High Def Forum
Thank you for visiting. This is our website archive. Please visit our main website by clicking the logo above.

3D Movies.... Love to watch, or just HYPE.

spyder_21
01-04-2010, 07:03 PM
EDIT:
Please keep in mind the poll should not read:
Just Hype (like HD-DVD)

It should read:

Just Hype (Will fade like HD-DVD)

Just don't know how to edit it with my phone.

Well I rose the question for you the reader. Do you think the 3D movie technology hitting homes so quick is really going to stay, or just hype and will fade as fast as it hits.

I myself think that 3D is too much of a HYPE, it is ok the first time I saw it. It has some problems

1. It is too dark at some scenes (I took my glasses off once, and I was like damn I can see the picture better) the glasses makes some parts too dark to see all the detail.

2. At some scenes when they are not doing anything close up, it is a bit blurry. Well at least I think it is.

3. I just don't like wearing the glasses (as I don't wear glasses right now).

I know no one if forcing me to see the movies in 3d. But when a movies comes out ONLY in 3D (like Avatar), you have no other option but to watch it in 3D unless I want to wait for the bluray version. Plus when the girlfriend nags and wants to see a movie in 3D, well then you must tag along.

So what is your take on it, is 3D here to say or will it fade out like HDDVD.

Loves2Watch
01-04-2010, 08:45 PM
I would have answered just hype until you wrote just like HD DVD which was not hype but a viable, completed and fully functional HD media format. Since you seem to hate innovation in technology or a fanboy of only one particular technology, I refuse to answer your poll. Please try to be a little less trite...

Lee Stewart
01-04-2010, 10:17 PM
3D is here to stay - just like it is in theaters.

The entire industry is getting involved in 3D. Soon 3D will be available from optical disc, cable, SAT and Telco.

HD Goofnut
01-04-2010, 10:36 PM
I would have answered just hype until you wrote just like HD DVD which was not hype but a viable, completed and fully functional HD media format. Since you seem to hate innovation in technology or a fanboy of only one particular technology, I refuse to answer your poll. Please try to be a little less trite...

+1:thumbsup:

spyder_21
01-05-2010, 03:35 AM
I'm sorry, I posted the topic and did not get a chance to review it. I ment to dsay Hype (Fade like HDIDVD), I know HDDVD is a good format, but I ment as far as HDDVD was how fast it came and went. Some people still use it, but bluray is the perfered format. My big reason why I see it fading is, (please correct me if I am wong). People just now bought hdtv's for their bluray movies, now they would be forced to buy another tv just to play this format. With just a very few selection of tv's right now that are 3d ready, they would not to be able to play them on their current model. Also does a special player needed to play 3d movies, or will the bluray players today be able to play them (if not then they would have to buy that as well).

Then it is not like bluray movies who they where able to release older movies in high def. Don't 3d movies have to be recorded at 2 different angles, so that means older movies won't be in 3d(that part I am not sure on)? I myslef just bought.a v10 so I won't be getting a 3d tv for at least 5years or so, how many people are in that same situation. Where they won't be buying te 3d tv anytime soon, which would drop sales of the discs, plus the production cost to make them. So if it don't mabang like bluray did, would it be able to stand the test of time.

I am on my cell phone now, will post more when I get out of work.

Lee Stewart
01-05-2010, 11:22 AM
I'm sorry, I posted the topic and did not get a chance to review it. I ment to dsay Hype (Fade like HDIDVD), I know HDDVD is a good format, but I ment as far as HDDVD was how fast it came and went. Some people still use it, but bluray is the perfered format. My big reason why I see it fading is, (please correct me if I am wong). People just now bought hdtv's for their bluray movies, now they would be forced to buy another tv just to play this format. With just a very few selection of tv's right now that are 3d ready, they would not to be able to play them on their current model. Also does a special player needed to play 3d movies, or will the bluray players today be able to play them (if not then they would have to buy that as well).

Then it is not like bluray movies who they where able to release older movies in high def. Don't 3d movies have to be recorded at 2 different angles, so that means older movies won't be in 3d(that part I am not sure on)? I myslef just bought.a v10 so I won't be getting a 3d tv for at least 5years or so, how many people are in that same situation. Where they won't be buying te 3d tv anytime soon, which would drop sales of the discs, plus the production cost to make them. So if it don't mabang like bluray did, would it be able to stand the test of time.

I am on my cell phone now, will post more when I get out of work.

http://www.highdefforum.com/high-definition-programming-shows/106439-discovery-launch-3d-channel-sony-imax-source.html

http://www.highdefforum.com/high-definition-programming-shows/106427-espn-launch-3d-network-june.html

spyder_21
01-05-2010, 03:59 PM
http://www.highdefforum.com/high-definition-programming-shows/106439-discovery-launch-3d-channel-sony-imax-source.html

http://www.highdefforum.com/high-definition-programming-shows/106427-espn-launch-3d-network-june.html
Thats cool.

I am just wondering how many people are going to rush out and buy a 3D HDTV when they hit the market? Too many people spent and bought a HDTV. On "Black Friday" I went to BestBuy and people where snatching up HDTV's left and right, they had a special line for checkout.

Do you think right now in the times like it is people are going to say "Oh who cares I spent 1000-3000 on this tv, lets go get another one".

I think the format would be a good option (if it did not need its own special tv to watch them).

It is not like when Bluray came out, all you really needed to start watching it was a Bluray player and not another tv. On-top of that not all Bluray players will support the 3d format (ps3 will by firmware update) so that means on-top of having to get another HDTV, you also have to buy a new Bluray player just to play the content.

I think that hardcore and people with money to spend on something so new, that it won't hit the average person for a few years (TV price, and new player being the biggest problem).

I on the other hand would love to see how games play in 3d, but as for watching movies... nah I would pass (maybe a few here and there) but not worth buying a new HDTV at the moment.

It does not matter if every station offers 3D, it is only going to be watched by who owns a 3D Ready TV

I am not a Fanboy in anyway, if 3D stays alive (when my V10 dies) then yeah I will be getting a 3D HDTV.

http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/12/17/specifications-for-3d-blu-ray-finalized-but-does-anybody-care/

Lee Stewart
01-05-2010, 06:14 PM
Thats cool.

I am just wondering how many people are going to rush out and buy a 3D HDTV when they hit the market? Too many people spent and bought a HDTV. On "Black Friday" I went to BestBuy and people where snatching up HDTV's left and right, they had a special line for checkout.

DisplaySearch: 3D Display Revenues Forecast to Reach $22B by 2018

http://www.3d-display-info.com/

You may not be aware of this but HDTV has been available since 1998. ;)

Do you think right now in the times like it is people are going to say "Oh who cares I spent 1000-3000 on this tv, lets go get another one".

50% of USA Households don't have an HDTV yet.

I think the format would be a good option (if it did not need its own special tv to watch them).

Only way to deliver the highest quality 3D available - same as the 3D in commerical movie theaters.

It is not like when Bluray came out, all you really needed to start watching it was a Bluray player and not another tv. On-top of that not all Bluray players will support the 3d format (ps3 will by firmware update) so that means on-top of having to get another HDTV, you also have to buy a new Bluray player just to play the content.

No - you need an HDTV to appreciate the HD from Bluray or HD DVD.

I think that hardcore and people with money to spend on something so new, that it won't hit the average person for a few years (TV price, and new player being the biggest problem).

Gee! Just like HDTV! :lol:

I on the other hand would love to see how games play in 3d, but as for watching movies... nah I would pass (maybe a few here and there) but not worth buying a new HDTV at the moment

Sports in 3D is going to be a BIG draw. Has already been a success - you go to a 3D theater and watch a sporting event live in 3D. Now you will be able to see it in your own home.

It does not matter if every station offers 3D, it is only going to be watched by who owns a 3D Ready TV

Gee! Just like HDTV! :lol: :lol:

I am not a Fanboy in anyway, if 3D stays alive (when my V10 dies) then yeah I will be getting a 3D HDTV.

http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/12/17/specifications-for-3d-blu-ray-finalized-but-does-anybody-care/

Keep in mind that a 3DTV will also be a top of the line HDTV. ;)

Imboden
01-06-2010, 04:15 AM
I don't think it will get much use and maybe die off. Kinda like it did like 50+ years ago. Even if it becomes viable in a home setting there are a lot of people out there who just simply don't like it. You would also need a huge tv for it to work well.

spyder_21
01-06-2010, 05:04 AM
I don't think it will get much use and maybe die off. Kinda like it did like 50+ years ago. Even if it becomes viable in a home setting there are a lot of people out there who just simply don't like it. You would also need a huge tv for it to work well.

yeah because right now you watch them at the theater how will it look going from 1000" screen, to a 56" screen at best. Plus you are not going to sit 1-2 feet from your TV, so you won't be surrounded by the picture like you are at the theater.

PFC5
01-10-2010, 06:05 AM
All the CE companies are very hot on 3D, but it will take some time to possibly catch on. I think we will find that we have to give up sharpness and detail to get 3D so it will not be the "be all end all" tech they are looking for it to be. I am basing this on seeing Avatar in 3D at IMAX.

spyder_21
01-10-2010, 11:13 AM
All the CE companies are very hot on 3D, but it will take some time to possibly catch on. I think we will find that we have to give up sharpness and detail to get 3D so it will not be the "be all end all" tech they are looking for it to be. I am basing this on seeing Avatar in 3D at IMAX.

I know what you mean about the sharpness, I noticed that Avatar was not as sharp as it could of been. It is not the fact of it catching on, it is the fact people will have to buy a new HDTV just to play the content. I will not be buying a new TV until my V10 dies, and I don't think people that already have a HDTV will want to buy another one right now. And for the people that don't have an HDTV they might not even considering buying a HDTV, as they would of had HDTV by now.

Plus the price tag for new tech is always high, so if it takes 2-3years for the price to come down on the 3D TV's, will companies still be interested in it at that time, or would it of faded by then?

Reason why I think it is popular at Theaters is the fact the screen is SO BIG. I just don't think 3D will be justified on a 40-65" TV.

Now if they made a front projector , that had long bulb life of 100,000 hours, that was 3Dready, then I would be all over that.

mytime
01-10-2010, 11:19 AM
i would have answered just hype until you wrote just like hd dvd which was not hype but a viable, completed and fully functional hd media format. Since you seem to hate innovation in technology or a fanboy of only one particular technology, i refuse to answer your poll. Please try to be a little less trite...

+2.

spyder_21
01-10-2010, 11:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by loves2watch View Post
i would have answered just hype until you wrote just like hd dvd which was not hype but a viable, completed and fully functional hd media format. Since you seem to hate innovation in technology or a fanboy of only one particular technology, i refuse to answer your poll. Please try to be a little less trite...

+2.

If you would of read the post after that comment, you would of noticed I mistyped it. It was not stating that HD-DVD was hype, it was stating that it would fade like HD-DVD.

PQ5150
02-10-2010, 12:35 AM
Personally I think it is good for cinemas but not for prolonged everyday use. 3D gives me headaches and my movies look bada** enough with blu ray. I'm really not interested in 3-D in the home.:bs:

HiDefRev
02-10-2010, 08:47 PM
Interesting. All of the naysayers on this thread are virtual "newbies" with fewer than 100 posts. All of the people giving viable, realistic answers are long time members of this board with thousands of posts. I am old enough to have sat through the onset of TV during the early 50's ( only a fad, will never replace radio ), the emergance of C O L O R . T V ( again, it was only a fad, it'll never work ), FM radio, 8-Tracks, Cassettes, CDs ( who would spend THAT much money for yet another device to play music ), VCRs, DVDs, HDTVs ( nobody will spend that kind of money for a TV ), Blu-rays ( nobody will spend that much money for a DVD player ) and now 3D. I have been listening to, and laughing at, naysayers for over 50 years. I've had HDTV for around 10 years now, and will most likely purchase a 3D HDTV this year. Yes, 3D is here to stay. And, as time passes, to be improved upon. IMHO, the naysayers can remain silent, because they're always WRONG.

hunt09
02-12-2010, 05:12 AM
3d will stay and improve more.

sanlyn
03-07-2010, 05:55 AM
Hype. Considering all the noise, contrast and color deficiencies, artifacts, etc., of today's HDTV designs, 3D looks almost as bad as blown-up VHS on a no-name picture tube. Add HDMI's inferior imaging to the mix, and you have yet another hi-res/low-quality toy that looks like crap, instead of a truly more accurate image and better audio.

All those deficiencies considered, 3D will probably sell a lot of TV's and a lot of media, until the toy crowd grows out of it and a new stream of toy lovers takes their place to insure its ultimate success.

When a/v manufacturers turn to gimmicks like this, it's a sign that quality video is taking another step downhill. Connect-the-dots and paint-by-the-numbers will be next, followed by "innovations" like STFM (Please Suggest Things For Me To Do While I'm Sitting Here With a Remote In My Hand) , or SRFF (Send My Robot Outside To Forage For Food). It all goes to prove that Marshall McLuhan knew exactly what he was talking about.

Chris Gerhard
03-07-2010, 06:51 AM
I voted here to stay. I believe that is true for theaters and Blu-ray but I don't know about the rest of the possible uses. I won't even begin to predict the percentage of HD displays sold being 3D capable in the coming years. I think it will be a success but can't imagine sales of 3D displays surpasses 2D displays in the next 5 years. I also don't know if it will work well for the home with anything that isn't Blu-ray based. For that matter, I don't even know if Blu-ray/PS3 3D will be so good that a big market will find it is a must have. Good enough to survive seems likely, good enough to become mainstream isn't clear.

It is pretty funny that some people won't vote because they don't like the fail option being compared to HD DVD. I can certainly recall my opinion that HD DVD wasn't viable, would flounder for a while then disappear being unwelcome and resulted in hostility here when the product was still current. Now that it wasn't a viable product and is history, floundered for a while with no market to speak of and then disappeared, some still don't want that stated even though it is a fact and behind us. HD DVD wasn't viable, all of the hype about the awful things that would happen if only Blu-ray existed were nonsense. 3D is viable and might be a success for the home market and unlike HD DVD, it has widespread industry support, a key element required for success.

Chris

Chris Gerhard
03-07-2010, 07:50 AM
Hype. Considering all the noise, contrast and color deficiencies, artifacts, etc., of today's HDTV designs, 3D looks almost as bad as blown-up VHS on a no-name picture tube. Add HDMI's inferior imaging to the mix, and you have yet another hi-res/low-quality toy that looks like crap, instead of a truly more accurate image and better audio.

All those deficiencies considered, 3D will probably sell a lot of TV's and a lot of media, until the toy crowd grows out of it and a new stream of toy lovers takes their place to insure its ultimate success.

When a/v manufacturers turn to gimmicks like this, it's a sign that quality video is taking another step downhill. Connect-the-dots and paint-by-the-numbers will be next, followed by "innovations" like STFM (Please Suggest Things For Me To Do While I'm Sitting Here With a Remote In My Hand) , or SRFF (Send My Robot Outside To Forage For Food). It all goes to prove that Marshall McLuhan knew exactly what he was talking about.

Ha, pretty funny first post.

