You can't bitstream more than 2.0 PCM over optical or coaxial digital so my receiver can't handle 5.1 PCM audio either.

So, by GizmoDVD's logic, I should be pissed off by the BD basic spec, since I'd have to upgrade my hardware to get the full benefit of it.

Yeah, your receiver's killing you. I thought it was great people were able to get an uncompressed 5.1 track before players and receivers had next gen decoders built in.

No, that is not GizmoDVD's logic. He didn't complain about having to originally upgrade his hardware to blu. I thought his point was very clear, he doesn't want to upgrade "again", so soon, to be able to use a new feature, especially if he's not interested in it. You and I don't think it will, but if he feels this new extension might take away from the current quality on new discs, that would be a legitimate concern, as would having to pay more for it. He was just contributing a post to this thread, like everyone else.

Personally, I like having features that I can opt to take advantage of in the future. My problem is, when I went to see Polar Express 3D at an Imax theater back when it came out, I could only watch for about a half hour at a time. I'd then have to take the glasses off for a couple minutes. I just went to see A Christmas Carol 3D recently at the same Imax. This time I lasted well over an hour before I had to rest my eyes. So I'm in no hurry to get b3d, and I'll probably find a relative or friend, if I can, to try it out with first.

Why not buy a compatible player in the first place, then?

I only bought into Blu-ray because I got the player for so cheap. I'm not too concerned about lossless, although I'm planning on upgrading my receiver at some point for lossless audio and HDMI switching and upconverting.

akrate69, after some reconsidering, I see your point about PCM. It is part of the basic spec, so anyone who bought BD players at launch would at least know what player they would need to get to have 5.1 uncompressed sound with their setup.

I still think my point about the lossless codecs TrueHD and DTS-HD stand though: that they're optional extensions to BD that are backwards compatible (DTS core or alternate DD track), same as with B3D.

There is no 3D compatible Blu-ray player on the market (besides the PS3, which I have zero interest in).

Yes, it was great to give us lossless sound with our current receiver, before TrueHD and DTS-HD MA decoders were in any equipment. They knew how many of us (by sales numbers) had receivers with multichannel inputs. What sucks is they didn't include the multichannel outputs on more blu players, or educate us a little better.

Absoltely, and because they're compressed and decoders are in most everything now, the LPCM track isn't used much anymore (if at all? maybe some music discs?).

Multi-channel outputs is additional hardware which would mean a higher pricetag. Typically the 'premium' version each player has it (S550 over the S350 etc.). This is needed less and less and people upgrade to HDMI receivers. I think most of the Gen1 players had it though.

PCM is rarely used. Dolby/DTS have deals with studios to use their flavor of lossless (You might notice has Paramount, Sony and even Warner have switched over to DTS). PCM as a name is just not as catchy as DTS MA or TrueHD, plus it takes up more space on the disc. There are still some circumstances where old titles that were planned, yet never came out in 06/07, come out in 09/10 that still have PCM. But, at this point I wouldn't expect to see many. PCM was a big deal back in 06/07 when most BD players couldn't internally decode DTS MA/TrueHD. Now, almost every player on the market can.

[Technical note:] The Sony S560 does not have multi-channel analog output. The last Sony player to offer that feature was the S550, IIRC.

One problem with the analog output, of what few players that had it, is poor or no speaker control options, since this cannot usually be done at the receiver level with analog. When using analog, the player should allow the adjustment of individual speaker distance (delay), speaker volume, and low frequency crossover setting. Except for a few high-end models, most Blu-ray Disc players that had analog outs did not have a good slate of speaker controls.

Now that HDMI receivers are common, BD players with analog output are becoming increasingly rare. The idea is that one is supposed to throw away one's old HT receiver and buy a new one with the latest HDMI handling capability. What a waste. [/Technical note:]

I found this report from the CES by an IGN reporter interesting:

CES 2010: Avatar 3D vs. Avatar 3D
Which fares better: the theatrical or Blu-ray 3D version?

Perhaps it was just the screen was smaller and image looked better. And since the image was sharper and smaller the 3D seemed to reach outta the screen more than in a large theatre screen.

That doesn't seem likely to me. Traditionally, it has been the bigger screen the more effective the 3D, especially when it comes to things looking like they are reaching out of the screen. It might have had more to do with the distance from the screen.

After seeing the Samsung Series 7 3D TV the other day (at the AVN show, 3D boobs!!!) I am definitely looking forward to this technology at home - thought the image looked great.

I personally only have interest in this for front projector in my HT playing movies. Watching any sort of TV on it doesn't appeal to me, minus maybe a little Discovery channel.

I wonder what all the news tickers and station bugs would look like in 3D. Would they be even more distracting?

