BURNING 3D Blu-Ray

[zak forrest]

Are there 3D blu-ray burners available now that burn framepacked 3D content?

What software would I need to do this?

I've emailed and called cineform but haven't heard back yet, anyone out there know about this stuff?


any snafus i should know about in the world of burning 3D frame packed blu-ray?


Is there a difference between framepacked and side-by-side in terms of how they look when you are joining the 3D content? I am thinking of doing most of the work in side-by-side to monitor it on the cheap, and then at the end burning/delivering a framepacked version. how does this sound?

thanks everyone

[Stacey Spears]

Netblender is the cheapest. http://www.netblender.com/main/

Its around $5k for the authoring software, $5k for the 3D add-on, and $7k for the encoder. Any BD burnder can burn it. Right now 3D BD is in the early stages. Lots of bugs to work out.

Side-by-side has half the horizontal resolution. This can result in visible moire and twitter. For monitoring, this is fine. Just verify one eye in full res and you should be good to go.

[Mark L. Pederson]

Right now 3D BD is in the early stages. Lots of bugs to work out.

Side-by-side has half the horizontal resolution. This can result in visible moire and twitter. For monitoring, this is fine. Just verify one eye in full res and you should be good to go.

What Stacey said.

Right now, most clients want a standard BluRay with 1920x1080 side-by-side media. That is what we delivery to Discovery for review. 3D BD is still a moving target.

[zak forrest]

What Stacey said.

Right now, most clients want a standard BluRay with 1920x1080 side-by-side media. That is what we delivery to Discovery for review. 3D BD is still a moving target.

Can I make the side-by-side 3d blu rays with Neo3D and some burning software? Or do I have to buy this ten thousand dollar program..

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Can I make the side-by-side 3d blu rays with Neo3D and some burning software? Or do I have to buy this ten thousand dollar program..

Yes. Neo3D can make individual eye streams and also allow you to generate side-by-side and over-under streams. Write these to conventional blu-ray. They will play in any BD player and you just need to manually kick your display into the appropriate 3D mode.

[Mark L. Pederson]

Can I make the side-by-side 3d blu rays with Neo3D and some burning software? Or do I have to buy this ten thousand dollar program..

ENCORE CS5

[Jose Lomeña]

What is better, side by side or over under? Or interlaced?. What of this is the most used?

Jose.

[Mark L. Pederson]

What is better, side by side or over under? Or interlaced?. What of this is the most used?

Jose.

Technically - over/under is better as you maintain horizontal resolution - and you use horizontal resolution to adjust post convergence - HOWEVER - side-by-side is simply the most common, adopted 3D format. Many monitors handle side-by-side - but not over/under.

So ... over/under is better IMO - but side-by-side is "standard"

[Stacey Spears]

Dolby published a nice document on frame compatible 3D. http://www.dolby.com/uploadedFiles/Assets/US/Doc/Professional/3DFrameCompatibleOpenStandard.pdf

[Iannis Holwech]

The best 3D format depends much on what the publishing/playback format it is expected to be used on, and how much conversion is acceptable.

Rule of thumb is;

Broadcast/Direct TV; Side by side.

Blu-ray disks standard spec is full 1080p/48 (24fps for each eye); Field Sequential.

The jury is still out on exactly which sub 3D system on what type of display hardware TV/Projectors/Glasses will display best and which product uses what, except Sequential and possible Frame Packing.

All DLP projectors (DC/HT) will do Sequential full resolution 2K and 4K + other sub systems.
Sony 4K DC projector have till now only done 3D Over/Under dual lens 2K 3D.

As important to how one capture and edit 3D is the intended playback system so not to end up with your 3D project looking bad.
There are a lot of pitfalls in choosing display devise, and many manufacturers try to hide the facts on what their displays can do; Example of JVC (http://www.jvc.eu/3d_monitor/monitor/index.html) that advertise their 3D monitor as Full HD 3D monitor for professional use, but it can only do 3D in Line-by-Line and Side-by-Side, which is not full 1080p in 3D except from eventual upconversion. (possible this also goes for their projectors).

Understanding the different 3D TV Formats (http://www.practical-home-theater-guide.com/3d-tv-formats.html)

Tom's Hardware; Blu-ray 3D May 19, 2010 by Tom Vaughan (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/blu-ray-3d-3d-video-3d-tv,2632-10.html)

HD 101: The difference between sequential and side by side 3D (http://hd.engadget.com/2010/01/12/hd-101-the-difference-between-sequential-and-side-by-side-3d/)

[Jason Goodman]

Technically - over/under is better as you maintain horizontal resolution - and you use horizontal resolution to adjust post convergence

Over under may be better if you are using a passive polarized display. These displays already decimate the vertical resolution by having opposing polarizers on every other horizontal line so the theory is nothing is lost. I've heard the argument that side by side is better because you are dividing 1920/2 rather than 1080/2. But you should try both and compare for yourself.

As far as horizontal resolution is concerned, I think by the time you take your 4k footage down to a 1920x1080 bluray, you've already done any post horizontal image translation needed so I can't see how that would have any impact.

Jason Goodman
CEO
21st Century 3D New York
505 8th Avenue #1006
New York, NY 10018
212-244-8585

21st Century 3D Hollywood
3450 Cahuenga Blvd W #509
Los Angeles, CA 90068
323-799-1046

http://www.21c3d.com
jason@21stcentury3d.com