3DTV, will it take off?

[Blue Meanie]

I saw a Panasonic 3d tv in a UAE shopping mall. It required no glasses, and although you only had certain angles where it would work, you could watch 3D TV, and it was superb. They had movies, games, etc, demoing on it, and it really did work a treat.

[im]

Blue Meanie said:

I saw a Panasonic 3d tv in a UAE shopping mall. It required no glasses, and although you only had certain angles where it would work, you could watch 3D TV, and it was superb. They had movies, games, etc, demoing on it, and it really did work a treat.

Sadly its not much cop for the average lounge though - if it only works from certain angles.

[Blue Meanie]

im said:

Blue Meanie said:

I saw a Panasonic 3d tv in a UAE shopping mall. It required no glasses, and although you only had certain angles where it would work, you could watch 3D TV, and it was superb. They had movies, games, etc, demoing on it, and it really did work a treat.

Sadly its not much cop for the average lounge though - if it only works from certain angles.

Well, when I say certain angles, it's like it works every 5 degrees, so it you walk from one side to the other, it's

work - st - work - st - work

If you see my point. It was easily usable in a lounge. You might have to move your head a few inches either way to get the 3d effect.

[im]

Blue Meanie said:

im said:

Blue Meanie said:

I saw a Panasonic 3d tv in a UAE shopping mall. It required no glasses, and although you only had certain angles where it would work, you could watch 3D TV, and it was superb. They had movies, games, etc, demoing on it, and it really did work a treat.

Sadly its not much cop for the average lounge though - if it only works from certain angles.

Well, when I say certain angles, it's like it works every 5 degrees, so it you walk from one side to the other, it's

work - st - work - st - work

If you see my point. It was easily usable in a lounge. You might have to move your head a few inches either way to get the 3d effect.

What are you actually seeing in the st bits as you cross the room? Blur?

[Plotloss]

Blue Meanie said:

I saw a Panasonic 3d tv in a UAE shopping mall. It required no glasses, and although you only had certain angles where it would work, you could watch 3D TV, and it was superb. They had movies, games, etc, demoing on it, and it really did work a treat.

I doubt it, if you saw a panel that didnt require glasses it was a Samsung and it's utterly comical.

[Blue Meanie]

Plotloss said:

Blue Meanie said:

I saw a Panasonic 3d tv in a UAE shopping mall. It required no glasses, and although you only had certain angles where it would work, you could watch 3D TV, and it was superb. They had movies, games, etc, demoing on it, and it really did work a treat.

I doubt it, if you saw a panel that didnt require glasses it was a Samsung and it's utterly comical.

Well, looked good 3D wise for us, and the rest of the crowd there. It may have been a Samsung, it was well over a year and a half ago.

[Plotloss]

It works like the things you used to get in cereal packets with the ribbed lense thing on the front of them.

They had it at CES and it didnt go down well at all.

[Blue Meanie]

Plotloss said:

It works like the things you used to get in cereal packets with the ribbed lense thing on the front of them.

They had it at CES and it didnt go down well at all.

It depends how snooty that crowd was I suppose. As a spectacle, it was very interesting, and fun to watch.

[Beardy10]

I think 3D in the cinema will be huge...having seen Avatar I almost don't think you can make a big Sci-Fi film now without it being 3D.

As for it's uptake in the UK...I am not sure. I just think there is a huge problem in the UK...that being the size of the average family living room and the average screen sizes. I think 42" screens are considered big by many with that and 37" probably being the most popular screens in a UK living room. Panasonic appear to think that the minimum screen size for 3D is 50" as I believe that is the smallest 3D screen they are launching this year.....recommended viewing distance for the full 3D effect is apparently 1.5 times screen size, so on a 50" TV that is just over 6ft. On a 42" screen that is 5ft. How many people really sit that close to their TV's ?
I bet most people that have a 50" screen sit the best part of 10ft away. Of course then you have the viewing angle problem where realistically only 2 people can really sit at the right viewing angle, especially at those recommended distances...imagine the arguments about who sits where when a family sits down to watch a film together.

