3DTV Content Capture, Encoding and Transmission E-Book

Daniel Minoli

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
• Serie: Wiley - IEEE
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 359

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2010

Beschreibung

The First to Present 3D Technology as Applied to CommercialProgramming for the Consumer This is the first book to provide an overview of thetechnologies, standards, and infrastructure required to support therollout of commercial real-time 3 Dimension Television/3 DimensionVideo (3DTV/3DV) services. It reviews the required standards andtechnologies that have emerged--or are just emerging--insupport of such new services, with a focus on encoding mechanismsformats and the buildout of the transport infrastructure. While there is a lot of academic interest in various intrinsicaspects of 3DTV, service providers and consumers ultimately tend totake a system-level view. 3DTV stakeholders need to consider theoverall architectural system-level view of what it will take todeploy an infrastructure that is able to reliably andcost-effectively deliver a commercial-grade quality bundle ofmultiple 3DTV content channels to paying customers with highexpectations. This text, therefore, takes such a system-level view,revealing how to actually deploy the technology. Presented in a self-contained, tutorial fashion, the book beginswith a review of 3DTV in the marketplace and the opportunities andchallenges therein. Recent industry events related to 3D are alsodiscussed. From there, the fundamental visual concepts supportingstereographic perception of 3DTV/3DV are explained, as are encodingapproaches. Readers will understand frame mastering and compressionfor conventional stereo video (CSV) and more advanced methods suchas video plus depth (V+D), multi-view video plus depth (MV+D), andlayered depth video (LDV). Next, the elements of an end-to-end 3DTV system are covered froma satellite delivery perspective, with explanations of digitalvideo broadcasting (DVB) and DVB-handheld. Transmissiontechnologies are assessed for terrestrial and IPTV-basedarchitecture; IPv6 is reviewed in detail. Finally, the bookpresents 3DTV/3DV standardization and related activities, which arecritical to any type of broad deployment. System planners, the broadcast TV industry, satellite operators,Internet service providers, terrestrial telecommunication carriers,content developers, design engineers, venture capitalists, andstudents and professors are among those stakeholders in theseservices, and who will rely on this volume to discover the latest3D advances, market opportunities, and competing technologies.

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Title Page

Copyright

Dedication

Preface

About the Author

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Overview

1.2 Background

1.3 Course of Investigation

1.4 Appendix A1: Some Recent Industry Events Related to 3DTV

Chapter 2: 3DV and 3DTV Principles

2.1 Human Visual System

2.2 3DV/3DTV Stereoscopic Principles

2.3 Autostereographic Approaches

Chapter 3: 3DTV/3DV Encoding Approaches

3.1 3D Mastering Methods

3.2 More Advanced Methods

3.3 Short-term Approach for Signal Representation and Compression

3.4 Displays

3.5 Appendix A3: Color Encoding

3.6 Appendix B3: Additional Details on Video Encoding Standards

Chapter 4: 3DTV/3DV Transmission Approaches and Satellite Delivery

4.1 Overview of Basic Transport Approaches

4.2 DVB

4.3 DVB-H

4.4 Appendix A4: Brief Overview of Mpeg Multiplexing and DVB Support

Chapter 5: 3DTV/3DV IPTV Transmission Approaches

5.1 IPTV Concepts

5.2 IPv6 Concepts

5.3 Appendix A5: IPv6 Basics

Chapter 6: 3DTV Standardization and Related Activities

6.1 Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG)

6.2 MPEG Industry Forum (MPEGIF)

6.3 Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) 3D Home Entertainment Task Force

6.4 Rapporteur Group On 3DTV of ITU-R Study Group 6

6.5 TM-3D-SM Group of Digital Video Broadcast (DVB)

6.6 Consumer Electronics Association (CEA)

6.7 HDMI Licensing, LLC

6.8 Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA)

6.9 Other Advocacy Entities

Glossary

Index

Copyright © 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved.

Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.

Published simultaneously in Canada.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, [phone], fax [phone], or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, [phone], fax [phone], or online at www.wiley.com/go/permission.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at [phone], outside the United States at [phone] or fax [phone].

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic formats. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at www.wiley.com.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data:

Minoli, Daniel, 1952-

3DTV content capture, encoding and transmission : building the transport infrastructure for commercial services / Daniel Minoli.

p. cm.

ISBN 978-0-470-64973-2 (cloth)

1. Stereoscopic television. I. Title.

TK6643.M56 2010

621.388–dc22

2010008432

For Anna, Emma, Emile, Gabby, Gino, and Angela

Preface

3 Dimensions TV (3DTV) became commercially available in the United States in 2010 and service in other countries was expected to follow soon thereafter. 3DTV is a subset of a larger discipline known as 3D Video (3DV). There are now many routine vendor announcements related to 3DTV/3DV, and there are also conferences wholly dedicated to the topic.

