HDTV Almanac - Is 2D to 3D Good Enough?

[alfredpoor]

Controversy continues to dominate discussions of 3DTV. Is it worth it? Are the glasses a deal-breaker? Do you lose too much brightness? Is autostereoscopic technology better than the technologies that require glasses, and is it practical? One fact that just about everyone can agree on, however, is that there just isn’t enough 3D content available [...]

[url=http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/columns/2010/09/hdtv-almanac-is-2d-to-3d-good-enough.php]Read Column[/url]

[docrog]

As for "on board" 2D to 3D conversion, I was amazed to see that the "about to be released" Sony VPL-VW95 3D SXRD (LCOS) projector (tentatively priced at about $10,000) has this capability. CNET (UK) reviewed the unit and thought that it was among the most impressive 2D projectors, including projectors priced many thousands of dollars higher, and that the 3D was impressive, as well, with sufficient brightness and contrast to overcome the current 3D issues because of its new auto iris.

Although they didn't have the opportunity to review 2D to 3D conversion, I'm hoping that this will be reviewed somewhere in the near future. As an owner of the VPL-VW50 ("Pearl") projector, I can't wait to purchase the VPL-VW90, as it appears to have improved on the already highly rated VPL-VW85.

[alfredpoor]

A couple companies were demonstrating automatic conversion of 2D to 3D last January at CES 2010. I can dig out my notes to find out who it was if people care, but I do recall clearly that I liked it. I remember watching a recording of a soccer match in particular. There was no "negative Z" effect (where objects break the plane of the screen and come at you), but it was still dramatic and I thought it definitely made it easier to follow the action and it was a richer viewing experience. The players were noticeably flat -- they looked a little like animated cardboard cutouts -- but the overall effect was still better than having everything look flat and in the same plane.

I look forward to better built-in conversion algorithms. This is the type of technology that can grow rapidly as increased processing power becomes cheaper, and the next generation of code can stand on the shoulders of the ones that have gone before. In another couple of years, I expect conversion on the fly in a typical HDTV to be quite good.

Alfred

[tnsprin]

Certainly the 2D to 3d code from DDD that is included in the SAMSUNG 3D TV's is quite amazing. And for some movies in my collection the effect is very good. But at least this on the fly is not as good as 3d shot movies. And for some movies or scenes it doesn't seem to work.

I now that DDD is one of the players in converting movies to 3d for the studios as well. Not sure how much better such movies are, especially with tweaking, than movies done on the fly by the TV. Certainly the example of the Clash of the Titans is a case showing its not "good enought"

[alfredpoor]

It is my understanding that the 3D effects get manipulated in post-processing even when the shots were recorded in stereoscopic views originally. In this regard, it's no different than lighting or color, or adding objects to a scene (or removing them).

Alfred