Panasonic invited us to a sneak peak of 3D at its booth tonight and representatives from
DirecTV were there showing off its new
1080p 3D HD demo feed. The quality was pretty good and quite enjoyable. There were no noticeable compression artifacts in the demo loop which included soccer, College Football, Avatar, Toy Story 3, and a few documentaries with awesome architecture and breathtaking views of mountains and ocean wildlife. We also had the chance to speak with the DirecTV technical staff which told us that the 1080p24 3D signal doesn't take any more bandwidth than 2D content at the same resolution and frame rate. We were told the demo was indeed real and that we were actually watching the signal you'll be able to watch in June -- after your existing set-top gets a simple firmware update and assuming you have a 3D HDTV, that is. We have to say this is something we're looking forward to and with every demo we become more convinced that 3D is actually going to take off.
posted January 7th 2010 12:04AM
Nice, but I am really looking for something that makes real life 2D
3D will fade out soon, very soon.
@epic Try shutting an eye.
@epic You're gonna fade out soon, very soon.
@BackStabber zing! I will laugh at you and your 3D glasses!
while 3d is nice, i prefer HD
still awesome though (can't stand 3d gaming)
@Pedobear
We all know what kind of movies you are watching Pedobear. Btw I've called Chris Hanson.
@Pedobear Well, if you had read the article, this is both 3D AND HD! best of both worlds! :-D
I want to know what television model they were using for the demo.
@plyx click the picture link - clearly panasonic!
1. I can't wait to try some 3d gaming.
2. Shouldn't all channels be in HD before moving to another format?
3. I'm still confused about the HDMI 1.3 v 1.4 stuff... is it a bad time to buy a new av receiver? Should I wait for the 1.4 stuff to get figured out?
@bellevegasj 1. It's intense. I'd be doing it right now were it not for typing this comment.
2. No. If we wait for everyone to move to HD before advancing to another standard, you'll probably be waiting another 5 years.
3. I'm confused too. By the numbers, HDMI 1.3 has the bandwidth to do 2x 1920x1080p24 which is all a player should have to output.
@bellevegasj
What I don't understand is, I just bought a 50" 1080P Plasma that does 600mhz back in September 09. Technically, why could it not display the 3D stuff from REAL D 3D? With LCD, I believe it's that 120hz refresh isn't fast enough, so they need to double it.
Also, we're looking at two standards for 3D? Flicker glasses and polarized glasses? Are movies going to be compatible with both types of 3D tech?
@xCrunk Based on an answer from samsung, for your display to do 3D, it needs to be able to accept a 120Hz signal. Currently all Samsungs take a 60Hz signal and upconverted to 120Hz.
http://answers.us.samsung.com/answers/7463/product/PN50B650S1FXZA/questions.htm?expandquestion=129528
@squeegeekid
Nice find squeege. So your TV has to be able to accept the 120Hz input. Very interesting. The first time I've heard this. I assume HDMI 1.3 can do 120Hz output. So, it would be up to the manufacturer to enable this in older TV's, which they most like WON'T. Bastards!
So, whether your TV displays has a 120Hz or 600Hz refresh is irrelevant. It's the TV's ability to input the 120Hz output of your 3D enabled bluray player.
Thank you sir. You get a gold star!
@xCrunk so to answer the first question, no your TV probably can't handle 3D. The screen is fine, but the input probably only accepts a 60Hz signal, thus it won't accept the 3D signal from a BluRay player, etc. Hook it up to a computer and give the various refresh rates a try, just try not to be too pissed when you confirm that the inputs ont hese things have been gimped for years.
The second question is a little more comforting. There is a set standard for 3D over HDMI, and it will probably carry over to other input methods. This means that it is up to the display to interpret the 3D signal, and display it within its capabilities. So whether you use Shutter, Poloraized or even anaglyph is entirely between the display and the viewer and the content source won't care.
@RandomGuy
"but the input probably only accepts a 60Hz signal"
that's the $64K question, or in my case, the $2K question. I can't see why the manufacturers can't upgrade firmware on sets to accept this 120Hz signal via the HDMI input on the TV. I could only assume this is new technology that allows an HDMI input to accept this 120Hz signal.
Still, makes you think, the PS3, with a simple firmware upgrade is going to be 3D compatible. So the same HDMI output that was launched with the system back in 2006 can output a 120Hz signal. My 4 month old set can't interpret this signal? Wow, what a rip. The TV buying cycle shrinks down from 10 years back in the CRT days to, what, three years? This is getting ridiculous.
