HDTV Expert - James Cameron Says Passive 3D Is ‘Good Enough’ for the Home

[720pete]

Yep, the perfectionist who spent four years making 'Avatar' thinks half-resolution 3D is just fine for home viewing.

[url=http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/columns/2011/04/hdtv-expert-james-cameron-says-passive-3d-is-good-enough-for-the-home.php]Read Column[/url]

[dhancock]

In that conference Cameron clearly referred to side by side being OK with Active Shutter systems. He did not say anything at all about Passive 3D displays! He said nothing about the real issue of how those passive displays interact with program material that already had their resolution cut in half.

Let's be honest in creating headlines.

[720pete]

Listen to the video clip. Cameron clearly said that home TV screens don't need full resolution video right now, in his opinion. Only cinema-sized screens.

What he overlooked is comparative screen sizes at different viewing distances. What if you have a 65-inch 3D LCD or plasma and you are viewing at at a distance of 7-8 feet?

That's like sitting 30 feet back in a stadium movie theater watching a flat Academy (1.85:1) aspect ratio image on a 20-foot screen. So, the theater screen needs full HD, but the 65-inch doesn't?

As for passive 3D, I raised the question, not Cameron. Although he has made comments in the past about home 3D TVs needing to work the same way as movie theaters (re: passive) to help drive adoption of 3D in the home.

[terrypaullin]

You are 100% correct, Pete. Shame on Cameron. He really doesn't live in our world.

Terry Paullin

[Rodolfo]

I can see how simple (and limited) statements by Cameron can be misinterpreted by extrapolating assumptions on the things that were not said.

However, I agree with dhancock’s post, Cameron said nothing about “passive 3D” and your response of “As for passive 3D, I raised the question, not Cameron” does not actually reconcile with the title of the column, which is the only issue raised by the post.

Regardless if some may be disappointed with the possible ramifications of Cameron’s comments when people may extrapolate from statements that were not made, Cameron should not be quoted on something he did not say,

It appears that Cameron was responding to the specific question of the limited bandwidth that broadcasters have when he said that half-resolution 3D would be fine for broadcasters because they can use their HD bandwidth, and the 3DTV will display full (interpolated) time sequential video frames. He was specific about the display method.

Although Cameron’s comment did not discuss the importance of pre-recorded 3D full resolution media, I agree with you Pete in that it is disappointing that Cameron did not use the opportunity to defend the value of full resolution at home when screen size/viewing distance would make a noticeable difference in image quality, especially on his Avatar creation.

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra

[dhancock]

I didn't disagree with Pete's article - it was the extrapolation of his content to the headline that is the problem.