Chris

spyder_21
03-07-2010, 09:09 AM
Interesting. All of the naysayers on this thread are virtual "newbies" with fewer than 100 posts. All of the people giving viable, realistic answers are long time members of this board with thousands of posts. I am old enough to have sat through the onset of TV during the early 50's ( only a fad, will never replace radio ), the emergance of C O L O R . T V ( again, it was only a fad, it'll never work ), FM radio, 8-Tracks, Cassettes, CDs ( who would spend THAT much money for yet another device to play music ), VCRs, DVDs, HDTVs ( nobody will spend that kind of money for a TV ), Blu-rays ( nobody will spend that much money for a DVD player ) and now 3D. I have been listening to, and laughing at, naysayers for over 50 years. I've had HDTV for around 10 years now, and will most likely purchase a 3D HDTV this year. Yes, 3D is here to stay. And, as time passes, to be improved upon. IMHO, the naysayers can remain silent, because they're always WRONG.


First of all with less than 100 posts does not make you a virtual "newbies", it just means you have not posted a lot on this site (A person of your age should know this).

I myself was born in the age of Technology (I do or did not have the experience of seeing things come and go, as much as you might have). Aside for the Cassettes, and VHS movies.

I hate it when people call other people noobs or newbies, it puts yourself (in my opinion, like the attitude of a 8 year old kid).

But notices as you listed 8-tracks, cassettes (they all came and now are replaced). Then VHS, came and now is replaced.

I am not saying that 3D would not become a media, I am saying it will not stay (like you have mentioned of the 8-track, Cassettes, and VHS) they where a media of choice but did not last, as something better came out.

Yes with changing Technology everything gets replaced (that is just the way things happen), but I just feel that 3D will not stick, and will end-up fading as fast as HD-DVD did.


EDIT:
The reason why I chose HD-DVD as a comparison, is that it is the only media I really know of that hit the shelves and then did not last long.

oblioman
03-07-2010, 09:36 AM
3D is here to stay. It's been around in some form or fashion for about the past 150 years. What is being presented today, is simply today's high tech version of an old thing. If the powers that be can eliminate the glasses,,it would have a good shot at getting more than a niche foothold. With the glasses,,,no thanks.

spyder_21
03-07-2010, 10:15 AM
3D is here to stay. It's been around in some form or fashion for about the past 150 years. What is being presented today, is simply today's high tech version of an old thing. If the powers that be can eliminate the glasses,,it would have a good shot at getting more than a niche foothold. With the glasses,,,no thanks.

yes without glasses I am all for, for some reason they make my eyes tired, and a slight headache. Don't forget to mention makes the image even darker.

oblioman
03-07-2010, 10:46 AM
In me opinion, what we be seeing is a marketing push by a few powers that be wishing to capitolize on 1.- the success of HDTV,,,2.- a few old farts in the business still pushing the tired 3D,,,3.- playing the wave of the Avatar 3D success. A little poll over at another site clearly shows that people would prefer better 2D over 3D by nearly a 2-1 margin.

fryet
03-09-2010, 09:09 AM
I answered that it is here to stay, but I wish it was just a fad. I also find that the 3d technology tires out my eyes, and also noticed with Avater how less sharp the movie is when it was shown in 3d.

One question for the experts here. Sony just announced 3d TVs. I am a bit confused. I thought any TV can show a 3D image (with the glasses). Why is a new TV necessary/valuable?

PFC5
03-09-2010, 09:19 AM
I answered that it is here to stay, but I wish it was just a fad. I also find that the 3d technology tires out my eyes, and also noticed with Avater how less sharp the movie is when it was shown in 3d.

One question for the experts here. Sony just announced 3d TVs. I am a bit confused. I thought any TV can show a 3D image (with the glasses). Why is a new TV necessary/valuable?

The new 3DTV standard is HD 3D and is different from the old type that works with all TVs and this new format/standard requires not only a new 3DTV, but also a 3D BD player AND new (currently pretty expensive) 3D shutter type glasses.

Lee Stewart has all the info on the top of his head to explain the names each type of old & new 3D standards are using so you can hit him up for more info if you want it. A 3DTV format FAQ would be great to have here and hopefully someone with the knowledge/time to do it can post this.

fryet
03-09-2010, 09:38 AM
I was trying to read up on it some based on some of the links posted here, but even so I couldn't really tell what the value is. So with this new format, I would see a better quality 3d picture? Would it be brighter and sharper than what I currently see in the theater? Also, Sony mentioned about tailoring the image based on where you were sitting in the room - does this mean that with a 3D TV, it looks best when viewed alone?

PFC5
03-09-2010, 05:48 PM
If you get a 3D plasma then it wouldn't matter where you sit, but just like 2D with LCD, off angle viewing will likely hurt PQ but probably not as much the 3D part from off angle.

We have to wait until they get released, but early indications are that 3D BD is better than 3D in the theaters with a sharper picture.

JMS
03-09-2010, 07:40 PM
Hype. It is no secret that dealers and manufacturers are an unhappy lot. TV sales have been OK, especially considering the soft economy. But profit margins are piss-poor and something just has to be done. Blu-ray adoption has been painfully slow and will not provide the shot in the arm needed for the near term profit picture. Manufacturers simply have to provide a more compelling incentive than higher refresh rates for people to pony up cash for more costly and more profitable models. What might that incentive be? By following the studios’ cue it surely must be 3D. Then all they need to do is to have all those twenty-somethings at Best Buy (and elsewhere) shame consumers into spending more on a TV than they need to. After all, who wants to take home a brand new out-of-date TV?

The industry seems to be absolutely convinced the general public is foaming at the mouth to have 3D in their homes. Where they get this idea I’m not so sure. Yes, there’s ticket sales for Avatar, which are substantial. It cannot be denied that a generous percentage of the population is amused by mindless rubbish such as this, and when you add the novelty of a little illusory depth in the picture, the appeal‘s enhanced. For a little while anyway. When people find out they have to buy a special TV, BD player, and wear some pretty expensive dorky looking shutter glasses to get the same effect at home, the deal’s off for most folks -- even before they find out about the lack of 3D stuff to watch. In addition to a no doubt very slow growing 3D HD Blu-ray content, cable and satellite providers will be forced to provide severely compromised 3D product due to constricted bandwidth. So the choice there will be close to choosing between HD 2D or SD 3D.

Also, what about the 4% to 10% (depending on which expert you talk to) of the population who for various medical reasons cannot see 3D at all? Then there’s a significant number of people who are wearing one contact lens for distance and the other for reading, which surely must queer their chances for small screen 3D nirvana.

This is just an opinion from somebody who’s not a newbie with less than a hundred posts. Seems to me home 3D will become a niche market phenomenon, kind of like Laserdisc. Every time somebody dredges up 3D in the last few decades it always peters out into the fog of entertainment history footnote.

Lee Stewart
03-09-2010, 08:10 PM
Hype. It is no secret that dealers and manufacturers are an unhappy lot. TV sales have been OK, especially considering the soft economy. But profit margins are piss-poor and something just has to be done. Blu-ray adoption has been painfully slow and will not provide the shot in the arm needed for the near term profit picture. Manufacturers simply have to provide a more compelling incentive than higher refresh rates for people to pony up cash for more costly and more profitable models. What might that incentive be? By following the studios’ cue it surely must be 3D. Then all they need to do is to have all those twenty-somethings at Best Buy (and elsewhere) shame consumers into spending more on a TV than they need to. After all, who wants to take home a brand new out-of-date TV?

Hype? No - not at all. Primarily, the only 3D movies you could see in your home was Anaglyph 3D - the Red/Cyan cardboard glasses.

Now you can buy true, full color, stereoscopic 3D for your home - the same as you see in digital cinemas today.

And I really have to laugh :lol: - 3D has ALWAYS required wearing glasses of some kind. Autostereoscopic 3D (no glasses) is at least 7 to 10 years away.

If you want 3D in your home - it is there for you. You will have acces to movies, live sports and other events in S3D.

The industry seems to be absolutely convinced the general public is foaming at the mouth to have 3D in their homes. Where they get this idea I’m not so sure. Yes, there’s ticket sales for Avatar, which are substantial. It cannot be denied that a generous percentage of the population is amused by mindless rubbish such as this, and when you add the novelty of a little illusory depth in the picture, the appeal‘s enhanced. For a little while anyway. When people find out they have to buy a special TV, BD player, and wear some pretty expensive dorky looking shutter glasses to get the same effect at home, the deal’s off for most folks -- even before they find out about the lack of 3D stuff to watch. In addition to a no doubt very slow growing 3D HD Blu-ray content, cable and satellite providers will be forced to provide severely compromised 3D product due to constricted bandwidth. So the choice there will be close to choosing between HD 2D or SD 3D.

70% of the $2.65 BILLION earned by Avatar came from 3D theaters.

Each of the live sporting events telecast to digital 3D theaters were great successes. At hefty premiums even over a 3D movie.

Everyone who owns a PS3 will be getting 2 firmware upgrades from Sony. The first gives it 3D gaming ability and the 2nd gives it the ability to play 3D BD's. 10 million PS3's in the USA?

There are 4 million 3D Ready DLP RPTV HDTV's by Mits and Samsung. All you need is a 3DC-1000 3D format converter (reportedly to sell for about $100)

Yes = you will need some 3D active shutter glasses which are priced at all different levels,

Also, what about the 4% to 10% (depending on which expert you talk to) of the population who for various medical reasons cannot see 3D at all? Then there’s a significant number of people who are wearing one contact lens for distance and the other for reading, which surely must queer their chances for small screen 3D nirvana.

What about them? They won't buy a 3DTV. Think of all the blind people that can't drive cars.

If they want 3DTV - and they wear glasses, they will make some changes. It is all about desire.

This is just an opinion from somebody who’s not a newbie with less than a hundred posts. Seems to me home 3D will become a niche market phenomenon, kind of like Laserdisc. Every time somebody dredges up 3D in the last few decades it always peters out into the fog of entertainment history footnote.

There were approx. 2 million LD owners in the USA after 20 years. 3DTV owners will crush that statistic.

They continue to make more and more 3D movies. The "new 3D craze" started in 2005 and is only getting stronger. In 2009 $1B of BO revenue came from 3D. 2009 was the best year ever for Hollywood - and Avatar had very little to do with it. 2010 is the year of Avatar.

Say what you want about 3D. It has been over 55 years and it's STILL with us , stronger and more popular than ever before with the best technology ever offered.

JMS
03-09-2010, 09:46 PM
Hype? No - not at all. Primarily, the only 3D movies you could see in your home was Anaglyph 3D - the Red/Cyan cardboard glasses.
Yeah, everybody wants some of those:lol:

Now you can buy true, full color, stereoscopic 3D for your home - the same as you see in digital cinemas today.
I have no idea what the hell you're talking about. What can I buy and exactly where can I buy it?

And I really have to laugh :lol: - 3D has ALWAYS required wearing glasses of some kind.
Laugh if you will, this is precisely why 3D has never succeeded.
Autostereoscopic 3D (no glasses) is at least 7 to 10 years away.
We'll see won't we?
If you want 3D in your home - it is there for you. You will have acces to movies, live sports and other events in S3D.
You speak in the present tense. Did I miss something?

70% of the $2.65 BILLION earned by Avatar came from 3D theaters.

Each of the live sporting events telecast to digital 3D theaters were great successes. At hefty premiums even over a 3D movie.

Everyone who owns a PS3 will be getting 2 firmware upgrades from Sony. The first gives it 3D gaming ability and the 2nd gives it the ability to play 3D BD's. 10 million PS3's in the USA?

There are 4 million 3D Ready DLP RPTV HDTV's by Mits and Samsung. All you need is a 3DC-1000 3D format converter (reportedly to sell for about $100)

Yes = you will need some 3D active shutter glasses which are priced at all different levels,
You rattle off some impressive stuff, but selling this whole thing to the general public will make selling Blu-ray look like a day at the beach. It's one thing for a $400 million movie to draw them in, but how that translates to an expensive and permanent commitment in the average household is questionable.

What about them? They won't buy a 3DTV. Think of all the blind people that can't drive cars.

If they want 3DTV - and they wear glasses, they will make some changes. It is all about desire.
Ah yes, let them eat cake. The only reason I bring them up is that here is a significant segment of the population that won't be buying any part of the hype.
There were approx. 2 million LD owners in the USA after 20 years. 3DTV owners will crush that statistic.

They continue to make more and more 3D movies. The "new 3D craze" started in 2005 and is only getting stronger. In 2009 $1B of BO revenue came from 3D. 2009 was the best year ever for Hollywood - and Avatar had very little to do with it. 2010 is the year of Avatar.

Say what you want about 3D. It has been over 55 years and it's STILL with us , stronger and more popular than ever before with the best technology ever offered.
Yeah, well if your figures are correct then that still doesn't guarantee much of anything will happen in the average home. Certainly the movie theaters will change. They have to given the abysmal ticket sales in the last decade. I just don't believe the average person has the incentive and desire to make that kind of change in the home. What has it been...almost 10 years and still only 50% homes with HDTVs in them? It's going to be one hell of a lot longer than that before 50% of the population sit in front of their 42" screens with shutter glasses on.

oblioman
03-09-2010, 10:22 PM
3DTV will become a force in the market, a niche, but a force none the less. With Avatar,,and now the release of TRON (12/2010) me see's a select few jumping on the bandwagon (again) for 3D. For me,,,it's all about the glasses. Just the thought of having them next to me pile of remotes (much less wearing them) is enough to dissuade any 3D purchase's. One thing that might be great for the industry,,is the enhanced 2D effect that the mfgs. will be bringing to market with their new sets. On the other hand,,,me will not be paying any subscription service (direct,komkast,etc) for anything in 3D.

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 12:09 AM
Yeah, everybody wants some of those:lol:

Probably added to that 10% you mentioned :lol:

I have no idea what the hell you're talking about. What can I buy and exactly where can I buy it?

How can you say you know about 3D when you don't know what Stereoscopic 3D is?

http://www.highdefforum.com/upcoming-display-technologies/110009-3d-formats.html

You can buy it tomorrow (today) at Best Buy


Laugh if you will, this is precisely why 3D has never succeeded.

I am laughing cause here we are - 2010 and 3D is with us! :lol:

We'll see won't we?

Nothing to see - the hurdles are great. It is not a new tech and there have been very few advancements made.

You speak in the present tense. Did I miss something?

I guess you did. Tomorrow - 3/10 - that is today (:D) Panasonic and Samsung 3DTV setups go on sale. The bundles include a 3DTV, a 3D BD player, and the 3D active shutter glasses. Samsung will include Monsters vs, Aliens - a brand new and the first 3D BD while Panasonic will include (???) a 3D BD sampler disc.

You rattle off some impressive stuff, but selling this whole thing to the general public will make selling Blu-ray look like a day at the beach. It's one thing for a $400 million movie to draw them in, but how that translates to an expensive and permanent commitment in the average household is questionable.

The Early Adopter! He bought first into HD, first into BD and now first into 3D.

Since when is a $3000 price tag - "for the masses?"

Ah yes, let them eat cake. The only reason I bring them up is that here is a significant segment of the population that won't be buying any part of the hype.

Could say the same thing about BD.:lol:

Yeah, well if your figures are correct then that still doesn't guarantee much of anything will happen in the average home. Certainly the movie theaters will change. They have to given the abysmal ticket sales in the last decade. I just don't believe the average person has the incentive and desire to make that kind of change in the home. What has it been...almost 10 years and still only 50% homes with HDTVs in them? It's going to be one hell of a lot longer than that before 50% of the population sit in front of their 42" screens with shutter glasses on.

