Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

Should DirecTv Lessen the EDID Restrictions for Watching 3D Content?


  • Please log in to reply
232 replies to this topic

Poll: Should DirecTv Lessen the EDID Restrictions for Watching 3D Content? (143 member(s) have cast votes)

Should DirecTv Lessen the EDID Restrictions for Watching 3D Content?

  1. Yes, DirecTv should lessen the EDID restrictions for watching 3D content. (115 votes [80.42%])

    Percentage of vote: 80.42%

  2. No, the EDID restrictions imposed by DirecTv for watching 3D content is good. (28 votes [19.58%])

    Percentage of vote: 19.58%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41 OFFLINE   DarinC

DarinC

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,183 posts
Joined: Aug 31, 2004

Posted 03 August 2010 - 08:10 AM

DirecTV uses EDID & VSI because that's what the spec calls for and not because the are imposing some restriction of their own.


I agree, and disagree. EDID is part of the 1.4 spec, but there's nothing in the spec about maintaining a separate manually updated white list.

VSI is a valid point. For those of us where the issue is due to including HDMI 1.3 components in the signal chain (an existing HDMI 1.3 receiver), VSI will cause a problem, because it can't reply that it's 3d capable (because technically, it's not. So I do understand your point about DirecTV just following the spec.

This simply comes down to whether DirecTV chooses to be customer friendly, or not. Following the hard line of the spec in itself suggests that you have to replace all the components in the signal chain to 1.4. But the fact remains that those formats used in broadcast 3d will work with 1.3 components just fine, as long as the TV (or an adapter connected to the TV) can understand the signal. It seems that all the other hardware makes understand this, and give the consumer an option to output the 3d signal anyway. It appears that DirecTV isn't as interested in the customer's needs as others may be. I STILL fail to see the downside to allowing a 3d signal even if their hardware can't confirm if the end device is 3d capable or not. If DirecTV is so interested in "going by the book", why didn't they do that with 24p? EDID info also contains valid timings for the display. Why rely on the customer to say "yes I can / no I can't view that format"?
Friends don't let friends buy PPV.

...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#42 OFFLINE   hdtvfan0001

hdtvfan0001

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 31,614 posts
Joined: Jul 28, 2004

Posted 03 August 2010 - 08:15 AM

No, I'm quite certain they are just as aware of the 3d formats that are already defined in the HDMI 1.4a spec as I am.

...and those in the know also realize that the HDMI 1.4a "standard" just came out recently, and hasn't been adopted in most equipment yet....its too new. Only very new hardware supports it. :rolleyes:

Again, please try to stay on topic. This has nothing to do with 3d formats, nor the various methods different TVs use to create a 3d image.

Just because you don't understand it - that there are various methods 3D HDTV's used to support watching a 3D channel - doesn't make it "off topic". :rolleyes:

The fact that Mits DLP and Panny plasma TVs work differently is moot.

Really? :lol: Tell that to the thousands of folks who bought them and can't get them to function without adapters, firmware updates, or other modifications. (I'm not one of them incidently).

First you insist on standards, then in that latest statement you don't care if they are applied. You continue to contradict yourself.

They BOTH accept the same standard formats defined in the HDMI spec. The fact that older Mits TVs require an adapter for those formats is moot. The adapter accepts the same formats defined in the spec and used by DirecTV. The topic of this thread is about DirecTV's use of an EDID "white list". That is NOT part of the spec.

Apparently you just don't get it that the HDMI 1.4a spec is just one part of the capability to view 3D HD.

You also refuse to accept the fact that most hardware out there today doesn't support HDMI 1.4a. It's only out there since earlier in 2010. You must not also be aware that the DirecTV 3D HD channels function today without HDMI v1.4a....since all HR21 and newer HD DVRs can successfully be used for 3D HD viewing with DirecTV. Those feature ONLY earlier versions of HDMI connections, further demonstrating that HDMI 1.4a is NOT the Holy Grail "requirement" as you seem to insist.

It is clear you did not carefully read the 4 links provided on the topic, as those clearly demonstrate standards are neither well established nor industry adopted on any form of wide-spread basis.

Yet a number of folks already use DirecTV 3D HD (without HDMI 1.4a).

Therefore ON TOPIC and to the OP and POLL...relaxing the EDID restrictions is nothing more than a bandaid attempt to assist in adapting other inadaquate hardware - caused mostly by the slow rollout for and basic lack of 3D HD standards as a whole.

