Where in the world is 3DTV going??

[skygreenleopard]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

I don't remember anyone knocking television as a technology, except the film industry, early on.

I remember folks knocking 8-track tape - it chopped up long album songs - but I don't remember anyone knocking cassette tapes. Heck, I remember 4 track tapes being knocked, then they were quickly supplanted by 8-track, and both were supplanted in four years by cassettes.

I remember folks knocking UHF TV getting knocked -reception was terrible, and very short range - which was supplanted by satellite (hideously expensive) and then cable. Oh, the howling! People wanted their "free TV".

The only people who knocked CD's were audio purists who loved the vinyl sound. There was no serious opposition that I can recall.

I have no memory of anyone knocking DVD's, perhaps you can provide examples?

The question here is quite different. In every example you cite, the media was already established. You had video or audio, quite standard since early in the 20th century, recorded in pretty much the same format for a long, long time.

3D is different. There is no established standard for media, and very little content available. The playback equipment is very expensive. A 3D platform of television and playback equipment costs far more than expected, and the high definition platform recently presented to the public was very quickly adopted. I didn't hear any complaints about flat screen HDTV's, which didn't appear on your "naysayer" list.

There is still no established standard, no matter what anyone says. Until that is clear and complete, there will be intense skepticism about where this is headed. I see the whole problem of glasses - whose shutter refresh method still may be proprietary to manufacturers - as akin to the 8-track tape problem, a rush job based on technology that is a bit too crude to be ready for full acceptance by they public.

If you like 3D, go for it. I think most people like the idea, but are turned off by the current incomplete implementation and marketing.

I agree - go for it if you like, but unless you're the kind of person who loves their LaserDisc selection, you're not going to be happy with the support it gets.

Besides, the whole problems lies with the glasses. Are you REALLY going to wear these goggles when you watch TV? What if you're doing homework and watching TV at the same time? What if you get up to get something from the fridge? Hell, what if you just want to watch casual news? I can name about 5 examples of things people want to watch in 3D: Transformers, Star Wars, LOTR, Avatar, and GI Joe. What about the hundreds of TV shows and thousands of other films made that don't excel in 3D? Are people going to want to watch Viagra commercials, Grey's Anatomy, PBS documentaries, and Judge Judy in 3D? You're going to upgrade your system for THAT?

Blu-Ray's still struggling a little, and that's with the thousands of catalog titles available right now with immediate visual and audio benefit. And that's the thing - with a lot of people already owning HDTVs, you don't need to WEAR equipment to see its benefits.

Wearable equipment has always failed. Think: Nintendo Powerglove, wearable computers, VR glasses (LOLs aplenty - have you seen Lawnmower Man?). With the exception of headphones, which have existed as a necessity for many years, consumers have shunned wearble accessories. Why? Because they're clumsy!

The world is a design-conscious place. That's the reason things like the iPod/iPad, laptops, newer cell phones, HDTVs, automated wipers, microwaves, and disk-based media have succeeded - they're all well-designed, easy to use, and a noticeabl improvement in FUNCTIONALITY over their predecessors. 3D glasses are a HUGE step backwards design-wise - they're NOT compatible with any current technology (making the transition more difficult), they're clumsy, and they are huge things that go on your face.

The reason Avatar is being pimped as a "gamechanger" is because it's pretty much the only example of a movie made where the majority of moviegoers WANT to see it in 3D. While it was great fun...

1) It's not going to be as fun for the majority of living room TV sets (in other words, I don't think the experience will translate well - devoting 3 hours to a theater in the dark is MUCH different from what 99% of people expect when watching TV.
2) I don't see the majority of media before and after Avatar enticing consumers to go 3D. If you want to spend $7000 to see Avatar in 3D in your living room, go ahead, but I'm gonna be fine with the other 18,000 films ever made being viewed in my living room in 2D.

Plus, I'll never stop laughing at people who look like this in their own living rooms:

[bone crusher]

I for one have zero interest in 3D at home.

[STARSCREAM]

I just think it could hit a stumbling block due to the economy. Most are not gonna be able to afford to or just won't want to upgrade all their equipment.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

I'll tell you where 3D TV is going...

IN MY LIVING ROOM!!!

[STARSCREAM]

Originally Posted by petra_kalbrain

i'll tell you where 3d tv is going...

in my living room!!!

lol.

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by bone crusher

I for one have zero interest in 3D at home.

Me too,.. in fact my home itself is 2D. It's a page from an magazine but it's really nice and clean looking and I can take it anywhere. Here it is, what do you think?

[drago3451]

I like the idea of 3D in a home front projection setting. I feel like the experience would suffer on a smaller TV (32-60”). I would love to see pricing on the 3D capable projectors. Will I need a new screen to go with it? Also what are these special shutter glasses going to cost $$$?

I will be following along with the development of the technology but it seems there is still a lot to work out. I will definitely not buy a 3D TV. Strictly projection for me so I hope they are reasonable.

[PlacervilleGuy]

Originally Posted by drago3451

I like the idea of 3D in a home front projection setting. I feel like the experience would suffer on a smaller TV (32-60”). I would love to see pricing on the 3D capable projectors. Will I need a new screen to go with it? Also what are these special shutter glasses going to cost $$$?

