Which SBS format is the same as a Frame Packed movie?

[ebruce]

I've been watching 3d movies for a few years and generally, I've noticed that SBS is far worse compared to my Frame Packed movies. I saw a recent reply on Reddit that said that a 4k SBS file is that same quality as a 3D Frame Packed movie. I wanted to verify if this is true. I have a 3d movie that is 44GB with a 45.90 Mbps bitrate and I'm wondering if I can get the same quality from a SBS. Thanks.

[Cornucopia]

It is probably best to consider a Frame-packed format the equivalent of a Top/Bottom FULL format, as the underlying layout is very close (Frame-packed has 1 or more guard bands).
So that is 1920 x 1080 p24 (most often) per image, with 2 images one over the other (L/R or R/L, depending on preparation, though L/R is supposed to be more the standard). Cannot remember the in-between guard band size ATM, but say for example that it is 45pixels, that means the FP total is 1920 x (1080 + 45 + 1080) or 1920 x 2205.

However, since FP is (should?) NEVER stored that way - it is TRANSMITTED via HDMI (3DBD uses MVC/AVC to store the images -main + dependent/difference - in the packet-interleaved M2TS+SSIF), the closest SBS equivalent is a "FULL SBS" aka 3840 x 1080. This is giving you stereoscopic HD video. The closest TAB equivalent would be 1920 x 2160.

Not sure where someone is offering 4k, as there is no spec for 4k 3D bluray. Possibly streaming, though I doubt it. Possibly their personal production.
If this is truly a thing, and not merely a rip+upconvert+re-encode (ripoff), a "Half" version of SBS ((1920 + 1920) x 2160) might not look quite as good (as FP), if you are going to a passive 3D TV, but should be equally fine for active 3D. The half TaB (3840 x (1080 + 1080)) would be equal either way, and FULL versions of either SBS ((3840 + 3840) x 2160) or (7680 x 2160) or of TaB (3840 x (2160 + 2160)) or (3840 x 4320) would be better than HD FP formats.

Scott

[ebruce]

It is probably best to consider a Frame-packed format the equivalent of a Top/Bottom FULL format, as the underlying layout is very close (Frame-packed has 1 or more guard bands).
So that is 1920 x 1080 p24 (most often) per image, with 2 images one over the other (L/R or R/L, depending on preparation, though L/R is supposed to be more the standard). Cannot remember the in-between guard band size ATM, but say for example that it is 45pixels, that means the FP total is 1920 x (1080 + 45 + 1080) or 1920 x 2205.

However, since FP is (should?) NEVER stored that way - it is TRANSMITTED via HDMI (3DBD uses MVC/AVC to store the images -main + dependent/difference - in the packet-interleaved M2TS+SSIF), the closest SBS equivalent is a "FULL SBS" aka 3840 x 1080. This is giving you stereoscopic HD video. The closest TAB equivalent would be 1920 x 2160.

Not sure where someone is offering 4k, as there is no spec for 4k 3D bluray. Possibly streaming, though I doubt it. Possibly their personal production.
If this is truly a thing, and not merely a rip+upconvert+re-encode (ripoff), a "Half" version of SBS ((1920 + 1920) x 2160) might not look quite as good (as FP), if you are going to a passive 3D TV, but should be equally fine for active 3D. The half TaB (3840 x (1080 + 1080)) would be equal either way, and FULL versions of either SBS ((3840 + 3840) x 2160) or (7680 x 2160) or of TaB (3840 x (2160 + 2160)) or (3840 x 4320) would be better than HD FP formats.

Scott

I also saw that there is no 4K 3D but some softwares offer it. I think as you said it's a rip + upconvert + re-encode. I would just use a full Top Bottom because of what you said. Just wish FFmpeg supported MVC. I was a bit confused with the latter part of your comment though. Can you tell what resolution a full TAB would have? Thank you.

[Cornucopia]

Full TaB HD is 1920 x (1080 + 1080) = 1920 x 2160.
Full TaB 4k is 3840 x (2160 + 2160) = 3840 x 4320.

Scott