By Rodolfo La Maestra • Mar 26 2011, 5:25pm
The 3DTV frame-compatible structures of “Side-by-side” and “Top-bottom” fit the left and right images within a shared video frame and could be employed by over-the-air broadcasting using the existing MPEG-2 transport and bandwidth that are currently used for DTV, similarly to how cable, satellite and IPTV implemented their 3DTV services over the past months using their existing MPEG-2/MPEG-4 transmission infrastructure.
The difference: broadcasters do not have the luxury of using a separate channel for 3DTV as they did.
Is there any other format that would perform the double function without impacting the image quality of either 2D or 3D and still fit in the allotted channel space?
The answer is...
By Rodolfo La Maestra • Mar 11 2011, 3:44pm
I would like to start with a statement that I customarily make about 3DTV.
3DTV should not be regarded as a new TV system intended to replace the current digital H/DTV system, but should rather be considered as just one more advanced feature to occasionally view 3D content on an HDTV.
The amount of 3D content is expected to improve with time.
The effects of prolonged 3D viewing may soon be confirmed by appropriate research.
The existing over-the-air, cable, satellite, and IPTV transmission infrastructure, bandwidth, and equipment are being adapted to distribute 3DTV, although with certain limitations compared to the 3D quality of Blu-ray, such as half resolution per eye using frame compatible 3D formats (such as side-by-side or top-bottom 3D structures for the left/right images to share the same video frame), relatively high digital compression, lower transfer speed rate, and reduced audio quality using lossy codecs rather than the high quality lossless codecs of Blu-ray (such as D ...
By Rodolfo La Maestra • Mar 9 2011, 3:05pm
As mentioned on the previous article, 3DTV is being implemented by different technologies.
According to some the approach causes unnecessary confusion, asserting that the various technologies may eliminate themselves if consumers decide they’d rather not spend on 3D when not knowing what to buy.
I see the choices of technologies as solutions to various issues and preferences people naturally have.
A consumer may not...
By Rodolfo La Maestra • Mar 7 2011, 3:27pm
At the beginning of any new technology the first products are usually immature and expensive.
A complex technology such as auto-stereoscopic glasses-free 3D cannot be expected to be at its best when introduced, and so far we have seen just prototypes of the large screen TVs.
On the other hand, the 3D technologies that require glasses, such as the active-shutter type or the theater like polarized glasses, got introduced to consumers at retail just recently and while they are expected to continue improving as new models are introduced, the technologies for the home are at their first stages.
Those that may have witnessed the HDTV introduction in 1998 may remember...
By Rodolfo La Maestra • Mar 3 2011, 4:02pm
The auto-stereoscopic (glasses-free) 3DTV technology is usually criticized by many in the press, especially those that have only seen the first generations of prototypes.
The negative comments are mainly about the limited number of viewing positions, the low resolution of the image on each viewing zone (eye) and the disruption of the 3D effect when changing positions.
Auto-stereoscopic panels of today are...