Ah - very soon (year or 2) ALL HDTVs will be 3D ready. Just like all BD players will be 3D BD players. Just buy the glasses and you are ready to watch 3D. Then just add the content.

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 12:15 AM
3DTV will become a force in the market, a niche, but a force none the less. With Avatar,,and now the release of TRON (12/2010) me see's a select few jumping on the bandwagon (again) for 3D. For me,,,it's all about the glasses. Just the thought of having them next to me pile of remotes (much less wearing them) is enough to dissuade any 3D purchase's. One thing that might be great for the industry,,is the enhanced 2D effect that the mfgs. will be bringing to market with their new sets. On the other hand,,,me will not be paying any subscription service (direct,komkast,etc) for anything in 3D.

LMAO! You are funny!

First you say you will not be buying a 3DTV because the glasses are a deal breaker, Then you go on to say you aren't going to pay for 3D subscription service.

LMFAO! What would you watch that 3D sub service on?

:haha:

Chris Gerhard
03-10-2010, 05:00 AM
If the consumer electronics companies are relying on this thread as their study to determine whether or not to go forward with 3D, it appears it is dead. I thought this new technology would be optimistically embraced here. I think maybe the negative votes here come without much reading and consideration on the topic.

Chris

sanlyn
03-10-2010, 06:15 AM
Ah - very soon (year or 2) ALL HDTVs will be 3D ready. Just like all BD players will be 3D BD players. Just buy the glasses and you are ready to watch 3D. Then just add the content.

Great. Digital artifacts and motion blur in 3D. I can't wait.

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 08:38 AM
Great. Digital artifacts and motion blur in 3D. I can't wait.

WOW! That is what you see on BD? :lol:

JMS
03-10-2010, 09:01 AM
I can buy stereoscopic 3D at Best Buy? I was in my local one yesterday afternoon. Didn't see any sign of it.

sanlyn
03-10-2010, 09:16 AM
WOW! That is what you see on BD? :lol:

Some of it is on the BD, but most of it's on the displays. If you don't see it, you should keep what you have. It was specifically designed with you in mind.

JMS
03-10-2010, 09:57 AM
If the consumer electronics companies are relying on this thread as their study to determine whether or not to go forward with 3D, it appears it is dead. I thought this new technology would be optimistically embraced here. I think maybe the negative votes here come without much reading and consideration on the topic.

Chris
The industry has already made up its mind, so whatever is said here will have no effect. Except for the glasses the plan is to make everybody pay for 3D, whether they want it or not. Sweet.

So Chris, if I read and contemplate more, I'll get warm and fuzzy? Look, before somebody labels me a Luddite, let me say that I'm not against progress. Wouldn't be on this forum if I were. It's just that I can't see this going mainstream anytime soon. Or even 10% for that matter.

It won't be a surprise to anyone on this thread when I say I've never been an early adopter. I've never had the money to buy everything new that comes down the pike. I have to see value and convenience on anything new to me before I buy in. I could be wrong but I just can't see that happening anytime soon.

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 10:28 AM
I can buy stereoscopic 3D at Best Buy? I was in my local one yesterday afternoon. Didn't see any sign of it.

The kick off is today - you got there a day early and not all BB's will have S3D today. They will be added to stores as the weeks progress

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 10:29 AM
Some of it is on the BD, but most of it's on the displays. If you don't see it, you should keep what you have. It was specifically designed with you in mind.

On the displays? :confused:

oblioman
03-10-2010, 10:32 AM
LMAO! You are funny!

First you say you will not be buying a 3DTV because the glasses are a deal breaker, Then you go on to say you aren't going to pay for 3D subscription service.

LMFAO! What would you watch that 3D sub service on?

:haha:

guess me was making 2 points. Number one be the glasses,,,number two would be any subscription for 3D. Granted yup,,,some 3dTV's will be bought. Some 3D BD players will be sold,,the PS3 will have some FW updates,,,some movies will be sold. But the alchemy of it all put together just makes for a tough sale to the masses. Especially the first time junior plops his arse on the couch,,,effectively breaking a pair of $50 shutter glasses left behind at the last piss break. Lee, me understands your enthusiasm but really fail to see meself buying into the hype.

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 10:33 AM
The industry has already made up its mind, so whatever is said here will have no effect. Except for the glasses the plan is to make everybody pay for 3D, whether they want it or not. Sweet.

Would that be like to plan to make all optical disc players BD players, getting rid of DVD players, making people pay for BD whether they want it or not? ;)

So Chris, if I read and contemplate more, I'll get warm and fuzzy? Look, before somebody labels me a Luddite, let me say that I'm not against progress. Wouldn't be on this forum if I were. It's just that I can't see this going mainstream anytime soon. Or even 10% for that matter.

Define "soon." How many years is "soon?"

It won't be a surprise to anyone on this thread when I say I've never been an early adopter. I've never had the money to buy everything new that comes down the pike. I have to see value and convenience on anything new to me before I buy in. I could be wrong but I just can't see that happening anytime soon.

You aren't thinking like an early adopter because by your own admission - you aren't one. No surprise at your skepticism.

sanlyn
03-10-2010, 01:41 PM
On the displays? :confused:

Yes. It certainly isn't in the source. Not very much of it, anyway. BD compression is lossy (so is MPEG, for that matter). Your display has some work to do, and that's where the problems begin, not counting the fact that all BD players don't behave that meticulously. The better player/display setups are equipped to fill in missing color information with, well, with calculated guesswork. Some displays do that better than others. Then the display has to convert the digital info to analog at the front panel. That doesn't even count decoder and CIE gamut errors, which tend to run rampant on LCD's in particular. Now, consider all the really bad HDMI cables out there, data transmission errors and no HDMI circuitry to handle it, and . . .

Why? What did you think I was referring to?

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 02:11 PM
Yes. It certainly isn't in the source. Not very much of it, anyway. BD compression is lossy (so is MPEG, for that matter). Your display has some work to do, and that's where the problems begin, not counting the fact that all BD players don't behave that meticulously. The better player/display setups are equipped to fill in missing color information with, well, with calculated guesswork. Some displays do that better than others. Then the display has to convert the digital info to analog at the front panel. That doesn't even count decoder and CIE gamut errors, which tend to run rampant on LCD's in particular. Now, consider all the really bad HDMI cables out there, data transmission errors and no HDMI circuitry to handle it, and . . .

Why? What did you think I was referring to?

Motion Blur is caused by 2 things:

1. Panning the camera too quickly

2. The 24 FPS rate that movies at shot at.

The first has nothing to do with a display. The second can be "mended" (not entirely fixed) by speeding up the frame rate by the display. If the MB is severe due to #1, it will still be there.

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 02:12 PM
guess me was making 2 points. Number one be the glasses,,,number two would be any subscription for 3D. Granted yup,,,some 3dTV's will be bought. Some 3D BD players will be sold,,the PS3 will have some FW updates,,,some movies will be sold. But the alchemy of it all put together just makes for a tough sale to the masses. Especially the first time junior plops his arse on the couch,,,effectively breaking a pair of $50 shutter glasses left behind at the last piss break. Lee, me understands your enthusiasm but really fail to see meself buying into the hype.

Like I already said - 3D isn't going to be for you. No problem. It's a personal choice.

oblioman
03-10-2010, 02:24 PM
Like I already said - 3D isn't going to be for you. No problem. It's a personal choice.

And me hopes it stays a personal choice. Does anybody, or perhaps you know,,,does 3D chew up more bandwidth? If so,,,to what degree? Will it push a 50 gig BD beyond it's size limit? Just asking.

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 02:36 PM
And me hopes it stays a personal choice. Does anybody, or perhaps you know,,,does 3D chew up more bandwidth? If so,,,to what degree? Will it push a 50 gig BD beyond it's size limit? Just asking.

Characteristics of a 3D BD (AFAIK):

1. Will use up to about 50% more storage (for 3D)

2. Will use a higher bit rate (60 Mbps instead of the normal 40) as 3D BD players will work (with 3D BD's) at 2X speed instead of a regular BD which works at 1X speed.

Sony and Panasonic are submitting a 66GB dual layer BD to the BDA as we speak.

sanlyn
03-10-2010, 02:42 PM
Motion Blur is caused by 2 things:

1. Panning the camera too quickly

2. The 24 FPS rate that movies at shot at.

The first has nothing to do with a display. The second can be "mended" (not entirely fixed) by speeding up the frame rate by the display. If the MB is severe due to #1, it will still be there.

Displays never blur. It's the image retention rate of the human eye that makes you think they do. Refresh the screen all you want. If you're into plasma, it's not likely a problem.

What I'm saying (I think) is that 3D and such does nothing to improve the image quality of a display. It certainly won't do much for the many tv's that can't handle film rates well.

3D is here to stay. TV makers will see to it that you pay for it whether you want it or not. The audience for toys has always been there.

oblioman
03-10-2010, 02:49 PM
Characteristics of a 3D BD (AFAIK):

1. Will use up to about 50% more storage (for 3D)

2. Will use a higher bit rate (60 Mbps instead of the normal 40) as 3D BD players will work (with 3D BD's) at 2X speed instead of a regular BD which works at 1X speed.

Sony and Panasonic are submitting a 66GB dual layer BD to the BDA as we speak.

So, in order to get the best 3D effect, one will want to get a new BD player (or upgrade the PS3), that's understandable. But is this not going to severely crunch the sat and cable's bandwidth?

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 02:55 PM
So, in order to get the best 3D effect, one will want to get a new BD player (or upgrade the PS3), that's understandable. But is this not going to severely crunch the sat and cable's bandwidth?

CBL & SAT are going to be using different 3D formats than 3D BD dues to their bandwidth restrictions. Nor will they use the AVC-MVC codec for 3D like BD will (that creates the extra 50% data)

They will be using 3D formats that offer 1/2 resolution (1Mega-pixel per eye instead of 2 MP's like BD will) so that a 3D takes up the same bandwidth as a currect HD signal.

They will either cut the verticle res to 540 or the hortizontial res to 960 depending on which 3D format they use (side by side or over/under)

It has been said that with 3D resolution differences are not as apparent as they are with HD. And 720P is less than 1 MP.

PFC5
03-10-2010, 06:43 PM
guess me was making 2 points. Number one be the glasses,,,number two would be any subscription for 3D. Granted yup,,,some 3dTV's will be bought. Some 3D BD players will be sold,,the PS3 will have some FW updates,,,some movies will be sold. But the alchemy of it all put together just makes for a tough sale to the masses. Especially the first time junior plops his arse on the couch,,,effectively breaking a pair of $50 shutter glasses left behind at the last piss break. Lee, me understands your enthusiasm but really fail to see meself buying into the hype.

I heard those glasses will be about $150.00 each at first. That means for a family of 4 it is an extra $600.00 just for the glasses for them to watch a 3D movie together. :eek:

I suspect the cost of the glasses will (hopefully) drop fast or else my vote for the new 3D being here to stay will be wrong. I still think it will be a slow developing niche market for a few years until you can only get 3D equipment and then it will build from no alternative. But the industry wants this so bad it will be here to stay IMO.

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 06:54 PM
I heard those glasses will be about $150.00 each at first. That means for a family of 4 it is an extra $600.00 just for the glasses for them to watch a 3D movie together. :eek:

I suspect the cost of the glasses will (hopefully) drop fast or else my vote for the new 3D being here to stay will be wrong. I still think it will be a slow developing niche market for a few years until you can only get 3D equipment and then it will build from no alternative. But the industry wants this so bad it will be here to stay IMO.

Samsung is offerring 3 different types of glasses:

Battery = $150
Rechargable = $200
Kid Size = $200

Samsung doesn't include any glasses with their 3DTVs

With the Panasonic, they include one pair and theirs are $150.

Samsung 3D Starter Kit gets 3DTV and Blu-ray buyers started

Well, the good news from Samsung's press conference is that you'll get a free 3D Starter Kit if you decide to fork over the cash for them both. Included are two pairs of active shutter glasses (available separately for $150) and the 3D Blu-ray version of Monsters vs. Aliens, which is exclusive to Samsung for the time being.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/09/samsung-3d-starter-kit-gets-3dtv-and-blu-ray-buyers-started/

oblioman
03-10-2010, 08:28 PM
I heard those glasses will be about $150.00 each at first. That means for a family of 4 it is an extra $600.00 just for the glasses for them to watch a 3D movie together. :eek:

I suspect the cost of the glasses will (hopefully) drop fast or else my vote for the new 3D being here to stay will be wrong. I still think it will be a slow developing niche market for a few years until you can only get 3D equipment and then it will build from no alternative. But the industry wants this so bad it will be here to stay IMO.

The $50 bucks is speculation,,thinking that by this time next year the glasses will be priced only 5 times what they be worth. Besides that, junior would get a serious ass-whoopage for busting a $150 set.

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 08:39 PM
The $50 bucks is speculation,,thinking that by this time next year the glasses will be priced only 5 times what they be worth. Besides that, junior would get a serious ass-whoopage for busting a $150 set.

LOL - it costs about 50 cents to replicate a DVD yet they sell them for $17.

"What the market will bear"

;)

PFC5
03-10-2010, 08:57 PM
Samsung is offerring 3 different types of glasses:

Battery = $150
Rechargable = $200
Kid Size = $200

Samsung doesn't include any glasses with their 3DTVs

With the Panasonic, they include one pair and theirs are $150.

Samsung 3D Starter Kit gets 3DTV and Blu-ray buyers started



http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/09/samsung-3d-starter-kit-gets-3dtv-and-blu-ray-buyers-started/

And I still wouldn't buy a Samsung BD player even with the glasses included given their history of poor firmware support after the model is replaced and the 1 year warranty ends. I imagine that 3D BD will require a few extra updates and I wouldn't trust Samsung on those either.

JMS
03-10-2010, 10:15 PM
CBL & SAT are going to be using different 3D formats than 3D BD dues to their bandwidth restrictions. Nor will they use the AVC-MVC codec for 3D like BD will (that creates the extra 50% data)

They will be using 3D formats that offer 1/2 resolution (1Mega-pixel per eye instead of 2 MP's like BD will) so that a 3D takes up the same bandwidth as a currect HD signal.

They will either cut the verticle res to 540 or the hortizontial res to 960 depending on which 3D format they use (side by side or over/under)

It has been said that with 3D resolution differences are not as apparent as they are with HD. And 720P is less than 1 MP.

So as I said earlier.....

.....cable and satellite providers will be forced to provide severely compromised 3D product due to constricted bandwidth. So the choice there will be close to choosing between HD 2D or SD 3D.
Also, those $150 shutter glasses won't work with this format either.....

Lee Stewart
03-10-2010, 10:26 PM
So as I said earlier.....

Which ignores what I said:

It has been said that with 3D resolution differences are not as apparent as they are with HD. And 720P is less than 1 MP.

SD is not 1 Mega-Pixel. It is 336,960 pixels (702x480).

Also, those $150 shutter glasses won't work with this format either.....

Yes they will:

Displays – must support all mandatory formats.

Post #2

http://www.highdefforum.com/upcoming-display-technologies/110009-3d-formats.html

EDIT:

From someone who saw the Samsung 3DTV and played with the menus:

One thing I noticed in the Samsung menu was 3 different 3D display modes that were manually selectable. One looked like it probably selected normal full HD 3D, another was side by side and the last was over/under.

fryet
03-18-2010, 04:43 PM
One thing to consider when it comes to 3D versus the introduction of DVD and HD. Movie theaters for several years have been offering 3D and non-3D versions of movies side by side. While the majority do choose the 3D version, many are choosing the 2D version. Part of that may be due to price (although I don't think there was a surcharge for 3D a couple of years ago), but the price is usually about $1, and I don't think that is the major issue. For some, the 2D experience is superior to that of 3D. With 2D, you don't have eye strain problems, blurry and unvivid colors, and 3D images thrown into your face.

