CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

cmjohnson · Joined: 03 Apr 2006 Posts: 5180 Location: Buried under G90s

Now that the Blu-Ray 3D standard has been set, the question has to be asked:

What CRT projectors will have the bandwidth to work at 1080P at the full spec frame rate with shutter glasses?

What additional equipment (if any) will be required to make it happen?

I can't find the details on the Blu-Ray 3D spec. What is the total required refresh rate that will have to be supported by
the PJ in order for it to be a contender?

My guess is that a healthy Marquee 8500 or 9500 will be able to handle it, along with most other top tier projectors,
but I think that a lot of low to mid range PJs will be out of the running.

CJ

Tim in Phoenix · Joined: 21 Oct 2006 Posts: 4409 Location: Phoenix

Guys!

One cannot expect smooth stereo below 96hz refresh, so think 105khz horizontal.

.

cmjohnson · Joined: 03 Apr 2006 Posts: 5180 Location: Buried under G90s

So what is the spec'ed frame rate (total and per channel) in the Blu-Ray 3D spec, if you know it?

I have looked but have not found that information.

Will new HDMI input cards have to be designed and built for our projectors?

CJ

ecrabb · Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:51 am Post subject:

CJ,

The BDA has only announced that they've finalized the spec, not actually released the spec. Until they do, there aren't really any details on how exactly it's going to work. All we know is that it'll use the MVC (Multiview Video Coding) extension to the AVC codec, and will be backwards-compatible with 2D equipment. Unless you're reading somebody that has first-hand info from somebody on the 3-D working group at the BDA, it's all a bunch of speculation at this point. We'll all have to keep our panties on until the BDA releases the spec.

Tim is right, though... 96khz overall refresh yields a 48hz refresh per eye. That's going to make the LCD shutter glasses flicker a bit. I'll be surprised if it's 96khz, though... How many displays will work with that. Some people are speculating it will somehow make use of 120hz displays, but I question that supposition, because it would yield 60hz per eye, which may not work well with film-source material - the overwhelming majority of what we'll be watching. They could use 240hz displays, which would be 120hz per eye, which would work well for both video- and film-source material, but would be a non-starter for CRT. The BDA press release said this:

MikeEby · Joined: 24 Jun 2007 Posts: 5237 Location: Osceola, Indiana

I don't see the point of a 50-60" Plasma or LCD screen at 10-12 feet away. IMO don't you need big screen immersion to really make 3D effect pay off?

Mike

bbfarmht · Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 5:22 am Post subject:

Axatax · Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 7:18 am Post subject:

Doable - if you're willing to sacrifice some resolution, so long as you have a competent VP (or the next generation of BDPs offer more flexible output options).

If you absolutely *must* have exactly 1080p at all costs, you need to look at a digital, but I bet most here aren't running at 1080p72 for film to begin with, so I wonder why this is even an issue?

Jeff

**Curt Palme** · Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 7:23 am Post subject:

Just think.. it's the next excuse to tell everyone that their current 1080p displays are obsolete, and that they need to upgrade.

TheVerge · Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 928

**AnalogRocks** · Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 2:58 pm Post subject:

emdawgz1 · Joined: 14 Mar 2006 Posts: 7949

I saw the 2 Toy stories in 3d.... I'm not impressed... It distracts from the film.

CIR Engineering · Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:17 pm Post subject:

I was digging a year ago for information, and it seemed at that time that pretty much any display device could be made 3D compatible with an external 3D processor... sorta like a VP that we run now. So I am hoping that if 3D ever winds up being worth doing, that we will be able to do it... if the projectors can handle the BW. If not, the only alternative for 3D CRT is with a blend.

I worked for a guy four years ago who was doing 3D rendering for the military without the use of ANY 3D glasses. They were using CRT projectors because CRT was the ONLY technology that would actually make an image that looked 3D at that time. He said that digitals just didn't work.

BTW my brother saw Avatar 3D last night a a really good theater in Philly. He phoned me as soon as he got out and said that it was the coolest fing thing he ever saw. It was quite an endorsement. He said the 3D looked perfect and realistic like no other he had seen yet. Now I just will have to go to a theater and check out Avatar as well and I don't ever go to theaters anymore.

craigr

emdawgz1 · Joined: 14 Mar 2006 Posts: 7949

garyfritz · Joined: 08 Apr 2006 Posts: 12088 Location: Fort Collins, CO

CIR Engineering · Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 5:13 pm Post subject:

emdawgz1 · Joined: 14 Mar 2006 Posts: 7949

TheVerge · Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 928

CIR Engineering · Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:55 pm Post subject:

MikeEby · Joined: 24 Jun 2007 Posts: 5237 Location: Osceola, Indiana

Lets hope Avatar doesn't have a Yo-yo in it...Every 3D movie I've seen to date seems to have one.

The opening shot with the WB logo in most of the Harry Potter Movies look very 3D on a CRT.

Oddly enough a simular shot in The Dark Night does too...Something about smoke.

Mike

ecrabb · Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 7:14 pm Post subject:

Refresh rate has nothing to do with it, TheVerge.

There is a technique for passive stereo viewing, but they it requires two projectors and passive glasses (cheap polarizers). There were also some newer direct-view LCD displays with a built-in grating to show discrete images for each eye, but it only worked for a single viewer in the sweet spot.

I doubt the display technique was a military secret, but rather the project itself was classified. Practically all of the military's technical hardware like this comes out of the commercial or ed/research sectors first.

SC