Quote:
Originally Posted by rickyshamilton
My point is that from my own observations and experiments, the result of a half-horizontal stereoscopic SBS arrangement is subjectively superior to that of a half horizontal 2D movie. My hypothesis is that the same amount of data (a single HD frame) contains more “information” when it carries stereoscopic elements as well.
|
Ah, this is where your hypothesis is flawed. There aren't stereoscopic elements in a SBS 3D video. What you have is two images that are half the number of pixels for
each eye. The same goes for a normal frame packed 3D movie on a Blu-ray disc. There isn't any extra info in the video. You have the full resolution for the left eye and the full resolution for the right eye. Total pixels for the left and right eye for SBS 3D is 960. For frame packed it is 1920. There is nothing that is added to 3D video.
What would be nice is if there was a spec for 4K 3D video. Then the loss of half the pixels wouldn't be as bad for a SBS 3D video, as that would have the resolution of a normal 1080p 3D video.
Because of the resolution loss for SBS, or OU, 3D video, I'll only ever deal with 3D on Blu-ray in order to get the full 1080p resolution. But, that is me. YMMV.