3D is Not Dead... - Page 10 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #271 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 12:28 AM
Advanced Member
 
Airion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 787
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by darksets View Post

The human brain can already visualize 3D without silly glasses and other awkward hardware.

This is true up to a point of course. Yesterday my wife and I visited a modern art museum and viewed a CG image of a slowly flowering tree on an LCD screen. The tree was slowly rotating as it grew and bloomed. The constant rotating motion and high frame rate made for a great 3D illusion. "Is this 3D?" she asked. Of course no, it was a 2D screen. It was therefore somewhat disorienting. The motion of the image suggested 3D, while binocular vision looking at a flat screen confirmed it as 2D. That's why she asked "Is this 3D?" instead of saying "It's 3D!" Despite seeing a good sense of 3D, she knew something didn't look right.

When we say "3D" in terms of 3D movies or 3D TVs, what we really mean is stereoscopic 3D. While a subset of vision, stereoscopic vision is a unique sense on its own with its own neural pathways. It's like colors. You can either see it or you can't. You can't see stereoscopic 3D on a traditional flat 2D screen, no matter what. Any 3D effect we can see in the image is always going to be contradicted by our stereoscopic vision, which will strongly tell our brains "nope, it's 2D." Unless you watch with one eye closed.
Airion is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #272 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 06:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KJSmitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,606
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

I respect anyone's right to dislike 3D, for whatever personal reasons he or she may have, but insulting the technology and people who like it with judgmental terms like "denial," "stupid," and "gimmick" is uncalled for. As someone who loves 3D technology and has spent a considerable amount of time thinking about why it engages me so thoroughly, I find these comments nothing but offensive. At best, they're uninformed, and at worst they're unjustifiably provocative for a thoughtful forum such as this.

You couldn't be more correct..

"Darksets" activity in this discussion only serves two purposes:
- One, to let us know how he feels about 3D - I get the impression he doesn't care for it..
- Two, he's just another troll trying to cause a ruckus via his keyboard...
guitarman512 likes this.

Love DIY
KJSmitty is offline  
post #273 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 06:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mtbdudex's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 4,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 189
For all the "3D is Not Dead..." banter why use old tech in post#1 of this thread?
mtbdudex is online now  
post #274 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 06:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KJSmitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,606
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtbdudex View Post

For all the "3D is Not Dead..." banter why use old tech in post#1 of this thread?

The OP has two pictures in his opening post.. The one you posted above then the large UHD 3D display. The obvious conclusion for me was: "we started with this and are now here...." As in, 3D isn't dead, it has continued into the home arena and is getting better along with current technology.

Regardless, some still like it and continue to support it - some don't.. Nothing wrong with either opinion..

Love DIY
KJSmitty is offline  
post #275 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 08:39 AM
Member
 
DTGallagher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wilmington, DE
Posts: 192
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by KJSmitty View Post

The OP has two pictures in his opening post.. The one you posted above then the large UHD 3D display. The obvious conclusion for me was: "we started with this and are now here...."

But theatrical NEVER used anaglyph (except for very rare showings like "Spy Kids 3D").

http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/home/top-10-3-d-myths
DTGallagher is online now  
post #276 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 08:43 AM
Member
 
Noonin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 12
If the only way to watch a DVD in your home was to buy it, the market would never taken off. The fact that the only way to watch a 3D DVD is to but it, other than a couple special rental places, blows.
Noonin is offline  
post #277 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 08:48 AM
Senior Member
 
CMonMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by DTGallagher View Post

But theatrical NEVER used anaglyph (except for very rare showings like "Spy Kids 3D").

http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/home/top-10-3-d-myths


I don't think they were that rare really. I'm in my mid twenties and recall watching several movies in theaters that required the red and blue glasses as a child.

