Blu-ray spec finally published at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Special Interest Areas > 3D Stereoscopic Production & Delivery

3D Stereoscopic Production & Delivery
Discuss 3D (stereoscopic video) acquisition, post and delivery.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 17th, 2009, 12:54 PM   #1
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Laguna Hills, CA
Posts: 352
Blu-ray spec finally published

The spec that has been in the works for a year and was due this year (on schedule) has been published. Blu-ray 3D video spec finalized | Electronista
Pavel Houda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2009, 10:30 PM   #2
Trustee
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Rhinelander, WI
Posts: 1,209
Ahoj, Pavle. Will this spec be available to the general public, or will it be sold as an expensive document that only big companies can afford?
Adam Stanislav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19th, 2009, 02:59 AM   #3
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Laguna Hills, CA
Posts: 352
Ahoj Stanislave. You guessed it, the details are under NDA, but I saw some details here: 3D Blu Ray: Charts, Videos, Q&A pdf's, brief overview, (and the dirt too...shh...) - AVS Forum .
Pavel Houda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19th, 2009, 11:59 PM   #4
Trustee
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Rhinelander, WI
Posts: 1,209
It has always puzzled me why people are developing standards and then want to keep those standards secret. How are developers supposed to adhere to those standards?

What always happens is that another group of people gets together and creates a different standard covering the same thing, and then we are stuck with incompatible standards and having to convert from one to the other.

Adam
Adam Stanislav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26th, 2009, 12:58 AM   #5
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Minnesota (USA)
Posts: 2,171
You have to follow the money to understand the why. The Blu-Ray standard is about making money, not a public service. The primary money interests are Sony and the major motion picture studios. They aren't really out to make the little independent film maker's life easier (and heck, the major motion picture studios don't really want to create any significant new competition - and easy access to distribution channels can do that - look what cable did to the major television networks) or provide assistance to open source software developers (for developing authoring or player software). There's no money in that (just more of that pesky competition!). They're only really interested in the players that are big enough (and willing) to shell out significant cash.

Last edited by Robert M Wright; December 26th, 2009 at 01:40 AM.
Robert M Wright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26th, 2009, 01:26 AM   #6
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Minnesota (USA)
Posts: 2,171
Frankly, I think the monopolistic-like business practices approach that's being taken with Blu-Ray is going to backfire. I think it's quite likely that the economics of internet distribution of HD content will overtake and overwhelm Blu-Ray before the consumer base gets established anywhere near as large as DVD or VHS did. If Blu-Ray is to be certain of getting well established in living rooms across the country (and throughout the world), they really need to keep dropping the prices of players and movies, and rather quickly get to DVD level player and movie pricing in short order (which means slashing licensing fees, which probably ain't gonna happen until it's to late).

In a few years, internet distribution of HD video content (so much more convenient for consumers - and certainly just far and away cheaper, by orders of magnitude, in the not-so-distant future) may dwarf Blu-Ray distribution, and then, at best, Blu-Ray will primarily be a computer data storage medium (and even that's pretty iffy, with no shortage of threats from other technologies - like postage stamp size flash memory cards, with larger capacities than Blu-Ray, at even way lower costs than today).
Robert M Wright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26th, 2009, 07:42 PM   #7
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Laguna Hills, CA
Posts: 352
Input cancelled.

Last edited by Pavel Houda; December 27th, 2009 at 12:19 AM.
Pavel Houda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26th, 2009, 08:57 PM   #8
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Minnesota (USA)
Posts: 2,171
I don't have a problem with companies making a fair profit (that's core to what makes our economy hum), but when a standard gets developed, that pretty much exclusively dominates in a large area of human activity (especially when two such standards would be contrary to the public interest), like Blu-Ray currently does for distribution of video content that is playable on the television sets in typical living rooms, without need for resorting to the use of special equipment that has very limited use otherwise, there is a genuine public interest in the reasonable availability to all, for use of that standard (in all meaningful regards).

The folks that own stakes in Blu-Ray, do not need to keep the specifications of the standard a secret, in order to retain ownership of and exercise their intellectual property rights, nor (arguably) is it even right to do so, when it is the exclusive defacto public standard for affordable distribution and viewing of high definition video content, for the common man to view in the comfort of their living room, on their television set (without having to hook up a computer, or something else that is not found in the vast majority of living rooms of persons with any desire to view such content).

Frankly, I think this is exactly the type of circumstance where the government should step in and exercise the right of eminent domain, and take public ownership of the standard (and of course, compensate the owners of the intellectual property appropriately, in accordance with law). That's really why we have eminent domain laws, for when a piece of property is lawfully being held privately, but that private holding of said property is significantly contrary to the greater public interest.

There's also anti-trust issues here. The owners of this particular intellectual property would certainly at least appear to be exercising their ownership rights in such a manner as to stifle competition. These practices clearly make it more difficult for independent film makers to distribute their work (much to the benefit of major motion picture studios, by keeping a significantly effective constraint on up-and-coming competition), and would tend to freeze out the small software development entrepreneur in a similar manner.

This is akin to a technology company and a handful of major publishing houses, developing a defacto standard that would dominate the printing of books, and holding it close to the vest, without any reasonable way for small publishers to fully access the technology. It's monopolistic, which is not the same thing as free enterprise. Free enterprise, as we have it, essentially depends on reasonable rules of conduct to prevent decay into anarchy, or simplistic survival-of-the-most-powerful if you will, which tends to devolve into anything but "free" enterprise (eventually the small guy is no longer free to engage in enterprises at will).
Robert M Wright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 27th, 2009, 08:15 PM   #9
Trustee
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Rhinelander, WI
Posts: 1,209
One would think Sony should have learned from Beta. Apparently they are slow learners, though.

Every industry has always profited from making its standards public. It helps both the businesses and the consumers. Just look at the computer revolution that happened after IBM made its PC and published all of its specs. Had they kept them proprietary, we might not be using computers today.

At the opposite spectrum is good quality photography. Each manufacturer has developed its own lens mount in the hope of forcing the buyers of their cameras to buy the lenses from them. As a result, only pros buy decent lenses. If all cameras used the same lens mount, many more people would buy more lenses, something that would profit both the manufacturers and the consumers. At least they have all agreed on the 35 mm film (even if most cameras are digital these days, they still continue using a similar size of their sensors).
Adam Stanislav is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Special Interest Areas > 3D Stereoscopic Production & Delivery

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:30 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network