The future of stereoscopic gaming

[Crossbar]

Sony plans to put 3D TVs in homes by end of 2010

Sony is planning to use “active shutter” technology, which uses electronic glasses containing small shutters that blink rapidly in time with a television image to create a three-dimensional effect.

Er, that doesn't sound too good...

I agree, but it´s probably a pretty cheap technology to add to 120 Hz TV sets, the glasses could be sold as add-ons. I am wondering how fast 3D will be added as another check box feature to the hi-end TV sets.

A number of specialist film companies are reportedly preparing to exploit the hype for the 3D medium. Uptake of 3D has taken off over the past three years, with 7,000 screens expected to be in use worldwide by the end of this year.

That number will probably at least 10 fold each year, by 2012-2013 3D could be common in mid-range TV sets.

 

[patsu]

After the HDM war, people may wait for the industry to standardize on the 3D tech specs first. BDA needs to announce the standard it will adopt.

 

[Crossbar]

After the HDM war, people may wait for the industry to standardize on the 3D tech specs first. BDA needs to announce the standard it will adopt.

Don´t you think supporting hdmi 1.4 is sufficient from the TV sets point of view?

The 1.4 version of the specification will define common 3D formats and resolutions for HDMI-enabled devices. The specification will standardize the input/output portion of the home 3D system and will specify up to dual-stream 1080p resolution.

 

[patsu]

Depends whether the 3D Blu-ray movies can play on all versions of 3D TV ? Are they encoded and stored differently on Blu-ray ?

Also, HDMI 1.4 requirement means it's not compatible with PS3 (?), unless they found a way to hack it into 1.3.

 

[Crossbar]

Depends whether the 3D Blu-ray movies can play on all versions of 3D TV ? Are they encoded and stored differently on Blu-ray ?

Also, HDMI 1.4 requirement means it's not compatible with PS3 (?), unless they found a way to hack it into 1.3.

I don´t think the encoding on the blu-ray matters as long as it can be transformed into a HDMI 1.4 stream, which I expect to be the least common denominator for 3D TV sets.

Is there some hardware limitations of the PS3 that prevents it to upgrade to HDMI 1.4 through a firmware upgrade?

 

[patsu]

I don´t think the encoding on the blu-ray matters as long as it can be transformed into a HDMI 1.4 stream, which I expect to be the least common denominator for 3D TV sets.

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=3351 seems to say BDA is working on some standard or convention.

"In turn, the Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) reminded today that it is still working on a uniform specification to ensure consistent delivery of 3-D content across the Blu-ray Disc platform."

Is there some hardware limitations of the PS3 that prevents it to upgrade to HDMI 1.4 through a hardware upgrade?

Nope, but they'd start from zero base like Blu-ray. At one point, BDA was (still is ?) also thinking about lesser 3D tech over HDMI 1.3.

 

[Crossbar]

Nope, but they'd start from zero base like Blu-ray. At one point, BDA was (still is ?) also thinking about lesser 3D tech over HDMI 1.3.

I meant PS3 firmware upgrade (see edit), but maybe you understood that.

There already are 3D movies on blu-ray and there maybe some slightly more advanced interim solutions, but I´d expect the next major technology step to be the support of HDMI 1.4, in BR-players and TV-sets, Sonys timeline seems to indicate that.

Takahasi confirmed that 3D Blu-ray discs and players would be made available to consumers by fall of next year, if everything stays on schedule.

 

[Crossbar]

Did some reading-up on the HDMI 1.4 spec. and it involves a LOT of stuff, some things that indicate hardware changes, such as an additional HDMI Ehternet Channel. But I wonder how much of this that will be mandatory in a device that is supposed to support 1.4, will there be equipment supporting just a subset and still be labled 1.4 compatible?

I was just wondering since the PS3 slim seems to include additional HDMI support (the bidirectional link to some Bravia screens) that is not supported by the old PS3s. What HDMI-spec was that bidirectional link part of? 1.3?

 

[Arwin]

I was just wondering since the PS3 slim seems to include additional HDMI support (the bidirectional link to some Bravia screens) that is not supported by the old PS3s. What HDMI-spec was that bidirectional link part of? 1.3?

It's a non-mandatory feature in the spec, I think it goes back maybe even to the first one. I posted a bit from wiki somewhere earlier, just look up HDMI and CEC there and it shows in which versions.

 

[Crossbar]

It's a non-mandatory feature in the spec, I think it goes back maybe even to the first one. I posted a bit from wiki somewhere earlier, just look up HDMI and CEC there and it shows in which versions.

Thanks!
I tried to download the 1.4 spec. to find what functions are mandatory, but it wasn´t public. However, I found this FAQ.

Are manufacturers required to implement all of the new HDMI 1.4 features?
No. HDMI technology is designed to enable a wide variety of manufacturers in different markets to implement the feature sets that work best for their customers.

