Blu-ray 3D specifications finalized, your PS3 is ready!

[SmartKit]

Doubt it was quicker adopted than DVD though. DVD offered a massive benefits over the format before (resolution, sound, convenience etc) so was quickly adaopted. There also was no format war and consumers were keen to buy. By comparisson, Blu Ray doesn't offer a huge leap over DVD - with slight resolutiion and sound - and with the format, it was pretty slow to get buy in.

I'm guessing maybe they mean by units sold (BR vs DVD players) - and in that case they're taking into account the almost 30 million PS3 out there. Of those, you'll probably find 29,800,000 bought it for games as a primary function.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc

According to Adams Media Research, high-definition software sales were slower in the first two years than standard DVD software sales.[46] 16.3 million standard DVD software units were sold in the first two years (1997–98) compared to 8.3 million high-definition software units (2006–07).[46][47] One reason given for this difference was the smaller marketplace (26.5 million HDTVs in 2007 compared to 100 million SDTVs in 1998).[

And since HD DVD was around in that period, we can take off those sales from the 8 mlillion odd HD ...

I wonder if the average consumer can really spot the difference, or if they can is it really enough to convince them to change. As you have stated the benefits of DVD over VHS were astronomical, to many people this may still be just another optical media.

 

[I am Penguin]

Yep, lots to say!

Are you a top HT enthusiast. Do you own a R300K projector or a R200K plasma? I doubt it. These top HT enthusiasts own HUGE screens or projectors

No! I don't own such an expensive system and neither do YOU. Also I never claimed that I am a top HT enthusiast, unlike others. Care to enlighten us about your HT system? What monster do you have? Tell us about the BluRay player you own to watch those BluRay movies. Tell us a bit about the sound system. I am really interested.

Yes! As I said, Many of them top HT enthusiasts do have those Big screens, but mostly huge projectors. Yet some of them as I said also have PS3's doing the honors. If you do not believe me go check it out for yourself on the AV forums.

BTW maybe we should define "Top", definitely not us wasting our time here on MyBB.

Just funny that most of the guys arguing about the resolution always refer to those chats we all saw already There are many sites claiming to differ in some sense as it all comes down to the beholder. My Granny (RIP) with 2cm thick glasses would agree with you fully, for her it made no difference.

Yet many of the same HD be-moaners sits with the top GPU cards in their PC running all games at maximum resolution and detail. WoW? How come!

Also there are so many suckers in the world buying the top LCD TV's, size and HZ TV's as they got so much many to waste, the same arguments is used on BluRay. The better details, resolution, crispness, colour, et al are just all in their minds, a imagination. They buy these consumer products as Sony and the other big corporations either brainwashed them or they enforce them to do so. Thus the market is a huge con is it not!

Yeah, the development in these fancy useless unwanted not needed consumer goods should stop. Pronto as its all a lie!

I presume the 3D is also a Imagination, as it does not really exist. Another unwanted not needed gimmick!

 

[PeterCH]

Arrgh! Please don't start this again We've just come out of multiple phonebook length threads regarding the quality of the PS3's Blu ray capabilities.

Back on topic, if the 3D effects in cinemas are anything to go by any screen sub 50" won't really have the same sort of immersion that the bigger screens offer. Saying that, I hope this technology becomes more demanded and mainstream as it will drive down the price of larger displays. Like we've seen 12" CRT monitors being replaced with 17/19" LCD displays, I would like to see 32" LCD displays replaced with 60" OLED 3D displays

Fudzy. The human eye can only resolve so much detail. We have a fixed number of photo receptors in our fovea centralis - the part of the retina through which we see the details we focus on. When you sit more than 3.5x height of screen away from your 1080p screen, you no longer discern the detail in it. That's why YOU need BIGGER screens or 1080p projectors - and those are expensive. To get the CINEMA experience (and we've had 3d for many decades now - so it's nothing new, just a new generation of kids discovering old tech) you need an expensive setup. If you can afford a 60 inch or 72inch set I will say YES, you can see a difference. By that time, I fear, we will be in 4K or even 8K territory and people will be laughing about 1080p as old, outdated technology. After all HD broadcasts are not new. Google for "1035i broadcasts" and see how old they are.

