3D Blu-ray Spec Finalized, PS3 Supported

Lucas123 writes "The Blu-ray Disc Association announced today that it has finalized the specification for Blu-ray 3-D discs. The market for 3-D, which includes 3-D enabled televisions, is expected to be $15.8 billion by 2015. Blu-ray 3-D will create a full 1080p resolution image for both eyes using MPEG4-MVC format. Even though two hi-def images are produced, the overhead is typically only 50% compared to equivalent 2D content. The spec also allows PS3 game consoles to play Blu-ray 3-D content. 'The specification also incorporates enhanced graphic features for 3D. These features provide a new experience for users, enabling navigation using 3D graphic menus and displaying 3D subtitles positioned in 3D video.'"

Comments

What?

[deathtopaulw]

Who is going to sit quietly with a headache for 90 minutes every time they want to watch a shitty action movie? Why is this 3D trend continuing despite the obvious uselessness?

Re:What?

[TheKidWho]

No, the problem with the virtual boy was an insanely low refresh rate.

Look at the Nvidia 3D vision setup for what a modern system should be like.

Re:What?

[suso]

blu ray is tanking

something like 2000 dvds sell for every 1 discounted blu-ray sale

LOOK ITS COOL BUY BLU-RAY

look at sales figures for blu-ray for the whole year in sales not shiped then look at dvd

Give it time. You're probably some kid who hasn't been around for long enough to remember, but nearly every format has this problem. Blu ray has only been around since 2006 and the format war only ended last year. It took audio CDs nearly a decade to really take off, all the while many people still bought cassettes and even LPs. DVDs probably took about 5 years to really take off, people were still buying VHS tapes just a year or two ago. It takes time because people wait to see if a format is going to survive before they invest in a player and a library. The PS3 probably has helped blu ray emmensely because it has double functionality as both a blu ray player and a game console. I thought about buying one even though I doubt I'll play many games.

I just got my first blu ray player yesterday and I generally keep up with things. I think it won't be until 2011 that you start to see sales of blu ray dominate. And even then since many players will up-convert DVDs, a lot of less popular titles will keep DVD sales up.

On the other hand, the mean time in-between formats (MTIF) is getting shorter and that probably means that people are wising up to having to invest in a new library of titles every 5-10 years. I know I'm getting tired of it already.

Re:What?

[cowtamer]

Well, you are partially right. We get our 3D information of the world not only from stereo disparity (each eye seeing something different) but also from parallax (stuff changing location as you move your head), accommodation (different objects being at different focal differences) and convergence (both your eyes changing direction to look at the same object).

The fact that parallax is important is why all high-end 3D visualization systems include head tracking (thus showing a much more realistic 3D picture). This will eventually (i.e., sooner than later) find its way into games, and can be done with current 3DTV technology.

There are several reasons for your headache:

1) The "3D" you see is at a different distance than your TV, hence your eye trying to focus on something that is not there. This can be remedied by better 3D content (i.e., once people get past the 'poke you in the eye' effect of 3D)

2) Low refresh rate or Bad Technology. I believe bad 3D is WAY worse than no 3D at all and turns people off forever. If you've ever seen an active 3D display running lower than 120 Hz or anaglyph 3D (colored glasses), or, God forbid, Pulfrich glasses (one dark and one light), you will remember the headache.

The other thing I mentioned (accommodation, convergence) will take a while to get into consumer (or even research) devices.

If you've seen the DLP projection 3DTV devices out there, you might be impressed with what can be done nowadays. I'm glad the format is out there.

That being said, 3D is not for everyone, and probably not for every type of content. I'm sure you'll be able to hit a button and turn it off if you don't like it.. :)

Why?

[Misanthrope]

You can mod me down, but who actually likes 3d video enough to spend extra money on the already expensive blu-ray format?

You insensitive clods...

[Aliotroph]

I only have one good eye!

Re:You insensitive clods...

[Hurricane78]

Looked at the sun trough a telescope, have we? :D

pr0n FTW?

[rsborg]

Seriously, HD porn video isn't exactly a huge draw, but imagine 3D.

Re:pr0n FTW?

[h4rm0ny]

Seriously, HD porn video isn't exactly a huge draw, but imagine 3D.

Ain't got nothing on full tactile sensurround

I think you mean sex.

Subtitles?

[srothroc]

As someone who is hearing-impaired and uses subtitles almost all the time...

Why do we need 3D subtitles? What good could possibly come of this?

In my book, subtitles have several requirements. They need to: be easy-to-read, have proper spelling/grammar, and have good timing. The third dimension doesn't fit in there anywhere. Now, if they were talking about improving the subtitle specifications to allow a wider range of fonts and outlines (as some are hard to read in certain situations), I would be all for it. But 3D? No thanks.

Re:Subtitles?

[Ranzear]

What they're being specific about is where in the third dimension the subtitles are placed. If you have a space or city scene at mostly infinite focus, its a major strain to suddenly focus on screen-depth subtitles.

This issue has been around a long time in first-person-shooter titles when using any of several 3d methods, including the shutter glasses once sold by E-Dimensional and now NVidia and even just red/blue anaglyph, when attempting to aim with a flat screen-depth reticle at an object at much further focus (real gun sights do not utilize binocular vision) and each eye views the reticle to be aimed at a different point.

It would actually take some artistic meddling and forethought for each scene of a movie as to where the subtitles should be placed. The same depth as whichever character is talking should suffice.

How about us handicapped people!

[bonaldo2000]

Would someone please think of us! I have what I think is called monovision - that is, I only focus with one eye at a time. I do see with the other eye too but it more, sort of, along for the ride. It's not a problem in real life - I have sub-par depth perception of course but I have learned to compensate for that. However, I am not able to use the good old red-green 3d glasses. Do anyone know if some of the new systems can be used by people with my condition?

Re:I disagree

[ubrgeek]

As someone red-green colorblind, the polarized ones (a) allow me to see the images in 3D and (b) contribute significantly to looking like a dork when someone suddenly walks into the living room and catches you watching Captain EO.