Taking an informal poll, from my own family, 4 like 3D, while 2 prefer 2D. As a result, I don't think 3D adoption will ever reach the level of DVD or HD. Sure your TV might handle it, but this portion of the population will never choose to purchase 3D content. To be fair, though, 3D advances may make many of the issues listed above non-issues. Then we would only need to convince movie directors that it isn't cool to send objects into the audiences' face.

PFC5
03-18-2010, 04:45 PM
Welcome back fryet! :hithere:

fryet
03-19-2010, 02:46 PM
Thanks! I do check in from time to time, but there hasn't been much to discuss since Blu-ray defeated HD-DVD. I guess arguing the value of 3D TVs will be my next thing. (:

PFC5
03-20-2010, 11:25 AM
:lol:

We do have the ongoing saga/war of LCD vs plasma still raging here, and we now have the 3D vs 2D war, and the 3d plasma vs 3d LCD war that is just brewing. :D

Lee Stewart
03-20-2010, 01:57 PM
:lol:

We do have the ongoing saga/war of LCD vs plasma still raging here, and we now have the 3D vs 2D war, and the 3d plasma vs 3d LCD war that is just brewing. :D

"War is not about being right . . . it is about being left."

:lol:

oblioman
03-21-2010, 09:35 AM
:lol:

We do have the ongoing saga/war of LCD vs plasma still raging here, and we now have the 3D vs 2D war, and the 3d plasma vs 3d LCD war that is just brewing. :D

Is 3D LCD even in the race?

PFC5
03-21-2010, 09:44 AM
Is 3D LCD even in the race?

Not for me, but a lot of people who do not research before buying might choose 3D LCD just because they do not know about the issues. ;)

JMS
03-21-2010, 02:25 PM
Seems like the 2D LCD issues are magnified with 3D. Not good.

In any case, I've made up my mind not to say another word about 3D until I've actually seen it. And not just cartoons either.

Lee Stewart
03-21-2010, 02:35 PM
Seems like the 2D LCD issues are magnified with 3D. Not good.

In any case, I've made up my mind not to say another word about 3D until I've actually seen it. And not just cartoons either.

For that you will need to see the Panasonic 3DTV demo - they use a demo 3D BD that has all kinds of different 3D content on it. Samsung is just using Monsters vs. Aliens.

PFC5
03-22-2010, 10:30 AM
A sure way to hide flaws in a display is to show cartoons. I would never base a decision on buying a display on a cartoon.

oblioman
03-22-2010, 07:58 PM
Content has always been a bain in the side of 3D. We have seen in the past 50 years every now and then a movie presented in 3D, but never really enough for it to overcome niche status. Today, we are presented with the opportunity to have acceptable 3D in the home but if the content is limited, it will severely hamper sales of the technology. Another huge hurdle is that the early adopters are still somewhat skeptical, not of the price, but of the practicality of 3D in the home. :2cents

Lee Stewart
03-22-2010, 09:56 PM
A sure way to hide flaws in a display is to show cartoons. I would never base a decision on buying a display on a cartoon.

I agree.

Watched about 20 minutes of M v A. The 3D runs from WOW to meh.

Lee Stewart
03-22-2010, 09:59 PM
Content has always been a bain in the side of 3D. We have seen in the past 50 years every now and then a movie presented in 3D, but never really enough for it to overcome niche status. Today, we are presented with the opportunity to have acceptable 3D in the home but if the content is limited, it will severely hamper sales of the technology. Another huge hurdle is that the early adopters are still somewhat skeptical, not of the price, but of the practicality of 3D in the home. :2cents

Well 3D BD is definitely not going to carry the ball as far as ushering in 3D to consumers homes. None available.

It will be 3D sports that will drive 3D into homes. A hockey game this month, The Masters next month and June is FIAA World Cup

Sky (UK) launches their 3D channel April 3rd.

oblioman
03-22-2010, 10:40 PM
Well 3D BD is definitely not going to carry the ball as far as ushering in 3D to consumers homes. None available.

It will be 3D sports that will drive 3D into homes. A hockey game this month, The Masters next month and June is FIAA World Cup

Sky (UK) launches their 3D channel April 3rd.

and 3D sports makes me all the more skeptical. Camera angles alone, just to get near the action are prohibitive, and anything else would certainly be an elevated full open f, generally from the side. If the NFL gets on board with that little cable cam that floats above the teams, it might have a bit of viability. But even that cam is removed from the field of play during action.

Lee Stewart
03-23-2010, 12:37 AM
and 3D sports makes me all the more skeptical. Camera angles alone, just to get near the action are prohibitive, and anything else would certainly be an elevated full open f, generally from the side. If the NFL gets on board with that little cable cam that floats above the teams, it might have a bit of viability. But even that cam is removed from the field of play during action.

Have you seen a live 3D sporting event broadcast to a 3D cinema?

teranova
03-26-2010, 09:22 AM
Dropped in at my local Best Buy yesterday to check out Samsung's 3D HDTVs. It was kind of disappointing as they had Monsters vs. Aliens running. I would of thought they would have shown clips of sports, or movies to show the real advantages of 3D over 2D like I experienced when I viewed the Panasonic 3D demo a few weeks ago.
It reminds me of when I first went shopping for a HD set seven years ago and every electronic store I went to had "Toy Story" or some other animated movie playing. I asked a young fellow at one chain store why wouldn't they be showing a football game or movie so I could get an idea how HD compares to regular analogue TV and he replied in a rather snotty voice: "Cause it got awesome effects, that's why!" and he then walked away. ( I for sure didn't purchase my set at his store)

Lee Stewart
03-26-2010, 10:38 AM
and 3D sports makes me all the more skeptical. Camera angles alone, just to get near the action are prohibitive, and anything else would certainly be an elevated full open f, generally from the side. If the NFL gets on board with that little cable cam that floats above the teams, it might have a bit of viability. But even that cam is removed from the field of play during action.

You like basketball?

Ready to Watch The 'Final Four' In 3D?

http://www.tvpredictions.com/cinedigm032610.htm

This theater near you? They will be showing the games in 3D.

http://www.fandango.com/carmikethoroughbred20_aaofp/theaterpage?date=4/5/2010

spyder_21
03-27-2010, 09:41 PM
Well 3D BD is definitely not going to carry the ball as far as ushering in 3D to consumers homes. None available.

It will be 3D sports that will drive 3D into homes. A hockey game this month, The Masters next month and June is FIAA World Cup

Sky (UK) launches their 3D channel April 3rd.

To be honest I don't think sports will drive the 3DTV. Think about it, when watching sports you have a bunch of friends at your place right? Well how many of your friends you think would even have the 3D Glasses (if they don't own a 3D TV), not to mention if they do what is the chance that their glasses even work with your 3DTV. So your friends would be stuck watching a blurry image while you enjoy the 3D Sports. If anything Cable TV (like HBO, Showtime, Discovery Channel)I think would push 3DTV more than Sports. Plus major sports evens is not every day.

It is not like when HDTV came out, where you could have a group of friends come over and admire your new TV. Now with 3DTV it is either your friends have the 3D glasses or they can't enjoy it.

fryet
03-30-2010, 02:19 PM
To be honest I don't think sports will drive the 3DTV. Think about it, when watching sports you have a bunch of friends at your place right? Well how many of your friends you think would even have the 3D Glasses (if they don't own a 3D TV), not to mention if they do what is the chance that their glasses even work with your 3DTV. So your friends would be stuck watching a blurry image while you enjoy the 3D Sports. If anything Cable TV (like HBO, Showtime, Discovery Channel)I think would push 3DTV more than Sports. Plus major sports evens is not every day.

It is not like when HDTV came out, where you could have a group of friends come over and admire your new TV. Now with 3DTV it is either your friends have the 3D glasses or they can't enjoy it.

Hmmm, I think the one who is providing the TV would also be providing the glasses. So you probably want around 8 of these expensive glasses to ensure that you always have enough - and for many even that number wouldn't be enough. Personally, I don't know that I would want to watch 3D sports with friends, though. With friends, half the fun is discussing what is going on in the game. Looking at someone wearing 3D glasses, while you are looking at them through 3D glasses, doesn't sound like the atmosphere I would want for a game. If I were to wear 3D glasses, it would be for movies, not for sports.

P.S. As one who doesn't like 3D, I am finding it to be a huge pain that every single major release now is being released in 3D. It is starting to turn me off from going to the movies at all, because if I go with friends, they are going to want to see the 3D version.

oblioman
03-30-2010, 02:34 PM
eeeyahhh,,,me son has been asking about a "new" 3dTV lately. So we made the trip over to HH Gregg today. They had a Sammy 46c7000 series set up. it had LED plastered all over it - no where did it say anything about LCD - not even on their website. Asked the salesman about it,,his response was that it is an LED. Me corrected him once,,but he corrected me by pointing to the sign that said LED. Well,, we both tried the glasses (Monsters vs Aliens demo),,and although the effect was there, the minute you diverted your eyes, then looked back at the screen, you had to refocus which was extremely annoying. Not to be a complete naysayer,,we then went over to BB and they had the exact set-up,,,,with one pair of broken glasses. Good thing about the trip - me son quit asking.

Lee Stewart
03-30-2010, 02:54 PM
To be honest I don't think sports will drive the 3DTV. Think about it, when watching sports you have a bunch of friends at your place right? Well how many of your friends you think would even have the 3D Glasses (if they don't own a 3D TV), not to mention if they do what is the chance that their glasses even work with your 3DTV. So your friends would be stuck watching a blurry image while you enjoy the 3D Sports. If anything Cable TV (like HBO, Showtime, Discovery Channel)I think would push 3DTV more than Sports. Plus major sports evens is not every day.

It is not like when HDTV came out, where you could have a group of friends come over and admire your new TV. Now with 3DTV it is either your friends have the 3D glasses or they can't enjoy it.

LOL! Who said you have to have friends over? You are probably going to have 2 pair in the house - that means you and your best friend can enjoy 3d sports while everyone else is watching ho-hum HD sports.

tvine2000
03-30-2010, 03:32 PM
EDIT:
Please keep in mind the poll should not read:
Just Hype (like HD-DVD)

It should read:

Just Hype (Will fade like HD-DVD)

Just don't know how to edit it with my phone.

Well I rose the question for you the reader. Do you think the 3D movie technology hitting homes so quick is really going to stay, or just hype and will fade as fast as it hits.

I myself think that 3D is too much of a HYPE, it is ok the first time I saw it. It has some problems

1. It is too dark at some scenes (I took my glasses off once, and I was like damn I can see the picture better) the glasses makes some parts too dark to see all the detail.

2. At some scenes when they are not doing anything close up, it is a bit blurry. Well at least I think it is.

3. I just don't like wearing the glasses (as I don't wear glasses right now).

I know no one if forcing me to see the movies in 3d. But when a movies comes out ONLY in 3D (like Avatar), you have no other option but to watch it in 3D unless I want to wait for the bluray version. Plus when the girlfriend nags and wants to see a movie in 3D, well then you must tag along.

So what is your take on it, is 3D here to say or will it fade out like HDDVD.

i voted here to stay. the main reason is as lee said theres a lot of support for it from people that can make it happen.somehow in our minds we think we have some control,or say on how things will go and turn out.

as far as 3d looking dark somtimes,i'm sure they will work out the bugs.i saw 3d at best buy and what i saw i liked.way better then the old 3d.

as far as avatar,the interview i saw with the director .avatar will be 2d first.3d later.

tvine2000
03-30-2010, 03:34 PM
http://www.highdefforum.com/high-definition-programming-shows/106439-discovery-launch-3d-channel-sony-imax-source.html

http://www.highdefforum.com/high-definition-programming-shows/106427-espn-launch-3d-network-june.html

also the ps3 is going to get a lot of 3d games,thats going get some people on the 3d train.your right lee,3d will take off as the years past.

tvine2000
03-30-2010, 03:37 PM
Thats cool.

I am just wondering how many people are going to rush out and buy a 3D HDTV when they hit the market? Too many people spent and bought a HDTV. On "Black Friday" I went to BestBuy and people where snatching up HDTV's left and right, they had a special line for checkout.

Do you think right now in the times like it is people are going to say "Oh who cares I spent 1000-3000 on this tv, lets go get another one".

I think the format would be a good option (if it did not need its own special tv to watch them).

It is not like when Bluray came out, all you really needed to start watching it was a Bluray player and not another tv. On-top of that not all Bluray players will support the 3d format (ps3 will by firmware update) so that means on-top of having to get another HDTV, you also have to buy a new Bluray player just to play the content.

I think that hardcore and people with money to spend on something so new, that it won't hit the average person for a few years (TV price, and new player being the biggest problem).

I on the other hand would love to see how games play in 3d, but as for watching movies... nah I would pass (maybe a few here and there) but not worth buying a new HDTV at the moment.

It does not matter if every station offers 3D, it is only going to be watched by who owns a 3D Ready TV

I am not a Fanboy in anyway, if 3D stays alive (when my V10 dies) then yeah I will be getting a 3D HDTV.

http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/12/17/specifications-for-3d-blu-ray-finalized-but-does-anybody-care/

if i had that kind of money to burn,id do it no matter how many tvs i had.i think some that can will jump on band wagon.

tvine2000
03-30-2010, 03:46 PM
3D is here to stay. It's been around in some form or fashion for about the past 150 years. What is being presented today, is simply today's high tech version of an old thing. If the powers that be can eliminate the glasses,,it would have a good shot at getting more than a niche foothold. With the glasses,,,no thanks.

i heard panasonic is working on that[no glasses].during the ces show this year,didn't toshbia show 3dtv with no glasses? i'm sure they did ,but it didn't look that good.

tvine2000
03-30-2010, 03:52 PM
Great. Digital artifacts and motion blur in 3D. I can't wait.

have you seen 3d yet? go to bb and watch.i saw no blur,artifacts and the color looked normal.

Lee Stewart
03-30-2010, 03:57 PM
i heard panasonic is working on that[no glasses].during the ces show this year,didn't toshbia show 3dtv with no glasses? i'm sure they did ,but it didn't look that good.

I do not believe so.

Companies like Aliscopy and Magnetic 3D are selling products to commerical customers for digital signage.

Autostereoscopic 3D has a LONG way to go before we ever see a consumer product.

tvine2000
03-30-2010, 03:57 PM
So, in order to get the best 3D effect, one will want to get a new BD player (or upgrade the PS3), that's understandable. But is this not going to severely crunch the sat and cable's bandwidth?

don't forget the 1.4 hdmi cables

Lee Stewart
03-30-2010, 03:58 PM
don't forget the 1.4 hdmi cables

You can use HDMI 1.3 Cat 2 certified high speed cables

tvine2000
03-30-2010, 04:01 PM
One thing to consider when it comes to 3D versus the introduction of DVD and HD. Movie theaters for several years have been offering 3D and non-3D versions of movies side by side. While the majority do choose the 3D version, many are choosing the 2D version. Part of that may be due to price (although I don't think there was a surcharge for 3D a couple of years ago), but the price is usually about $1, and I don't think that is the major issue. For some, the 2D experience is superior to that of 3D. With 2D, you don't have eye strain problems, blurry and unvivid colors, and 3D images thrown into your face.