 

[SmartKit]

Good to know but I have a feeling most of us will be on at least a PS4 by the time this is mainstream

Disregarding the PS3 (actually this article has nothing to do with the gaming console), even if the players become available many people have recently bought their TV for the long run, have they not? Surely they won't adopt 3D technology very rapidly, or at all?

 

[I am Penguin]

You better not tell Matsuda all the anti-Japanese drivel you've been saying on these forums.

He certainly would blush if he heard your anti-Japanese drivel on MyBB.

Trying to take this off topic again. I never said anything against the Japanese, I love them for creating all the consumer goods we can get for cheap under the SONY brand first and foremost then the other brands too. I also love USA and M$.

 

[I am Penguin]

I wonder if the average consumer can really spot the difference, or if they can is it really enough to convince them to change. As you have stated the benefits of DVD over VHS were astronomical, to many people this may still be just another optical media.

Well looking at the sharp rise in BluRay and HD adoption recently I am sure there must be something in there. I wont give my own opinion but the fact that it is just marginally better are just well... whatever.

There are many MyBB members that bought into this BluRay and HD fad and it would be interesting to hear their individual opinions if certain members allow them to do so!

 

[SmartKit]

Arrgh! Please don't start this again We've just come out of multiple phonebook length threads regarding the quality of the PS3's Blu ray capabilities.

Back on topic, if the 3D effects in cinemas are anything to go by any screen sub 50" won't really have the same sort of immersion that the bigger screens offer. Saying that, I hope this technology becomes more demanded and mainstream as it will drive down the price of larger displays. Like we've seen 12" CRT monitors being replaced with 17/19" LCD displays, I would like to see 32" LCD displays replaced with 60" OLED 3D displays

There is a benefit that I've never considered. Hmmmm... intriguing. Hell, I could do with a nice 60" OLED. What do those go for? 8-9 million? (But in a few years of course )

 

[PeterCH]

No! I don't own such an expensive system and neither do YOU. Also I never claimed that I am a top HT enthusiast, unlike others. Care to enlighten us about your HT system? What monster do you have? Tell us about the BluRay player you own to watch those BluRay movies. Tell us a bit about the sound system. I am really interested.

I can more than easily put down R120K for a screen, I just don't see a need for it.

Yes! As I said, Many of them top HT enthusiasts do have those Big screens, but mostly huge projectors. Yet some of them as I said also have PS3's doing the honors. If you do not believe me go check it out for yourself on the AV forums.

Those "HT enthusiasts" will all say that you can't see HD vs SD at over 3.5 screen heights. If they can, they are either using binoculars or are lying. These people run HUGE screens and they can discern these differences because that's for what HD is really designed for. It's not for 40 inch TV, it's for 70 or even 100 inches. Google for the HD graph on EngagetHD.

Just funny that most of the guys arguing about the resolution always refer to those chats we all saw already There are many sites claiming to differ in some sense as it all comes down to the beholder. My Granny (RIP) with 2cm thick glasses would agree with you fully, for her it made no difference.

You must have some super human eyes then. After you die, please donate your eyes to science so that humanity can learn from you.

Yet many of the same HD be-moaners sits with the top GPU cards in their PC running all games at maximum resolution and detail. WoW? How come!

Because they sit 40cm from their 24 inch set. I can also sit 40cm from my 30inch 2560 by 1600 S-IPS LCD and get more of an impressive view. When you put the same set and sit 3 m away from it, be it HD or SD, it won't matter.

Also there are so many suckers in the world buying the top LCD TV's, size and HZ TV's as they got so much many to waste, the same arguments is used on BluRay. The better details, resolution, crispness, colour, et al are just all in their minds, a imagination. They buy these consumer products as Sony and the other big corporations either brainwashed them or they enforce them to do so. Thus the market is a huge con is it not!

YES. These are all suckers. Unless they measured out their room and bought a 72 inch set. Then they're not suckers. They're just chumps with lots of cash to spend.

Yeah, the development in these fancy useless unwanted not needed consumer goods should stop. Pronto as its all a lie!