To highlight the commercial interest in this topic, note that ESPN announced in January 2010 that it planned to launch what would be the world's first 3D sports network with the 2010 World Cup soccer tournament in June 2010, followed by an estimated 85 live sports events during its first year of operation. DirecTV was planning to become the first company to offer satellite-based 3D as announced at the 2010 International Consumer Electronics Show. Numerous manufacturers showed 3D displays at recent consumer electronics trade shows. Several standards bodies and industry consortia are now working to support commercialization of the service. An increasing inventory of content is now also becoming available in 3D.

This text offers an overview of the content capture, encoding, and transmission technologies that have emerged of late in support of 3DTV/3DV. It focuses on building the transport infrastructure for commercial services. The book is aimed at interested planners, researchers, and engineers who wish to get an overview of the topic. Stakeholders involved with the rollout of the infrastructure include video engineers, equipment manufacturers, standardization committees, broadcasters, satellite operators, Internet Service Providers, terrestrial telecommunications carriers, storage companies, content-development entities, design engineers, planners, college professors and students, and venture capitalists.

While there is a lot of academic interest in various aspects of the overall system, service providers and the consumers ultimately tend to take a system-level view. While service providers do to an extent take a constructionist bottom-up view to deploy the technological building blocks (such as encoders, encapsulators, IRDs, and set-top boxes), 3DTV stakeholders need to consider the overall architectural system-level view of what it will take to deploy an infrastructure that is able to reliably and cost-effectively deliver a commercial-grade quality bundle of multiple 3DTV content channels to paying customers with high expectations.

This text, therefore, takes such system-level view. Fundamental visual concepts supporting stereographic perception of 3DTV are reviewed. 3DTV technology and digital video principles are discussed. Elements of an end-to-end 3DTV system are covered. Compression and transmission technologies are assessed for satellite and terrestrial (or hybrid) IPTV-based architecture. Standardization activities, critical to any sort of broad deployment, are identified.

The focus of this text is how to actually deploy the technology. There is a significant quantity of published material in the form of papers, reports, and technical specifications. This published material forms the basis for this synthesis, but the information is presented here in a self-contained, organized, tutorial fashion.

About the Author

Mr. Minoli has done extensive work in video engineering, design, and implementation over the years. The results presented in this book are based on work done while at Bellcore/Telcordia, Stevens Institute of Technology, AT&T, and other engineering firms, starting in the early 1990s and continuing to the present. Some of his video work has been documented in the books he has authored such as 3D Television (3DTV) Technology, Systems, and Deployment - Rolling out the Infrastructure for Next-Generation Entertainment (Francis and Taylor, 2010); IP Multicast with Applications to IPTV and Mobile DVB-H (Wiley/IEEE Press, 2008); Video Dialtone Technology: Digital Video over ADSL, HFC, FTTC, and ATM (McGraw-Hill, 1995); Distributed Multimedia Through Broadband Communication Services (co-authored) (Artech House, 1994); Digital Video (4 chapters) in The Telecommunications Handbook, K. Terplan & P. Morreale Editors, IEEE Press, 2000; and, Distance Learning: Technology and Applications (Artech House, 1996).

Mr. Minoli has many years of technical hands-on and managerial experience in planning, designing, deploying, and operating IP/IPv6-, telecom-, wireless-, and video networks, and data center systems and subsystems for global best-in-class carriers and financial companies. He has worked in financial firms such as AIG, Prudential Securities, Capital One Financial, and service provider firms such as Network Analysis Corporation, Bell Telephone Laboratories, ITT, Bell Communications Research (now Telcordia), AT&T, Leading Edge Networks Inc., and SES Engineering, where he is Director of Terrestrial Systems Engineering (SES is the largest satellite services company in the world). At SES, in addition to other duties, Mr. Minoli has been responsible for the development and deployment of IPTV systems, terrestrial and mobile IP-based networking services, and other global networks. He also played a founding role in the launching of two companies through the high-tech incubator Leading Edge Networks Inc., which he ran in the early 2000s: Global Wireless Services, a provider of secure broadband hotspot mobile Internet and hotspot VoIP services; and, InfoPort Communications Group, an optical and Gigabit Ethernet metropolitan carrier supporting data center/SAN/channel extension and cloud computing network access services. For several years, he has been Session, Tutorial, and now overall Technical Program Chair for the IEEE ENTNET (Enterprise Networking) conference; ENTNET focuses on enterprise networking requirements for large financial firms and other corporate institutions.

Mr. Minoli has also written columns for ComputerWorld, NetworkWorld, and Network Computing (1985–2006). He has taught at New York University (Information Technology Institute), Rutgers University, and Stevens Institute of Technology (1984–2006). Also, he was a Technology Analyst At-Large, for Gartner/DataPro (1985–2001); based on extensive hand-on work at financial firms and carriers, he tracked technologies and wrote CTO/CIO-level technical scans in the area of telephony and data systems, including topics on security, disaster recovery, network management, LANs, WANs (ATM and MPLS), wireless (LAN and public hotspot), VoIP, network design/economics, carrier networks (such as metro Ethernet and CWDM/DWDM), and e-commerce. Over the years he has advised Venture Capitals for investments of $150M in a dozen high-tech companies. He has acted as Expert Witness in a (won) $11B lawsuit regarding a VoIP-based wireless air-to-ground communication system, and has been involved as a technical expert in a number of patent infringement lawsuits (including two lawsuits on digital imaging).

Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1 Overview

Recently, there has been a lot of interest on the part of technology suppliers, broadcasters, and content providers to bring 3 Dimension Video (3DV) to the consumer. The year 2010 has been called the first year of 3D Television (3DTV) by some industry players. 3DTV is the delivery of 3DV on a TV screen, typically in the consumer's home. The initial step in this commercialization endeavor was to make 3D content available on Blu-ray Discs (BDs), for example with the release of Titanic, Terminator, and Avatar. However, well beyond that stand-alone home arrangement there has been a concerted effort to develop end-to-end systems to bring 3DTV services to the consumer, supported by regular commercial programming that is delivered and made available on a routine scheduled basis. Broadcasters such as, but not limited to, ESPN, DIRECTV, Discovery Communications, BSkyB, and British Channel 4 were planning to start 3D programming in 2010. LG, Samsung, Panasonic, Sony, JVC, Vizio, Sharp, and Mitsubishi, among others, were actively marketing high quality TV display products at press time, with some such as Samsung and Mitsubishi already shipping 3D-ready flat-panel TVs as far back as 2008. Front Projection 3D systems for medium-sized audiences (5–25 people), for example for the “prosumer,” have been available for longer; of course, movie theater systems have been around for years. The goal of the 3DTV industry is to replicate to the degree possible the experience achievable in a 3D movie theater, but in the home setting.

A commercial 3DTV system is comprised of the following functional elements: capture of 3D content, specifically moving scenes; encoding (representation) of content; content compression; content transport over satellite, cable, Internet Protocol Television (IPTV), or over-the-air channels1; and content display. Figure 1.1 depicts a logical, functional view of an end-to-end 3DTV system. Figure 1.2 depicts graphically a system architecture that may see early commercial introduction—this system is known as stereoscopic Conventional Stereo Video (CSV) or Stereoscopic 3D (S3D). Figures 1.3 and 1.4 show examples of 3D camera arrangements, while Fig. 1.5 illustrates a typical 3D display (this one using active glasses, also called eyewear). Finally, Fig. 1.6 depicts what we call a pictorialization of 3D TV screens, as may be included in vendor brochures.

Figure 1.1 Basic 3DTV system—logical view.

Figure 1.2 Basic 3DTV system—conventional stereo video.

Figure 1.3 Illustrative 2-camera rig for 3D capture.

www.inition.co.uks

Figure 1.4 Illustrative single 3D camcorder with dual lenses.

Panasonic CES 2010 Press Kit

Figure 1.5 Illustrative 3D home display. Panasonic CES 2010 Press Kit

Figure 1.6 Pictorialization of 3D home display.

LG CES 2010 Press Kit

This text offers an overview of the content capture, encoding, and transmission subelements, specifically the technologies, standards, and infrastructure required to support commercial real-time 3DTV/3DV services. It reviews the required standards and technologies that have emerged of late—or are just emerging—in support of such new services, with a focus on encoding and the build-out of the transport infrastructure. Stakeholders involved with the rollout of this infrastructure include consumer and system equipment manufacturers, broadcasters, satellite operators, terrestrial telecommunications carriers, Internet Service Providers (ISPs), storage companies, content-development entities, and standardization committees.

There is growing interest on the part of stakeholders to introduce 3DTV services, basically as a way to generate new revenues. There was major emphasis on 3DTV from manufacturers at various consumer shows taking place in the recent past. One in four consumers surveyed by the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) in a press time study indicated that they plan to buy a 3D TV set within the next three years (1). The research firm DisplaySearch has forecasted that the 3D display market will grow to $22 billion by 2018 (this represents an annual compound growth rate of about 50%2). When it comes to entertainment, especially for a compelling type of entertainment that 3D has the opportunity of being, there may well be a reasonably high take rate, especially if the price point is right for the equipment and for the service.

Classical questions that are (and/or should be) asked by stakeholders include the following:

Which competing 3D encoding and transmission technologies should an operator adopt?What technological advancements are expected in 3D, say by 2012 or 2015?Where do the greatest market opportunities exist in the 3D market?

These and similar questions are addressed in this text.

1.2 Background

This section provides an encapsulated assessment of the 3DTV industry landscape to give the reader a sense of what some of the issues are. It provides a press time snapshot of industry drivers that support the assertion just made: that there is a lot of activity in this arena at this time.

1.2.1 Adoption of 3DTV in the Marketplace

It should be noted that 3D film and 3DTV trials have a long history, as shown in Fig. 1.7 (based partially on Ref. 2). However, the technology has finally progressed enough at this juncture, for example with the deployment of digital television (DTV) and High Definition Television (HDTV), that regular commercial services will finally be introduced at this juncture.

Figure 1.7 History of 3D in film and television.

