Share your voice with LG President about 3D TVs

[Collect3D]

Share your wish for a new 3D TV with the LG President at:

https://www.lg.com/us/support/email-to-president

Here's what I sent:

LG,

I am, along with tens of thousands of others around the world, an avid 3D movie enthusiast with almost 400 3D Blu-rays in my collection. With the advent of 4K TVs and passive 3D, the technology, especially on an LG OLED 4K TV, reached its pinnacle in quality and convenience with low-cost and low-weight polarized glasses – I’m the proud owner of a 2016 OLED55E6 and I’m still amazed every time I watch a 3D movie on it – and then you stopped making them.

One of the reasons given for removing the polarizing screen layer needed for passive 3D was to help reach HDR brightness standards. To me, HDR is a gimmick that I care very little about as the difference between HDR and non-HDR is little compared to the difference between HDR and 3D. When I show people an HDR picture on my E6, they say, “nice picture”; when I show them a 3D demo, they say, “Wow! Where can I get one?”

3D is not dead, especially in Europe and Asia! LG made the best 3D TV ever with their 3D-capable OLED TVs. With the newest 3D-capable OLED TV now approaching 5 years old, there is a huge worldwide pent-up demand for a replacement 3D-capable TV. I, and many others, will not buy a new TV that is not 3D-capable.

For 2022, please offer at least one reasonably-priced 3D-capable 4K OLED TV along the lines of the 2020 CX (maybe call it CXII3?). I will be first in line for a 65” and it will sell like hotcakes around the world!

[gazadams]

for what its worth...sent

[8traxrule]

I bought one of their TVs in 2017 after they announced their new ones would not have 3D. That was the first time I bought a big-ticket electronics item because of availability issues. I wrote to their US headquarters letting them know- they sent a reply saying "We apologize for any inconvenience. We would be happy to pursue 3D in the future if there is consumer demand." Consumers, make your demand known! (Funny though that they've kept plenty of other useless features even without any apparent demand.)

[8traxrule]

Reading the fine print there, the recipient here is the President of their "Customer Care" department, not the top President of LG electronics. Still, let's see how he "commits our operation to the necessity of change".

[Retired Flyer]

I sent a plea for 3D TVs.

[8traxrule]

If you're serious, please continue to send WRITTEN letters about this- those carry far more weight than any form of online communication. I told them that my current TV is IRREPLACEABLE as long as they keep 3D capability off of their future TVs. (I know projectors still support it, but it would be hugely impractical to set one up in my current place of residence.)

[roger semerad]

I'd love to see LG bring back their passive tvs. I never got a hold of a decent t.v. myself, and when LG dropped their's in 2017 I took it pretty hard. Unfortunately at this point it's pretty clear that the old 3d technologies are simply not coming back. There's no harm in sending letters to show your interest, I just don't think there is any point.

After a few years to think about it, I think I'm okay with that. Going forward I think the future of 3d video is via virtual reality. That's probably still 6-10 years away from 50%+ adoption, but it will happen. When it does 3d movies will probably pick back up. Even right now the tech in the Occulus Quest 2 is pretty close to where we need it for mass market penetration. VR also brings with it 360 degree videos as well, and that offers another avenue for pre recorded entertainment that isn't possible with other techs. The only downside is needing a headset for every person in the room, but if most people have their own they can bring it with them for a viewing party, and there's always online viewing options as well.

[8traxrule]

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to watch movies on a head-mounted device, same reason I don't normally use headphones for listening.

There's no reason why at least the highest-priced TVs shouldn't still include 3D. If I buy the 'best' TV and pay thousands of dollars for it, then there shouldn't be anything it can't do.

[roger semerad]

Originally Posted by 8traxrule

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to watch movies on a head-mounted device, same reason I don't normally use headphones for listening.

There's no reason why at least the highest-priced TVs shouldn't still include 3D. If I buy the 'best' TV and pay thousands of dollars for it, then there shouldn't be anything it can't do.

Oh, I agree that it's ridiculous that there isn't a 3d option on a high end set at least, but if LG was following that logic they wouldn't have dropped it in the first place. The only logical conclusion to make is that they think 3d via glasses are not feasible for the mass market. While glasses free tech shows promise, it's been stuck in the r&d and prototype stages for years, and shows no sign of being ready for market.

Then you have the rising juggernaut that is VR. The tech is already on it's second generation of refinement. Games from high profile studios are being made and are getting rave reviews. There's all sorts of interesting apps being developed for it like virtual site seeing, virtual open house, and virtual offices. 360 degree videos are already being tested to see what they can do, with some studios making short films that are exploring the medium like the Invisible Man, Ashes to Ashes, and Invasion. Future techs like light field recording can make pictures and videos that you can freely walk around in. There are short experiments like Agent, Wolves in the Walls, and Bonefire that are showing what interactive narrative experiences can look like. VR is poised to be huge.

It's not that I think that VR will take over the t.v. space, it's just that it's going to have a huge install base in the very near future. When VR hits it big, t.v. makers will have to take a hard look at their own tech and evaluate weather it can compete with the already established VR. So at least in the short term VR is the future of 3d video, and it might be the future long term depending on how glasses free tech developes, how VR tech developes, what adoption rates look like, and if 360 degree and light field video catch on.

