3D Blu-ray Spec Finalized, PS3 Supported 157
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.'"
Re:What? (Score:1, Informative)
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
Re:Subtitles? (Score:3, Informative)
Why do we need 3D subtitles? What good could possibly come of this?
When everything else is in 3D, having subtitles in 2D puts them at the furthest effective focal distance. 3D subtitles doesn't necessarily mean that all subtitles are on an angle with depth and drop shadows... it could be used only as a means to control where they appear on the Z axis.
A character in the foreground could have their subtitle float in the foreground for example. When you see "[music playing]" as a subtitle, it could be positioned at the same focal distance as that piano player in the back of the room. When the bird on a branch chirps right in your face, the subtitle is in your face too. Would be really cool for an action comic kind of "biff" "pow" subtitles without baking them into the video frame.
Re:Why? (Score:2, Informative)
That actually might be an effort to give something which is decisively different from "good enough" DVD.
And hoping people will like it, of course.
Re:Why? (Score:0, Informative)
I'm willing to pay for it. I saw Avatar last night in 3d and it was amazing. Totally worth the extra money.
Re:Why? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Why? (Score:2, Informative)
Coraline, Up
Well, I saw Coraline in 3D, with the red/blue glasses; I won't repeat the experience. The 3D effect came and went, glasses got annoying after a time, I had to keep my head straight up or the two images got out of sync (so no stretching on the sofa), the colors were all washed up and changed weirdly (maybe my eyes aren't trained to correct for brightness with colored glasses?). But even if the quality were better, I don't think this kind of gimmick adds much to the movie. I'll wait for real 3D displays, maybe holography-based.
3d via firmware upgrade--but still no bitstream? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Subtitles? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What? (Score:4, Informative)
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:Subtitles? (Score:3, Informative)
It’s not a question of “needing” them. :)
It’s simple physics: With those glasses, everything has a depth position. Whether you want it or not. So even if you put the subtitles at position zero, it will still look like it’s hovering in space.
Don’t worry, I found the subtitles to be even more readable than normal 2D ones and was positively surprised.