We start by noting that there are two general commercial-grade display approaches for 3DTV: (i) stereoscopic TV, which requires special glasses to watch 3D movies, and (ii) autostereoscopic TV, which displays 3D images in such a manner that the user can enjoy the viewing experience without special accessories.3

Short-term commercial 3DTV deployment, and the focus of this book, is on stereoscopic 3D imaging and movie technology. The stereoscopic approach follows the cinematic model, is simpler to implement, can be deployed more quickly (including the use of relatively simpler displays), can produce the best results in the short term, and may be cheaper in the immediate future. However, the limitations are the requisite use of accessories (glasses), somewhat limited positions of view, and physiological and/or optical limitations including possible eye strain. In summary, (i) glasses may be cumbersome and expensive (especially for a large family) and (ii) without the glasses, the 3D content is unusable.

Autostereoscopic 3DTV eliminates the use of any special accessories: it implies that the perception of 3D is in some manner automatic, and does not require devices—either filter-based glasses or shutter-based glasses. Autostereoscopic displays use additional optical elements aligned on the surface of the screen, to ensure that the observer sees different images with each eye. From a home screen hardware perspective the autostereoscopic approach is more challenging, including the need to develop relatively more complex displays; also, more complex acquisition/coding algorithms may be needed to make optimal use of the technology. It follows that this approach is more complex to implement, will require longer to be deployed, and may be more expensive in the immediate future. However, this approach can produce the best results in the long term, including accessories-free viewing, multi-view operation allowing both movement and different perspective at different viewing positions, and better physiological and/or optical response to 3D.

Table 1.1 depicts a larger set of possible 3DTV (display) systems than what we identified above. The expectation is that 3DTV based on stereoscopy will experience earlier deployment compared with other technological alternatives. Hence, this text focuses principally on stereoscopy. Holography and integral imaging are relatively newer technologies in the 3DTV context compared to stereoscopy; holographic and/or integral imaging 3DTV may be feasible late in the decade. There are a number of techniques to allow each eye to view the separate pictures, as summarized in Table 1.2 (based partially on Ref. 3.) All of these techniques work in some manner, but all have some shortcomings.

Table 1.1 Various 3D Display Approaches and Technologies

Stereoscopic 3D (S3D)A system where two photographs (or video streams) taken from slightly different angles that appear three-dimensional when viewed together; this technology is likely to see the earliest implementation using specially designed equipment displays that support polarizationAutostereoscopic3D displays that do not require glasses to see the stereoscopic image (using lenticular or parallax barrier technology). Whether stereoscopic or autostereoscopic, a 3D display (screen) needs to generate parallax that, in turn, creates a stereoscopic sense. Will find use in cell phone 3D displays in the near futureMulti-viewpoint 3D systemA system that provides a sensation of depth and motion parallax based on the position and motion of the viewer; at the display side new images are synthesized, based on the actual position of the viewerIntegral imaging (holoscopic imaging)A technique that provides autostereoscopic images with full parallax by using an array of microlenses to generate a collection of 2D elemental images; in the reconstruction/display subsystem, the set of elemental images is displayed in front of a far-end microlens arrayHolographyA technique for generating an image (hologram) that conveys a sense of depth, but is not a stereogram in the usual sense of providing fixed binocular parallax information; holograms appear to float in space and they change perspective as one walks left or right; no special viewers or glasses are necessary (note, however, that holograms are monochromatic)Volumetric systemsSystems that use geometrical principles of holography, in conjunction with other volumetric display methods. Volumetric displays form the image by projection within a volume of space without the use of a laser light reference, but have limited resolution. They are primarily targeted, at least at press time, at the Industrial, Scientific, and Medical (ISM) community

Table 1.2 Current Techniques to Allow Each Eye to View Distinct Pictures Streams

With appliances (glasses)Orthogonal polarizationUses orthogonal (different) polarization planes for each, with matching viewer glasses for each of the left and right eye pictures. Light from each picture is filtered such that only one plane for the light wave is available. This is easy to arrange in a cinema, but more difficult to arrange in a television display. Test television systems have been developed on the basis of this method, either using two projection devices projecting onto the same surface, or two displays orthogonally placed so that a combined image can be seen using a semisilvered mirror. In either case, these devices are “nonstandard” television receivers. Of the systems with glasses, this is considered the “best”Colorimetric arrangements (or anaglyth)One approach is to use different colorimetric arrangements (anaglyth) for each of the two pictures, coupled with glasses that filter appropriately. A second, is a relatively new notch filter color separation technique that can be used in projection systems (advanced by Dolby)—described later in the chapterTime multiplexing of the displaySometimes also called “interlaced stereo”, content shown with consecutive left and right signals and shuttered glasses. This technology is applicable to 3DTV. This technique is still used for movie theaters today, such as the IMAX, and sometimes used in conjunction with polarization plane separation. In a Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) environment, a major shortcoming of the interlaced stereo was image flicker, since each eye would see only 25 or 30 images per second, rather than 50 or 60. To overcome this, the display rate could be doubled to 100 or 120 Hz to allow flicker-free reception“Virtual reality” headsetTechnique using immersion headgear/glasses often used for video gamesWithout appliancesLenticularThis technique arranges for each eye's view to be directed toward separate picture elements by lenses. This is done by fronting the screen with a ribbed (lenticular) surfaceBarrierThis technique arranges for the screen to be fronted with barrier slots that perform a similar function. In this system, two views (left and right), or more than two (multi-camera 3D) can be used. However, since each of the picture elements (stripes or points) have to be laid next to each other, the number of views impacts on the resolution available. There is a trade-off between resolution and ease of viewing. Arrangements can be made with this type of system to track head or eye movements, and thus change the barrier position, giving the viewer more freedom of head movement

