu-ray players will have dual HDMI ports for this purpose. If there's no way to use HDMI audio (DTS HD Master Audio and Dolby TrueHD) from the PS3 with an existing AVR, then it's not a practical solution for me. I'll need a 3D Blu-ray player, and most likely another HDMI cable to the projector. At least in the beginning of this transition to a 3DHD world, I don't want to reinvest in a completely new HD infrastructure.

I hear your concerns and I don't think any of us feel very differently. we'll have to wait when updates are really released and product is here to test out our system-connectivity options to see what works and what doesn't.

With all the 3D announcements coming out of CES, 3D threads are sprouting up like weeds on AVS. Too bad we don't have some sort of 3D Central, a thread where people could go for answers to all things 3D. I've been learning a lot the last few weeks, but it's hard to sift through. You should consider starting a thread like that, Dave. I'm sure there would be a lot of people who would be willing to contribute. I have a few organizational ideas, if you're interested, and I'd be willing to help. Personally, I can't get enough info on the topic.

Joe try this: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=790210

Thanks. I read the first and last pages of that thread. I hadn't run across it before, but I notice it's been going for over 3 years. What I'd like to see is an organized look at 3D technology. We have a real standard now - 3D Blu-ray - and it would be great to know the details of what will and won't work with it as the products begin to emerge, as well as having a central location for 3D disc releases that are announced.

What I think could be improved on with threads like that is having to sift through 43 pages to find answers. What's needed, it seems to me, is a thread like the one that summarizes Blu-ray disc release information. All the relevant information is kept updated in the first section of the thread. Maybe the 3D thread you linked could be upgraded in that way. It if were, it would be a terrific resource that I'd go to frequently, even daily, to check up on the latest 3D news.

Just my 2 cents.

All of the rear projection DLP projectors use the checkerboard approach. Checkerboarding originated from TI's "wobulation" solution for getting 1080P from DLP chips that then couldn't deliver a full 1080p image instantaneously. http://medtron.org/Documents/TI_DLP_...Technology.pdf Although the checkerboard format was first designed with DLP in mind, it can and has been used in other types of displays, and also doesn't require a true 120hz input.


But now that affordable projectors like the HD66 are coming out which accept a true 120 input, it's possible to then display full resolution per eye. Getting full 1080P DLP while also displaying a higher frame rate is tougher to pull off, which is why we're only seeing 720p true 120hz projectors at this price range. ..On this note, the original Real-D projectors weren't quite up to 1080p resolution per eye, but later generation Real-D equipped projectors overcame this limitation. On the consumer front, Titan does offers a 1080P DLP projector at full 1920x1080 (per eye) that sadly is still quite expensive..... LCD manufactures may beat DLP when it comes to offering the first "affordable" 1080p front projector.


For those wanting optimum L/R cancellation (minimal "ghosting"), and are weighing the options of LCD vs DLP, it's worth noting DLP's almost instantaneous decay rate makes it the best canidate for 120hz 3-D.



What HDMI 1.4 overcomes is the reliance of an alternating frame system to deliver 1080p 3-D by offering simultaneous 1080p streams. *This* is what HDMI 1.3 can't do. How this affects the end user depends on their 3-D display. It hasn't really been discussed in this thread yet, but all alternating frame 3-D systems will have (to varying degrees) "phasing" issues. Notably with motion at a sympathetic rate of the alternating cycle which is used. This can be seen with certain pans or motion in theatrical polarized Real-D, as well as the Dolby / Infitec system, which both uses alternating frames @ 144hz in order to be able to use one projector. Only IMAX uses twin projectors, and therefore avoids these potential phasing issues. The faster the alternating frames, the less obtrusive this type of artifact becomes. However- With a 3-D display device (be it a 4K display device that can offer L/R stereo content at 2K via polarization, or dual projectors) that doesn't need alternating frames, these issues can then be easily bypassed with 1.4, as it has the bandwidth to offer both streams in a better form.

Is it my imagination, or does the last post seem just a teeny bit angry?

Angry, uninformed, and mistaken.


While you can certainly (understandably) feel frustrated by the new Blu-ray 3D spec requiring HDMI 1.4, this false mantra that there's some sort of "format war" or undefined 3D standard needs to stop. It's not true.

There is NOT SUPPOSED TO BE a rule about what type of display is used or what type of 3D display technolgy consumers can buy. Our HD standard doesn't require that all TVs be Plasma or that all projectors be DLP... that's a manufacturing design question. In the same way the industry doesn't require that displays choose active or passive or mandate a refresh rate... that's up to you as a consumer to choose what you'd prefer. That's not the 3D standard... that's the TV set.

The "standard" is how it's shipped back/forth between devices so that the signals work over HDMI 1.4 on all 1.4 gear. There are also some "old fashioned" ways of packing 3D onto HDMI 1.3 that were written into the new 3D spec to allow Satellite and cable companies to send (1/2 resolution) 3D over existing equipment and hardware.

Those standards are already written. Now it's just a matter of getting the 3D displays to make the most of them.