If you have a room that is big enough to take a projector or you have a dedicated room where you can sit close enough to a big enough screen to get the effect I am sure the technology will develop into something amazing. I just wonder given the above how much energy the likes of SKY will put into 3D content when most of their customers won't be able to enjoy it. Having said that there are plenty of people that buy TV's never get them set up properly and look at a shocking HD picture which is worse than a decent SD picture so they will probably get 3D to keep up with the neighbours.

[theboyfold]

Forgive the chopping of the quotes, this would have been the longest reply in history otherwise!!

JustinP1 said:

Stuff

3d isn't the holy grail IMO, but that is just MO (if that's an allowed acronym!).

The changes you have mentioned mean very little in terms of TV production, the only major one being HD, and to be honest that's only really taken off on Sky as they can make money from the platform. HD is the norm in the states, but the jump from 4x3 NTSC to 16x9 720p is much bigger than the jump from our (actually quite good) SD signal to HD isn't that great. Lots of people in the street still won't be able to tell the difference.

My thoughts are that in the cinema it will become more popular and about 85% of them won't be worth watching in 3d as lots of producers/directors don't know how to use it and unless it's shot orginally in 3d and not synthesised,.

On home TV I'm really not sure, the production workflows and the budgets that feed them are being cut all the time, unless you are Sky. The money is being put elsewhere or not at all. Lots of people are only slowly starting to upgrade studios to HD, let alone 3d. Live sport is slightly different as you can move the kit from venue to venue, but I still don't think it's as easy as making everything 3d and reformatting it for 2d. Production wise I don't think it will work, but that's something I'm willing to be proven wrong on. Also live 3d is nowhere near as good as well made post produced 3d, sorry, but it's not in the same league. Have a look at the 3Ality (http://www.3alitydigital.com/) showreel on a decent 3d screen and you will see what I mean. These guys know what they are doing, your average sports director won't.

Plotloss said:

His point of view

I still think it's a gamble, especially for home TV. BluRay might be a success along with gaming, but I think we are long long way from good mass produced 3d content on TV. With the advances in the HDMI spec it's not that much of an investment, same with screens, lots of them are stock screens with a different front plane (As I had described to me at IBC by the guys at Panasonic)

Super Slo Mo said:

Other stuff

With regards to the directors, the one I know will be able to cope has the initials TM and the other who I've not worked with for a while, but was always impressed with has the initials SS. Any clearer?

You are right on the OB truck, Sony have thrown masses of cash at it, and I mean masses! Live OBs in sport in 3D have been around for about a year if not a little longer. I assume by your name you know who EVS are, I'm a product manager there so you can imagine 3d is a popular topic of conversation. Lots of companies come to use to ensure we can work in 3d and what our road map looks like. So I hope it adds a little kudos to my point of view as I'm speaking from direct contact with the companies in the world of TV (not cinema though)

With regards to the cameras there are a few different rigs, lots originally were 2 lenses side by side. The company I linked to earlier 3alityDigital have a very cool rig were the cameras are at 90 degrees to each other and the image is fired through a prism before hitting each camera. The zoom and focus controls are a work of art, they have to take into account the optical differences of each lens before they can build a rig!! I seem to remember reading the other week that we are starting to see the first 3d out of the box cameras, rather ones that have been put together from the parts bin.

ETA the picture of the rig I was talking about. We had these guys on our stand at IBC and the guy kneeling down is so so passionate about 3d he's great to chat to about how it's made and the difficulties.

Edited by theboyfold on Thursday 18th March 22:20

[Tycho]

I think a big step for 3D will be when the PS3 gets its 3D upgrade via new firmware later this year. A lot of gamers will jump on this and I can't wait. My HDTV is about 5 years old and may get put in the bedroom soon.