I will be following along with the development of the technology but it seems there is still a lot to work out. I will definitely not buy a 3D TV. Strictly projection for me so I hope they are reasonable.

From what I read in Popular Mechanics, current projectors (front- and RPTV) can already handle 3D, providing the source can deliver it. So, you'd need a 3D-capable BluRay player. They didn't mention anything about needing a new screen. What the shutter-glasses will cost is anyone's guess, but I'd expect 'em to be not-cheap.

[skygreenleopard]

If they're the shutter type glasses, you won't need a new screen, since the projector's refresh rate and the glasses will handle all the 3D wizardry. The polarized Real-D technology might require a special screen, but i'm not sure...

[drago3451]

Originally Posted by PlacervilleGuy

From what I read in Popular Mechanics, current projectors (front- and RPTV) can already handle 3D, providing the source can deliver it. So, you'd need a 3D-capable BluRay player. They didn't mention anything about needing a new screen. What the shutter-glasses will cost is anyone's guess, but I'd expect 'em to be not-cheap.

What makes my LCD projector special in terms of 3D? Why then can't a typical LCD accept a 3D source?

[skygreenleopard]

I think they typically have refresh rates fast enough to handle the image switching that both the TVs and shutter glasses will have to keep up with. I might be wrong though. I think a lot of people will have to upgrade LCD TVs since plasma and other sets have much higher refresh rates. People like me with 60hz LCDs will probably have to upgrade for 3D.

[aneed123]

They need to slow down with putting out new technology so fast. many people still have tube tvs. just a couple yrs ago regular plasmas and LCDS were top now we have 240 htz and LED. let regular folk (those who dont trace all the new technology) get accustomed to HD tvs because if not they wont maximize the money and market for the current products. 3d tv sounds cool but I want to enjoy the LED tv I plan on getting now for some years

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by aneed123

They need to slow down with putting out new technology so fast. many people still have tube tvs. just a couple yrs ago regular plasmas and LCDS were top now we have 240 htz and LED. let regular folk (those who dont trace all the new technology) get accustomed to HD tvs because if not they wont maximize the money and market for the current products. 3d tv sounds cool but I want to enjoy the LED tv I plan on getting now for some years

All they need to do is offer some kind of backwards compatibility, even if it's in "limp mode".

But that's not their goal.

[Blu Titan]

If Avatar does not get released in 3D this year, that would be a major setback for the 3D proponents..

[BluRayFiend]

where is it going ? nowhere ! where you going 3dTV nowhere! "BD SAINTS 1"

[john_1958]

personaly 3dtv is taking hdtv where it should be I've seen many tv sets and its about time tv industry came up with this technology

and as for the person who listed the type of people who wouldn't buy he is so wrong
I wear precription glasses and 3d glasses is not a problem

[steve1971]

Let me just say this. If they come out with a black box or some other gizmo that will have my tv 3D ready then I am all for it and I will pick up the black box or gizmo. But I will not go out and upgrade to another HDTV and Blu ray player anytime soon or in the near future. Sorry guys but thats just me. I am very happy with what I have right now.

[Buddy Christ]

Originally Posted by moodyman

by who??

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/ele...dles-cost.html


http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messa...79/630674.html

[john_1958]

Originally Posted by Blu2U

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/ele...dles-cost.html


http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messa...79/630674.html

its funny in ecoustic saying discs are dying lol

[ADWyatt]

On the rarest of occasions, companies can screw potential customers around so badly that the public actually benefits. This is certainly true in the world of 3DTV, at least for those people who decide to aid their intellect with common sense.

Companies like Sony, Panasonic and Samsung are increasing their exclusivity deals for blu-ray 3D content, hampering the widespread availability of titles to justify the purchase of 3D hardware. (There is no doubt in my mind that they would do the same for the network programming that they're sponsoring if they were able to.) As well, it appears that the prices of 3D discs may be initially higher than the public should tolerate. It looks to me as if Disney, with its release of 'A Christmas Carol' in 3D, is trying to fool customers into paying the $50 price by throwing in a bunch of extra plastic that might cost the company an extra ten cents. If Disney is successful with this strategy, look for other studios to follow the lead.

Beyond the above, I'm going to be brazen enough to say that only the biggest fools in the world would buy into 3D Home Theater now. The glasses, which aren't worth more than about $30, are selling for as much as $150 per pair. There won't be widespread blu-ray content for as much as two years (and what there is will much too expensive), and the TV technology is imperfect and over-priced.

If you're an impulse buyer, and 3D is catching your eye, now is the time to pull in the reins. I love movies and I love 3D, to the point where I'm fanatical about the possibilities of this new form of home entertainment, but I can certainly wait two years for the technology to be perfected and more reasonably priced, and for content to be widespread and affordable.

With this in mind, I'm quite happy that companies are screwing potential buyers around. It makes my decision to wait easier, and I'm completely confident that there will be a sufficient number of fools in the market place who will allow the technology to grow.