How will I know which HDMI 1.4 features are implemented in a device?
Shop for the specific features that interest you, rather than shopping for an HDMI version number and assuming that a certain feature is supported. Since many of the capabilities detailed in the HDMI 1.4 specification are optional implementations, it’s the responsibility of the manufacturer to tell you what features are supported in any given device.

...

Can older HDMI (v.1.0 - 1.3) devices be firmware-upgraded to take advantage of the new features introduced in HDMI 1.4?
Probably not. Most of the new features introduced in HDMI 1.4 will require a new HDMI chip to enable, and cannot be upgraded via firmware.

I found that "probably" very annoying. I like clear answers.

 

[Arwin]

Thanks!
I tried to download the 1.4 spec. to find what functions are mandatory, but it wasn´t public. However, I found this FAQ.



I found that "probably" very annoying. I like clear answers.

Well for one thing the 1.4 spec needs to support twice the bandwidth of 1.3. That alone will probably require new chips.

 

[Crossbar]

Well for one thing the 1.4 spec needs to support twice the bandwidth of 1.3. That alone will probably require new chips.

But do we know that is a mandatory function?

Maybe that is required for full 1080p 3D content, but the bandwidth offered by HDMI 1.3 may be sufficient for 720p 3D content (frame alternative)?

Here´s some more about 1.4 3D.

Which 3D video formats are contained in HDMI 1.4?
The HDMI 1.4 specification includes information on a wide range of 3D display formats at up to 1080p resolution, including:

field alternative
frame alternative
line alternative
side-by-side half
side-by-side full
L + depth
L + depth + graphics + graphics depth

What kind of cable will I need to use for 3D over HDMI?
3D video requires substantial data throughput, so you’ll want to use a High Speed HDMI cable (with or without Ethernet).

Are there any 3D displays available today? What about 3D content?
A number of displays on the market are already 3D capable, including many DLP models. Likewise, there are already some content sources, such as gaming consoles that are 3D-capable. The 3D support introduced in HDMI 1.4 fills an important role by providing an input/output connection that can handle 3D content, and this could help launch consumer 3D video into the mainstream.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Er, that doesn't sound too good...

Gosh, why? Seems very retro. What does active shutter offer that polarised doesn't? Or is it just a case of being cheaper?

 

[Crossbar]

Gosh, why? Seems very retro. What does active shutter offer that polarised doesn't? Or is it just a case of being cheaper?

I´d expect polarized glasses would require a pretty advanced screen in comparison. Do they even exist? I know there are projectors.

 

[patsu]

I meant PS3 firmware upgrade (see edit), but maybe you understood that.

Yes, I know HDMI 1.4 support will require a new HDMI chip. That's why I said they will have to start from zero base.

There already are 3D movies on blu-ray and there maybe some slightly more advanced interim solutions, but I´d expect the next major technology step to be the support of HDMI 1.4, in BR-players and TV-sets, Sonys timeline seems to indicate that.

That's correct. But these 3D movies require 3D glasses, and is compatible with all TVs. I believe the new 3D TV do not need any glasses; but they place other special requirements on the hardware. So the industry needs some harmonization to make sure that their stuff work well together.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I remember reading that the tech to add poliarizing 3D support just involved a cunning layer behind the LCD at little extra cost. No idea where I read that though!

 

[patsu]

Well for one thing the 1.4 spec needs to support twice the bandwidth of 1.3. That alone will probably require new chips.

Yap. The rumored Blu-ray compatible 3D content will support a mode for lower resolution (plus compression) so that it can pass through HDMI 1.3 devices. I could be wrong here (Don't have a lot of details).

I remember reading that the tech to add poliarizing 3D support just involved a cunning layer behind the LCD at little extra cost. No idea where I read that though!

Depending on the quality degradation, the viewing angle argument sounds justified. Would be interesting to know the cost difference between the 2 techs. Their reliability is also an important factor since the one Sony picked looks more complicated (and use more power ?).

 

[Quaz51]

Well for one thing the 1.4 spec needs to support twice the bandwidth of 1.3.

no it's the same bandwidth. S3D (and 4K) use the "deep color" bandwidth aviable on 1.3. but need new pixel rate mode (1.4)

 

[patsu]

Quaz51, have you heard about the 3D movie over HDMI 1.3 rumor ? Do you have more details ?

 

[Laa-Yosh]

What does active shutter offer that polarised doesn't? Or is it just a case of being cheaper?

It's the other way - shutter glasses flicker and it's a lot more unpleasant for the eyes. They also require batteries and are heavier because of this. But yes they are cheaper and it's easier to extend existing tech to support them.

On the other hand polarized tech would require far more complex displays, and would certainly work a lot better with projectors and expensive 'silver' screens compared to televisions. But they would offer better quality too.