[Press Release]

TCO Development, the company behind the usability and eco label for ICT products, has released the results of a study to compare the visual experience of active shutter eye-glasses or passive FPR (film pattern retarder) eye-glasses technology for viewing 3DTV. The study confirms that the two techniques differ in visual performance characteristics that affect the overall 3D experience.

[Download the full 8 page report pdf here:  http://tcodevelopment.com/tcodevelopmentnew/Artiklar/TCO_3DTV_ver_13.pdf ]

3D functionality is becoming more common in computer displays, projectors, notebooks and TVs. The growing trend towards 3D display devices for consumers will likely extend to the workplace as well. Within the display industry the merits of active vs passive glasses has been hotly debated for some time. As an independent certification body for displays, TCO Development is in a unique position to evaluate each of these technologies from the viewpoint of the user experience.

The major findings from the study include:

1. Angular dependent cross-talk
The cross-talk (also known as “image ghosting” or “image doubling”) was measured since it refers to the incomplete isolation of the left and right image channels so that one leaks or bleeds into the other when the screen is viewed from different angles. Measurements were taken up to ±30° in both horizontal and vertical directions.

Cross-talk values for the horizontal direction are low for both types of glasses. However in the vertical direction the passive glasses had higher cross talk values when tilted above ±15°. For a 3DTV that is placed at the correct height or tilted towards the viewer it is unlikely that the viewing angle will be larger than ±15° in the vertical direction. A conclusion however, is that a tilting function and correct placement are more important for a passive eye-glass 3DTV. Keep this in mind as some wall mounts may have limited tilting functionality.

2. Luminance
The centre luminance of white is about 3 times lower on an active eye-glass 3DTV compared to the passive eye-glass 3DTV due to the different transmittance of the eye-glasses. When wearing the eye-glasses the viewer will adapt to the average luminance, which means that the big difference in luminance will not be perceived by the viewer in the same degree. However, higher luminance is considered advantageous for the image quality, but other parameters are also important, e.g. black level, resolution and crosstalk, for the experienced quality of the viewer. This is true for both types of glasses but the active ones are darker than the passive ones.

3. Measured resolution through each eye-glass in 3D mode 
The passive eye-glass 3DTV must sacrifice vertical resolution in order to show the images for each eye with different polarization. A passive eye-glass 3DTV with (1920 x 1080) will thus only have a measured resolution in 3D-mode of (1920 x 540) for each eye where an active eye-glass type 3DTV will have (1920 x 1080) for each eye.

Studies suggest that images with the same resolution are perceived in more detail in 3D than in 2D. This means that the perceived detail of watching both (passive 1920 x 540) and (active 1920 x 1080) in 3D will be slightly higher than watching of each eye (passive 1920 x 540) and (active 1920 x 1080).

Niclas Rydell, Product and Certification Director at TCO Development, commented on the study findings: “As a certification body with a long history in the field of visual ergonomics for displays, it is important for TCO Development to evaluate the visual ergonomics of these new technologies and to assess any possible impacts on the user experience. TCO Development will further investigate the need of a TCO Certification for 3D”.

For the full details of the findings see the report: TCO Development 3DTV Study

Health aspects of 3D
Viewing artificial 3D is known to cause discomfort for some viewers. This makes it a very interesting area to investigate for TCO Development. However in this first study about 3D no conclusions to the human health have been investigated.

Contact: 
Niclas Rydell, Product and Certification Director, 
e-mail: niclas.rydell@tcodevelopment.com, phone: +46 8 782 92 71

(2011-05-02)

See the original post here: http://www.tcodevelopment.com/

[By ELSA KESLASSY, Variety]

Coming off a post-recession year, Cannes Market is experiencing a boom in participation and screenings.

Even with a skyrocketing euro — which was trading at $1.44 in mid-April against the dollar — more marketgoers will head to Cannes this year, says market topper Jerome Paillard, who points to a 10% increase in registered attendees compared with 2010 at the same period.

As of April 14, some 7,800 participants and 3,400 companies were registered from 50 countries.

“We’re slightly up on 2008, and we noted that more companies are attending, but outfits are not sending more staff than last year,” says Paillard.

The breakdown in participation is nearly identical to last year. U.S. industryites make up 15% of all marketgoers, France represents 16% and the U.K. represents 11%. Other European countries represent more than one-third of attendees.

The mart, which is making more strides in programming initiatives targeting independent producers, is launching the Producers Workshop, designed to school 180 producers on the ins and outs of Cannes’ film market, and train those who are making their first steps on the international scene. The program will complement the Short Film Corner and the Producers Network, which have become staple business-to-business services.

“Last year we had to turn down people who didn’t have the required experience to participate in the Producers’ Network and we realized there was a big demand for an event which could welcome emerging producers,” explains Paillard.

Kicking off on May 12, the Producers Workshop will host a series of panels and seminars hosted by film professionals. The event will cover international sales, distribution models, talent and agents, among other topics.

Paillard points out that the market’s strategy is to strengthen its matchmaking role and provide producers with more co-production and networking opportunities.

“Distribution models are constantly evolving, but one thing that’s not going to change is the producer’s role,” says Paillard. “Producers will always need to look for mixed-financing options, and be as creative as possible in drawing funds from wherever they can: Co-producers, regional funds, subsidies, tax rebates, soft money, etc.”

For the second year, sales agents and buyers will have access to a catch-up streaming service on Cinando, the confab’s web database.

The service allows participants to watch films after the market ends.

Paillard says sales agents have already submitted more than 1,000 films. With some 50 stereoscopic 3D screenings confirmed as of April 13 (50% up on 2010), the market will boast 14 3D-equipped screens — four more than last year — out of a total 34 screens.

Market unspoolings are also on the rise. As of April 13, 1,300 screenings were confirmed and more than a hundred pending.

“We’re being flooded with demands and it’s proving difficult for us to answer them all,” Paillard says. “I don’t think the market can absorb that much content, but this volume increase is certainly a sign of vitality.”

Another sign of the film market’s recovery is the abundance of sales and distribution outfits being launched, he says.

“I’m amazed to see more and more producers doing distribution, or distributors getting into international sales; and they often thrive by focusing on a niche, maintaining low operating costs and limiting their expenses — they’ll come to Cannes even if they don’t have a stand.”

See the original post here: http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118035846