We are getting a 47in 3D TV in the room where I work and I can't wait to try it out...

[Marf]

satans worm said:

If it does take off I can guarantee Mr George Lucas will be re-releasing a certain trilogy

http://uk.movies.ign.com/articles/106/1061786p1.html

[Super Slo Mo]

theboyfold said:

Super Slo Mo said:

Other stuff

With regards to the directors, the one I know will be able to cope has the initials TM and the other who I've not worked with for a while, but was always impressed with has the initials SS. Any clearer?

You are right on the OB truck, Sony have thrown masses of cash at it, and I mean masses! Live OBs in sport in 3D have been around for about a year if not a little longer. I assume by your name you know who EVS are, I'm a product manager there so you can imagine 3d is a popular topic of conversation. Lots of companies come to use to ensure we can work in 3d and what our road map looks like. So I hope it adds a little kudos to my point of view as I'm speaking from direct contact with the companies in the world of TV (not cinema though)

With regards to the cameras there are a few different rigs, lots originally were 2 lenses side by side. The company I linked to earlier 3alityDigital have a very cool rig were the cameras are at 90 degrees to each other and the image is fired through a prism before hitting each camera. The zoom and focus controls are a work of art, they have to take into account the optical differences of each lens before they can build a rig!! I seem to remember reading the other week that we are starting to see the first 3d out of the box cameras, rather ones that have been put together from the parts bin.

ETA the picture of the rig I was talking about. We had these guys on our stand at IBC and the guy kneeling down is so so passionate about 3d he's great to chat to about how it's made and the difficulties.

Edited by theboyfold on Thursday 18th March 22:20

Much clearer, I know exactly who you mean, thanks. I imagine the aforementioned of the two is providing some of the impetus behind the broadcast side of things.

Don't assume my name means what you think it means. It's more of an oxymoron. I'm an RF and occasional vision engineer mostly these days. But yes, I do know who EVS are.

Interesting stuff, I shall have to look into 3ality Digital a bit more. Have you any idea whether 3D can be done effectively with hand held cameras? I would imagine it can, since other mobile units like aerial platforms can manage it, but I figure cutting it into a show might be tricky. Using it with a radio link might also be fun! I shall look forward to that one.

Edited by Super Slo Mo on Saturday 20th March 21:44

[theboyfold]

Super Slo Mo said:

Much clearer, I know exactly who you mean, thanks. I imagine the aforementioned of the two is providing some of the impetus behind the broadcast side of things.

Don't assume my name means what you think it means. It's more of an oxymoron. I'm an RF and occasional vision engineer mostly these days. But yes, I do know who EVS are.

Interesting stuff, I shall have to look into 3ality Digital a bit more. Have you any idea whether 3D can be done effectively with hand held cameras? I would imagine it can, since other mobile units like aerial platforms can manage it, but I figure cutting it into a show might be tricky. Using it with a radio link might also be fun! I shall look forward to that one.

3ality I'm sure have done some hand held stuff, if you look on their homepage they have a photo of a guy with a hand held rig.

3d radio cam? Hello bandwidth! That would be interesting...

[andyroo]

Am I the only one who thought Avatar (although the CGI was astounding) just looked like a few flat layers stacked on top of each other? That, and it wasn't possible to focus on certain parts of the image, rather than it all being visible. And it was really dim.

[Super Slo Mo]

theboyfold said:

3ality I'm sure have done some hand held stuff, if you look on their homepage they have a photo of a guy with a hand held rig.

3d radio cam? Hello bandwidth! That would be interesting...

Not as tricky as you might think, it depends on the source quality really, if it's 2 x HD signals. However, all (!) you need to do for the bandwidth thing is book and utilise to adjacent channels and set the TX and RX up accordingly. It's not that common a thing to do, due to the cost and scarcity of channels in most heavily populated areas, but does happen when increased quality is required.