"but the input probably only accepts a 60Hz signal"
that's the $64K question, or in my case, the $2K question. I can't see why the manufacturers can't upgrade firmware on sets to accept this 120Hz signal via the HDMI input on the TV. I could only assume this is new technology that allows an HDMI input to accept this 120Hz signal.
Still, makes you think, the PS3, with a simple firmware upgrade is going to be 3D compatible. So the same HDMI output that was launched with the system back in 2006 can output a 120Hz signal. My 4 month old set can't interpret this signal? Wow, what a rip. The TV buying cycle shrinks down from 10 years back in the CRT days to, what, three years? This is getting ridiculous.
@xCrunk For the PS3, using a firmware update to make it 3D compatible would mean fixing how it outputs a signal which is a lot easier than changing the input of your TV to accept a 120hz signal. Changing the input might result in additional hardware which a firmware update wont help.
Having seen Avatar, I'm itching for 3D TV to take off.
I have to say, though, that the 3D display on Fuji's camera and photoframe though is much cooler than wearing specs. I hope that's the next step in 3D TV.
http://lemon.soju.co.uk/3d/finepix-w1-hands-on/
What kind of TV is needed for 3D? Does it need a special 3D mode or just a minimum refresh rate?
@Paulmichael
As far as I can tell refresh rate plays a big role in what is 3D-capable and what isn't. Hopefully all of us modern plasma TV owners won't need to change sets.
Yeah I'm hoping Plasma sets qualify, the one we got quoted a 600 Hz refresh rate, but there isn't really any way to test that, not that I know of anyway.
@Paulmichael
Your 600hz plasma is actually only 60hz.
@Paulmichael there is an easy way to test it. Plug it into a PC, and see if you can set the refresh rate on the signal to 120Hz. I am betting you can't unless it has a 3D logo somewhere on it.
Of course, wow I feel dumb for not thinking of that. Thanks for the tip.
We just need the box;)
@(Unverified)
really is this true? having just bought a new panny G15 i'm starting to get annoyed i didn't wait for this 3D stuff
Can't wait. Gaming in stereoscopic 3D makes 2D stuff look... bland.
Sounds like it is using a checkerboard pattern and leaving it to the tv to split the frame and create a 3D image out of it. Not the best for image quality but easiest to release to consumers.
Cool glasses. I hope by the end of ces we will have more clear picture on this whole HDMI issues thing.
3D may be cool and all but I paid a small fortune for my Kuro two years ago. I don't see myself buying a new TV for a long time.
Everyone who just bought a $1500 TV will have to buy a new TV, probably $3000, to get 3D. Nice. And wear silly glasses all the time. To watch a crappy picture that negates all the benefits of true HD. NO THANK YOU!
will the glasses be necessary to take advantage of 3d? there is no way in hell you will ever catch me sitting around comfortably, trying to relax with those stupid glasses on. can you really envision a family sitting around all wearing their own set of glasses? or if you invite friends over to watch a game - are you going to hand out pairs of glasses? what about people who wear prescription glasses already?
@alkaline
Agreed, that is definitely a problem that will have to be addressed before 3D content becomes the norm. As long as glasses are required, I think 3D viewing will be an occasional indulgence, like for certain movies or games. It will be interesting to see what happens when ESPN 3D launches, though, because you're right the idea of handing out glasses to people you invite over to watch a game does seem a bit silly, especially if you're the one that had to buy a bunch of extra pairs for friends. On the other hand, if they like the look of 3D, I suppose they might consider it to be worthwhile. Although I have visions of people laughing when someone gets up to get food or something and people end up looking at each other wearing glasses rather than focusing on the screen.
anyone who believes the industry believes we are all GOING to buy new TVs right now isn't thinking like a business man. I guarantee this: There are going to be 3d solutions for most current TVs from third party developers. It will make these companies money to offer you 3d without buying a TV right after already buying a 'new' one...
I can see upgrading my projector in my home theater, yet I'm not going to get getting rid of my LCD HDTVs anytime soon, and I don't need anymore.
Now, they should be able to use 1080p HDTVs and make them 1080i, but display a left & right image while using active glasses.
I just have a hard time getting rid of functional equipment. I just gave away my 27" panasonic. But the old 60" rear projection screen still gets the job done. Maybe wait another year or two and then get a big HD set of some kind. Only problem is it takes a 72" 16:9 set to do a 4:3 image at the same size, or a 55" to display 16:9 at the same size as I currently see.