Yahoo article on 3D predicted to be huge flop

[STARSCREAM]

Link: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Why-3D...55288.html?x=0

That does blow that on things like ESPN 3D channel it will be blacked out most of the time and have no reruns. Soooo, you're gonna have to pay a premium to get that channel and probably get a new cablebox and the channel isn't even gonna be on most of the time.

[Jimmy Smith]

This reminds me of articles that said that DVD would never catch on or that HD-DVD would beat Blu-Ray because it was cheaper. People doubt premium technology all the time and are usually wrong.

3D is unlikely to ever replace 2D television viewing completely (at least not as long as it requires glasses) however there are more then enough people interested in the technology to keep it alive. As 3D televisions go down in price and the number of 3D movies increase 3D will control a signifigant niche of the market. The huge profits 3D premium tickets produce are proof of that.

[Bizdady]

I just bought my pricey hdtv last year. No way im upgrading to a new tv just for 3d.

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Bizdady

I just bought my pricey hdtv last year. No way im upgrading to a new tv just for 3d.

Neither can I but I still plan on stocking up on new 3D discs. Since they are backwards compatible I can buy the discs now and watch them in 2D now and watch them in 3D later.

[STARSCREAM]

Originally Posted by jimmy smith

neither can i but i still plan on stocking up on new 3d discs. Since they are backwards compatible i can buy the discs now and watch them in 2d now and watch them in 3d later.

+1.

[Blu Titan]

Lets just say that I'll be taking a loooonnngggg wait and see attitude on this. HD TV has just began to really catch on in the last two years, and millions of people recently purchased new HDTV sets. Consumers were replacing TVs that they had own for 5+ years for the benefits and aesthetics of LCD and Plama TVs. Expecting consumers to shell thousands for 3D TVs to replace their HD TV is just .

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

Lets just say that I'll be taking a loooonnngggg wait and see attitude on this. HD TV has just began to really catch on in the last two years, and millions of people recently purchased new HDTV sets. Consumers were replacing TVs that they had own for 5+ years for the benefits and aesthetics of LCD and Plama TVs. Expecting consumers to shell thousands for 3D TVs to replace their HD TV is just .

Then don't

Why do 3D haters seem to think that all 2D displays will stop working when 3D displays are introduced. My advice if people aren't comfertable buying a new television this year (believe me Im one of the) then you can wait. Since the discs are backwards compatible you can still buy and watch 3D movies even without the equitment. Just in 2D.

[haphilli]

With as much money they seem to be pouring into this new format, obvious from all of the CES products, I think they expect it to catch on pretty quick. I don't think it will, most of my friends don't own an HDTV and none of them have Blu-Ray. Just boggles my mind of what is expected it seems.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

Then don't

Why do 3D haters seem to think that all 2D displays will stop working when 3D displays are introduced.

They don't, and they're not "haters"; they're realists. I'm looking at all these specs for HDMI 1.4 - when HDMI 1.2 is a shade over two years old.

The whole stampede makes no sense at all. This is not a settled spec, by a long shot, and repurchasing expensive fundamentals such as receivers, televisions, and players is not the same as the HD-DVD or DVD vs Blu battles at all.

This is a grubby, expensive, and impractical model, rushed to market as margins on 2D equipment go through the floor. TV's are cheap, Blu players are commodity items well under $200, and even the pricey cables are cheaper than dirt nowadays.

So what to do? Release a "hot" movie in 3-D, then scorn anybody not willing to bust loose another $5,000 to re-buy their now "obsolete" equipment for this madness.

Imagine - two pairs of glasses cost $200 - better not invite folks over to your home theater on any given night.

This thing is a mess, poorly thought out and rolled out, and the public's lack of enthusiasm for this lemming race is not hatred. It's skepticism and cynicism over this technological gaffe.

For any large electronics house who didn't know even four months ago that this new standard was what they should have been selling, it has all the stench of a rip-off.

[ryoohki]

Btw Blu Ray 3D is back compatible with HDMI 1.3, in 1080i. I'am pretty sure 90% of the people out there don't see the difference between de-interlaced 1080i vs 1080p 24hz..