To highlight the commercial interest in 3DTV at press time, note that ESPN announced in January 2010 that it planned to launch what would be the world's first 3D sports network with the 2010 World Cup soccer tournament in June 2010, followed by an estimated 85 live sports events during its first year of operation. DIRECTV announced that they will start 3D programming in 2010. DIRECTV's new HD 3D channels will deliver movies, sports, and entertainment content from some of the world's most renowned 3D producers. DIRECTV is currently working with AEG/AEG Digital Media, CBS, Fox Sports/FSN, Golden Boy Promotions, HDNet, MTV, NBC Universal, and Turner Broadcasting System, Inc., to develop additional 3D programming that will debut in 2010–2011. At launch, the new DIRECTV HD 3D programming platform will offer a 24/7 3D pay per view channel focused on movies, documentaries, and other programming; a 24/7 3D DIRECTV on Demand channel; and a free 3D sampler demo channel featuring event programming such as sports, music, and other content. Comcast has announced that its VOD (Video-On-Demand) service is offering a number of movies in anaglyph 3D (as well as HD) form. Comcast customers can pick up 3D anaglyph glasses at Comcast payment centers and malls “while supplies last” (anaglyph is a basic and inexpensive method of 3D transmission that relies on inexpensive colored glasses, but its drawback is the relatively low quality.) Verizon's FiOS was expected to support 3DTV programming by Late 2010. Sky TV in the United Kingdom was planning to start broadcasting programs in 3D in the fall of 2010 on a dedicated channel that will be available to anyone who has the Sky HD package; there are currently 1.6 million customers who have a Sky HD set-top box. Sky TV has not announced what programs will be broadcast in 3D, but it is expected to broadcast live the main Sunday afternoon soccer game from the Premiership in 3D from the 2011 season, along with some arts documentaries and performances of ballet (4). Sky TV has already invested in installing special twin-lens 3D cameras at stadiums. (Appendix A1 includes a listing of events during the year, prior to the publication of this text to further document the activity in this arena.)

3DTV television displays could be purchased in the United States and United Kingdom as of the spring of 2010 for $1000–5000 initially, depending on technology and approach. Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) systems with active glasses tend to generally cost less. LG released its 3D model, a 47-in. LCD screen, expected to cost about $3000; with this system, viewers will need to wear polarized dark glasses to experience broadcasts in 3D. Samsung and Sony also announced they were bringing their own versions to market by the summer of 2010, along with 3D Blu-ray players, allowing consumers to enjoy 3D movies such as Avatar and Up, in their own homes (4). Samsung and Sony's models use LED (Light-Emitting Diode) screens which are considered to give a crisper picture and are, therefore, expected to retail for about $5000 or possibly more. While LG is adopting the use of inexpensive polarizing dark glasses, Sony and Samsung are using active shutter technology. This requires users to buy expensive dark glasses, which usually cost more than $50 and are heavier than the $2–3 plastic polarizing ones. Active shutter glasses alternately darken over one eye, and then the other, in synchronization with the refresh rate of the screen using shutters built into the glasses (using infrared or Bluetooth connections). Panasonic Corporation has developed a full HD 3D home theater system consisting of a plasma full HD 3D TVs, 3D Blu-ray player, and active shutter 3D glasses. The 3D display was originally available in 50-in., 54-in., 58-in. and 65-in. class sizes. High-end systems are also being introduced; for example Panasonic announced a 152-in. 4K × 2K (4096 × 2160 pixels)-definition full HD 3D plasma display. The display features a new Plasma Display Panel (PDP) that uses self-illuminating technology. Self-illuminating plasma panels offer excellent response to moving images with full motion picture resolution, making them suitable for rapid 3D image display (its illuminating speed is about one-fourth the speed of conventional full HD panels). Each display approach has advantages and disadvantages as shown in Table 1.3.

Table 1.3 Summary of Possible, Commercially Available TV Screen/System Choices for 3D

It is to be expected that 3DTV for home use is likely to first see penetration via stored media delivery. For content source, proponents make the case that BD “is the ideal platform” for the initial penetration of 3D technology in the mainstream market because of the high quality of pictures and sound it offers film producers. Many products are being introduced by manufacturers: for example at the 2010 Consumer Electronics Show (CES) International Trade Show, vendors introduced eight home theater product bundles (one with 3D capability), 14 new players (four with 3D capability), three portable players, and a number of software titles. In 2010 the Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) launched a new 3D Blu-ray logo to help consumers quickly discern 3D-capable Blu-ray players from 2D-only versions (Fig. 1.8) (5).