[kurko1992]

The problem is the Studios, they don't make movies that worth to watch on 3D, my LG 47" 3D TV i have it from 2013 ro something like that, i don't remember haha, this April the LEDs died, i bougth new ones from eBay for 30$, my brother in law change them and now my TV works like new.
The problem is that the last movies that i saw that the 3D was worth it, was The Hobbit trilogy and The Force Awakens :-(
And if you want to buy a 3D movie, you need to buy it twice most of the time, so people (most of them) just stop to buy 3D movies :-(, i was checking to buy Solo in 3D and i found it on Amazon for like 70 Dolars!! is to much money for a movie that i have in BR and 4K allready :-(

[8traxrule]

I know someone here says "If you don't believe in VR, then you haven't tried it" and I haven't really tried it much, but being more of a movie watcher than a gamer (I was huge into video games in the 80s, but just can't get into the current ones) I want my experience to be like a theater. If VR catches on and makes 3D desirable again though, I'm all for it.

The only logical conclusion to make is that they think 3d via glasses are not feasible for the mass market.

Rechargeable active glasses probably aren't feasible for the mass market, but what's not to like about passive glasses, other than that the first generation of passive TVs had a noticeable loss in resolution via lines? 4K solved that problem, yet that was NEVER advertised or promoted- I only heard about that through word of mouth. I only had 3 sets of active glasses on my old TV, but have more passive glasses than room for that number of people who could fit in my living room. They're extremely cheap so I keep a set out in the open just to grab for casual viewing whenever something 3D happens to come on my screen (like a YouTube video I've found) and the rest stored more properly. If I sit on one of them and it breaks though, no biggie as I've got plenty more and you can still order them cheap. I wear regular glasses also and they've never been uncomfortable worn over them. Consumer projectors simply can't do passive 3D though so I'm not looking forward to going back to active if I'm forced to switch to a projector later. I'll probably just be thankful to have any 3D at all by that point though.

I told the LG rep that Polar Express in 3D is a Christmas tradition, I could never imagine watching that in flat 2D.

[roger semerad]

Originally Posted by 8traxrule

Rechargeable active glasses probably aren't feasible for the mass market, but what's not to like about passive glasses, other than that the first generation of passive TVs had a noticeable loss in resolution via lines? 4K solved that problem, yet that was NEVER advertised or promoted- I only heard about that through word of mouth. I only had 3 sets of active glasses on my old TV, but have more passive glasses than room for that number of people who could fit in my living room. They're extremely cheap so I keep a set out in the open just to grab for casual viewing whenever something 3D happens to come on my screen (like a YouTube video I've found) and the rest stored more properly. If I sit on one of them and it breaks though, no biggie as I've got plenty more and you can still order them cheap. I wear regular glasses also and they've never been uncomfortable worn over them. Consumer projectors simply can't do passive 3D though so I'm not looking forward to going back to active if I'm forced to switch to a projector later. I'll probably just be thankful to have any 3D at all by that point though.

Your speaking to the choir here. I never personally experienced any problems with my 3d glasses, and this is from someone that uses prescription glasses and has an active display. For really long movies I had a bit of mild soreness on my nose, but that dissipated quickly after removing them. If someone left a light on in the room it would cause reflections, but just turning off the light fixed that. By all accounts the 3d on LG's last round of passive oleds were perfect. Just a few posts after the one I linked to Mar3o said:

Just a random comment I found on a 2016 LG OLED UHD model on AVS:

"I wanted 3D because I heard its killer on the 2016 OLEDs. I wanted flat, but because of price picked the 65C6P.

Firstly, the 3D is freaking ridiculous. Simply astonishing. I am now a true 3D fan and had never cared before.

Secondly, the curve is hardly noticeable and I don't care one way or the other in only three days of owning.

Lastly, the 4K is just incredible. Nothing comes close, at any price."

and further down:

"Man, I wish there were a way to have a permanently emblazoned list of people with exactly the same response. It's really incredible how "meh" and "ugh" people have been converted to 3D fans."

"This is LGs sleeper feature and as long as the studios keep putting out 3D Blurays, they would be nuts to kill it off completely. Very little incremental material cost (plastic glasses and a polarizing filter) and all of the investment in engineering has already been made (sunk cost)."

I'm betting that if they had stuck with it for a couple more years, as the price of OLEDs continued to drop, there would have been a whole new group of consumers discovering the combination of OLED and 3D. LG was set up to dominate the OLED and 3D market, and they couldn't even see it.

and every review and comment I've ever seen is pretty much the same, I can't find any negative comments about those t.v.'s 3d playback.

This leads me to think that the problems with glasses based 3d is an emotional one. People have a really strong idea about what a t.v. is that has been built up over years. It's something that the family can sit around and watch something without any hassles. You hit a few buttons on your remote and just watch something. It's the centerpiece of an entertainment room. I think that on an emotional level 3d glasses just break people's expectations about what a t.v. experience is supposed to be. It's one small step that makes 3d viewing not casual enough. It somehow breaks the expected usage for a t.v. for a lot of people.