[OrlandoEastwood]

I'm 50/50 on the matter. I feel like I just wasted my time in getting an HDTV after my SDTV's color became shot, everything was green. So, this whole 3D thing to me is cool. Yet, at the same time, it pisses me off that this stuff is coming out.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by ryoohki

Btw Blu Ray 3D is back compatible with HDMI 1.3, in 1080i. I'am pretty sure 90% of the people out there don't see the difference between de-interlaced 1080i vs 1080p 24hz..

Think I'd give up my Kuro for 1080i?

It's whole hog, or nothing. And 90% of the people aren't going to give up their current sets for this thing, is what I'm saying.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by OrlandoEastwood

I'm 50/50 on the matter. I feel like I just wasted my time in getting an HDTV after my SDTV's color became shot, everything was green. So, this whole 3D thing to me is cool. Yet, at the same time, it pisses me off that this stuff is coming out.

Yeah, what's up with that. Panasonic and Samsung were selling sets just last year touting "3D compatible", and now they're obsolete, according to this new standard.

It's stuff like that which keeps people from moving to new technologies, because they got hustled. This latest gimmick is over the line.

[Clark Kent]

The only chance for 3-D as a mass medium is through the PS3. There are just too many doubters because of the technology's frustrating history for it to have the normal product cycle of a regular format like dvd or Blu-ray.

The PS3 could act as a trojan horse if Sony comes through and enables it via firmware update. That is the only way enough people will get exposure to it in their homes. Except that avenue, the technology is a tough sell. Hollywood is desperate to repackage movies in this format, because they know most consumers have large media libraries now and are not likely to repurchase older movies.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

The only chance for 3-D as a mass medium is through the PS3. There are just too many doubters because of the technology's frustrating history for it to have the normal product cycle of a regular format like dvd or Blu-ray.

The PS3 could act as a trojan horse if Sony comes through and enables it via firmware update. That is the only way enough people will get exposure to it in their homes. Except that avenue, the technology is a tough sell. Hollywood is desperate to repackage movies in this format, because they know most consumers have large media libraries now and are not likely to repurchase older movies.

Good points. What I find odd is the idea that a 2D movie can be revamped somehow to 3D.

Maybe Lucas is redoing all the old stuff, and Disney/Pixar is reworking cartoons, but the rest of the libraries? It makes little sense, and is nowhere near worth the effort.

I'm wondering if folks slavering for 3D are taking the costs of this into consideration. The studios won't do all of this for free. It's not like doing a different encode or something.

[LynxFX]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

They don't, and they're not "haters"; they're realists. I'm looking at all these specs for HDMI 1.4 - when HDMI 1.2 is a shade over two years old.

HDMI 1.2 was released on August 8, 2005, HDMI 1.3 was June 22, 2006 which is how the PS3 got it.

I still hate the entire HDMI spec and find it to be probably the biggest scam in the A/V industry since the beginning.

As for 3D, I think it could be a niche product but it really depends on how good it actually is and what kind of content is out there.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Whether or not 3D will be a success or a flop remains to be seen.

I have mixed feelings on it, myself. I'm actually kind of in the market for a new HDTV, but I'm debating on getting something soon or holding off to see how this 3D thing pans out.



I can see where there is a lot of potential for it to be a flop, especially if it requires glasses.

I have yet to see Avatar (which is supposed to look awesome in 3D), but I have seen some other movies in 3D in theaters, the most recent of which being Up.

And yes, it was cool seeing it in 3D. But, I have to agree with the part of the article that says it can be a strain on the eyes and even headache enducing. The 3D is nice, don't get me wrong. But I do find prolonged use of the glasses to be an endurance trial on my eyes.

That's not to say that I would never use it at home, but if it requires use of the glasses, it is something that I will likely use sparringly. I am much more interested in 3D that doesn't require glasses (if such a thing is even possible) than with.


And even if the eye-strain thing wasn't an issue, it's still something that I couldn't see using all of the time. It is one thing to use the glasses when I am at the theater... its something of a special occasion. And I can maybe using them at home on a 'special occasion' basis.

