AVS Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,603 Posts
As far as I know, none of the '07 or '08 consumer grade 120Hz LCD's will actually accept a 120Hz source signal. I'm assuming that is a requirement for this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts
Orta, Yeah I read that your set has to accept a 120hz signal, and NOT just have a 120hz refresh rate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
338 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tele-TV /forum/post/15528990


Orta, Yeah I read that your set has to accept a 120hz signal, and NOT just have a 120hz refresh rate.

Are you folks sure that the TV has to accept a 120Hz signal? It would make no sense since all of the HDTV's out on the market would not be compatible with RealD 3D.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
667 Posts
Based on that article the method Sony employed with RealD technology is passive and does not require a 120hz set ("120hz or less' is quoted.) The advantages I see are

1) No need for new 3d sources (bluray, ps3/xbox360 even dvd would work with properly mastered media 2) doesn't require a new display, 60Hz+ would work (that is if (big if) a manual filter can be added to current flat panels/projectors fairly easily) 3) the feedback on the effect has been very positive.

It seems there are two camps right now the passive guys (this method/RealD and Dolby 3D) vs the other camp (Panasonic, Nvidia, DLP) which use active glasses and higher display input and refresh rates (hence requiring a display with 120hz input which none have at the moment.) I haven't heard that any new HDTVs for home viewing (ie 25+ inches) have been announced with 120hz inputs or dual dvi. Hollywood is sold on 3D and it's coming big time. It's just a matter of a standard being set for home consumption and cost will play a big factor in how quickly and deeply home adoption occurs. The active method will require most everyone to buy new displays and the active glasses.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomieDaClown /forum/post/15530170


Are you folks sure that the TV has to accept a 120Hz signal? It would make no sense since all of the HDTV's out on the market would not be compatible with RealD 3D.

Don't quote me on that please, I could be wrong.
I'm trying to find the article where I believed I read that statement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts
^^ Thanks for your input derek, very! informative post.


It looks like the pics I seen of the SOny 3d, they're using cureent and old Bravias. This is very interesting. Yeah, and your right derek, something I read about a filter. It has to be software related, right cause it wouldn't be hardware related?



So even when I get my XBR8, and IF the only way you could do Sony 3D was a new Sony 3D ver. TV, (say for EXAMPLE they had 3D in the XBR10? XBR11, or whatever # designation its going to be); I just buy my XBR8 now caused I'm tired! of waiting. And than sell it for as much as I could get before the new models came out. I wonder if I'm making sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
667 Posts
Based on some more online research I've drawn a few conclusions (and someone correct me if I'm wrong.) I've got some good and some bad news. The good news is that current media sources (like PS3, PC, blurray players with firmware upgrades) could output 3d material that is properly mastered to a standard LCD/plasma display that has a special polarized filter attached to the screen. The output would be interlaced (1080i for example) and the 3D material is row or column interleaved (see glossary at http://www.vrex.com/support/glossary.shtml .)

I'm pretty sure this is how Sony did at their 3D demo at CES 2009 using a PS3 and Bravia LCD (with a special filter on the screen.) The bad news is that the filter may be cost prohibitive and 'attachable' filters to our current sets might never be feasible. I'm guessing the system at
http://www.berezin.com/3D/3ddisplay.htm is very similar to how Sony pulled it off. But that is a $1000(!!) markup on a 19" LCD display for the specially bonded filter.

I share your pain in 'waiting' for this 3D tech to settle. I just bought a 52" LCD and I'm unsure if it will be compatible. My guess right now is that it will be at least two years before the technology makes its way into the home and a few more years after that when it becomes 'commonplace.' Unfortunately the filter bonding process probably has to be done when the panel is made for a precise fit because each pixel needs to be filtered by row or column...but I hope I'm wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts
^^ Thanks for another great post. I read the entire description about the

19" inch monitor in your link. Man!, like $1,300. It just seems to cost prohibitive right now. And I don't think PS3 3D, and IF, will be ready to 2010. It would be crazy IMO to wait to buy a monitor for this tech.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
462 Posts
Why 120hz? Think about it for a second. Movies are 24fps, so to do an active stereoscopic version of a movie you need a TV that can accept at least a 48hz signal, which all TV's can do. And I believe Blu-ray does allow movies to be stored with up to 60 unique frames a second, can anyone confirm?