Taking an informal poll, from my own family, 4 like 3D, while 2 prefer 2D. As a result, I don't think 3D adoption will ever reach the level of DVD or HD. Sure your TV might handle it, but this portion of the population will never choose to purchase 3D content. To be fair, though, 3D advances may make many of the issues listed above non-issues. Then we would only need to convince movie directors that it isn't cool to send objects into the audiences' face.

maybe. but one thing i have learned from this forum is never say ''ever''

tvine2000
03-30-2010, 04:04 PM
You can use HDMI 1.3 Cat 2 certified high speed cables

thats right,sorry. but you know bb gonna push those 1.4s at ya.

Lee Stewart
03-30-2010, 04:37 PM
thats right,sorry. but you know bb gonna push those 1.4s at ya.

Unfortunately you are correct.

Like Monster - they offer a 15.2Gbps ULTRA High Speed HDMI cable . . .

Both 1.3 and 1.4 top out at 10.2Gbps. :lol:

PFC5
03-31-2010, 06:47 PM
LOL! Who said you have to have friends over? You are probably going to have 2 pair in the house - that means you and your best friend can enjoy 3d sports while everyone else is watching ho-hum HD sports.

So if you have 4 friends over to watch in 3D you need for sets of glasses, but if you only have 2 sets then no one can watch 3D because watching in 3D means those two without glasses will just see a blurry mess on 3D content right? ;)

Lee Stewart
03-31-2010, 07:02 PM
So if you have 4 friends over to watch in 3D you need for sets of glasses, but if you only have 2 sets then no one can watch 3D because watching in 3D means those two without glasses will just see a blurry mess on 3D content right? ;)

Correct - but you decided to move the goal posts. I said you and your buddy - not you and three of your buddies.

If your agenda is to tell people that 3DTV is too expensive - then you are of course welcome to it. There are early adopters and then there is everyone else. The early adopters get to enjoy the new tech while everyone else watches the old tech.

I bought my first HDTV is 1997 - when did you buy your first HDTV again?

You want the new tech - you pay for it.

JMS
04-01-2010, 09:01 AM
I bought my first HDTV is 1997 -

Really....I'm sure your days and nights were filled with all that HD content to watch.....;):lol:

PFC5
04-01-2010, 01:44 PM
Correct - but you decided to move the goal posts. I said you and your buddy - not you and three of your buddies.

If your agenda is to tell people that 3DTV is too expensive - then you are of course welcome to it. There are early adopters and then there is everyone else. The early adopters get to enjoy the new tech while everyone else watches the old tech.

I bought my first HDTV is 1997 - when did you buy your first HDTV again?

You want the new tech - you pay for it.

A lot of people have more than just ONE friend over to watch sports together. And forget about having some household members watch too.

I am not moving the goal posts but responding to a real issue with the current high price of each pair of glasses and that they are currently proprietary to each display mfg as an additional hinderence at these early stages.

I expect in 2 years that the prices of glasses will drop and also they will be "universal" as well or else I believe that 3DTV is going no where far if that doesn't happen. For mass adoption this needs to happen so others who also buy into 3DTVs, etc will simply be able to bring over their relatively cheap glasses and you will not have to limit who is over to watch based on how many sets of glasses they cannot afford to buy.

So 3D glasses themselves are not a great stumbling block, but the current prices and proprietary nature at this stage IS going to limit the appeal. Think about it in those terms and I am sure you can see the point I am making. Also what a waste it will be if you buy 4 sets for your current 3DTV and then have to buy new ones IF you get a different brand for your next one.

So glasses being proprietary AND expensive at this point WILL greatly limit the appeal and THAT is the biggest issues at this point over simply needing to wear glasses IMO. I just want people to know the logistics of these issues so they can make a informed decision. ;)

oblioman
04-01-2010, 02:06 PM
Mass adoption is highly unlikely. Niche adoption, granted. At this stage, consumers would get better use and enjoyment by buying a decent 2D plasma and a decent sound system. The 46' sammy at HH Gregg is $2300 bucks (LED LCD),,glasses,,$300,,,BD player,,$350. Early adoption of some tech is worth it,,,but this is folly IMO.

Lee Stewart
04-01-2010, 06:17 PM
Mass adoption is highly unlikely. Niche adoption, granted. At this stage, consumers would get better use and enjoyment by buying a decent 2D plasma and a decent sound system. The 46' sammy at HH Gregg is $2300 bucks (LED LCD),,glasses,,$300,,,BD player,,$350. Early adoption of some tech is worth it,,,but this is folly IMO.

Yeah! Just like back in June 2006; $4000 for a 50+" 1080P LCD HDTV and $800 to $1000 for a BD player.

What schmucks bought that stuff?

:rolleyes:

spyder_21
04-01-2010, 07:58 PM
Yeah! Just like back in June 2006; $4000 for a 50+" 1080P LCD HDTV and $800 to $1000 for a BD player.

What schmucks bought that stuff?

:rolleyes:

Yeah, but I think when going from DVD to BD was a big jump. You where getting a higher quality image, which did not need special glasses to watch, everyone could enjoy it. People still had the big tube, or older rear projection, it was a new deign, new look, and something to show off on how THIN it was, hanging it on the wall was a big marketing ad.

Now with 3D (even though it is a new feature) it does not enable everyone to watch with ease. All you are paying for is to watch the same movies you have on BD in 3D. Too me that just does not justify the cost of a new TV.
1. everyone has to have glasses
2. some people with optical glasses do find 3D glasses to be a bear to ware (my father is one), and I did hear a customer at BestBuy saying it would not work because the optical glasses and 3d glasses are too much to have on to watch TV.
3. Would you be willing to pay more just for a 3D effect?

I like the idea of 3D, I like it a lot. Just the glasses are what is putting me off (for now), oh and having to buy another TV after I just purchased a V10.

I would love to play PS3 games in 3D, but I can wait for now.

JMS
04-01-2010, 08:06 PM
Yeah! Just like back in June 2006; $4000 for a 50+" 1080P LCD HDTV and $800 to $1000 for a BD player.

What schmucks bought that stuff?

:rolleyes:
Only those schmucks with money to burn. And '06 was back in the good times.

Now....? Times is different.

oblioman
04-01-2010, 08:39 PM
Yeah! Just like back in June 2006; $4000 for a 50+" 1080P LCD HDTV and $800 to $1000 for a BD player.

What schmucks bought that stuff?

:rolleyes:

me understands your point Lee, and really hope that 3D takes off and meets and exceeds your expectations. Paid over 4 grand for me first 46" RP 1080i,,,,back when we had 1 program, 1 time per week to view it. Also had to buy me a HD OTA box to get reception of that one program. Things have progressed ten, twenty fold in the past 10 years. We are just getting to the point where mass acceptance of HD is becoming reality to many homes. Many, many homes are just getting their first BD player to get a grasp of what great HD is all about. Providers are still grasping the concept of pushing HD through their pipes and struggling with bandwidth issues. Movie makers can easily create 3D cartoons and they can synthesize classics. But to shoot in 3D is expensive - and me gut tells me that a majority of viewers would prefer to pay for that added expense at one time, affordably at the theater, instead of making a commitment at the home. hope ya can understand me rant,,pretty pissed up for a friday night.

Lee Stewart
04-01-2010, 09:26 PM
Only those schmucks with money to burn. And '06 was back in the good times.

Now....? Times is different.

So no people with money to burn? Really?

spyder_21
04-01-2010, 09:29 PM
So no people with money to burn? Really?

Yeah really, with people loosing their jobs left and right, houses going into foreclosure, and just trying to make by on what you have... Yeah no people with money to burn. Near us they just laid off 20 police workers, now what is up with that.

Lee Stewart
04-01-2010, 09:30 PM
me understands your point Lee, and really hope that 3D takes off and meets and exceeds your expectations. Paid over 4 grand for me first 46" RP 1080i,,,,back when we had 1 program, 1 time per week to view it. Also had to buy me a HD OTA box to get reception of that one program. Things have progressed ten, twenty fold in the past 10 years. We are just getting to the point where mass acceptance of HD is becoming reality to many homes. Many, many homes are just getting their first BD player to get a grasp of what great HD is all about. Providers are still grasping the concept of pushing HD through their pipes and struggling with bandwidth issues. Movie makers can easily create 3D cartoons and they can synthesize classics. But to shoot in 3D is expensive - and me gut tells me that a majority of viewers would prefer to pay for that added expense at one time, affordably at the theater, instead of making a commitment at the home. hope ya can understand me rant,,pretty pissed up for a friday night.

Of course I understand. 3DTV isn't going to be for everyone. Just like HDTV isn't. Oh people will buy an HDTV because that's all they can buy. Then they have to spend extra for HD service. Not all do.

I would be happy if 3DTV penetrated 25% of all USA HH's. That would be people with a 3DTV, watching 3D content on it. That would insure a steady stream of 3D content IMO.

PFC5
04-01-2010, 11:54 PM
I am excited about 3DTV but I thankfully already have a great HDTV I bought in 2008 so I do not have to buy a new HDTV right now and choose among the 1st Gen models. I plan on waiting until Gen2 in 2011 and then will likely upgrade my current 50" to a 58" 3DTV. Hopefully by then universal 3D glasses that work with all 3DTVs will be available at under $50.00/each so I can justify buying at least 4.

What the hell were these mfg thinking when they decided to not agree on a universal interface/comm link between the glasses & displays when they decided on this format?????? :banghead:

I can only assume they figured it would give them an extra revenue stream for the glasses being repeatedly bought with every new display and possibly to basically force people to buy their brand again after the first one so those people didn't have to re-buy all new glasses. Sounds like short sighted greed that WILL hamper adoption for many right now IMO. THIS is a MUCH bigger issue to me than simply having to wear glasses.

Ruffrob
04-02-2010, 01:57 AM
What the hell were these mfg thinking when they decided to not agree on a universal interface/comm link between the glasses & displays when they decided on this format??????

Just think if this 3D thing takes off with the different brands/glasses,it could really turn into a format war. But because I've been burned by first generation electronics in the past, I'm happy to say I'm on the sidelines,buying hot dogs and watching who makes the first down...;)

Lee Stewart
04-02-2010, 06:23 AM
Yeah really, with people loosing their jobs left and right, houses going into foreclosure, and just trying to make by on what you have... Yeah no people with money to burn. Near us they just laid off 20 police workers, now what is up with that.

That is what is happening at the bottom of the "ladder." At the top - you still have plenty of wealthy people. And the premium for 3DTV over a comparible HDTV (top of the line) is only about 25%.

We are talking about a $3000 exoenditure here. They are selling cars aren't they? They cost 10+X as much. ;)

Lee Stewart
04-02-2010, 06:25 AM
I am excited about 3DTV but I thankfully already have a great HDTV I bought in 2008 so I do not have to buy a new HDTV right now and choose among the 1st Gen models. I plan on waiting until Gen2 in 2011 and then will likely upgrade my current 50" to a 58" 3DTV. Hopefully by then universal 3D glasses that work with all 3DTVs will be available at under $50.00/each so I can justify buying at least 4.

What the hell were these mfg thinking when they decided to not agree on a universal interface/comm link between the glasses & displays when they decided on this format?????? :banghead:

I can only assume they figured it would give them an extra revenue stream for the glasses being repeatedly bought with every new display and possibly to basically force people to buy their brand again after the first one so those people didn't have to re-buy all new glasses. Sounds like short sighted greed that WILL hamper adoption for many right now IMO. THIS is a MUCH bigger issue to me than simply having to wear glasses.

Universal glasses for $50 in 2011? IMO, that isn't going to happen. Maybe $100 at best.

spyder_21
04-02-2010, 09:22 AM
That is what is happening at the bottom of the "ladder." At the top - you still have plenty of wealthy people. And the premium for 3DTV over a comparible HDTV (top of the line) is only about 25%.

We are talking about a $3000 exoenditure here. They are selling cars aren't they? They cost 10+X as much. ;)

You are comparing cars to TVs. That is a big difference, a vehicle is a must where as upgrading to a 3d TV is not.

Lee Stewart
04-02-2010, 09:48 AM
You are comparing cars to TVs. That is a big difference, a vehicle is a must where as upgrading to a 3d TV is not.

Not a $30,000+ car. Sure a $17,000+ car.

And 3DTV is an Early Adopter product. EA's have money. Joe Public isn't going to buy one. He's the one in bad financial shape.

spyder_21
04-02-2010, 11:45 AM
Not a $30,000+ car. Sure a $17,000+ car.

And 3DTV is an Early Adopter product. EA's have money. Joe Public isn't going to buy one. He's the one in bad financial shape.

Yeah, EA's will buy them, but for it to really kick off they need the public support as well. When the public can afford them, you will see the average people buying them up left and right, but until that happens 3D only has the market to sell to people that can afford another TV.

Like I said I don't despite 3D, I like the concept. Just think it will have a struggle to stay alive.

Lee Stewart
04-02-2010, 12:19 PM
Yeah, EA's will buy them, but for it to really kick off they need the public support as well. When the public can afford them, you will see the average people buying them up left and right, but until that happens 3D only has the market to sell to people that can afford another TV.

Like I said I don't despite 3D, I like the concept. Just think it will have a struggle to stay alive.

Major CE products don't go from EA to mass market in a couple of years. Not even DVD accomplished that.

spyder_21
04-02-2010, 12:46 PM
Major CE products don't go from EA to mass market in a couple of years. Not even DVD accomplished that.

To me it looks like they are trying to push it that way.

Lee Stewart
04-02-2010, 04:21 PM
To me it looks like they are trying to push it that way.

That's just marketing hype and your impression. :lol:

spyder_21
04-02-2010, 05:04 PM
That's just marketing hype and your impression. :lol:

quote taken from IGN

Sony will have several big name PlayStation 3 titles ready this summer when the company plans to launch its major 3D initiative.


So when PS3 games become 3D this summer, are they going to turn to EA's to play them... I think they are thinking about the public, so why are they making them so soon, if they are not relaying on the public?

So I don't think it is my impression, just what I read and heard.

Not trying to sound like an ass, just asking.

Lee Stewart
04-02-2010, 06:39 PM
quote taken from IGN


So when PS3 games become 3D this summer, are they going to turn to EA's to play them... I think they are thinking about the public, so why are they making them so soon, if they are not relaying on the public?

So I don't think it is my impression, just what I read and heard.

Not trying to sound like an ass, just asking.

$2500+ for a 52" 3DTV from Sony. Is that a "the public" price range?

spyder_21
04-02-2010, 10:38 PM
$2500+ for a 52" 3DTV from Sony. Is that a "the public" price range?

I can't say what is in the price range of someone's budget. I was just stating about the PS3 3D games coming out this summer, and did not even mention Sony 3D TV's.

Lee Stewart
04-03-2010, 03:47 AM
I can't say what is in the price range of someone's budget. I was just stating about the PS3 3D games coming out this summer, and did not even mention Sony 3D TV's.

Well let me help you out. The most popular HDTV bought in 2009 was the 32" size.