This is another reason that I think VR 3d video might work well. A VR experience is by design a more involved process. Putting on a VR device to watch a 3d video doesn't break the normal usage of the device, it plays to it's strengths. If the average viewer sees 3d as more of an occasional event rather than a staple entertainment, using VR to view it makes sense. A VR experience is a special event style entertainment, meant to take your full attention. So 3d video shown through a VR device doesn't have to appeal to a casual audience, as VR isn't a casual experience by design.

[Lee A Stewart]

This isn't the 1950s. It's the 21 century. People like to multitask while watching TV. 3D glasses complicate such activities. They accept it in theaters because they can't multitask: X amount of people sitting in the dark, staring at a screen.

[MattmanAlpha]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

This isn't the 1950s. It's the 21 century. People like to multitask while watching TV. 3D glasses complicate such activities. They accept it in theaters because they can't multitask: X amount of people sitting in the dark, staring at a screen.

VR headsets make it much more difficult to multitask than 3D glasses.

Honestly, this argument against 3D glasses really grates me. That's like saying the Atari 2600 shouldn't have a paddle controller because makes it too difficult to cut a head of lettuce while playing "Video Olympics".

1950s or 2020s, sometimes folks just want to sit down together and watch a movie at home, shutting out the distractions. I would argue the ritual of 3D glasses adds to those moments, like a big bowl of popcorn and a comfortable Snuggie

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by MattmanAlpha

VR headsets make it much more difficult to multitask than 3D glasses.

Honestly, this argument against 3D glasses really grates me. That's like saying the Atari 2600 shouldn't have a paddle controller because makes it too difficult to cut a head of lettuce while playing "Video Olympics".

1950s or 2020s, sometimes folks just want to sit down together and watch a movie at home, shutting out the distractions. I would argue the ritual of 3D glasses adds to those moments, like a big bowl of popcorn and a comfortable Snuggie

And yet 3D failed in the home. It was short lived and replaced first by 4K then 4K HDR.

So your little argument sounds nice but in fact only holds true for the last holdouts of 3D - like you. That's why the TV manufacturers no longer make 3D TVs.

[MattmanAlpha]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

And yet 3D failed in the home. It was short lived and replaced first by 4K then 4K HDR.

So your little argument sounds nice but in fact only holds true for the last holdouts of 3D - like you. That's why the TV manufacturers no longer make 3D TVs.

This belongs on a different thread, but I'll address it here anyway. Remember that time 3D TVs were available for $150 at Walmart on Black Friday? Neither do I.

They were expensive and stayed expensive. The movies (with exceptions) were also expensive, which did not change until the format was on the outs. Even at the launch of 4K UHD, titles were already being sold around the $20-25 range. Compare that to 3D titles like the first "Captain America", which comfortably sat at or around $35, while the standard BD was easy to snag at $15.

3D bombed as a home format because of pricing and marketing, not because of glasses or "multitasking". 4K itself succeeds in the market because it is readily accessible to budget-minded consumers as a normal evolution to HD. High end 4K HDR (Dolby Vision) is currently a niche, much like 3D, for similar reasons.

The justification for including upper end formats of HDR on higher tier TVs is the same justification for including 3D on higher tier TVs.

[Jbug]

Originally Posted by MattmanAlpha

VR headsets make it much more difficult to multitask than 3D glasses.

Honestly, this argument against 3D glasses really grates me. That's like saying the Atari 2600 shouldn't have a paddle controller because makes it too difficult to cut a head of lettuce while playing "Video Olympics".

1950s or 2020s, sometimes folks just want to sit down together and watch a movie at home, shutting out the distractions. I would argue the ritual of 3D glasses adds to those moments, like a big bowl of popcorn and a comfortable Snuggie

Yep. LG was quoted saying that "People did not want the 3D feature." I never heard them say anything about buyers not liking to put on the glasses nor anything else. Folks saying that glasses free would be the answer are barking up the wrong tree.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Jbug

Yep. LG was quoted saying that "People did not want the 3D feature." I never heard them say anything about buyers not liking to put on the glasses nor anything else. Folks saying that glasses free would be the answer are barking up the wrong tree.

Pulling the plug on a hi-tech turkey: Last two major 3D TV manufacturers announce they will no longer be making the sets

A lack of demand from consumers reluctant to sit in their living rooms wearing chunky 3D glasses was behind the decision, the companies admitted.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ping-sets.html

[8traxrule]

I CAN multitask with my 3D glasses on if I want to- I've been able to look at my phone screen if I get a trigger that a message has come in, and I can even look to the side to see what my cats are doing without taking them off. Of course proper viewing involves shutting out ALL distractions- during a good movie I don't answer the phone at all or even look at it. And people turning on their phones in theaters in the middle of a movie is one reason why I've simply stopped going.

[globalimages]

Just mentioning that AFAIK, some 3D TV models (active) are still being sold, at least they were last year, even if they were fairly old models, but I also think they were not marketed outside Asia.

http://the-sun.on.cc/cnt/lifestyle/2...00490_001.html

https://www.electrictung.com/en/ltdn50k660hk3d

(HKD $3000 ~ USD $500)