3DTV In The Home--Not So Fast
While 3D is becoming more popular in movie theaters, it has a number of hurdles to overcome before arriving in the home. I’m not talking about the occasional 3D show that forces viewers to use 50’s-style red/blue glasses, but the more sophisticated 3D technologies used in movie theaters that use polarized (passive) and shutter-type (active) glasses.
The main drawback at the moment is a lack of a defined standard – at the recent Hollywood Post Alliance Technology Retreat, there were a number of 3DTV panel discussions and demonstrations, and as one presenter put it “It takes about eight years to define a SMPTE standard on average, and as far as 3DTV in the home goes, we’re at five minutes to midnight.”
Another panelist pointed out that current systems being proposed rely on alternating left-eye/right-eye-encoded frames, and that the burgeoning crop of LCD sets that feature 120 Hz or higher refresh rates include frame interpolation processing that effectively destroys the 3D frame-encoding. While most of these high refresh HDTVs provide the user with the ability to turn the refresh function off, that capability is often buried deep within a setup or advanced settings sub-menu, something the average TV viewer is loathe to tinker with (most buyers end up watching their new HDTV with the factory default settings, and never ever fiddle with these types of adjustments).
At the recent NAB show, Panasonic showed a complete end-to-end 3DTV professional solution, with stereoscopic (dual lens) HD cameras, 3D encoding and mastering equipment and the like, but theirs is but one proposed system. If 3DTV is ever going to get off the ground, the broadcast and production industries will have to move quickly to define a single standard, in much the same way that the HDTV broadcast standard evolved from using best elements from the five main HDTV system proponents – the so-called “Grand Alliance”.
I don’t see that happening anytime soon with 3DTV, so for now, I’ll sit back and watch and wait – things could gel into a single standard, or not, and consumers could be deluged with multiple incompatible systems which could cause the whole thing to collapse.
Discussion Topics
- Speaker recommendation 2-channel, for paycheck to paycheck music lovers
- Magico V3 vs Magnepan 20.1
- Quad 2905
Speakers
- Bad Firmware Update to Oppo BDP-83
- Anyone bought the new Sony BDP-S350 BD player?
- Oppo BDP-83 Blu Ray Player
Comments
David:
I haven't seen you since I worked for NEC and you worked for Philips.
Now, my comments:
Given the time it took HD to really get to market what is your estimate for the time it will take 3D to show up?
DanW
With the current tech available, can a unit be designed that is astetically pleasing like the LCD T.V`s that are currently on the market? we have come a long way in these regards in even the past 5 years and it would be a shame to have A console type t.v. or worse yet back to the old fashioned multi-component like T.V./Receiver/Speaker Systems of old.
I've been a 3D fan since the earlier 1950's and I look forward to 3D TV... what's taking so long? 3D is a natural 'fit' for HD and surround sound. Get moving...I'm old !!!
Panasonic showed a complete end-to-end 3DTV professional solution, with stereoscopic (dual lens) HD cameras, 3D encoding and mastering equipment and the like, but theirs is but one proposed system
While i appreciate that creating a common standard will take some time, i understand there is another problem that is potentially more pressing; namely, the transmission rates of 3DTV signals. I might have understood this wrong, but i understand that signle uncompressed 3DTV channels are in the terabits and that the compression technologies are not close to getting this under 100 MB/s. Without overcoming this issues, the communications infrastructure in this country (or any other one for that matter) wouldn't be capable of supporting 3DTV transmission. [Now, i could be wrong on this but i do remember this being a major issue at CES]
Post new comment