Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

1 - 20 of 54 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,595 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
News is out that CBC will broadcast a ton of world cup 2010 soccer games, and some will be in 3D. Besides having a 3D capable TV, will this 3D broadcast be via OTA? Is 3D broadcast anywhere via OTA? I assume any 3D broadcast will also be in HD...?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,080 Posts
I hadn't heard about 3D on CBC. Though I wouldn't be surprised if an American network does the 3D thing...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,410 Posts
CBS had broadcast a few episodes of 'The Medium' in the past where you didn't need a 3DTV, but you just needed the funkie glasses.

oppps! sorry,.. it was NBC

MEDIUM 3D MAKES YOU WATCH TV AGAIN
NBC'S TV SHOW MEDIUM DID IT AGAIN TONIGHT....an episode broadcast in 3D which is causing lots of talk and probably

It was hilarous to read that some bloggers were using their own glasses and mocking up 3D with blue and red markers

http://hollywood2020.blogs.com/hollywood2020/2005/11/medium_3d_makes.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,257 Posts
Besides the need for a 3D capable TV, you'll need a pair of those funkie bi-coloured glasses.
No. Bi-coloured glasses is old technology and can be used with any TV. Current 3D TVs use LCD shutter glasses, where the TV tells the glasses to alternate which eye sees the image. For this the TV needs to refresh the image 120 fps so until they switch to MPEG4, I don't think there is enough bandwidth to do 3D TV OTA.

I don't see all the hype about 3DTV going anywhere until they can provide 3DTV without the need for the glasses.
There are 4 technologies for 3D TV (copied from Wikipedia):

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
982 Posts
CBC is making the 3D signal available to cable and satellite operators who will put it on a separate channel. The 3D signal is not backwards compatible for 2D TV viewers. Regular TVs display 2 side by side images. (Left Eye,Right Eye)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,257 Posts
Regular TVs display 2 side by side images. (Left Eye,Right Eye)
So could you make a simple cardboard stereoscope for your TV that makes it so that your left eye only sees the left image and the right eye only sees the right image to see it in 3D? I guess you would also need anamorphic lenses to expand the image to the proper width, otherwise everything would look squished.
 

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
I assume any 3D broadcast will also be in HD...?
Its not happening but if it was the answer would be No.

A 3D broadcast needs twice the bandwidth of a regular broadcast.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,257 Posts
A 3D broadcast needs twice the bandwidth of a regular broadcast.
While Blue-ray uses sequential 3D encoding and thus uses twice the bandwidth, both CBC and ESPN are using side-by-side encoding, thus using the same bandwidth while sacrificing half the horizontal resolution. So while it will likely still be called HD, it won't be as high a resolution as the 2D broadcast.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
327 Posts
A 3D broadcast needs twice the bandwidth of a regular broadcast.
This is not entirely correct.

To date, almost all 3D broadcasts have used the side-by-side or "frame compatible" method which does not require any more bandwidth. With this method, there is nothing inherently unique to the signal versus any regular 2D channel - it's simply two images side-by-side sharing basically a standard video frame. The upside is better backwards compatibility with existing broadcasting infrastructures in terms of delivery. The downside is there is effectively half the resolution (either vertical or horizontal depending on the side-by-side configuration used of either top/bottom or left/right) for each image once processed.

The magic happens in the TV where that single frame with two images is processed into a single 3D frame.
 

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
But then its not HD which is what the OP asked.

To clarify I will change

A 3D broadcast needs twice the bandwidth of a regular broadcast.
to

A 3D broadcast needs twice the bandwidth of a regular broadcast in order to maintain the same resolution.
In other words, unless you double the bandwidth, the 3D broadcast will no longer be in HD.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
327 Posts
I think it's going to be one of those "dirty little tech secrets" that most of the public won't know about.

Sort of like when DVD first arrived - most people weren't aware how much vertical resolution they were losing when the DVD players were converting anamorphic titles to letterbox for compatibility with 4:3 televisions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,257 Posts
But then its not HD which is what the OP asked.
It all depends how you define HD. As I said:

while it will likely still be called HD, it won't be as high a resolution as the 2D broadcast.
Since there are already two resolutions defined as HD (more if you count the different refresh rates), why not add more? It will still be better than SD or ED.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
220 Posts
3D Broadcasts OTA?

That might be a cool reason to grab a 3d set if
they display some over the air stuff in 3d to enjoy,
or is it going to be limited to just cable and satellite?
Also is it going to be in 1080i for each eye when
they broadcast 3d?
 

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
No broadcast channel is going to air something that can only be viewed by about 1/10,000 of the population.

Until 3DTVs are available in 90% of the homes (probably never), don't expect it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,390 Posts
^^^^
Also, there's a limited bandwidth available for OTA, which means that if 3D is supported, then something else (picture quality) has to go.
 

·
OTA Forum Moderator
Joined
·
24,867 Posts
The ATSC standard allows 1080p, but the broadcasters have not used it since it was not prevalent when the DTV transitions began. As far as 3D goes, there is no momentum at this time to offer it. In Canada the object of broadcasters now is simply to get the DTV transition done using today's common systems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,396 Posts
Currently, SAT & Cable companies are getting their feet wet with reduced resolution 3D
transmissions, using a "side-by-side" format (vice Blu-Ray's alternating L/R frames).
Every other horizontal pixel is thrown away, so that a pair of 1920x1080 L/R images
are compressed into a pair of 960x1080 images, which fit into a SINGLE frame.
At the receiving 3DTV, these are expanded and then displayed as alternating L/R images.
The transmitted 1920x1080i 3D image is viewable on a regular HDTV as side-by-side
L/R images....and requires the same datarate as a regular HD channel:
http://hd.engadget.com/2010/01/12/hd-101-the-difference-between-sequential-and-side-by-side-3d/

In order to convey TRUE HD 3D programs, the datarate would double....which
impacts not only the existing inventory of (slow) SAT/Cable boxes, but also requires
a faster datarate that exceeds their HDMI (currently v.1.3) interfaces.

SAT & Cable guys requested some ADDITIONAL 3D formats (including progressive)
be added to the higher speed, 3D Blu-Ray HDMI spec (v.1.4), resulting in new v.1.4a:
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/449713-HDMI_Group_Ratifies_3D_Broadcast_Formats.php
http://www.hdmi.org/press/press_release.aspx?prid=120
Note that the 3D portion of v.1.4a can be downloaded....the rest is proprietary....

So ultimately, 3D viewers will need a 3DTV (with an HDMI v.1.4a I/F or external adapter),
and perhaps an AVR that won't reject the audio signal cuz they don't recognize the
video format....and won't go bonkers trying to display on-screen menus when trying
to pass-thru one of the new v.1.4a 3D formats. Last I checked, no one was advertising
compatibility with v.1.4a....so I recommend waiting.....Yeah, it might be a firmware
only change to a 3DTV....but when have manufacturer's ever updated software to
accommodate new technology, given the opportunity to sell you a brand new product.....

BTW: The underlying SMPTE and ISO 3D specs won't be finished until the end of
this year....so what you buy today might not work right in the future.....such as
where in the 3D field do they display caption info....
 
1 - 20 of 54 Posts
Top