It's all new technology....and until true "standards are defined, accepted, and deployed in all equipment....the early adopter issues some have reported will continue.
DBSTalk CHAT ROOM MODERATOR
DirecTV Customer Since 1996

#43 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,596 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 03 August 2010 - 08:22 AM

I agree, and disagree. EDID is part of the 1.4 spec, but there's nothing in the spec about maintaining a separate manually updated white list.

VSI is a valid point. For those of us where the issue is due to including HDMI 1.3 components in the signal chain (an existing HDMI 1.3 receiver), VSI will cause a problem, because it can't reply that it's 3d capable (because technically, it's not. So I do understand your point about DirecTV just following the spec.

This simply comes down to whether DirecTV chooses to be customer friendly, or not. Following the hard line of the spec in itself suggests that you have to replace all the components in the signal chain to 1.4. But the fact remains that those formats used in broadcast 3d will work with 1.3 components just fine, as long as the TV (or an adapter connected to the TV) can understand the signal. It seems that all the other hardware makes understand this, and give the consumer an option to output the 3d signal anyway. It appears that DirecTV isn't as interested in the customer's needs as others may be. I STILL fail to see the downside to allowing a 3d signal even if their hardware can't confirm if the end device is 3d capable or not. If DirecTV is so interested in "going by the book", why didn't they do that with 24p? EDID info also contains valid timings for the display. Why rely on the customer to say "yes I can / no I can't view that format"?


Ding, ding, ding! There we have it. The issue is DirecTV restrictions rather than component limitations. DirecTV should allow for more leeway in such a diverse and new technology. Your DirecTV receiver doesn't believe that you have fully capable 3D ready display? That's fine, but the customer should have the option of acknowledging that suggestion and attempting to display it anyway. If it works, great! If it doesn't...no harm done.

The Samsung 3D DLP's are just as capable as the Mitsubishi 3D DLP's. DirecTV could easily make this experience more customer friendly and I hope that they will at some point.
DTV = Digital Television

#44 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,596 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 03 August 2010 - 08:24 AM

True HDMI 1.4 is not required for 3D. See the Sony PS3 as an example. Those most necessary and currently needed features of 1.4 are available via 1.3.
DTV = Digital Television

#45 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,596 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 03 August 2010 - 08:27 AM

BTW, I voted No but what I really mean is...

No, DirecTV is just following the current HDMI 1.4a standards for 3D Television as should everyone else

:grin:

Mike


Yet they use receivers with HDMI 1.3...
DTV = Digital Television

#46 OFFLINE   Doug Brott

Doug Brott

    Lifetime Achiever

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 28,912 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles
Joined: Jul 12, 2006

Posted 03 August 2010 - 08:35 AM

VSI is a valid point. For those of us where the issue is due to including HDMI 1.3 components in the signal chain (an existing HDMI 1.3 receiver), VSI will cause a problem, because it can't reply that it's 3d capable (because technically, it's not. So I do understand your point about DirecTV just following the spec.


I'm pretty sure that this is the root of all of the problems and that it has little if anything to do with EDID.
DIRECTV Firmware Monitor - iPhone - Android - HTML5

DIRECTV employee since August 2011.
All comments are my own. Unless specifically stated, my views do NOT represent the views of DIRECTV

#47 OFFLINE   hdtvfan0001

hdtvfan0001

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 31,614 posts
Joined: Jul 28, 2004

Posted 03 August 2010 - 08:38 AM

Yet they use receivers with HDMI 1.3...

Yup....supporting wider adoption and more "customer friendly" by eliminating a complete equipment refresh.
DBSTalk CHAT ROOM MODERATOR
DirecTV Customer Since 1996

#48 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,596 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 03 August 2010 - 08:45 AM

Needless to say, the adoption and push for 3D has not been handled in as organized or smooth a manner as possible. That goes for just about every company involved. One and only one standard and delivery method should have been adopted before equipment was being marketed and sold. Support should have been built in for new equipment, equipment in the near future, and legacy support for perfectly capable Mitsubishi and Samsung DLP from the last couple of years. Countless companies (including Mitsubishi and Samsung) ran with and/or dropped their own ball. It will take a long time to sort out and if 3D fails entirely, that may be one of the reasons why.