No kidding. Someone is making money. They are pushing this and you're one of those who's drunk the Kool-Aid.

I presume the 3D is also a Imagination, as it does not really exist. Another unwanted not needed gimmick!

I remember watching one of the Friday the 13th Movies in 3D in the early 90s. It's not an imagination but it's not necessary but those who want it, let them have it. A fool and his money is soon parted.

 

[SmartKit]

Well looking at the sharp rise in BluRay and HD adoption recently I am sure there must be something in there. I wont give my own opinion but the fact that it is just marginally better are just well... whatever.

There are many MyBB members that bought into this BluRay and HD fad and it would be interesting to hear their individual opinions if certain members allow them to do so!

I've been trying to convince my parents of the benefits of at least an HD-ready TV and they'll have none of it. These are people with purchasing power, and in general your average home electronics consumer, and their exists no intention there. I just wonder about the average Joe rather than those on this forum or early adopters? Perhaps the early uptake by those in the know bolstered the numbers, but there may be metaphorical "glass ceiling" until this becomes a bit more main stream. The single shelf dedicated to BD at Mr Video across the road is testament to this, don't you think?

 

[PeterCH]

Trying to take this off topic again. I never said anything against the Japanese, I love them for creating all the consumer goods we can get for cheap under the SONY brand first and foremost then the other brands too. I also love USA and M$.

Er no Sony is expensive. Samsung is cheaper, in fact HiSense is even cheaper. I would gather that if you spoke to Matsuda and he read your anti-Japanese comments, you'd be escorted off and Sony would distance themselves from you. That's how the Japanese are.

 

[I am Penguin]

Fudzy. The human eye can only resolve so much detail. We have a fixed number of photo receptors in our fovea centralis - the part of the retina through which we see the details we focus on. When you sit more than 3.5x height of screen away from your 1080p screen, you no longer discern the detail in it. That's why YOU need BIGGER screens or 1080p projectors - and those are expensive. To get the CINEMA experience (and we've had 3d for many decades now - so it's nothing new, just a new generation of kids discovering old tech) you need an expensive setup. If you can afford a 60 inch or 72inch set I will say YES, you can see a difference. By that time, I fear, we will be in 4K or even 8K territory and people will be laughing about 1080p as old, outdated technology. After all HD broadcasts are not new. Google for "1035i broadcasts" and see how old they are.

Tell me Peter if you see a picture in Standard resolution with details like green leaves with small black dots on them. Are you telling me that going to a higher resolution you will not see any more or better details, crisper, sharper better colour, nada nothing?

 

[PeterCH]

I've been trying to convince my parents of the benefits of at least an HD-ready TV and they'll have none of it. These are people with purchasing power, and in general your average home electronics consumer, and their exists no intention there. I just wonder about the average Joe rather than those on this forum or early adopters? Perhaps the early uptake by those in the know bolstered the numbers, but there may be metaphorical "glass ceiling" until this becomes a bit more main stream. The single shelf dedicated to BD at Mr Video across the road is testament to this, don't you think?

Your parents are intelligent. Don't listen to shills. Wait. In a few years you'll buy a 60-72 inch set and then you'll have your HT. Right now the 40-50 inch stuff we see is ok if you have a tiny living room.

 

[PeterCH]

Tell me Peter if you see a picture in Standard resolution with details like green leaves with small black dots on them. Are you telling me that going to a higher resolution you will not see any more or better details, crisper, sharper better colour, nada nothing?

It depends on the VIEWING distance. The rule of thumb is to keep your set within 3-3.5 screen heights to enjoy the benefit of FULL HD. Google for the graph on EngagetHD, it compares HD vs SD (1080p, 720p, 576p etc) viewing distances. The bigger the viewing distance, the larger the set has to be. To get the 24 inch PC screen effect of a guy playing Crysis on his desktop LCD - you would need something like a 100+ inch living room screen - for typical South African living rooms. If you have a tiny flat in Osaka, well then you can prolly get away with 42 inches or so.

 

[SmartKit]

Your parents are intelligent. Don't listen to shills. Wait. In a few years you'll buy a 60-72 inch set and then you'll have your HT. Right now the 40-50 inch stuff we see is ok if you have a tiny living room.