But, in terms of normal day to day use, I really don't see myself using the glasses even if a lot of TV programming and movies on Blu-Ray are available in 3D. While I will generally be focusing on the program/movie that I am watching, I may turn to my wife to say something, have to get up to get the phone, or may have other little distractions here and there that come up (nothing major, but just those things that happen when watching these things at home)... or I may even want to lay on the couch while watching a movie.

I just find the idea of having glasses on... taking them on and off when having to do other things (things that may only require me to focus on something else briefly under normal circumstances, but is now prolonged by having to fidget around with glasses instead of just turning back towards the screen and continuing to watch), and the idea of having them on if I am laying on the couch to just be frustrating and annoying.


I just wonder if the general population would feel the same way.

As long as the Blu-Ray 3D discs are compatible with non-3D equipment for typically 2D use, and as long as they also give people who do have the proper 3D equipment the option of watching in 2D, then I may still go this route, myself. But, that doesn't mean it will be successful.

[Uniquely]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

Then don't

Why do 3D haters seem to think that all 2D displays will stop working when 3D displays are introduced. My advice if people aren't comfertable buying a new television this year (believe me Im one of the) then you can wait. Since the discs are backwards compatible you can still buy and watch 3D movies even without the equitment. Just in 2D.

It's not so much hate as it is realism. Even many that would easily qualify as "early adopters" are not eager to go out and buy new equipment to get 3D in the home. IF 3D discs come out with a premium price, a fair assumption I would think, not many people will be buying those over standard BD in anticipation of the day they can use them. If only a tiny minority of people are buying the gear AND the discs.... 3D is going to have a very hard road. For the record.... I'm NOT a 3D hater. I already have a 3D ready TV, and I am anxious to give it a go, but I also won't be holding my breath for it to be a huge success.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by robinandtami

It's not so much hate as it is realism. Even many that would easily qualify as "early adopters" are not eager to go out and buy new equipment to get 3D in the home.

I think it is more sour grapes. People that know they want it but want to talk themselves out of jumping in. So it is "3D is evil" (and then insane excuse for it), "3D is a fad that will pass", "3d is something you only want when out", "you can't watch more then a few minutes of 3D"....

IF 3D discs come out with a premium price, a fair assumption I would think, not many people will be buying those over standard BD in anticipation of the day they can use them. If only a tiny minority of people are buying the gear AND the discs.... 3D is going to have a very hard road.

you do realize that 2D= one eye of 3D (for 3D movie) and so after 2010 there won't be any 2D only releases of 3D movies. That is happening now, the early part of this year because the studios don't want to wait to release the 3D version.

For the record.... I'm NOT a 3D hater. I already have a 3D ready TV, and I am anxious to give it a go, but I also won't be holding my breath for it to be a huge success.

I can't see anything but a success. In the end people want to watch movies, if the movie is made in 3D then, if possible, people will want to watch it in 3D. Now, don't get me wrong, I am not saying everyone will get a new 3D display in 2010, but like HDTVs I see the numbers growing with new TVs that are bought and eventually only 3D sets available for purchase. Now why do I think 3D will be popular for films? the answer there is also easy, if a movie (like Avatar) is filmed in 3D then people will rather go to a theatre that shows it in 3D. As theatres add 3D equipment in the rooms, those rooms can be used for 3D or 2D but since they can charge more for a 3D presentation, all else being equal they would rather show a 3D movie then a 2D movie in the room. As theatres privilege 3D movies more, studios/directors find it more important to make 3D movies (a movie can't make money when it is not on the screens) and so more 3D movies are made. And now we closed the loop, with more 3D movies being made, and so back to the start of the cycle and it is more important for theatres to upgrade to 3D rooms. So theatre owners push movie makers and movie makers push theatre owners and 3D in film becomes more important with every passing year. We already know people will pay a bit more for 3D in theatres, but as more and more movies go 3D, I think it is obvious that more and more people will want to see them in 3D at home.

[FinalEvangelion]

Is it just me? Or haved the naysayers moved from Blu-ray to this now? The same with HDTVs in the late 90s as well.