I simply wish that DirecTV would have taken the same approach as Panasonic did with their 3D BD players...allow for both side by side and checkerboard formats.
DTV = Digital Television

#49 OFFLINE   hdtvfan0001

hdtvfan0001

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 31,614 posts
Joined: Jul 28, 2004

Posted 03 August 2010 - 08:58 AM

Needless to say, the adoption and push for 3D has not been handled in as organized or smooth a manner as possible. That goes for just about every company involved. One and only one standard and delivery method should have been adopted before equipment was being marketed and sold. Support should have been built in for new equipment, equipment in the near future, and legacy support for perfectly capable Mitsubishi and Samsung DLP from the last couple of years. Countless companies (including Mitsubishi and Samsung) ran with and/or dropped their own ball. It will take a long time to sort out and if 3D fails entirely, that may be one of the reasons why.

I simply wish that DirecTV would have taken the same approach as Panasonic did with their 3D BD players...allow for both side by side and checkerboard formats.

I'd say I'd have to agree with ALL your points....that last one was likely an issue of timing and having to make a go/no go choice at the time the settled on their launch plans.
DBSTalk CHAT ROOM MODERATOR
DirecTV Customer Since 1996

#50 OFFLINE   Doug Brott

Doug Brott

    Lifetime Achiever

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 28,912 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles
Joined: Jul 12, 2006

Posted 03 August 2010 - 09:05 AM

In a perfect world, there should be one standard, yes. However, getting all of the Industry big-wigs together to come up with a standard clearly wasn't a priority. Everyone wanted to be first so that their "standard" would win. These sorts of fights have been happening forever. I wonder how many early adopters were angered over VHS beating Beta, Blu-Ray beating HD-DVD. This is nothing new, just a fight to get your product out first and then a realization that interoperability is important to the consumer.

It's early still and unfortunately early adopter headaches enter the picture. I'm probably 4-5 years out from getting my first 3DTV and today's glitches will be long gone at that point with all sorts of new glitches being introduced into the system.
DIRECTV Firmware Monitor - iPhone - Android - HTML5

DIRECTV employee since August 2011.
All comments are my own. Unless specifically stated, my views do NOT represent the views of DIRECTV

#51 OFFLINE   DarinC

DarinC

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,183 posts
Joined: Aug 31, 2004

Posted 03 August 2010 - 09:07 AM

Just because you don't understand it - that there are various methods 3D HDTV's used to support watching a 3D channel - doesn't make it "off topic". :rolleyes:

I apparently at least understand it better than you. If you care to discuss it in a separate thread about the topic, perhaps I can enlighten you. Again, HOW a TV creates a 3d image is COMPLETELY off topic to this thread. A DLP and an LCD create images in very different ways. But if they can both accept a 1080p/24 signal, how it gets from the DVR to the TV is exactly the same.

Really? :lol: Tell that to the thousands of folks who bought them and can't get them to function without adapters, firmware updates, or other modifications. (I'm not one of them incidently).

Again, completely off-topic. I've created a separate thread in an appropriate forum if you'd like to continue this.

Apparently you just don't get it that the HDMI 1.4a spec is just one part of the capability to view 3D HD.

And the ONLY part that is relevant to getting the signal from the DVR to the display.

You also refuse to accept the fact that most hardware out there today doesn't support HDMI 1.4a. It's only out there since earlier in 2010.

Apparently you haven't read all my posts.

You must not also be aware that the DirecTV 3D HD channels function today without HDMI v1.4a....since all HR21 and newer HD DVRs can successfully be used for 3D HD viewing with DirecTV.

Yet they are using the 1.4 spec to define how 3d signals are communicated over HDMI.

Those feature ONLY earlier versions of HDMI connections, further demonstrating that HDMI 1.4a is NOT the Holy Grail "requirement" as you seem to insist.

Again, you aren't reading my posts. I am ALL FOR allowing the signal to transmit over a 1.3 connection. But Doug's post suggested that it's the requirement of VSI that is the reason they aren't allowing 3d over 1.3 devices. VSI is part of 1.4a.

Therefore ON TOPIC and to the OP and POLL...relaxing the EDID restrictions is nothing more than a bandaid attempt to assist in adapting other inadaquate hardware

Just to be clear, the EDID restrictions are a DirecTV thing, not something others are doing. It would be more correct to call the EDID white list a bandaid, rather than removing it being a bandaid. I fail to see how you can consider hardware "inadequate" when we are talking about allowing legit 3d capable displays to receive the 3d signal.
Friends don't let friends buy PPV.