For games? Well, only a fraction of today's consoles games run at full 60fps, most can barely squeeze out 30fps, which again means that a 60hz TV has more than enough frames to make do. Unfortunately with games two separate full fields would have to be rendered each frame to make stereoscopy work which would make the whole game run a lot slower. At least I think, I am not sure how SONY is going to attack this thing in games. Maybe a alternate field will be rendered each frame, (actually this makes much more sense) but I am not sure how pleasant that will be to the eye.


Also it is worth noting that all of SONY's CES 2009 3D demos were running on what looked like ordinary 46Z4100 series LCD televisions, not some sort of crazy prototype models.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts
^^ Thanks for hazarding a guess on what model Bravia Sony was using to demo their PS3 3D. I just Googled some terms like 3D screen filters, do you guys think the filters will be "available" before a 3D PS3 game (like that James Cameron one), is released? Thank-you so much for your input everyone. I'm addicted to this thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
462 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tele-TV /forum/post/15537874


^^ Thanks for hazarding a guess on what model Bravia Sony was using to demo their PS3 3D. I just Googled some terms like 3D screen filters, do you guys think the filters will be "available" before a 3D PS3 game (like that James Cameron one), is released? Thank-you so much for your input everyone. I'm addicted to this thread.

Avatar (that 3D thing James Cameron has been working on forever) is a 3D movie, not a game. SONY hasn't announced any 3D games forthcoming and they themselves think 2010 at the earliest, at least for a Blu-ray movie 3D spec. Games could come out sooner than that, but knowing SONY I wouldn't hold my breath, 2010 at the earliest sounds about right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts
Hey Kamikaze, my bad again for rushing while posting. Yes your right about that Avatar being a movie. Yes, and knowing Sony, it will probably quite a wit before we see anything.


[Kami, what kind of TV do you have again? I haven't seen you any in of the Sony threads lately. Just wondering. Thanks.]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
462 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tele-TV /forum/post/15539690


Hey Kamikaze, my bad again for rushing while posting. Yes your right about that Avatar being a movie. Yes, and knowing Sony, it will probably quite a wit before we see anything.


[Kami, what kind of TV do you have again? I haven't seen you any in of the Sony threads lately. Just wondering. Thanks.]

I have the 46Z4100, but I was really close to returning it and getting the 46XBR8. However, after seeing it with my own eyes and confirming that not even with local dimming could it achieve absolute black I decided it wasn't worth paying 3500$ more for its incremental improvements.


I am holding on to that money for the day true absolute blacks are possible. The 46Z had a MSRP of about only 2k, so I will not have a problem with upgrading it soon. Seeing the CES models I can see that nothing that fits the bill will be coming at least until this summer, more likely not until 2010. I am crossing my fingers for a 40" OLED by 2010, I wouldn't mind going back 6 inches in size if it means getting the PQ I've been searching for in years.


Now to sit back and see who gets there first, SONY or Samsung or maybe Pioneer with their NeoPDP? Who knows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
667 Posts
Well turns out I was correct on Sonys PS3 3D exhibit:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...er-coming.html


Based on this update no current or announced 2009 full size LCD panels will be compatible or upgradable to the forthcoming 3D 'standard'....at least at 120Hz (60Hz to each eye.) My guess is the new sets will have 120Hz+ refresh and 120Hz+ inputs/engines (like the new 3D compatible monitors http://ces.cnet.com/8301-19167_1-10136801-100.html ) Also a 3D sync (like the Mits/Samsung DLP sets.)


