Many thanks to all for their advices and comments.

E Dieppedalle

On 25/11/11 13:01, Vincent wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 17:43:40 +0000, funkyoldcortina
wrote:

On 15/11/11 12:14, Vincent wrote:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:59:43 GMT, (Zero
Tolerance) wrote:

On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:40:10 +0000, funkyoldcortina
wrote:

Correct, but there is still loss of horizontal resolution!

Exactly the same horizontal resolution, just that the pixels are
directed towards individual left and right eyes now. Hence 3D.

Correct. What's important is what your brain gets at the end of the
day, not what each eye gets.

He may mean horizontal temporal resolution (i.e. when the scene pans
fast horizontally, interlaced content looks very bad compared to
progressive content). But, as you said, it's exactly the same. A full
1920 pixels go to each eye, but only every other horizontal line goes
to any given eye. But that makes no difference with interlaced
content, as explained previously.


Please explain how a full 1920 pixels go to each eye, when 1920 pixels
contain the images sent to BOTH eyes.

I think you're confusing horizontal with vertical resolution.

The horizontal resolution isn't changed at all, whether interlaced or
3D or not. For any given line of pixels, the full 1920 of them is sent
to either the left or the right eye in 3D, or both eyes at the same
time in 2D.

Both interlacing and the method of 3D Sky uses only affects vertical
resolution.

With Sky 3D you get all the even numbered horizontal lines of pixels
(540 of them) sent to one eye, and all the odd numbered lines (540 of
them) sent to the other eye. Each line is still the full 1920 pixels
wide. Each eye gets 1920x540 pixels.

As Sky broadcast both 3D and interlaced content at 25fps, each set of
540 lines is updated every 1/12.5th of a second, which your brain
combines into a 1920x1080 @ 25fps 3D image, or a 1920x1080i25 2D image
respectively.


Have you looked at a Sky 3D broadcast on a non-3D TV?

The box outputs a 1080i signal with two images side by side at the same
time.Each image is 960 pixels wide and the two of them together make up 1920
pixels.

Each eye gets a 960 pixel-wide image, NOT 1920.

On 25/11/11 13:34, Vincent wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 17:42:06 +0000, funkyoldcortina
wrote:

On 15/11/11 10:59, Zero Tolerance wrote:
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:40:10 +0000, funkyoldcortina
wrote:
Exactly the same horizontal resolution, just that the pixels are
directed towards individual left and right eyes now. Hence 3D.


Yes you get 3D (well you can if you can see it, there's a high percentage who
can't). But the majority of those pixels are the same. Hence loss of
horizontal resolution.


Studies typically claim around 1 in 10 people can't perceive the 3D.
But they're a bit flawed. A good chunk of those people have very
little spatial awareness anyway, and can't tell any difference between
viewing a scene (not on a TV) with one eye closed or with both eyes
open (required for 3D visual perception).

Correct. There are more of these people than you might think. I am one.

Put simply, with Sky 2D 1080i you get a full 1920x1080x25fps image,
with a horizontal temporal resolution of 12.5fps, and no 3D effect.
With Sky 3D you get a 2 sets of 1920x540x12.5fps images, which are
combined by your brain to give you a 1920x1080x25fps 3D image with a
horizontal temporal resolution of 12.5fps.


You do NOT get 1920 pixels wide images with Sky 3D. You get 960pixels.

The two images are sent side-by-side in a single 1920 pixel frame.

This is different to 3D bluray, which uses a higher bitrate to produce two
full 1920x1080 images, one for each eye.

On 25/11/11 13:40, Vincent wrote:


Crap. So what I hadn't realized was that Sky broadcast their 3D in the
way you describe (side by side image of 960x1080). For some reason I
thought it was 1920x540...

I take back what I said




Example here...

http://www.avforums.com/news/images/20100420130313.jpg

Do you also have to subscribe to Sky broadband? The Sky website suggests you
do. I had given up un getting Sky 3D because I didn't want to change
broadband supplier, though I wondered - couldn't imagine such bundling being
allowed by the regulators.


NO
You phone up Sky and if you have the Full Package tell them you want
the 3D channel, they then unscamble it and BINGO
thats all their is to it, they dont ask about Sky broadband, what
makes you think you have to have it?

I am not with Sky broadband and have never been