3D and Glasses - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 40 Old 02-11-2010, 03:02 PM
Member
 
racer59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 110
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbrennem View Post

So by your logic (and even ignoring 3D) I guess sales of TVs in general are going to tank now because everyone has a new TV and they will keep it for 10 years??

That is not likely. Obviously there are people buying plenty of new TVs every year, otherwise the TV industry would collapse. If 3D TVs are only a small premium over a 2D TV, why wouldn't people buy one when they are already buying a new TV? They don't have to use the 3D capability unless they want to, but at least their new TV will have a future compatibility with 3D if they choose to try it. I don't think anyone is suggesting that everybody will run out and buy a new 3D TV to replace their current model, but it will happen in due time.

I would bet that by late 2011 all of the major manufacturers (Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, LG, etc) new TV lines will be 3D capable. So people will have no choice but to buy 3D capable TVs, unless they purchase older models that are still in stock (or budget brands that lag behind the major manufacturers).

Whether or not people choose to use the 3D capability is an entirely different question, and the jury is still out on that question.

Actually, now you are talking about the Dynamics of Consumer Demand for New Durable Goods and a measurement of the voracity of the demand.

Of course there will always be demand for televisions, and of course this demand is in part created by advancements in technology. The question is at which points does this demand speed and cool. There are models that are used to measure this but there are so many factors that come into play we would be wasting our time trying to discuss this issue.

I stand by a 10 year period. Consumer Electronics are a very elastic industry and as a matter of fact sales are down. Primarily as a function of the current economy but I hypothesize that we will continue to have weak demand even as unemployment figures begin to improve.

Similarly we have an automobile industry, yes? The average consumer rarely buys new cars every few years, but the industry does not implode.

3D, in my opinion, aint gonna make it. Again, just my opinion. (you have to admit those glasses really are lame)

Last, we have not even accounted for the large percentage of people who are Stereo Blind.
racer59 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 40 Old 02-11-2010, 07:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brandon B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: LA lalalalala
Posts: 3,973
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Converting a film theater to 3d digital for only say $70,000? Not possible.

Oddly, after I replied to this last time, a daily page from Insight Media landed in my inbox which says:

Quote:
At roughly $70K per installation, the 2009 investment in digital screens was over $510M and the investment taps are still open. JP Morgan, for example, is expected to supply $700M for an additional 12,000 digital screens.

http://displaydaily.com/page/2/

If the link brings up the incorrect page, you want the Feb 10 post.

I tend to agree with you, as it seems a decent D cinema unit alone is about that, and it omits the new screen, additional processing and polarizing equipment etc. But I think the OP as well as this blog post are referring to a straight digital conversion, not a 2D film to 3D digital conversion.
Brandon B is offline  
post #33 of 40 Old 02-12-2010, 06:46 AM
Senior Member
 
mbrennem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer59 View Post

Actually, now you are talking about the Dynamics of Consumer Demand for New Durable Goods and a measurement of the voracity of the demand.

I actually agree with the 10 year period on average for TVs, but your original hypothesis was that 3D would fail because most people you knew had just bought TVs and wouldn't be buying for 10 years. My point is that many other people will be at the end of their 10 year cycle and will buy, and because most TVs will be 3D capable next year, people who are in the market for a TV will buy them, and therefore sales of 3D TVs will ultimately happen through attrition if nothing else. Again, whether people will actually use the 3D capability remains to be seen and probably hinges on the quality of the experience and content.


I think people who wear glasses should be insulted by all these posters saying "glasses are dorky". I wear contacts but I don't have any problem with glasses. If people are so vain and insecure that they worry about putting on a pair of glasses to watch occasional 3D content then I think they should be seeing a therapist to discuss their issues instead of watching TV/movies. I wore glasses for years before I got contacts and the main reason I got contacts is that glasses often fog up when you go from hot to cold and vice versa, which shouldn't be a problem with 3D glasses (unless perhaps you are watching "adult" content!)

My favorite complaint is "my friends will laugh at me"...ummm, aren't your friends wearing the glasses too? Perhaps the new "cool kids" will go to 3D movies and watch them without glasses just so they can mock the rest of the crowd!
mbrennem is offline  
post #34 of 40 Old 02-12-2010, 09:03 AM
Senior Member
 
jhunt17's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I went to see avatar the other day in 3d. I absolutely hated it. The 3d experience was fuzzy, dim and just didn't look right. The depth of the images didn't make it seem 3d, but more like Alice in wonderland. I kept thinking during the movie, "man I would really love to see this movie on a regular screen so it would be clear and clean". The visuals of the movie were astounding, but ruined by the 3d affect it was putting off. I was really disappointed. I had hoped it would be cool. I thought it might be a neat addition to home theater, but after seeing that I am definitely not bothering with that at all.
jhunt17 is offline  
post #35 of 40 Old 02-12-2010, 04:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
AJSJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sonoma County, CA, US
Posts: 755
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbrennem View Post

I think people who wear glasses should be insulted by all these posters saying "glasses are dorky". I wear contacts but I don't have any problem with glasses. If people are so vain and insecure that they worry about putting on a pair of glasses to watch occasional 3D content then I think they should be seeing a therapist to discuss their issues instead of watching TV/movies. I wore glasses for years before I got contacts and the main reason I got contacts is that glasses often fog up when you go from hot to cold and vice versa, which shouldn't be a problem with 3D glasses (unless perhaps you are watching "adult" content!)

My favorite complaint is "my friends will laugh at me"...ummm, aren't your friends wearing the glasses too? Perhaps the new "cool kids" will go to 3D movies and watch them without glasses just so they can mock the rest of the crowd!

My sentiments entirely
AJSJones is offline  
post #36 of 40 Old 02-12-2010, 05:42 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,105
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 533 Post(s)
Liked: 540
Anybody who posts in this thread is likely to be extremely dorky. Nothing at all to do with whether that person wears glasses other than for 3D viewing or how that person looks.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is online now  
post #37 of 40 Old 02-12-2010, 08:50 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Robert Whitehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: West Hartford, CT; USA 06107
Posts: 3,316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
About a week.
Robert Whitehead is offline  
post #38 of 40 Old 02-12-2010, 09:39 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,105
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 533 Post(s)
Liked: 540
Wow. That fast? And I thought I was quick. You da man.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is online now  
post #39 of 40 Old 02-26-2010, 03:11 PM
Advanced Member
 
MarkcusD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 594
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
I use the nVidia 3D Vision glasses on top my own. Not a big deal. If you don't want to then don't.
MarkcusD is offline  
post #40 of 40 Old 03-01-2010, 12:54 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
RealD is "joining up" with Look3D who is offerring designer 3D glassses that work with the RealD 3D process.

These are to be used when you go to a RealD 3D digital cinema instead of the cheap throwaways they hand out.

http://www.look3d.com.au/collections.html

And RealD said . . .

Quote:


RealD also said that prescription 3D glasses are also in the works

http://www.i4u.com/article27049.html

There is no other information I can find.

This of course doesn't solve the issue for those who wear glasses and the use of active shutter glasses for home 3D.
Lee Stewart is offline  
Reply 3D Tech Talk

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off