Figure 1.8 3D Blu-ray disc logo.

The BDA makes note of the strong adoption rate of the Blu-ray format. In 2009, the number of Blu-ray households increased by more than 75% over 2008 totals. After four years in the market, total Blu-ray playback devices (including both set-top players and PlayStation3 consoles) numbered 17.6 million units, and 16.2 million US homes had one or more Blu-ray playback devices. By comparison, DVD playback devices (set-tops and PlayStation2 consoles) reached 14.1 million units after four years, with 13.7 million US households having one or more playback devices. The strong performance of the BD format is due to a number of factors, including the rapid rate at which prices declined due to competitive pressures and the economy; the rapid adoption pace of HDTV sets, which has generated a US DTV household penetration rate exceeding 50%; and, a superior picture and sound experience compared to standard definition and even other HD sources. Another factor in the successful adoption pace has been the willingness of movie studios to discount popular BD titles (5). Blu-ray software unit sales in 2009 reached 48 million, compared with 22.5 million in 2008, up by 113.4%. A number of movie classics were available at press time through leading retailers at sale prices as low as $10.

The BDA also announced (at the end of 2009) the finalization and release of the Blu-ray 3D specification. These BD specifications for 3D allow for full HD 1080p resolution to each eye. The specifications are display agnostic, meaning they apply equally to plasma, LCD, projector, and other display formats regardless of the 3D systems those devices use to present 3D to viewers. The specifications also allow the PlayStation3 gaming console to play back 3D content. The specifications that represent the work of the leading Hollywood studios and consumer electronic and computer manufacturers, will enable the home entertainment industry to bring stereoscopic 3D experience into consumers' living rooms on BD, but will require consumers to acquire new players, HDTVs, and shutter glasses. The specifications allow studios (but do not require them) to package 3D Blu-ray titles with 2D versions of the same content on the same disc. The specifications also support playback of 2D discs in forthcoming 3D players and can enable 2D playback of Blu-ray 3D discs on an installed base of BD. The Blu-ray 3D specification encodes 3D video using the Multi-View Video Coding (MVC) codec, an extension to the ITU-T H.264 Advanced Video Coding (AVC) codec currently supported by all BD players. MPEG-4 (Moving Picture Experts Group 4)-MVC compresses both left and right eye views with a typical 50% overhead compared to equivalent 2D content, according to BDA and can provide full 1080p resolution backward compatibility with current 2D BD players (6).

The broadcast commercial delivery of 3DTV on a large scale—whether over satellite/Direct-To-Home (DTH), over the air, over cable systems, or via IPTV—may take some number of years because of the relatively large-scale infrastructure that has to be put in place by the service providers and the limited availability of 3D-ready TV sets in the home (implying a small subscriber, and so small revenue base). A handful of providers were active at press time, as described earlier, but general deployment by multiple providers serving a geographic market will come at a future time. Delivery of downloadable 3DTV files over the Internet may occur at any point in the immediate future, but the provision of a broadcast-quality service over the Internet is not likely for the foreseeable future.

At the transport level, 3DTV will require more bandwidth of regular programming, perhaps even twice the bandwidth in some implementations (e.g., simulcasting—the transmission of two fully independent channels4); some newer schemes such as “video + depth” may require only 25% more bandwidth compared to 2D, but these schemes are not the leading candidate technologies for actual deployment in the next 2–3 years. Other interleaving approaches use the same bandwidth of a channel now in use, but at a compromise in resolution. Therefore, in principle, if HDTV programming is broadcast at high quality, say, 12–15 Mbps using MPEG-4 encoding, 3DTV using the simplest methods of two independent streams will require 24–30 Mbps.5 This data rate does not fit a standard over-the-air digital TV (DTV) channel of 19.2 Mbps, and will also be a challenge for non-Fiber-To-The-Home (non-FTTH) broadband Internet connections. However, one expects to see the emergence of bandwidth reduction techniques, as alluded to above. On the other hand, DTH satellite providers, terrestrial fiberoptic providers, and some cable TV firms should have adequate bandwidth to support the service. For example, the use of the Digital Video Broadcast Satellite Second Generation (DVB-S2) allows a transponder to carry 75 Mbps of content with modulation using an 8-point constellation and twice that much with a 16-point constellation. The trade-off would be, however (if we use the raw HD bandwidth just described as a point of reference), that a DVB-S2 transponder that would otherwise carry 25 channels of standard definition video or 6–8 channels of HD video would now only carry 2–3 3DTV channels. To be pragmatic about this issue, most 3DTV providers are not contemplating delivering full resolution as just described and/or the transmission of two fully independent channels (simulcasting), but some compromise; for example, lowering the per eye data rate such that a 3DTV program fits into a commercial-grade HDTV channel (say 8–10 Mbps), using time interleaving or spatial compression—again, this is doable but comes with the degradation of ultimate resolution quality.