It'd be cool if the sports info bar with the scores and times, was floating just below the TV.

Will we need LCD goggles that plug into the TV or BD player in order to view this new 3D technology? If so, why? If we can see Real 3D (whatever it's called) in theaters with cheap plastic glasses, why won't they work at home?

If LCD goggles are needed, will TV's or BD players allow more than one set of goggles to plug into them? I assume they'll be expensive at first, so how realistic is it that a family of 4 will embrace this new tehcnology if they have to buy 4 expensive pairs of goggles?

Is this the same technology the Sega Master System used with its 3D games and LCD goggles?

I'm also not clear why a special HDTV is needed. Does a 3D BD have a double image of the movie on it? If so, does that mean a normal HDTV can't display it? Why not? What's different about this new 3D compared to the old red/green 3D that prevents a normal HDTV from displaying it? Doesn't the red/green 3D have a double image too?

Thanks!

Depending on the TV, possibly. They don't necessarily have to "plug in" though; there are wireless versions.

Real 3D uses circular polarization, where two opposite polarizing filters are alternately placed over the projector lens. For front or rear projection, this method may work (although I'm not so sure about rear).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealD_Cinema

Something similar is possible for LCD, but it needs to be built into the LCD itself, and is more expensive.

http://gizmodo.com/5084121/giz-explains-3d-technologies

Yes. Most Transmitters for the shutter glasses are wireless now, so a near unlimited number of glasses could be used with them. With wired glasses, the wire could be split, since communication is only one-way (to the glasses).

3D systems already exist, although they are niche products. Prices range from under $100 to over $1000:
http://www.ultimate3dheaven.com/3dsyst1.html
http://www.amazon.com/nVidia-GeForce.../dp/B001PV6MCS
http://xpand.tv/XpanD-3D-Stereoscopi...B001CQNP5I.htm

SMS used shutter glasses, but configured for interlaced TV, and limited to the 60hz refresh rate of NTSC (meaning each eye was seeing half a screen at 30 times a second). Modern shutter glasses work with progressive displays, and typically 120hz, although this could be advanced in the future to 240hz or higher.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_Ma...pe_3-D_Glasses

The HDTV has to know how to handle the 3D image it's receiving. At the least, it has to be able to accept a 120hz signal (if that's what the BD player is sending), most HDTVs max out at 60hz input, even 120hz displays (they double the refresh rate internally).

Or, the BD player could output the 3D image at 48hz for theatrical features, which is a refresh rate current displays were not designed to handle.

Even if the display could handle the refresh rates, it might not necessarily know that it's a 3D signal being sent. HDMI 1.4 spec contains a 3D implementation, but most current TVs are only HDMI 1.3 compliant.

The B3D spec stores two separate images, one for each eye, for each frame of the video. A normal HDTV will be able to display one of the two images normally, so it'll play like a standard BD.

Anaglyphic images are a single image with two colors superimposed over each other on it. These images "work" on any display, but once superimposed, you can't (easily) extract the two originally separate images.

The new B3D keeps the two images stored separately and sends them to the display as two separate images, leaving it to the display to decide how to display the two images as a 3D effect.

So with B3D, you could display using polarized lenses, shutter glasses, or any other method display manufacturers come up with now or in the future (even as an analglyph, potentially). With the current anaglyph 3D images on DVDs and BD, you're stuck with viewing it only with colored glasses, even if you had a display compatible with another form.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaglyph_image

You are the first person I have seen mention this. Ever since this talk started, I was thinking how this was implemented with the SMS. The effect was pretty cool.

Wow! Thanks for all the info. There's a lot to process.

I thought maybe they were just resurrecting that old technology. And I agree: there's only one return, and it's of the Jedi.

Movie theaters were using polarized lenses, the type used in Real 3D, back in the 1930s:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-D_fil...zation_systems

However, the first shutter glasses were used back in 1922:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-D_film#Eclipse_method

So most of the 3D viewing methods being used today are "old tech," just greatly refined.

FWIW, the new 3D players sound like they will have one or two pairs of the glasses in the box.

Engadget has reported that the PS3 is getting a 3D firmware upgrade in the summer, not just for Blu-ray movies, but for video games as well.

Nice. I may not agree regarding converting movies shot flat to 3D but I believe many games can be easily converted to 3D with positive results.

See, I'd imagine games would be much harder, because you'd have to factor in so much more than in a movie. In a film, once you've set the 3D, there's never a need for it to change, because the movie will remain the same no matter how many times you play it. But I have much more free reign in a video game. I'm not sure how they'd set up 3D in a first person shooter, for example, where you can walk all the way around an object, right up to walls, etc.

Apparently several Sony standalone BD players will receive a 3D update at the same time.