They don't have any 32" 3DTVs. They start at 46". Only Sony has a 40"

Bugwart
04-30-2010, 02:25 PM
DisplaySearch: 3D Display Revenues Forecast to Reach $22B by 2018
You may not be aware of this but HDTV has been available since 1998. ;)


I was in Tokyo in 1993 wandering around the Ginza. In the Sony building they had an HDTV demo working. At the time, it required a room full of electronics to run it - I looked into the back room. It was impressive, even then.

This was only a demo. As you noted, HD was not commercially available for years after that.

sanlyn
05-02-2010, 06:31 AM
I was going to movies when 3D came out in the early 1950's. It seemed to me that people payed to watch them because of the novelty, not because the process technically "improved" anything. Certainly, most of those films were garbage; a few classics came out and are in non-3D DVD prints today (Them!, Kiss Me Kate, a few others). Back then the glasses were free. They were cardboard or plastic and were dumped into a big can when people left the theater. The fad lasted about 3 or 4 years.

You could say that in the 50's people were staying home to watch tv and the whole movie exhibition business would have been decimated anyway, 3D or no 3D. Today, my business puts me in a lot of homes and I contact a great many people. I haven't met one person who's interested in 3D, and I've been asking out of curiosity. Most people just shrug it off. I wonder what kind of numbers the marketing people have on public appeal. Marketers are going to push this anyway the same way they pushed LCD's by cutting the supply of CRT's, and pushing BluRay by cutting the supply of SD-DVD players and DVD recorders. Some TV makers have already eliminated composite, s-video and some component jacks from their sets so they can force you into buying 4, 5, 6 or maybe 10 HDMI devices. But I know several people who won't buy a new TV because they won't throw away good s-video or component gear.

If 3D "succeeds" it will do so because manufacturers will find ways to force it down our throats. In my daily routine I just don't see any 3D interest at all. None. Period.

oblioman
05-02-2010, 07:42 AM
Ebert is joining the masses,,,,,against 3D!!!!!!!:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/237110/page/1

spyder_21
05-02-2010, 10:09 AM
Ebert is joining the masses,,,,,against 3D!!!!!!!:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/237110/page/1

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n247/spider2021/thumbupsmiley.png for Ebert

tvine2000
05-02-2010, 03:00 PM
Ebert is joining the masses,,,,,against 3D!!!!!!!:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/237110/page/1

I read that a couple of days ago. I don't know how much pull he has anymore.If he does that doesn't help 3dhdtv's. But all they have to do is not make as many 2d tvs. in years to come all there will be is hdtvs with 3d.

Btw,the last picture i saw of Ebert showed a very sick man,sad.Theres always people out there that knock new technology,we have seen that here before.I think 3dtv will make a big wave in years to come. I like it.

spyder_21
05-02-2010, 03:12 PM
I read that a couple of days ago. I don't know how much pull he has anymore.If he does that doesn't help 3dhdtv's. But all they have to do is not make as many 2d tvs. in years to come all there will be is hdtvs with 3d.

They won't just stop making 2d tv's if that was the case they would of stopped making DVD to make people buy bluray players. Maybe in years to come like 10+ they might stop making dvd's. Look how long it took to stop making VHS tapes (I think they still do make them though).

oblioman
05-02-2010, 03:14 PM
I read that a couple of days ago. I don't know how much pull he has anymore.If he does that doesn't help 3dhdtv's. But all they have to do is not make as many 2d tvs. in years to come all there will be is hdtvs with 3d.

Btw,the last picture i saw of Ebert showed a very sick man,sad.Theres always people out there that knock new technology,we have seen that here before.I think 3dtv will make a big wave in years to come. I like it.

3D has yet to prove itself as a grail, much less the holy grail. People should really research the pro's & con's before spending the extra money on 3D. At this point, the con's far out weigh the pro's and the average consumer would be far better served by buying a better brand of 2D TV and/or buying a quality sound system.

tvine2000
05-02-2010, 03:58 PM
3D has yet to prove itself as a grail, much less the holy grail. People should really research the pro's & con's before spending the extra money on 3D. At this point, the con's far out weigh the pro's and the average consumer would be far better served by buying a better brand of 2D TV and/or buying a quality sound system.

I have no plans buying into 3dtv,none at this time.If its going to prove itself maybe it will happen on cable networks first.

I didn't mean they cut back on 2dtvs tomorrow or next year,but you can bank on it ,they will when the time is right. One thing i have learned at this forum is what the industry wants ,it gets. THERE pushing 3dtv hard ,its going to happen.We saw blu-ray win,even though it wasn't ready for prime time.I rest my case.

spyder_21
05-02-2010, 04:13 PM
I have no plans buying into 3dtv,none at this time.If its going to prove itself maybe it will happen on cable networks first.

I didn't mean they cut back on 2dtvs tomorrow or next year,but you can bank on it ,they will when the time is right. One thing i have learned at this forum is what the industry wants ,it gets. THERE pushing 3dtv hard ,its going to happen.We saw blu-ray win,even though it wasn't ready for prime time.I rest my case.

Keep in mind it will only win if we buy it. If we don't want it, they don't get sales. There are still DVD's being made so they didn't push Bluray in the sense you are talking about 3D pushing 2D.

To be honest until far far into the future, I don't see all and every 2D model being gone from existence.

If that is the case it will more and less in the line of 3D, Hologram, Brain Wave sets (where it feeds the video and audio right too your brain).

Lee Stewart
05-02-2010, 05:51 PM
Why I Think Roger Ebert Is Obsolete (And You Should Too)

http://www.thewrap.com/blog-entry/why-i-think-roger-ebert-obsolete-and-you-should-too-16868

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x66/LeeAStewart/bullseye-2.jpg

spyder_21
05-02-2010, 07:03 PM
Why I Think Roger Ebert Is Obsolete (And You Should Too)

http://www.thewrap.com/blog-entry/why-i-think-roger-ebert-obsolete-and-you-should-too-16868

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x66/LeeAStewart/bullseye-2.jpg


See thats sad. When someone speaks their mind, and it is not what they want to hear you get ridiculed over it.

I for one support him.

Lee Stewart
05-02-2010, 08:12 PM
See thats sad. When someone speaks their mind, and it is not what they want to hear you get ridiculed over it.

I for one support him.

And I think he is full of shit.

You do know the difference between one man's opinion and anothers right?

PFC5
05-03-2010, 12:53 PM
Ebert is joining the masses,,,,,against 3D!!!!!!!:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/237110/page/1

All those points were correct IMO, but I think if they can do 3D well it could improve things if they can find a way to avoid the dim look with future tech and we may eventually always want to see everything in 3D. I do not think we are close to being to that point technology wise yet.

Good read though so thanks for posting it.:thumbsup:

PFC5
05-03-2010, 01:11 PM
Keep in mind it will only win if we buy it. If we don't want it, they don't get sales. There are still DVD's being made so they didn't push Bluray in the sense you are talking about 3D pushing 2D.

To be honest until far far into the future, I don't see all and every 2D model being gone from existence.

If that is the case it will more and less in the line of 3D, Hologram, Brain Wave sets (where it feeds the video and audio right too your brain).

If they force only 3DTVs then we will have no choice when we need to buy a new TV. Just like we cannot get CRTs anymore.

PFC5
05-03-2010, 01:14 PM
Why I Think Roger Ebert Is Obsolete (And You Should Too)

http://www.thewrap.com/blog-entry/why-i-think-roger-ebert-obsolete-and-you-should-too-16868

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x66/LeeAStewart/bullseye-2.jpg

I agree with some of what he says as well. I have always wondered WHY they have not moved sooner into 3D. I have posted previously that they have a almost new medium if they did this but I just wish we didn't lose PQ to get 3D even with the current state of the art tech they are using.

I was a little underwhelmed with the 3D demo on the Samsung of Monsters vs Aliens I saw at BB myself.

oblioman
05-04-2010, 01:40 PM
The difference between Ebert and Darrow, is that Darrow is banking on 3D,,,not sure what motive Ebert has. And since Darrow is defending and profiting from the 3D cash cow,,of course he had to come out with both guns blazing. Either way, me money stays in me pocket until 3D is worth it.

Lee Stewart
05-04-2010, 03:48 PM
The difference between Ebert and Darrow, is that Darrow is banking on 3D,,,not sure what motive Ebert has. And since Darrow is defending and profiting from the 3D cash cow,,of course he had to come out with both guns blazing. Either way, me money stays in me pocket until 3D is worth it.

Why don't you take an educated guess to Ebert's motive. You dismissed it too quickly IMO.

oblioman
05-04-2010, 04:08 PM
Why don't you take an educated guess to Ebert's motive. You dismissed it too quickly IMO.

What motive would Ebert have for his article? Does he have a stake in MaxiVision? Please clue me in. Certainly he could critique a 3D movie as well as he has critiqued 2D over the years. His bread and butter be the same. Ebert wrote an article expressing his views on 3D, many of us share the same opinion.

tvine2000
05-04-2010, 04:24 PM
Keep in mind it will only win if we buy it. If we don't want it, they don't get sales. There are still DVD's being made so they didn't push Bluray in the sense you are talking about 3D pushing 2D.

To be honest until far far into the future, I don't see all and every 2D model being gone from existence.

If that is the case it will more and less in the line of 3D, Hologram, Brain Wave sets (where it feeds the video and audio right too your brain).

There will be a lot of people buying 3dtvs only because they can and have to have the latist toy. a very small number, but enough to keep it going. the main thing that will kill 3d is lack of 3d movies .At this point i don't think this market lives and dies on sales.Its a new technology.

spyder_21
05-04-2010, 04:46 PM
There will be a lot of people buying 3dtvs only because they can and have to have the latist toy. a very small number, but enough to keep it going. the main thing that will kill 3d is lack of 3d movies .At this point i don't think this market lives and dies on sales.Its a new technology.

Well to push all 2D TV's and HDTV's off shelves would be a big feat in itself. We can still buy Tube Tv's (Walmart still sells them). And of course everything lives and dies on sales. Supply and Demand my friend, supply and demand. If we don't demand it, there is no reason to supply it.

On a side note:
And I think he is full of shit.

You do know the difference between one man's opinion and anothers right?

That is some strong wording. I know the difference from man's opinion and another's. I understand Ebert's opinion and I understand yours. Also it does not mean that if YOU don't agree with something someone has to say, you think they are full of shit.

That is really childish, a man of your age should grow up a bit, and respect people's opinions. You might not like them, you might not agree with them(that is fine) but respect them (Ebert saying that means a big deal, it is not like he is an average person just making a post about it) This is Ebert we are talking about, his reputation of all his discussions about movies is always taken literally.

tvine2000
05-05-2010, 03:50 PM
Well to push all 2D TV's and HDTV's off shelves would be a big feat in itself. We can still buy Tube Tv's (Walmart still sells them). And of course everything lives and dies on sales. Supply and Demand my friend, supply and demand. If we don't demand it, there is no reason to supply it.

On a side note:


That is some strong wording. I know the difference from man's opinion and another's. I understand Ebert's opinion and I understand yours. Also it does not mean that if YOU don't agree with something someone has to say, you think they are full of shit.

That is really childish, a man of your age should grow up a bit, and respect people's opinions. You might not like them, you might not agree with them(that is fine) but respect them (Ebert saying that means a big deal, it is not like he is an average person just making a post about it) This is Ebert we are talking about, his reputation of all his discussions about movies is always taken literally.

I don't know where your walmart is,but where i am they haven't had a crt in 2 years. I woundnt doom 3dtv just yet the YES network just said they will broadcast a yankees ,mariner game in june or july in3D.
It won't be avatar,but the push is on.Don't you think someone thats a yankees fan with money to burn will buy a 3dtv just for that game. So theres people out that will do that.Maybe the demends not there but some sales will be there.

Beside its a new technology thats ea driven just like blu-ray was,or any new technology. HOW many here doomed blu-ray after the format war,saying it costs to much,it won't last etc.supply and demend just isn't part of it right now.You may end up right,but all i can really say and be honest is ''will see''.

Does anybody remember when lcd came out for computers.Didn't we see less and less crts?Btw i didn't say 2d tvs will vanish tomorrow,or 2 years from now. You can't bet if you need a new tv and your at bestbuy,they will try to sell you a 3dtv and tell you you can still watch 2dtv on it.
All i'm saying is even when a new technology looks like its going down the tubes,don't count on it.We all saw this with the format war.I thought no way is hd dvd going to lose!Boy was i wrong.

Lee Stewart
05-05-2010, 05:18 PM
That is some strong wording. I know the difference from man's opinion and another's. I understand Ebert's opinion and I understand yours. Also it does not mean that if YOU don't agree with something someone has to say, you think they are full of shit.

Sure it does. That is my opinion. It is a strong opinion, but you already guessed that

That is really childish, a man of your age should grow up a bit, and respect people's opinions. You might not like them, you might not agree with them(that is fine) but respect them (Ebert saying that means a big deal, it is not like he is an average person just making a post about it) This is Ebert we are talking about, his reputation of all his discussions about movies is always taken literally.

I respect Ebert's opinions - his ability to voice them - not what they stand for. And this time I think he is full of shit on his position of 3D.

You don't like my opinion? Well - tough &^%$ :lol:

When he came out and voiced his opinion on what IMAX was doing with their new digital theaters - calling them IMAX theaters and he called them LieMAX theaters - I was 100% in his favor. I actually wrote an email to him congratulating him on pulling the covers off this scam that IMAX was doing.

I ended my email with this comment . . .

Calling a 2K digital theater an IMAX theater, is like calling a Chevy Chevette . . . "a vette."


;)

Lee Stewart
05-05-2010, 05:21 PM
I don't know where your walmart is,but where i am they haven't had a crt in 2 years. I woundnt doom 3dtv just yet the YES network just said they will broadcast a yankees ,mariner game in june or july in3D.
It won't be avatar,but the push is on.Don't you think someone thats a yankees fan with money to burn will buy a 3dtv just for that game. So theres people out that will do that.Maybe the demends not there but some sales will be there.

Beside its a new technology thats ea driven just like blu-ray was,or any new technology. HOW many here doomed blu-ray after the format war,saying it costs to much,it won't last etc.supply and demend just isn't part of it right now.You may end up right,but all i can really say and be honest is ''will see''.

Does anybody remember when lcd came out for computers.Didn't we see less and less crts?Btw i didn't say 2d tvs will vanish tomorrow,or 2 years from now. You can't bet if you need a new tv and your at bestbuy,they will try to sell you a 3dtv and tell you you can still watch 2dtv on it.
All i'm saying is even when a new technology looks like its going down the tubes,don't count on it.We all saw this with the format war.I thought no way is hd dvd going to lose!Boy was i wrong.

Psssst . . .

A 3DTV is an HDTV . . . don't tell anyone.

:lol:

slobson
05-05-2010, 08:39 PM
the only ones that you can for sure say are wrong are those who swear up and down they and they alone know exactly what will happen in the future :haha:

tvine2000
05-05-2010, 09:50 PM
the only ones that you can for sure say are wrong are those who swear up and down they and they alone know exactly what will happen in the future :haha:

I agree ,kind of. Based on what i have seen and read, the industry is behind 3d.Hollywood is, cable is getting in gear and we have 3d ready blu-ray players. Sony has a 3dtv coming out. Based on what we have seen so far you can see the future and how its starting to play out. Does the industry just throw out a technology like this and hope for the best,i don't think so.Maybe they know something we don't.Maybe they did there homework before buying into this 3d market. I don't really know ,you tell me.