There are a number of alternative transport architectures for 3DTV signals, also depending on the underlying media. As noted, the service can be supported by traditional broadcast structures including the DVB architecture, wireless 3G/4G transmission such as DVB-H approaches, Internet Protocol (IP) in support of an IPTV-based service (in which case it also makes sense to consider IPv6) and the IP architecture for internet-based delivery (both non–real time and streaming). The specific approach used by each of these transport methods will also depend on the video-capture approach. One should note that in the United States, one has a well-developed cable infrastructure in all Tier 1 and Tier 2 metropolitan and suburban areas; in Europe/Asia, this is less so, with more DTH delivery (in the United States DTH tends to serve more exurban and rural areas). A 3DTV rollout must take these differences into account and/or accommodate both. In reference to possible cable TV delivery, CableLabs announced at press time that it started to provide testing capabilities for 3D TV implementation scenarios over cable; these testing capabilities cover a full range of technologies including various frame-compatible, spatial multiplexing solutions for transmission (7).

Standards are critical to achieving interworking and are of great value to both consumers and service providers. The MPEG of the International Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission (ISO/IEC) has been working on coding formats for 3D video (and has already completed some of them.) The Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) 3D Home Entertainment Task Force has been working on mastering standards. The Rapporteur Group on 3DTV of the International Telecommunications Union-Radiocommunications Sector (ITU-R) Study Group 6, and the TM-3D-SM group of DVB were working on transport standards.

1.2.2 Opportunities and Challenges for 3DTV

The previous section highlighted that many of the components needed to support an end-to-end commercial broadcast service are available or are becoming available. Hence, proponents see a significant market opportunity at this time. CEA estimates that more than 25% of sets sold in 2013 will be 3D-enabled. A handful of representative quotes from proponents of the 3D technology are as follows:

No one can escape the buzz and excitement around 3D. We're witnessing the start of dramatic change in how we view TV—the dawn of a new dimension. And through Sky's clear commitment to 3D broadcasting, 3D in the home is set to become a reality…(4).

…The next killer application for the home entertainment industry—3DTV… [It] will drive new revenue opportunities for content creators and distributors by enabling 3D feature films and other programming to be played on their home television and computer displays—regardless of delivery channels…(8).

…The most buzzed about topics at CES: 3-D stereoscopic content creation…Several pivotal announcements [in] 2010 including 3D-TV releases from the major consumer electronics manufacturers and the launch of several dedicated 3D broadcast channels are driving the rapid increase in demand for 3-D content …(9).

3D technology is now positioned “to become a major force in future in-home entertainment.”(10).

…3DTV is one of the ‘hottest’ subjects today in broadcasting. The combination of the audience's‘wow’ factor and the potential to launch completely new services, makes it an attractive subject for both consumer and professional. There have already been broadcasts of a conventional display-compatible system, and the first HDTV channel compatible broadcasts are scheduled to start in Europe in the Spring of 2010…(11).

…In Europe, the EC is currently funding a large series of projects for 3DTV, including multiview, mobile 3D and 3D search…(12).

Naturally, while there are proponents of the 3DTV technology, at the same time, there are industry observers that take a more conservative view. These observers make note that there are uncertainties about the availability of content, the technological readiness, and acceptance in the living room, especially given the requirement to use polarized or shutter glasses. A rational approach to market penetration is certainly in order; also, the powerful tool of statistically valid market research can be used to truly measure user interest and willingness to pay. Some representative quotes for a more conservative view of the 3D technology are given below:

…In a wide range of demos, companies … claim … in January 2010 that stereoscopic 3D is ready for the home. In fact, engineers face plenty of work hammering out the standards and silicon for 3DTV products, most of which will ship for the holiday 2010 season…(13).

It has proven somewhat difficult to create a 3D system that does not cause ‘eye fatigue’ after a certain time. Most current-generation higher resolution systems also need special eyeglasses which can be inconvenient. Apart from eye-fatigue, systems developed so far can also have limitations such as constrained viewing positions. Multiple viewpoint television systems are intended to alleviate this. Stereoscopic systems also allow only limited ‘production grammar’ … One should not underestimate the difficulty, or the imagination and creativity required, to create a near ‘ideal’ 3DTV system that the public could enjoy in a relaxed way, and for a long period of time…(14).

…The production process for 3D television requires a fundamental rethinking of the underlying technology. Scenes have to be recorded with multiple imaging devices that may be augmented with additional sensor technology to capture the three-dimensional nature of real scenes. In addition, the data format used in 3D television is a lot more complex. Rather than normal video streams, time-varying computational models of the recorded scenes are required that comprise of descriptions of the scenes' shape, motion, and multiview appearance. The reconstruction of these models from the multiview sensor data is one of the major challenges that we face today. Finally, the captured scene descriptions have to be shown to the viewer in three-dimensions which requires completely new display technology…(15).

