Easiest road to universal 3D add-on? (shutter vs polar vs anaglyph vs 0 eyewear)

[tripletopper]

I know most of you are big screen movie types and therefore are advocating for the polar based projectors.

I am more of a game player who sometimes deals in cinema and I'm looking for a quick screen that's big enough to see the individual trees but small enough to see the whole Forest? In other words. 24 inches is the maximum for me.

I noticed that from Autumn 2011 there were 3D haters that were complaining (and rightfully so) that the 2012 Super Bowl that was scheduled to be 3D had the 3D portion abandoned when they was found out that broadcasting the 3D Bowl which shut out 2D viewers which was 70% at the time.

I noticed that later after 2012. Two TVs have identical brands identical sizes identical features except. one is 3D one is not, the 2D one is more expensive and the 3D one doesn't sell. The people who hated 3D, hated it so much that they were willing to pay an extra $200 to strip the feature.

Knowing what I do about the market, that adding 3D to a current TV would give it negative added value, or subtracted value for adding more cost, the only way it would be worth companies going back into 3D was it 3D was a separate component like Dolby surround sound.

Have you ever heard of a surround sound hater? What people complaining that you have to go surround sound or else you miss the boat on your programming?

No, the most people ask is it right for me. And most people who don't partake would say would be good to have it but not a necessity. You may have heard of people preferring Dolby or DTS but not protesting against the concept of surround sound as a concept?

As long as people will rebel against 3D if it's tacked on then the smartest way to sell it is to sell it as an add-on option to any TV. Pick any kind of TV you want and just add depth. That would be the ideal Market. 3D lovers could add it to whatever they think is great on a 3D TV. And 3D haters could just ignore.

What is the easiest way to make a universal 3D add-on kit?

Some people suggest the 3D wizard which turns it into analglyph (and strangely enough blue and yellow, not the traditional red and cyan).

Some people suggest glasseslrds TV but I heard the problem with that is that there is a sweet spot and if you're not in it it's very distorted plus multiple people cannot be tracked for sweet spots for communal viewing.

Some people suggest that there's a way to mod a TV to get a TV to add polarization. I know polar Shields are cheap and if they do not affect 2D viewing then that's probably the cheapest answer. However you'd have 3D haters protesting by not buying them and paying more for the non-polarized TVs. The solution would be going down to the TV shop and adding a polar screen for your particular model of TV which means making different sizes and makes of polar shields. And if you don't have both an exact model match and a perfectly laid shield, installed by professionals, you'll have miscommunicated 3D which will cause worse headaches.

I suggest the shutter kind of add-on 3D. Is it possible? Yes it's possible. In fact I own such a thing for the Sega Master System 3D?

Now people will say it works just for CRT TVs. The question now is why does it work for CRT TVs but not modern TVs?

I theorize it's a matter of timing. CRT timing is both very regular and very quick, sub microsecond quick.

However ping times are all over the place for every TV. In order for it to get working with every possible TV it has to know when the start frame signal enters the TV and when the frame exits the TV because it's taking at least a one millisecond trip through the TV and that's the generous low ping monitors. It could be up to 100 milliseconds.

Edison 3D tried it with I believe a manual timing tuner where you just have to tune it to your TV.

I got a better solution send an encoded signal through the audio on left and right channels, and plug a dongle into any audio port out whether it be an HDMI ARC, toslink, coaxial. R a lr or Headphone set that doesn't turn off the noise to the proper speakers, and then you can compute the timing and adjust accordingly.

I could see possibly one flaw in this when I convert my Segascope from Composite to HDMI to VGA , on my VGA monitor with the glasses it does make a clear picture but the problem is it's a clear 2D picture. I think it has to do with the difference between 240p30 vs 480i60. I don't know whether it uses 240p15 x 2 eyes or 240i30x2 eyes. The VGA conversion doesn't work right then probably it's 240i30x2 eyes and uses the alternating interlaced Fields as left eye and right eye. If that explains why a Sega scope in particular would not work on a VGA monitor then I assume it does not apply to post-DVD 3D material.

By the way I'm giving this idea because both I value the fact that can watch my movies more than any money or credit given and I'm on Social Security Disability, therefore if I do get some credit and money but not an astronomical amount which I won't get on this idea alone, it would hurt chances of keeping Social Security. Therefore I put it out in the public and hopefully someone who reads this can be sparked into making a universal shutter based 3D adapter

However I admit that I see things that others don't see, usually at the cost of not seeing things which most people see. At first I thought who could hate 3D but then when my friend told me why 3D is bad that it forces people to make a choice and it forces people to upgrade or be left behind (which no one thought of me, with my lack of ability to access broadband for my Xbox and Nintendo), as soon as I understood the 3D haters perspective I came up with a conclusions that 2D compatibility is the key to 3D inclusion.

By the way I shared the story of my ideas for a 3D compatible 2D broadcast standard and the head engineer at WEWS said it was brilliant, insightful, and I was thinking things no one else was thinking, like how to make 3D 2D-friendly.

So if you read this and think my idea is the best way to make sure we don't run out of 3D TVs to play on movies on then take my idea for all it's worth and you pay what it's worth: nothing.

However if you're proponents of one of the other technologies, am I missing something that you're seeing? I don't understand how one proposes to add polarization to TVs without polar shields.
Also is there a way you could communally watch glassesless 3D? Finally what color do I sacrifice with anaglyph converters like video wizard?

I say what I know but I'm open to other ideas. As I said, I share them to be used, not to be hoarded, and it's more to my advantage that it actually gets invented then getting any money or credit associated with it at least at my point of level of contribution.

Do you agree that enough people are 3D haters that they'll pay more to strip than we can pay to add?

Am I right the only way the industry can make money is to make 3D an independent transaction as opposed to part of a package deal with the TV set?

Ps. Someone should change the icon of th the guy wearing glasses, if that's supposed to represent 3D lover, to a red and cyan glass, because shutter and polar glasses could be easily confused with regular sunglasses unless you knew the context of the symbol. A red left eye and a right cyan eye is no mistaking for anything but 3d.