The problem, as I see it, would be that the RF Transmitters are probably not yet capable of dealing with a 3D input. I'm guessing it'd 2 discrete channels of video, which would need to be Mux'd and de-mux'd. It's this format of mux'd video that the system would need to be capable of handling.

Whether the compression in a radio system would screw up the 3D I've no idea, but since (I assume) you must be compressing it to use it in your EVS systems, and of course, it's massively compressed once it gets fed out to the consumer, then I'd think that it wouldn't be a major problem.

[JustinP1]

theboyfold said:

Forgive the chopping of the quotes, this would have been the longest reply in history otherwise!!

JustinP1 said:

Stuff

3d isn't the holy grail IMO, but that is just MO (if that's an allowed acronym!).

...My thoughts are that in the cinema it will become more popular and about 85% of them won't be worth watching in 3d as lots of producers/directors don't know how to use it and unless it's shot orginally in 3d and not synthesised,.

On home TV I'm really not sure.... Also live 3d is nowhere near as good as well made post produced 3d, sorry, but it's not in the same league. Have a look at the 3Ality (http://www.3alitydigital.com/) showreel on a decent 3d screen and you will see what I mean. These guys know what they are doing, your average sports director won't.

I'll fully admit that I am not at the forefront as a professional film director, but this exact factor and the study of it was the subject of one of my degree papers - the link between technology and film and music production and consumption.

I think that my 'outsiders' view has perhaps more perspective, however, I do agree, at the moment, because 3D is so new, it is very much still at the 'trial and error' stage and the 'norms' which lesser directors could just copy are not yet ingrained into 3D production. However, what is clear though is that that stage *will* come. It is only a matter of time.

Consider the challenge of a director to make 3D work well for the screen compared to:

The new ability to use 'sound' in your films.

The ability (shock, horror) of having a camera small enough you could wheel it around so it would not have to be static, or

The ability to have a handheld camera.


All of these, especially the firm two had a *huge* effect on how films could be made, which in turn changed the artistic content of film, which in turn changed consumption. Compared to those, going from 2D to 3D production is seemingly trivial!

My point is, although at the moment, 3D being the norm feels a while off, as pace picks up to where the large majority of films are in 3D, and there are a number of 'normal' 3D channels, the 'norms' and the best methods of production will become accessible to the majority.

[GingerMunky]

JustinP1 said:

Yes.

I had a long answer but it was three pages long.


Seriously though, expect the pattern to be like HD. It won't really 'take off' until it gets to a tipping point. That tipping point is that there is enough 3D output out there for people to want a 3DTV and there is enough demand for 3D content for 3D consumers.

For the first few years it seems the 'glasses' method is the way it will go. The bigger the screen the better. The better the screen the better the effect.

Like HD, the screens will just get better and better.

One day, 3D will be the standard, like widescreen.

I agreed I think DVD and BluRay will certainly help when all the 3D films released in the past 18 months come to http://www.3dtv-products.co.uk/

Edited by GingerMunky on Tuesday 30th March 20:35

[Tonsko]

I'm down with the OP - my eyes are not too hot, so cannot percieve 3D with glasses.

I read somethign a while back that said Sony had released 3D capability in their PS3, went looking for it, and found this:

http://hdtvorg.co.uk/news/articles/2010033001.htm

Seems like they are fairly well placed.

[WeirdNeville]

What's the big deal with "3D capability in consoles /PS3"?
ANY 3D rendered game can be made 3D at the drop of a hat - and that's pretty much all of them.
You render one frame 6 inches to the left of a neutral viewpoint, then the next frame 6 inches to the right. It costs no extra processing power, it just drops the max resolution or framerate you can run at.
PC's have been capable of this ever since doom and quake, as far as I see it it is purely a problem of standardising the display and viewing technology to a point where it is usable in the living room without massive buy-in costs.

Ever since 3D gaming, it's been posible to draw a full 3D environment - it's only the 2D screens holding it back.