One more thing i haven't see Lee get excited about anything,like he is about 3d.I think he on to something.

soupnazi
05-07-2010, 10:22 AM
One more thing i haven't see Lee get excited about anything,like he is about 3d.I think he on to something.

or, maybe he's just on something :haha:

Just kidding Lee, I know how strongly you feel about 3D. Do you have some investment in the technology?

As for MY opinion, curse at me all you want if you disagree with my opinion Lee. I think the tv industry moved on 3D too quickly. When things happen this fast I have to be wary. I think they felt the time was right because of the hype around 3D movies in the theatre. But what about development of the tv technology? Are there better ways to view 3D on tv? How far below standard is this 3D equipment going to be 10 years from now or will it even be compatible? We don't really know do we because it's still in early stages of getting consumers with enough curiosity to test it out and there are still companies trying to develop other 3D technology. There are also people in the market for a new home theatre and some may buy it if they can afford it. Remember, you have to buy more than just a tv to get 3D. Add it all up. Besides those people it will take years for the people that already own a home theatre to buy a whole new one just for 3D. These people will wait to make a decision until after it has been tested by enough consumers to generate a realistic opinion. Then and only then will anyone be able to tell me if it is the future of tv.

PFC5
05-07-2010, 05:48 PM
or, maybe he's just on something :haha:

Just kidding Lee, I know how strongly you feel about 3D. Do you have some investment in the technology?

As for MY opinion, curse at me all you want if you disagree with my opinion Lee. I think the tv industry moved on 3D too quickly. When things happen this fast I have to be wary. I think they felt the time was right because of the hype around 3D movies in the theatre. But what about development of the tv technology? Are there better ways to view 3D on tv? How far below standard is this 3D equipment going to be 10 years from now or will it even be compatible? We don't really know do we because it's still in early stages of getting consumers with enough curiosity to test it out and there are still companies trying to develop other 3D technology. There are also people in the market for a new home theatre and some may buy it if they can afford it. Remember, you have to buy more than just a tv to get 3D. Add it all up. Besides those people it will take years for the people that already own a home theatre to buy a whole new one just for 3D. These people will wait to make a decision until after it has been tested by enough consumers to generate a realistic opinion. Then and only then will anyone be able to tell me if it is the future of tv.

All the more reason that BD moved as fast as they did to get 3D started IMO. Luckily I already have a HD display I am very happy with and I am able to wait until at least 2011 to decide whether or not to upgrade to 3D then. This time I am able to wait and not buy a launch year display. :D

I do agree that maybe the broadcasters have moved too fast without more investigation for the broadcast standard for 3D. Lets hope this has been in development for a couple of years though already.

oblioman
05-07-2010, 08:52 PM
Me can see getting a 3DTV in a couple of years. Just for the grandkids. Have no interest in it me self. The reason me takes exception to the roll out at this time is not to discount the early adopters - but to urge consumers to spend the extra money on a sound system worthy of their viewing experience. So many folks are missing the video/audio experience by using just their tv speakers or a crappy box system. For the extra 6-8-1000 dollars they could enjoy all of their movies in true surround,,instead of a few cartoons in 3D on substandard audio.

Lee Stewart
05-07-2010, 10:38 PM
All the more reason that BD moved as fast as they did to get 3D started IMO. Luckily I already have a HD display I am very happy with and I am able to wait until at least 2011 to decide whether or not to upgrade to 3D then. This time I am able to wait and not buy a launch year display. :D

I do agree that maybe the broadcasters have moved too fast without more investigation for the broadcast standard for 3D. Lets hope this has been in development for a couple of years though already.

There is no "broadcast" standard yet. That will be set by SMPTE by the end of this year.

What 3D standards exist are being used by CBL and SAT and really came from HDMI.ORG

The other 3D standard is for BD and was set by the BDA.

There is nothing to investigate. OTA, CBL and SAT want to use an existing HD channel's bandwidth for 3D. te good news is that all the HD STB's in the field will be compatible with the different 3D formats. The bad news is that the resolution will be Half HD and not Full HD per eye. But those that hhave seen it already (The Masters in 3D) say it is very good 3D PQ.

Lee Stewart
05-07-2010, 10:49 PM
or, maybe he's just on something :haha:

Just kidding Lee, I know how strongly you feel about 3D. Do you have some investment in the technology?

Nope - just that after watching HD for near 12 years - time for something new and 3D has always been a love of mine - real 3D - not crap like Anaglyph 3D.

As for MY opinion, curse at me all you want if you disagree with my opinion Lee. I think the tv industry moved on 3D too quickly. When things happen this fast I have to be wary. I think they felt the time was right because of the hype around 3D movies in the theatre. But what about development of the tv technology? Are there better ways to view 3D on tv? How far below standard is this 3D equipment going to be 10 years from now or will it even be compatible? We don't really know do we because it's still in early stages of getting consumers with enough curiosity to test it out and there are still companies trying to develop other 3D technology. There are also people in the market for a new home theatre and some may buy it if they can afford it. Remember, you have to buy more than just a tv to get 3D. Add it all up. Besides those people it will take years for the people that already own a home theatre to buy a whole new one just for 3D. These people will wait to make a decision until after it has been tested by enough consumers to generate a realistic opinion. Then and only then will anyone be able to tell me if it is the future of tv.

1. In the last 10 years, has HDTV changed? Not that I have seen. Was the HDVT first broadcast in Q4 1998 any different than what is being shown today? Nope - it was 1080i with an AR of 1.78.

2. 3D displays - there are two types; the first uses active shutter glasses and allows 3D to be shown at Full HD per eye (3D BD). The second uses passive polarized glasses and can only show 3D (on an FPD) at half HD per eye.

If you are talking about Auto 3D displays, they are so far into the future that no one knows when they will be available to consumers and what their cost would be. It will definitely be MUCH higher than any of todays 3DTVs simply because those that have been shown that can dulplicate 1920x1080 resolution on all views could not use an HDTV to do it. They had to use a 4K/Super HDTV - 4000x2000 to achieve it.

OBTW - Soup - you can take a MUSE HD LD and display it on one of todays HDTVs with no problems.

So much for your compatability concerns for 3D, which in reality is just a new version of HD.;)

soupnazi
05-08-2010, 10:19 AM
Nope - just that after watching HD for near 12 years - time for something new and 3D has always been a love of mine - real 3D - not crap like Anaglyph 3D.



1. In the last 10 years, has HDTV changed? Not that I have seen. Was the HDVT first broadcast in Q4 1998 any different than what is being shown today? Nope - it was 1080i with an AR of 1.78.
I said 3D not HD :confused:

2. 3D displays - there are two types; the first uses active shutter glasses and allows 3D to be shown at Full HD per eye (3D BD). The second uses passive polarized glasses and can only show 3D (on an FPD) at half HD per eye.
There were 2 types of HD media being sold a few years ago too, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD
If you are talking about Auto 3D displays, they are so far into the future that no one knows when they will be available to consumers and what their cost would be. It will definitely be MUCH higher than any of todays 3DTVs simply because those that have been shown that can dulplicate 1920x1080 resolution on all views could not use an HDTV to do it. They had to use a 4K/Super HDTV - 4000x2000 to achieve it.
Far into the future isn't that far anymore in terms of the speed of technology.

OBTW - Soup - you can take a MUSE HD LD and display it on one of todays HDTVs with no problems.

So much for your compatability concerns for 3D, which in reality is just a new version of HD.;)

The display isn't the concern with compatibility. It's the way in which the media is displayed that could change. eg. Sans glasses

I believe that they rushed 3DTV to the market. The only way to prove me wrong is to wait and see. So you're not allowed to tell me I'm wrong yet Lee.

Lee Stewart
05-08-2010, 10:58 AM
I said 3D not HD :confused:

No different with 3D. the standards have been set. What makes you think they will change in the future? HD didn't so why should 3D?


There were 2 types of HD media being sold a few years ago too, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD

But they both worked on any HDTV. :confused:

Far into the future isn't that far anymore in terms of the speed of technology.

10 years IMO, is far into the future ESPECIALLY at the speed tech moves today.

The display isn't the concern with compatibility. It's the way in which the media is displayed that could change. eg. Sans glasses

No it won't. Unless they start using more than 2 cameras to shoot 3D content and that just isn't going to happen. The display does all the heavy lifting when it comes to 3D. No difference if it's a 3DTV or an Auto 3DTV

I believe that they rushed 3DTV to the market. The only way to prove me wrong is to wait and see. So you're not allowed to tell me I'm wrong yet Lee.

What part of 3DTV do you believe was rushed to market? You really have to explain that.

Sure I can - that is nothing more than your opinion. It has no basis of fact. My opinion differs from yours. I believe I am right and you are wrong. You are doing nothing more than speculating as am I. Since when is your opinion worth more than mine or anyone else's about a future event?

soupnazi
05-08-2010, 11:03 AM
No different with 3D. the standards have been set. What makes you think they will change in the future? HD didn't so why should 3D?




But they both worked on any HDTV. :confused:



10 years IMO, is far into the future ESPECIALLY at the speed tech moves today.



No it won't. Unless they start using more than 2 cameras to shoot 3D content and that just isn't going to happen. The display does all the heavy lifting when it comes to 3D. No difference if it's a 3DTV or an Auto 3DTV



What part of 3DTV do you believe was rushed to market? You really have to explain that.

Sure I can - that is nothing more than your opinion. It has no basis of fact. My opinion differs from yours. I believe I am right and you are wrong. You are doing nothing more than speculating as am I. Since when is your opinion worth more than mine or anyone else's about a future event?

Wrong again Lee, It's is MY opinion not yours. You don't get it do you?

3DTV isn't real 3D like you say it is, it's a perception

PFC5
05-08-2010, 12:40 PM
Me can see getting a 3DTV in a couple of years. Just for the grandkids. Have no interest in it me self. The reason me takes exception to the roll out at this time is not to discount the early adopters - but to urge consumers to spend the extra money on a sound system worthy of their viewing experience. So many folks are missing the video/audio experience by using just their tv speakers or a crappy box system. For the extra 6-8-1000 dollars they could enjoy all of their movies in true surround,,instead of a few cartoons in 3D on substandard audio.

I agree and have always believed that a good (even an OK system) surround sound system brings you into the movie more like in the theater without the cell phones than most other enhancements. That is why I had such a system before I even got my first HDTV.

If I had to choose at this point between getting a Surround sound system and a good 2D HDTV, or a 3DTV and no surround I would choose the former any day. Once you experience surround sound in your home when watching a movie and/or gaming it improves the experience tremendously IMO.

spyder_21
05-08-2010, 12:44 PM
Wrong again Lee, It's is MY opinion not yours. You don't get it do you?

3DTV isn't real 3D like you say it is, it's a perception

Lee has a 1 track mind, when it is set on 1 thing you can't change it. And he only sees in his line of view, so its hard to talk to him on subjects he don't agree with.

soupnazi
05-08-2010, 03:56 PM
Lee has a 1 track mind, when it is set on 1 thing you can't change it. And he only sees in his line of view, so its hard to talk to him on subjects he don't agree with.

I know, MY opinion has felt the wrath of Lee a few times.

spyder_21
05-08-2010, 05:51 PM
I know, MY opinion has felt the wrath of Lee a few times.

lol.. Wrath of Lee...

This should be his avatar.
http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n247/spider2021/Lee_Avatar.png

JMS
05-08-2010, 09:42 PM
I agree and have always believed that a good (even an OK system) surround sound system brings you into the movie more like in the theater without the cell phones than most other enhancements. That is why I had such a system before I even got my first HDTV.
Absolutely. In fact, long before surround sound I was feeding the audio from my Sony TV's audio line out into my stereo system back in the early eighties.
If I had to choose at this point between getting a Surround sound system and a good 2D HDTV, or a 3DTV and no surround I would choose the former any day. Once you experience surround sound in your home when watching a movie and/or gaming it improves the experience tremendously IMO.
It's not just about video; audio is equally important.

Lee Stewart
05-09-2010, 09:54 AM
Wrong again Lee, It's is MY opinion not yours. You don't get it do you?

LMFAO! YOU don't get it! :rolleyes:

Your opinion is just that - your opinion. I disagree with your opinion. I believe you are wrong. That is MY opinion of YOUR opinion. :lol:

3DTV isn't real 3D like you say it is, it's a perception

3DTV shows Stereoscopic 3D. The same 3D you will see in a 3D cinema. THAT is the 3D we are discussing and have always been discussing.

You can stop with the bullshit that 3D equals binocular vision. :rolleyes:

Lee Stewart
05-09-2010, 09:57 AM
Lee has a 1 track mind, when it is set on 1 thing you can't change it. And he only sees in his line of view, so its hard to talk to him on subjects he don't agree with.

WTF! He has his opinion and I have mine. They differ. That's what makes horse races.

And you can take your sorry ass psych about me and stick it where the sun doesn't shine. Who the hell died and made YOU Queen?

soupnazi
05-09-2010, 10:56 AM
WTF! He has his opinion and I have mine. They differ. That's what makes horse races.

And you can take your sorry ass psych about me and stick it where the sun doesn't shine. Who the hell died and made YOU Queen?

Whoa Nellie. I didn't realize this was a horse race.

This is what I was talking about when I said you don't get it. It's the manner in which you disagree with people.

spyder_21
05-09-2010, 12:23 PM
3DTV isn't real 3D like you say it is, it's a perception
LMFAO! YOU don't get it! :rolleyes:
3DTV shows Stereoscopic 3D. The same 3D you will see in a 3D cinema. THAT is the 3D we are discussing and have always been discussing.

You can stop with the bullshit that 3D equals binocular vision. :rolleyes:

Lee I think he meant that 3DTV, or 3D at the cinema does not = Real Life 3D you see everyday with your eyes.




WTF! He has his opinion and I have mine. They differ. That's what makes horse races.

And you can take your sorry ass psych about me and stick it where the sun doesn't shine. Who the hell died and made YOU Queen?


Oh and Lee, you don't have to act so mean with your comments. I am just saying what I am seeing.

Lets not bicker back and forth to get this thread locked, I wanted to talk about the future of 3D's life here.

Lee Stewart
05-09-2010, 09:54 PM
Lee I think he meant that 3DTV, or 3D at the cinema does not = Real Life 3D you see everyday with your eyes.

The term "3D" as it is used on THIS forum and others, along in the media is defined by the term Stereoscopic 3D - the method of capturing 2 seperate images which are displayed and require the viewer to wear glasses of some kind.

Saying that "3D" mean real life is nothing more than his desire to move the goal posts on the discussion and has no bearing in what we are talking about. At this time - and for at least far far into the future - it will be impossible to create "real life" images in consumers homes.

Sorry - the Star Trek Holodeck is nothing more than science fiction. Just like Warp Speed and Matter Transformers/Transmitters

Oh and Lee, you don't have to act so mean with your comments. I am just saying what I am seeing.

Then you best keep your observations to yourself.

Lets not bicker back and forth to get this thread locked, I wanted to talk about the future of 3D's life here.

How can there be a discussion when there are preconcieved notions that there is no future for 3D?

This logic defies all common sense . . .

FACT = 3D is VERY successful in theaters

SPECULATION = 3D will fail in the home

:rolleyes:

Lee Stewart
05-09-2010, 09:59 PM
Whoa Nellie. I didn't realize this was a horse race.

:rolleyes:

You never heard that expression? It means they have more than a single horse running in a race. People choose their horse (meaning there is more than a single choice available) to win in a race. There is only one winner - the rest are losers.