Then again what do I know? I've been putting off buying one, and always raising the bar. I've got myself to 42" under 10k and now that the LCDs are there I'm thinking why not wait till 50" is under 10k?

 

[I am Penguin]

Er no Sony is expensive. Samsung is cheaper, in fact HiSense is even cheaper. I would gather that if you spoke to Matsuda and he read your anti-Japanese comments, you'd be escorted off and Sony would distance themselves from you. That's how the Japanese are.

Now there still off topic. Where am I anti Japanese. I am anti YOU because you always jam the Japanese down our throats.

So anyway back on topic. Its not about your Japanese friendships now. What's the price got to do with this topic? The Sony product are cheap enough and theirs are better products than some of those you listed at any price, even free.

 

[SmartKit]

It depends on the VIEWING distance. The rule of thumb is to keep your set within 3-3.5 screen heights to enjoy the benefit of FULL HD. Google for the graph on EngagetHD, it compares HD vs SD (1080p, 720p, 576p etc) viewing distances. The bigger the viewing distance, the larger the set has to be. To get the 24 inch PC screen effect of a guy playing Crysis on his desktop LCD - you would need something like a 100+ inch living room screen - for typical South African living rooms. If you have a tiny flat in Osaka, well then you can prolly get away with 42 inches or so.

EDIT: so that is about 5' for a 42" 1080p screen? That's tiny, I'd be half way across my lounge! Wow even a 60" screen is barely worth it! Guess I'll be waiting a while then

 

[PeterCH]

Now there still off topic. Where am I anti Japanese. I am anti YOU because you always jam the Japanese down our throats.

You've said some pretty nasty things about them. If they knew it, they'd prolly not sell you a single product.

So anyway back on topic. Its not about your Japanese friendships now. What's the price got to do with this topic? The Sony product are cheap enough and theirs are better products than some of those you listed at any price, even free

You said it was cheap.

 

[I am Penguin]

It depends on the VIEWING distance. The rule of thumb is to keep your set within 3-3.5 screen heights to enjoy the benefit of FULL HD. Google for the graph on EngagetHD, it compares HD vs SD (1080p, 720p, 576p etc) viewing distances.

Now that's the crux, I do not sit where my thumb (sucking/) tells me too. I sit where I have the best view and quality surround sound. Those graphs are just a planning guide, then after the plan is implemented you throw those graphs away and sit according to comfort. viewing pleasure and sound. My Granny (RIP) with 2cm glasses sat next to the screen, sometimes in my view. Obviously the sound stage did not matter to her then. If we all The whole family) sit according to that graphs we would all sit on top of each other!

/
Wait bring the graphs, lets see who sits where, its the rule of the thumb! It must be abide by!
/end

 

[PeterCH]

Now that's the crux, I do not sit where my thumb (sucking/) tells me too. I sit where I have the best view and quality surround sound. Those graphs are just a planning guide, then after the plan is implemented you throw those graphs away and sit according to comfort. viewing pleasure and sound. My Granny (RIP) with 2cm glasses sat next to the screen, sometimes in my view. Obviously the sound stage did not matter to her then. If we all The whole family) sit according to that graphs we would all sit on top of each other!

/
Wait bring the graphs, lets see who sits where, its the rule of the thumb! It must be abide by!
/end

That stuff is based on science and not BS Fanboyism.

Then again, perhaps you have some super duper eyes there with a higher than average density of photoreceptors, a better than average cornea and lens and so perhaps, you should put that in your will that one day you'll donate those eyes to science.

 

[SmartKit]

Now that's the crux, I do not sit where my thumb (sucking/) tells me too. I sit where I have the best view and quality surround sound. Those graphs are just a planning guide, then after the plan is implemented you throw those graphs away and sit according to comfort. viewing pleasure and sound. My Granny (RIP) with 2cm glasses sat next to the screen, sometimes in my view. Obviously the sound stage did not matter to her then. If we all The whole family) sit according to that graphs we would all sit on top of each other!

/
Wait bring the graphs, lets see who sits where, its the rule of the thumb! It must be abide by!
/end

Er...

Can't you sit in an approximate semi-circle around your TV?