#52 OFFLINE   DarinC

DarinC

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,183 posts
Joined: Aug 31, 2004

Posted 03 August 2010 - 09:11 AM

Yup....supporting wider adoption and more "customer friendly" by eliminating a complete equipment refresh.

So in other words, they don't want to have to upgrade THEIR hardware when they know perfectly well that for the types of signals they are dealing with, 1.3 is perfectly capable. But when it comes to OUR hardware, we need to be fully 1.4 compliant throughout the chain, or they won't turn on the signal. :rolleyes:
Friends don't let friends buy PPV.

#53 OFFLINE   DarinC

DarinC

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,183 posts
Joined: Aug 31, 2004

Posted 03 August 2010 - 09:16 AM

I simply wish that DirecTV would have taken the same approach as Panasonic did with their 3D BD players...allow for both side by side and checkerboard formats.


Honestly, I can understand them not supporting checkerboard. Checkerboard has not won adoption. Besides, I doubt the hardware is powerful enough to convert from one to another, and if they have to choose a format to encode in, it makes sense to use the formats that are already being adopted by the industry.

But again, regardless of what format they choose, it's moot if they won't even allow the output to be enabled.
Friends don't let friends buy PPV.

#54 ONLINE   Mike Bertelson

Mike Bertelson

    6EQUJ5 WOW!

  • Moderators
  • 13,824 posts
Joined: Jan 24, 2007

Posted 03 August 2010 - 09:44 AM

EDID & VSI are apparently an issue for equipment that hasn’t implemented all of the 3D portion of the HDMI 1.4a standards.

What’s the harm in giving the user the option of allowing the 3D signal to pass or eliminating EDID & VSI?

IIUC, this would require a rewrite of the current firmware to allow the user more options...which probably requires rewriting of a substantial portion of the modules that handle 3D.

What about other parts of the 3D portion of the HDMI 1.4a standards that could affect our ability to view 3D content? Who is going to scrub the current standards and the coming updates to make sure they don’t implement anything that affects our 3D watching?

It doesn’t really seem that easy to do. How does anyone decide which parts of the standards to implement, which to ignore, and which to give the viewer the option to ignore?

I think the harm lies in all the new coding of the 3D modules in the firmware that would be required to accomplish any of this.

I don’t think DirecTV has imposed anything on us. Further, I don’t think DirecTV should lessen the requirements just because other manufactures are not implementing the same standards.

Not to mention that these standards are in their infancy. IMHO, if DirecTV follows the standards as they’re currently written, then they’ll have a leg up when those standards become more cohesive.

Not to mention, again, that Hitachi, Panasonic, Philips, Silicon Image, Sony, Technicolor, and Toshiba are all onboard with this implementation (see the cover page & credits for the link in my previous post) as laid out in the HDMI 1.4a specification.

All of this to say that I believe that EDID & VSI shouldn’t be removed/ignored until the standards becomes more solidified. IMO, until then they should stick to the specs as they’re laid out.

My 2¢ FWIW. :grin:

Mike

µß
Since it costs 2.4¢ to produce a penny, my 2¢ worth is really 4.8¢ worth.  That 4.8¢ is my own and not the 4.8¢ of DIRECTV, Dish, or anyone else for that matter.


#55 OFFLINE   hdtvfan0001

hdtvfan0001

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 31,614 posts
Joined: Jul 28, 2004

Posted 03 August 2010 - 09:59 AM

So in other words, they don't want to have to upgrade THEIR hardware when they know perfectly well that for the types of signals they are dealing with, 1.3 is perfectly capable. But when it comes to OUR hardware, we need to be fully 1.4 compliant throughout the chain, or they won't turn on the signal. :rolleyes:

Other than you in that post, nobody said that. :rolleyes:

Yes....they chose to promote and delivery 3D HD based on their existing equipment (which by the way in NOT HDM1.3 either). That required the least change to the end user period.
DBSTalk CHAT ROOM MODERATOR
DirecTV Customer Since 1996

#56 ONLINE   Mike Bertelson

Mike Bertelson

    6EQUJ5 WOW!

  • Moderators
  • 13,824 posts
Joined: Jan 24, 2007

Posted 03 August 2010 - 10:10 AM

So in other words, they don't want to have to upgrade THEIR hardware when they know perfectly well that for the types of signals they are dealing with, 1.3 is perfectly capable. But when it comes to OUR hardware, we need to be fully 1.4 compliant throughout the chain, or they won't turn on the signal. :rolleyes:

IIRC, 1.4 lays out the specs for 3D over HDMI. Further, 1.4 has the same bandwidth requirements as 1.3 and there are no addition hardware requirements.