The question is passive vs. active glasses? The only hint we get is 'standardized, full resolution displays.' An active polarizing or color filter on the display might be cost prohibitive (ie RealD and Dolby3D methods) and TV manufacturers want to keep costs low so that leaves us with active LCD glasses which in of themselves is $$$ but will come down with mass adoption/future drops in manufacturing costs. It would be compatible with the gamut of properly equipped display devices (LCD, plasma, DLP, projectors etc.)


Now once a delivery format is in place (ie PC, PS3 bluray via software update)...current sets still could take advantage of an active glasses setup just at the reduced rate (60hz input, 30hz to each eye.) The 3D effect isn't as good as a 120hz input setup though and that's why the new 'display' standard will incorporate the higher rates. Anyway my .02
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
462 Posts
OK, still why 60hz->120hz? Movies are still only 24fps, so 48 frames is enough for full frame active solution for movies (Blu-ray). And games still very, very rarely run at 60fps so not even there does a 120hz input special 3D TV make any sense. What are these manufacturers thinking? Maybe now that the LCD market growth is hitting the roof they are looking for alternative technologies to push onto consumers to bolster sales of future products. A 3D solution that could work with any 60hz television could be make, I am almost certain, both for games and movies.


Why would all these companies who want 3D to go mainstream soon be in a hurry to draft a standard that would make all current hardware obsolete and thereby gurantee their 3D technology to become something obscure and under utilised for many years to come? Makes not sense to me. If I were SONY I would give the current demonstrated 3D tech the greenlight for games, because then both the PS3 and current displays would be able to utilise them and instantly millions of gamers would be able to benefit from it. Plus, games could come out as soon as this year that would support it. To go the other way would mean that only a handful of gamers who buy future 3D enabled display models would be able to take advantage of the tech and games supporting the thing would be years off. Just doesn't make sense to me to do it that way, but then again SONY has been pretty thick about making the right decisions this generation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I believe (and I could be wrong) the the 18-24 frames per second was the standard on old technology tv's.


Read up first on how the eye works vs frames per second and with motion here:


add a 'w' to the link below...this forum won't let me post URL's yet...

ww.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm


The USAF, in testing their pilots for visual response time, used a simple test to see if the pilots could distinguish small changes in light. In their experiment a picture of an aircraft was flashed on a screen in a dark room at 1/220th of a second. Pilots were consistently able to "see" the afterimage as well as identify the aircraft. This simple and specific situation not only proves the ability to percieve 1 image within 1/220 of a second, but the ability to interpret higher FPS.


With the higher resolutions we watch today, the high-action motion picture actually needs more frames per second so the picture doesn't get all sketchy looking. The reason for the higher HZ is to support the higher frame rates.


You can prove this for yourself by simply ripping a high-motion action movie DVD (martial arts movies work good for this test) movie to 24 frames per second and then trying to watch it. You will see areas where your eye can fully detect missing elements of the action because there aren't enough frames in the screen to catch all the movement. Now repeat the test at 29.9 frames per second, and you'll notice the difference. But even at 29.9 you'll see some artifacting during high motion scenes. Now pop the DVD into your dvdplayer and watch it in comparison to the two above. Notice how it's all nice and smooth? several factors are being utilized to get the images to this quality.


Most human's eyes can see these issues at 24 frames per second, but as we approach the eye's limits (30 frames per second) the issues start to dissapear.


Now the only reason they added 60 frames a second at first, was to do interlacing or progressive scanning. The second frames get scanned in between the first ones, therby making the motion smoother.


What the hell 120 frames per second is going to do for you, not sure. We simply can't see that fast. It must be for future compatibility for things like 3D, where they need that extra band width for the other eye.


I'm with you guys though, the current options are way too expensive.


But I'm glad I was born when this stuff is being invented. Over the next 5-10 years we're going to see some very amazing devices come to market.


Question is, will we be able to afford them without mortgaging our houses...


~~Startiger
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top