This is what I was talking about when I said you don't get it. It's the manner in which you disagree with people.

Yeah - too bad I defended myself from a personal attack right? :rolleyes:

soupnazi
05-10-2010, 12:47 AM
:rolleyes:

You never heard that expression? It means they have more than a single horse running in a race. People choose their horse (meaning there is more than a single choice available) to win in a race. There is only one winner - the rest are losers.



Yeah - too bad I defended myself from a personal attack right? :rolleyes:

I have heard that expression and I really didn't realize that you think there has to be a winner and a loser. I gave my point of view of what I think about 3DTV based on what I have seen and learned about technological advances in the past and you dug some kind of meaning out of it that I wasn't trying to portray.

Lee, I respect that you have a lot of knowledge about camera and video technology and I never said that your facts are wrong. Just try to show a little respect for other peoples opinions. Opinions are subjective statements based on interpretations of facts. Maybe you could learn something by listening to other peoples opinions instead of just trying to discredit them.

sanlyn
06-01-2010, 10:32 PM
FACT = 3D is VERY successful in theaters

That's news to me. Last time I looked, 95-plus% of movies out there were 2D, and 99.9% of the people I talk to (over the age of 14) could care less about 3D.

SPECULATION = 3D will fail in the home
:rolleyes:

Speculation? Why is it speculation, while one or two temporary box office hits means fact ? You know how long box office "records" last, right? Two months? A week? 15 minutes? What age group are you talking about? Can you break that down with some demographic models? During the past few months I visited homes of dozens of customers in 3 adjoining states, spoke with several people in my own co-op building, visited relatives for a week in a big Southern city, and...guess what? Not a single 3DTV anywhere, no mention of it (except for my snotty cousin Tony who called in "useless crap", the numbskull, when will he learn to use the language?), nada, nicht, non. Not once. Seems a little stronger than "speculation" and a little closer to "probably".

Speculation: 3D is and will forever remain a huge hit in theaters, and in the future all movies will be made in 3D and all humans will be implanted with 3D goggles at birth. Scientists will be working on a more genetics-based approach that will avoid expensive and sometimes fatal goggle surgery on newborns.

Fact: I have yet to enter a home with a 3DTV in 3 states. And I'm looking, too. But, then, that's just my own perspective.

Anyway, Lee. Sic 'em.

dsskid
06-02-2010, 09:16 AM
Last I checked, Shrek in 3D was less than successful, and a lot of consumers balked at the $20 a ticket price tag, when they can see the same movie in 2D for $11.

IMO 3D will be successful for some blockbuster films that can benefit from the technology, and those that people are willing to pay a premium for. Is it enough to come out of niche' status? IMO no. In Lee's opinion yes.

Let's see whose prediction is more accurate.

No need to quarrel over it because everyone has their own opinion, and chances are you aren't going to change it.

acblue94
10-24-2010, 03:19 PM
People, 3D has been around since the 50's. How can it be a hype? I realize everyone that has voted it being a hype are the same people that cant afford a new 3D TV and justify not buying one by saying its a hype. Buying a 3D TV is great. You cant lose. Even if it becomes a hype what do yo have to lose by having a 3D TV? Your only investment are the glasses.

unotis
12-31-2010, 02:10 PM
3D has been around since the 1950s, but in name only the new improved version is a revolution more then a evolution.

I know and respect that some people think 3D is a fad that will not take off, I disagree and think it is the next frontier for home and theater entertainment.

If you've been to any 3D films lately then you've seen all the previews of upcoming 3D movies coming out, 3D is not only for science fiction, fantasy, adventure films, any film will benefit from the greatly increased depth of field and perspective you receive and will greatly increase the viewing pleasure.

I also agree about the sound system adding a great deal to the overall viewing pleasure, but that for most of us is a given and something I have handled already and and have for 12 years.

Why can't a knowledgeable person aspire to have both and I think with the general public seeing and realizing the increased enjoyment they too will aspire and purchase in increasing numbers.

It was the same way with color TV, if you had asked most people if it was something they were interested in at the time, they probably would have said not too much until they saw and understood the benefits.

KavinDonald
01-05-2011, 02:49 AM
I like to watch 3d movies online. I love to watch best graphics of 3d movies.

djeclipse25
02-10-2011, 12:50 PM
Love to watch 3D at home or in the theaters!!

When comparing this technology, and how HDDVD lost the battle, that was purely a medium, and a coding format.
3D would be like comparing HDTV to SDTV, and saying SDTV will win cause no 1 wants to buy that HD stuff because the price is out of line, and content isn't there...well.....look where we are now.
As TV's progress, processing and display technologies get better, and this is just a step, there is NO competing technology with 3D until we get them fancy holographic displays.
Even your PC, you may not know this, but if you run an Nvidia graphics card, more than likely you can buy a breakout box to display 3d images with the their stereoscopic glasses. The technology is there, it WILL be built into your TV's just like apps, and texting on your phones... It's more or less are you going to use it?
3D glasses are coming down in price around 80 bucks, and TV's are coming out that don't need glasses...which will you chose.
No ones forcing you to go out and buy a new TV, but when you do in the near or distant future the feature will be there..

Stew4HD
02-10-2011, 09:35 PM
Love to watch 3D at home or in the theaters!!

When comparing this technology, and how HDDVD lost the battle, that was purely a medium, and a coding format.
3D would be like comparing HDTV to SDTV, and saying SDTV will win cause no 1 wants to buy that HD stuff because the price is out of line, and content isn't there...well.....look where we are now.
As TV's progress, processing and display technologies get better, and this is just a step, there is NO competing technology with 3D until we get them fancy holographic displays.
Even your PC, you may not know this, but if you run an Nvidia graphics card, more than likely you can buy a breakout box to display 3d images with the their stereoscopic glasses. The technology is there, it WILL be built into your TV's just like apps, and texting on your phones... It's more or less are you going to use it?
3D glasses are coming down in price around 80 bucks, and TV's are coming out that don't need glasses...which will you chose.
No ones forcing you to go out and buy a new TV, but when you do in the near or distant future the feature will be there..

Great first post :hithere: Well said and welcome to HDF! GMTA :D

tvine2000
02-11-2011, 04:45 PM
Love to watch 3D at home or in the theaters!!

When comparing this technology, and how HDDVD lost the battle, that was purely a medium, and a coding format.
3D would be like comparing HDTV to SDTV, and saying SDTV will win cause no 1 wants to buy that HD stuff because the price is out of line, and content isn't there...well.....look where we are now.
As TV's progress, processing and display technologies get better, and this is just a step, there is NO competing technology with 3D until we get them fancy holographic displays.
Even your PC, you may not know this, but if you run an Nvidia graphics card, more than likely you can buy a breakout box to display 3d images with the their stereoscopic glasses. The technology is there, it WILL be built into your TV's just like apps, and texting on your phones... It's more or less are you going to use it?
3D glasses are coming down in price around 80 bucks, and TV's are coming out that don't need glasses...which will you chose.
No ones forcing you to go out and buy a new TV, but when you do in the near or distant future the feature will be there..

Well said. Many here have been trying to make this point and are meant with the boo birds and doomsayers who think 3D is a fad and will fail. These are the same people who said HDtv would fail, hd dvd would win the format war. There seems to be a group of people who just can't see past there nose when it comes to tecnology. It seems to me technology always moves forward, always did and always will. Some will fail, but 3d ....no. Theres enough support out there , like blu-ray when it started, to make 3d a success. Its only going to get better. The industry is behind it. And yes people have to buy it, and they will. After Blu-ray won the format war, i heard people at this forum say it won't last a year. Here we are again with 3D and there saying the same thing. It makes interesting debate, but thats about all

djeclipse25
02-12-2011, 07:46 AM
Great first post :hithere: Well said and welcome to HDF! GMTA :D

Thanks :D , I am cursed with wanting to jump into new technologies, this case new oldLOL! I like to get to know all the facets of it before the mainstream get their hands on it.
Grabbed myself a Samsung PN63C7000 over the holidays, love that TV, Love the 3D!! Just FYI for all the hesitant 3D shoppers, 3D movies usually come bundled with the 2D version, so you really aren't out anything ;)
Not only is 3D great 3D TV's stomp the pic quality of older gen screens...Better panels, better components...for the time of course

ImRizzo
02-12-2011, 09:29 AM
Viewing 3D is a personal preference, some people love it, some hate it and some just don't care they have no interest in that particular meduim. I have found that almost all the 3D movies I viewed the PQ is greatly affected by the focus problem the Prime image in a scene is crisp and sharp, where as the balance of the image is very much out of focus ( I believe this is intentional to enhance the 3D effect, cause basically that's where they want your attention focused). The exception being animated (digital) features, allowing everything on screen to be sharply focused. Personally I'm not interested in giving up the full picture quality so I can see things "jumping out at me", again that is my personal preference. If you have a high quality display panel then the picture should almost "jump off the screen" without any gimmicky or trickery effects to enhance that image.

BTW I voted "Here to Stay", because the manufacturers are not going to just abandon this new "CASH COW" they've pushed onto the market

Lee Stewart
02-12-2011, 11:31 AM
Viewing 3D is a personal preference, some people love it, some hate it and some just don't care they have no interest in that particular meduim. I have found that almost all the 3D movies I viewed the PQ is greatly affected by the focus problem the Prime image in a scene is crisp and sharp, where as the balance of the image is very much out of focus ( I believe this is intentional to enhance the 3D effect, cause basically that's where they want your attention focused). The exception being animated (digital) features, allowing everything on screen to be sharply focused. Personally I'm not interested in giving up the full picture quality so I can see things "jumping out at me", again that is my personal preference. If you have a high quality display panel then the picture should almost "jump off the screen" without any gimmicky or trickery effects to enhance that image.

BTW I voted "Here to Stay", because the manufacturers are not going to just abandon this new "CASH COW" they've pushed onto the market

The issue you describe is the fault of the camera operator. If done correctly, both images should be in focus meaning both the foreground and the background are in focus. Unfortunately, it is the background that is the hardest to accomplish because of the depth of field.

Most of the camera operaters today have little or no experience shooting in 3D. It takes time to get that experience. Both Sony and Panasonic have have been offerring workshops to cameramen on how to shoot in 3D. It should get better as time goes on and they get the needed experience under their belt.

djeclipse25
02-13-2011, 11:54 AM
The issue you describe is the fault of the camera operator. If done correctly, both images should be in focus meaning both the foreground and the background are in focus. Unfortunately, it is the background that is the hardest to accomplish because of the depth of field.

Most of the camera operaters today have little or no experience shooting in 3D. It takes time to get that experience. Both Sony and Panasonic have have been offerring workshops to cameramen on how to shoot in 3D. It should get better as time goes on and they get the needed experience under their belt.

Have to agree, give it time! Someday you'll look back it , and think it would be like watching a movie without your DTS 7.1, or alternate. It's only going to get better, and you can thank the early adopters for paying for the R&D :D

unotis
02-13-2011, 12:59 PM
Have to agree, give it time! Someday you'll look back it , and think it would be like watching a movie without your DTS 7.1, or alternate. It's only going to get better, and you can thank the early adopters for paying for the R&D :D

Good post and welcome to the forum! :hithere:

djeclipse25
02-14-2011, 08:41 AM
Good post and welcome to the forum! :hithere:

Thanks :D, hope my opinions, and knowledge can help out.

tbk1bacon
02-27-2011, 08:42 AM
Hey you know that after all thats technology and after some time I hope that we will watch 3D movies at home without glasses for sure. If you love to watch tv shows online than go to otavo.tv.

Hitachi65SWX20B
02-28-2011, 09:04 PM
3D is the real deal, be it movies or games! cost of entry for me was fantastic too. 50 inch sammy 490n, 649 dollars with two free pairs of glasses. i bought the starter kit also with how to train your dragon. wanted to buy another 2 sets from BB each for 149. called abcwarehouse to price match. not only did they price match they sold me the samsung starter kit with the shrek movies in it for 298, lol. actually my shipment was late with them and they gave me cloudy with a chance of meatballs 3D free for the delay lol niiiiice!

So a 50 in 3D plasma, 6 pair of glasses and 6 3D movies for 1246.00 I kicked some major ass wheeling and dealing! all together all that retails for 2285.00

djeclipse25
03-04-2011, 08:53 AM
3D is the real deal, be it movies or games! cost of entry for me was fantastic too. 50 inch sammy 490n, 649 dollars with two free pairs of glasses. i bought the starter kit also with how to train your dragon. wanted to buy another 2 sets from BB each for 149. called abcwarehouse to price match. not only did they price match they sold me the samsung starter kit with the shrek movies in it for 298, lol. actually my shipment was late with them and they gave me cloudy with a chance of meatballs 3D free for the delay lol niiiiice!

So a 50 in 3D plasma, 6 pair of glasses and 6 3D movies for 1246.00 I kicked some major ass wheeling and dealing! all together all that retails for 2285.00

Yeah that was a great deal, I think I paid 2700 just for my TV (63" plasma c7000) Did you get the rechargable glasses?? I think they recover faster from scene changes. I think I will drag you out next time looking for a TV :D

oblioman
03-05-2011, 02:46 AM
3D is neither evolutionary or revolutionary. It be just another aspect of HD viewing. In me little opinion, the enhancements work and sometimes be stellar. Other times can be annoying. Is it here to stay, sure. Will it make huge inroads. Sure, since basically every new tv will have the "3D app" included. Will it change how we watch tv,,,nah. Once the newness wears off,,,,the consumer is still left with a damn nice 2D HD tv (really nice tv if they bought plasma):hithere:

kate0558
07-26-2011, 01:35 PM
3d is here to stay.... its just gonna get bigger and better...

HD DVD's obviously didn't last very long... so 3d already has it beat... i don't think it can even be compared.... From the days of red and blu 3d glasses in cartoons ....to active shutter technology and being able to watch it from my own living room.

I'm not saying everyone needs to go out and get a 3d tv now but i am saying that its growing and as more ppl get 3d tv's (which they will because its not that expensive) they will release more and more movies and television in 3d format.

HiDefRev
07-26-2011, 08:51 PM
Indeed, I hope 3D .IS. here to stay, because, as Kate said, it will only get better and better. However, if it does founder and die out, at least I have the pleasure and enjoyment of viewing it as long as it is here. IMHO, anyone who hasn't seen SPORTS in 3D has missed something very wonderful to behold. . :eyecrazy . And ESPN 3D goes FULL TIME on DIRECTV tomorrow !! . :banana: . :banana: . :banana: . :banana:

cassandrablue
01-09-2012, 04:43 AM
Plus the price tag for new tech is always high, so if it takes 2-3 years for the price to come down on the 3D TV's, will companies still be interested in it at that time, or would it of faded by then?


Now if they made a front projector , that had long bulb life of 100,000 hours, that was 3Dready, then I would be all over that (http://www.fashionforhome.co.uk/exclusive-furniture).

Totally with you there! I just wish, it was a bit more comfortable to watch 3D. If it was on a big screen and I maybe had some kind of sorround 3D glasses set, like a helmet or something, that would be grand. Right now I always get a headache with the glasses and most of the movies I've watched in 3D were just shot in the format without it really counting into any of the pictures (for example: Harry Potter 7/2: The only time I was conscious of the 3D use was the ending scene with the ash particles flowing around... which was also not a very nice experience)