At some point the bulb in your (fantastic) Sony projector will need replacing... and certainly by your 2nd, 3rd, or 4th bulb you'll be getting the upgrade bug as some new LED lit true-black projector will be for sale for probably less than what you paid for your Sony. That might be the right time to think about getting into 3D. For now, enjoy your Sony. It's no less a great projector just because there's now the ADDITIONAL option for consumers to enjoy 3D blu-ray and TV, for those who want it.

I don't recall anyone holding a gun to my head to buy any technology. I've been hoping for years for a 3DHD standard that would feed my hunger for high definition 3D movies at home. I get a bit irritated when people start crying conspiracy theory because manufacturers and studios are pushing 3DHD. I've been disappointed that it's taken this long to bring it to market.

From everything I've been reading, a high quality 3D experience in my own home is possible now, and it's fairly easy to implement because of digital technology. Although I have no doubt the technology will be refined if I wait another 2 or 3 years before I get into it, I have no intention of doing that. As an early adopter, I know I'll pay more, but that's true of any new technology. It's every buyer's prerogative to buy or stay away, to embrace the fast pace of change or lament it. Just don't claim that manufacturers are robber barons and those of us who want 3D are fools. 3D is not a planned betrayal of those who have just bought HDTVs. It's simply progress (maybe faster than some would like, but progress nonetheless). I'm not only not angry about 3D, I'm ecstatic about it.

You may be right. I certainly don't think any major electronics manufacturer has my best interests at heart when they introduce new technology. It seems likely to me, though, that the demands of 4D are different enough that they need new protocols to make it work well. It's going to be hard enough to sell 3DHD to a wary consumer. Why make it even harder? Reports have it that the standard is backward and forward compatible, meaning that new 3D discs will work in old Blu-ray players. Why do that if your only goal is to sell new tech?

I guess we still don't have concrete facts about this yet?

Rumor: PS3 Firmware 3.20 with 3D Support Coming Soon

Posted February 16, 2010 05:12 AM by Juan Calonge


PlayStation 3 slim According to video games site VG247, the upcoming new firmware for the PS3, version 3.20, will enable 3-D video output, presumably for games only. Support for 3-D movies will be added in another upgrade later in the year. Note that you also need a 3-D TV and the required glasses to get the full experience.


well looks like its coming

Thanks for the response! I was more curious if more info was known about 3D Blu-Ray over 1.3 support was available though.

It depends what you mean by "over 1.3"

If you mean does the sending device... the 3D blu-ray player need a bonifide-1.3 HDMI port, the answer is it will work... the PS3 will be firmware updated to enable the 3D protocols even though it has an actual 1.3 port.

If you mean on the TV/Display that's a 3D type display... the answer is that 1.3 probably will NOT work because any new 3D TV will have 1.4, and older so-called "3D ready" sets with HDMI 1.3 probably won't have the built-in protocols to receive a dual-stream 3D signal. That's why Mistubishi has planned a converter-box that will take in the dual-stream 3D HDMI signal and format it for their sets' unique 3D needs.

If you mean will the 3D video signal survive in tact when sent through an HDMI 1.3 receiver used as a switching device... the jury is still out and it will probably vary device-by-device and application-by-application. Products acting as blind HDMI switches, even if 1.3 spec, will probably work with 3D signals if they can lock onto them (1080p48 and maybe 1080p120). But the catch is with receivers as they will strip out the audio for processing, and the act of manipulating the HDMI datastream may affect the video signal in some way if the receiver tries to "do anything" with the video portion of the signal (like some receivers that upscale or add processing or even just overlay meta-data like the volume-control info gui when you change volume etc.)

i think for the amount of 3D that will be available, 3D over a HDMI 1.3 onto a 120HZ Projector, LED TV or whatever would have done the job for many of us normal consumers. Even if it is not at full 1080p. Many cant even tell the difference between 1080 and 720p - and i have a setup where i can judge this comment.

What's stopping you?

If you actually have a 120Hz projector that *can* accept 120Hz input over HDMI 1.3, then you'll be able to buy some sort of converter that would take stereo 1080p48 over 1.4 and convert that to 1080p120 over 1.3. This is more or less what the Mitsubishi adaptor is doing for their "3D ready" sets, though that adaptor is tailored to that DLP set's method of using "checkerboard" for 3D rendering. But there's no reason why someone can't build a converter that would just convert to 120Hz stereo. Maybe even some high-end receivers will do 3D conversions like this.

Plus, 3D blu-ray players themselves and other 3D source components (set top boxes for DSS) will offer a variety of output flavors for 3D. Some may even do the dreaded anaglyph on the fly for those with conventional sets who still want to see some sort of 3D, however compromised. Point is that there's no reason why a blu-ray player or other device can't give you a choice of "1080p120" over HDMI 1.3 along with the method of 3D encoding your display requires... alternating left/right or checkerboard or over/under etc.

If Sony and Panasonic don't provide this level of flexibility, I'm sure someone like OPPO will.

One thing: let's enjoy 3D and the equipment we do or don't have without starting up myths about 720p being good enough. Been there, done that on this board, and while some viewers do really seem to not see a difference from a 30 degree viewing angle, those anecdotes don't change the fact that many viewers easily see the increased image purity with true 1080p display (as in real 1080p source material along with full 1080p rendering) versus 720p at a 30 degree viewing angle.

Let's move foward with video quality, not backwards!