…The conventional stereoscopic concept entails with two views: it relies on the basic concept of an end-to-end stereoscopic video chain, that is, on the capturing, transmission and display of two separate video streams, one for the left and one for the right eye. [Advocates for the autostereoscopic approach argue that] this conventional approach is not sufficient for future 3DTV services. The objective of 3DTV is to bring 3D imaging to users at home. Thus, like conventional stereo production and 3D Cinema, 3DTV is based on the idea of providing a viewer with two individual perspective views—one for the left eye and one for the right eye. The difference in approaches, however, lies in the environment in which the 3D content is presented. While it seems to be acceptable for a user to wear special glasses in the darkened theatrical auditorium of a 3D Digital Cinema, [many, perhaps] most people would refuse to wear such devices at home in the communicative atmosphere of their living rooms. Basically, auto-stereoscopic 3D displays are better suited for these kinds of applications (16).

…The two greatest industry-wide concerns [are]: (1.) That poor quality stereoscopic TV will‘poison the water’ for everyone. Stereoscopic content that is poorly realized in grammar or technology will create a reputation of eyestrain which cannot be shaken off. This has happened before in the 30s, the 50s, and the 80s in the cinema. (2.) That fragmentation of technical standards will split and confuse the market, and prevent stereoscopic television from ever being successful…(17).

…people may quickly tire of the novelty. I think it will be a gimmick. I suspect there will be a lot of people who say it's sort of neat, but it's not really comfortable…(18).

The challenge for the stakeholder is to determine where the “true” situation is, whether it is at one extreme, at the other extreme, or somewhere in the middle. An abbreviated list of issues to be resolved in order to facilitate broad deployment of 3DTV services, beyond pure technology and encoding issues, include the following (19):

Production grammar (3D production for television still in infancy)Compatibility of systems (also possibly different issues for pay TV and free-to-air operators)Assessment of quality/suitability Methodologies for the quality assessment of 3D TV systems;Parameters that need to be measured that are specific to 3D TV;Sensation of reality;Ease of viewing.Understanding what the user requirements are.

In general, a technology introduction process spans three phases:

Phase 1: The technology becomes available in basic form to support a given service;Phase 2: A full panoply of standards emerges to support widespread deployment of the technology;Phase 3: The technology becomes inexpensive enough to foster large-scale adoption by a large set of end-users.

With reference to 3DTV, we find ourselves at some early point in Phase 1. However, there are several retarding factors that could hold back short-term deployment of the technology on a broad scale, including deployment and service cost (overall status of the economy), standards, content, and quality.

The previous assertion can be further elaborated as follows: ITU-R WP 6C classifies 3D TV systems into two groups. The “first generation” systems are essentially those based on “Plano-stereoscopic” display of single or multiple discrete lateral left and right eye pictures. Recommendations for such systems should be possible in the near future. The “second generation” systems are those which are based on object-wave recording (holography) or approximations of object-wave recording. Recommendations for such systems may be possible in the years ahead. We refine these observations by defining the following generations of 3DTV technology:

Generation 0: Anaglyth TV transmission;Generation 1: 3DTV that supports plano-stereoscopic displays, which are stereoscopic (that is, require active or passive glasses);Generation 2: 3DTV that supports plano-stereoscopic displays, which are autostereoscopic (do not require glasses);Generation 2.5: 3DTV that supports plano-stereoscopic displays, which are autostereoscopic (do not require glasses) and support multiple (N=9) views;Generation 3: 3DTV that supports integral imaging, transmission, and displays;Generation 4: 3DTV that supports volumetric displays, transmission, and displays;Generation 5: 3DTV that supports object-wave transmission.

See Figs. 1.9 and 1.10 (partially based on Ref. 2). Whether and when we get beyond Generation 2.5 in this decade remains to be seen. This text, and the current commercial industry efforts concentrate on Generation 1 services. At press time, we find ourselves in Phase 1 of Generation 1. The existing commercial video infrastructure can handle 3D video in a basic, developmental form; however, providing HD 3D with motion graphics is not achievable without making enhancements to such infrastructure. Existing infrastructures, including satellite and/or terrestrial distribution networks for example, can handle what some have termed “half-HD resolution” per eye, or frame formats of 1080i, 1080p24, and 1080i60. Existing encoders and set-top boxes can be used as long as signaling issues are addressed and 3D content is of a consistent form. The drawback of half-HD resolution is that images can be blurry, especially for sporting events and high-action movies (20). New set-top chip sets are required for higher resolution 3DTV.

Figure 1.9 Three epochs of 3DTV commercial deployment.

Figure 1.10 A 30-year timeline for 3DTV services (1995–2025).

1.3 Course of Investigation

While there is a lot of academic interest in various aspects of the overall system, service providers and the consumers ultimately tend to take a system-level view. While service providers do, to an extent, take a constructionist bottom-up view to deploy the technological building blocks (such as encoders, encapsulators, IRDs [Integrated Receiver/Decoders], set-top boxes, and so on), 3DTV stakeholders need to consider the overall architectural system-level view of what it will take to deploy an infrastructure that is able to reliably and cost-effectively deliver a commercial-grade quality bundle of multiple 3DTV content channels to paying customers with high expectations. This text, therefore, takes such a system-level view, namely how to actually deploy the technology. Figure 1.11 depicts the 3DTV distribution ecosystem that this text addresses.

Figure 1.11 A system view of a fully developed 3DTV distribution ecosystem.