Originally Posted by rjruby
They are stating facts.
PLUS, they go on to put a negative spin on the "facts" to make it sound as if 3D genre is going down the toilet. Star56 calls that an attack. I agree that this article is an attack.
The initial basis for the claim comes from Nintendo. This is pretty typical coming from a company that had a huge failure in its own miniscule implementation of 3D. Their device quality absolutely sucks ( IMO) and now the company is trying to blame the industry "perhaps, slightly on the wane." for their failure to gain a market share. I'd rather hear from companies that have had a huge success story with their implementation of home 3D. Companies like LG, Samsung, Sony, Panasonic, Disney, IMAX, Cinemark, and Regal to name a few. If 3D was not adding to the profits of these companies you would not see their 3D offerings on the increase.
It's also interesting that when I'm out shooting a 3D project with my twin cameras, people come up to me more than ever now and volunteer they understand what I'm doing and then tell me they love their new 3D TV. Some ask me what I would suggest for a 3DTV as they've been shopping. The frequency of these experiences directly related to 3D is waxing, not waning. Take a look at you Tube and see how 3D video is getting more and more uploads.
Anymore, when I see these negative articles and posts, I just have to laugh at the ignorance, fear, and doubt from some people. Then I wonder what their motivation is for pooh poohing the medium. I don't understand what is to be gained in this sense. Some have suggested it's that they are simply frustrated they are too poor to afford yet another upgrade and feel sorry for themselves they aren't having the fun with 3D entertainment as well.
Last month, 3-D attendance hit a record low for the opening weekend of Pixar's "Brave," with just 32% of revenues coming from 3-D, says the Hollywood Reporter. While "The Avengers" fared better, with a little more than half of sales coming from 3-D tickets, it's not even close to the 83% 3-D revenue that "Avatar" enjoyed in December 2009. The days where you absolutely had to see a hit movie in 3-D are over.
The 3-D TV situation isn't much better. Sales of 3-D televisions are on the rise in the U.S. according to The NPD Group, but only 14% of consumers who might buy a TV in the next six months say 3-D is a "must-have" feature.
Interesting how this is painted as bad numbers. 32% of revenues from 3D is somehow a bad ratio? How does that compare to the 3D % of total from 4-5 years ago? Is IMAX doing just as poor? I wonder what the ratio is for those who go to an IMAX showing vs. a standard screen size showing. I doubt it is 32%. Also, interesting that when that 32% went to see the movie in 3D they also chose to spend more to see the movie. That proves in and of itself that 3D can raise the bar for revenue at the theater. Also, in my home, I haven't bought a 2D Blu Ray movie in well over 2 years, reserving all my discretionary budget for 3D version.
I don't think there was ever a time when all the people just had to see the hit movie in 3D. But given the option, there will be a comfortable % of the people who are willing to spend more to see the movie in 3D. I think 1 in 3 is a healthy %.
14% of TV sales "must have 3D" is a bad number? I'm surprised it is that high considering how "everyone hates 3D"
Everyone likes to use Avatar as the benchmark but Avatar was the game changer. It is not a benchmark.
3D content availability is increasing too. Today, I can buy a new 3D movie a week and not keep up with the releases. Last year one per month was lucky. The number of 3D releases is obviously on the rise.