| Author | Message | ||
     EJocys Rating: N/A |
HD-DVD can support high resolutionñ. HD-DVD Standard: Capacity: 20-30 GB Video compression: MPEG-2, VC-9, MPEG-4 part 10 (and also known as H.264, JVT or AVC) Video resolution: 1280x720 (720p), 1920x1080 (1080i or 1080p) Audio: 5.1 DTS, 7.1 DTS How they can put stereo support into to that? Just some suggestions: For aspect ratios: 2.35 (Cinemascope), 2:1 (International), 1.85 (Widescreen), 5:3 (European) or 16:9 (HDTV) they can split 1920x1080 frames in to two 1920x540 parts for Right and Left eye [Top][Bottom]. For aspect ratios 4:3 (TV) or 3:2 (SDTV): they can split image in to two 960x1080 parts [Left][Right] PC (+NVIDIA) already has Stereo 3D support. They can use page flipping on 100Hz HDTV (50Hz for one eye) (TV must have connection jacket for 3D shutter glasses) With stereo mode turned off people can see both images [left/right or top/bottom] Maybe 1280x720x60fps will be better thing for stereo page flipping? Some ideas? | ||
| vsv Rating: N/A |
L+R muxed with audio+subtitles into transport stream (VOB) | ||
| Anonymous Rating: N/A |
Solution must be simple enough and with minimum hardware modification. a) With two images in one stream you need just add new features to HDTV hardware. b) With two video streams you need to modify HD-DVD hardware (add two separate video outputs or somehow synchronize frames with HDTV) and HDTV hardware It is why solution B is less likely. If some Stereo 3D features will be included in to "HD-DVD Standard" then I will be very happy. I think NVIDIA can do some action about that. | ||
| Anonymous Rating: N/A |
NVIDIA is not interested. Stereoscopic video market is to small. In addtion - what device will you use for plaing stereoscopic DVD ? There does not exist any good one and no HW manufacturer will invest in it (small not clear market again). PC based playbcak is more easy ... | ||
| Anonymous Rating: N/A |
"Stereoscopic video market is too small" "Shader Model 3.0 market is too small" … oh yes it was ATI  Then it is time to create one. For example HD-DVD Video market is too small too. Why wee need HD-DVD if people already happy with that they have? Back days then VHS was popular there was no DVD market too. If market does not exist because of people don’t know about that new technologies can offer for cheap price then excuse "market is too small" is stupid and shortsighted. Many professionals and 3D enthusiasts support NVIDIA and not ATI just because Stereo 3D and innovations. Most of them are directing decisions of hundreds or thousands of customers (Today I personally converted one IT professional to NVIDIA from ATI jus because I had chance to show him features which are not available on ATI, like Stereo 3D and SLI (best with 3D) . If NVIDIA is not interested then it is happy news for competitors of NVIDIA. | ||
| Anonymous Rating: N/A |
The problem is not NVIDIA is not interested. The problem is "NO investor is interested in stereoscopic video problematic". Everybody who want to start investing in something at first starts a marketing reserarch to be sure the money will come back. To make this technology enought polular and wide spread ("read profitable for HW and software manufacturers") will require so much money that nobody want take the risk ... The first question of any company is "How many unit can wee sell ?" "How many users already exist ?". The current nubers derived e.g. from nVidia stereoscopic drivers downloads and LCD shuterglasses sales are clear - to few people. Just now there is a limited chance for stereoscopic game market, but almost no chance for consumer level stereoscopic video market. | ||
| Anonymous Rating: N/A |
Another related remark - in current world quantity rules, not quality. IMAX is good nVidia is good Both heave problems becouse they prefer quality over quantity | ||
| Peter Wimmer Rating: N/A |
I believe that 3D-HD-DVDs will be produced even is there is no standard, similar to currently existing 3D-DVDs. However, side-by-side or over/under layout will be used instead interlaced since interlaced playback for shutterglasses won't work on modern TV sets anyway. And if nobody produces 3D-HD-DVDs, I'll do it :-) But first, industry has to decide on one HD format: I can't imagine consumers will accept two incompatible, rivalling formats (HD-DVD, Bluray). The good news is that next generation Windows "Longhorn" will support HD-DVD playback of-the-shelf, so it should be easy to adopt existing PC-based playback applications, e.g. Stereoscopic Player to play 3D-HDTV content. | ||
| M.H. Rating: N/A |
But if we realy want to have quality - HDTV standard is not sufficent. We need per eye HDTV resolution - and for this HD-DVD standard are still not sufficient accrding data flow :-). | ||
| Anonymous Rating: N/A |
don't look now but Ultra HDTV could be around the corner. NHK has produced UHDTV in Japan....32 million pixels over 4000i. people that have seen it says its beyond amazing.imagine 3d with that kind of resolution? | ||
| Peter Wimmer Rating: N/A |
Go to an IMAX cinema and you'll see what UHDTV looks like... However, digital UHDTV is not affordable within the next years, even still cameras don't have such a high resolution by now. | ||
| Puppet Kite Kid Rating: N/A |
To me, it looks like HD-DVD standards will simply offer the same options for 3D as the DVD standards, just with higher resolution. "Interlaced 3D" is simply a storage format (or a "distribution" format). How it is output is the option of the playback system. Even if interlaced storage formats *disappear*, all we have to do is deinterlace our 3D sources to half rez, over/under (e.g., "view fields") format. Since MPEG's seem to stretch horizontally much better than vertically, a squeezed, side-by-side storage format seems like a better solution, anyway. The only exception to that might be it probably doesn't convert to interlaced format as well as a half-vertical-rez format (because it has to be doubled in width _and_ have halved in height). Hey, to me, standard DVD or HD-DVD isn't the best way to distribute 3D, anyway... full resolution, double-wide (2x DVD rez with moderate bitrates) is the way to go... but of course, standard DVD players won't be able to play them... however, since computers are probably always going to be the best way to present 3D, that probably really doesn't matter, anyway, provided you have a "fast enough" computer... maybe we need more than one rez/bitrate version on each DVD, just like most of us distribute web videos (a "high band" and a "low band" one), to please everyone :-) PKK | ||
| M.H. Rating: N/A |
PKK >>Since MPEG's seem to stretch horizontally much better than vertically ?? The used YV12 (4:2:0) quantization stretch identicaly bad in both directions ... I do not expect HD-DVD will use 4:2:2 qunatization witch raly have different resolution in diferent directions ... I agree with the rest of PKK opinion - the futre of stereoscopic video is in PC. Non PC technologies had to much wired in stereo non-compatiblity ... HD-DVD colud be used only as a storage medium - but probably not for direct playback (to low data transfer bandwitch) ... | ||
| Anonymous Rating: N/A |
check this out! |