The bandwidth/capability requirements are nearly identical. 1.3 devices should be able to handle full 1080p 3D as laid out in the 1.4 spec. Therefore, if you're 1.3 compliant then you're 1.4 compliant...I think. :grin:

Mike

µß
Since it costs 2.4¢ to produce a penny, my 2¢ worth is really 4.8¢ worth.  That 4.8¢ is my own and not the 4.8¢ of DIRECTV, Dish, or anyone else for that matter.


#57 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,596 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 03 August 2010 - 10:22 AM

IIRC, 1.4 lays out the specs for 3D over HDMI. Further, 1.4 has the same bandwidth requirements as 1.3 and there are no addition hardware requirements.

The bandwidth/capability requirements are nearly identical. 1.3 devices should be able to handle full 1080p 3D as laid out in the 1.4 spec. Therefore, if you're 1.3 compliant then you're 1.4 compliant...I think. :grin:

Mike


That is basically my understanding as well. The additional features of 1.4 over 1.3 deal more with future tech than current tech and don't impact current 3D capabilities.

Edited by Hoosier205, 03 August 2010 - 10:50 AM.

DTV = Digital Television

#58 OFFLINE   Doug Brott

Doug Brott

    Lifetime Achiever

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 28,912 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles
Joined: Jul 12, 2006

Posted 03 August 2010 - 10:37 AM

OK .. I just found the HDMI 3D documentation for 1.4a. I think I see where the problem is and why both the AVR and DIRECTV are saying that they are correct.

You can find the spec here (need to give name/email if you want to download):
http://www.hdmi.org/...cification.aspx

This has to be due to the VSI. Namely, the transmission of the VSI is optional UNLESS the source device outputs a signal defined in section 8.2.3.

The AVR MFG is likely not passing this frame through to the TV at all. So there becomes a disconnect on determining support. So as MicroBeta suggests .. is DIRECTV forcing the standard wrong or is the AVR NOT enforcing the standard wrong.
DIRECTV Firmware Monitor - iPhone - Android - HTML5

DIRECTV employee since August 2011.
All comments are my own. Unless specifically stated, my views do NOT represent the views of DIRECTV

#59 OFFLINE   Doug Brott

Doug Brott

    Lifetime Achiever

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 28,912 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles
Joined: Jul 12, 2006

Posted 03 August 2010 - 10:38 AM

That is basically my understanding as well. The additional features of 1.4 over 1.4 deal more with future tech than current tech and don't impact current 3D capabilities.


It seems to me that the "3D" portion of the 1.4a spec have everything to do with the way 3D is packaged and delivered.
DIRECTV Firmware Monitor - iPhone - Android - HTML5

DIRECTV employee since August 2011.
All comments are my own. Unless specifically stated, my views do NOT represent the views of DIRECTV

#60 OFFLINE   DarinC

DarinC

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,183 posts
Joined: Aug 31, 2004

Posted 03 August 2010 - 11:26 AM

The AVR MFG is likely not passing this frame through to the TV at all. So there becomes a disconnect on determining support. So as MicroBeta suggests .. is DIRECTV forcing the standard wrong or is the AVR NOT enforcing the standard wrong.


Well, I think the answer is: neither. :grin: There are two separate cases: 1.3 AVRs and 1.4 AVRs. VSI is not part of 1.3. So it's not that 1.3 AVRs are handling it wrong. It's just not part of their spec. As I said before, 1.3 AVRs will cause a problem, because they can't reply that they are 3d capable. That's why I said it's an issue of how customer friendly they want to be. Virtually every other manufacturer with a 3d source allows a workaround, so that people with 1.3 devices aren't left out in the cold.

The case with 1.4 receivers is completely different. I have seen posts going both ways on 1.4 receivers: some work, and some don't. Just like some 1.3 AVRs work, and some don't. In the case of 1.3 AVRs, that's simple to explain: some AVRs are mere switches. They don't process the signal. In that case, the DVR will essentially just see whatever is behind the AVR. But higher end models provide scaling and other functions that require the AVR to process the signal. Now, if the situation with DirecTV receivers on 1.4 AVRs is the same, then that would suggest that DirecTV is indeed doing an EDIE white list rather than depending on using VSI.

But either way, it is not accommodating to customers.
Friends don't let friends buy PPV.




spam firewall