CMonMan is offline  
post #278 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 09:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KJSmitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,606
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by DTGallagher View Post

But theatrical NEVER used anaglyph (except for very rare showings like "Spy Kids 3D").

http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/home/top-10-3-d-myths

Like Cmonman mentioned above. And I'm significantly older and those type of glasses (colored filter) were all I remember wearing until the RealD glasses came along.

Regardless,,,,,, we've come from paper glasses (like and/or similar) that facilitated a 3D image in the theater to wireless active glasses/technology with TVs in our home.

Cheers

Love DIY
KJSmitty is offline  
post #279 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 11:00 AM
Member
 
DTGallagher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wilmington, DE
Posts: 192
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Sorry - I still think showing audience members wearing the red/blue or cyan glasses is WRONG and misleading since IN GENERAL (as the 3D myths link
notes) they weren't used for the original 3D movies of the 1950's nor the first revival movies of the early 1980's.
(I do realize that showing people wearing the red and blue glasses has become some kind of "shorthand" for 3D since it's easier than showing
an audience wearing what looks like sunglasses.)

http://www.hometheater.com/images/100426-audience.jpg?1282071966
DTGallagher is online now  
post #280 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 11:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 3,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 199 Post(s)
Liked: 181
The real problem I see with the acceptance of 3D in the home is not really all about quality but how much are you willing to pay for it. The quality is OK for now and logic tells us it will get better, if it needs to. Necessity is the mother of invention is a phrase that certainly applies here. With Sony coming out with the 550 series in Passive 3D I think you'll see a shot in the arm for 3D in general. It looks good, it comes with 4 pair of glasses and new glasses can be had for under $10pr. And most importantly the TV is very affordable. Right now Active 3D may be slightly better quality but Passive is so much easier to swallow and quite acceptable to the new comer to 3D.
andy sullivan is online now  
post #281 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 12:45 PM
Member
 
Noonin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post

The real problem I see with the acceptance of 3D in the home is not really all about quality but how much are you willing to pay for it. The quality is OK for now and logic tells us it will get better, if it needs to. Necessity is the mother of invention is a phrase that certainly applies here. With Sony coming out with the 550 series in Passive 3D I think you'll see a shot in the arm for 3D in general. It looks good, it comes with 4 pair of glasses and new glasses can be had for under $10pr. And most importantly the TV is very affordable. Right now Active 3D may be slightly better quality but Passive is so much easier to swallow and quite acceptable to the new comer to 3D.
Very true...look at who won the Beta VHS battle. Not the better technology (of course the porn industry helped)
Noonin is offline  
post #282 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 01:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Joseph Clark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 10,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 115
I saw the Sony 4K passive 3D set at a Best Buy Magnolia store the other day. The set was not calibrated, which the sales rep warned me about before I viewed some titles that I took with me. There was considerable black crush, but despite the inaccuracies, the 3D looked very good - no loss of vertical resolution (like the LG sets), bright and punchy. The 3D glasses were great - neutral tint, passing plenty of light, as well as being extremely light and comfortable. The 65" set was $7,000 - far too expensive to make much difference in 3D sales, IMO, but it hints at better things to come. When I got my first set in 2010, there were literally NO titles that could be bought in a store - only bundled titles. That held true far too long, but now I have about 100 3D titles in my collection (and I certainly don't own all that have been released). Most are not great titles, just like my 2D collection. I'd like more and better 3D, but IMO it's here to stay this time around. The biggest reason, I believe, is that although it's not a runaway success story, it's not that expensive for manufacturers to implement it in modern digital sets. 3D Blu-ray players aren't expensive, either, because it was easy to expand the Blu-ray format to accommodate Blu-ray 3D. I bought a Sony 3D player for $79. The initial "3D frenzy," with its cheesy Avatar wannabe's and cheap (lousy) conversions may have slowed, but there's no reason to fear that 3D is going away. Great (or even very good) 3D titles will be as rare as great 2D titles, but that's to be expected.

Joe Clark

Joseph Clark is online now  
post #283 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 07:38 PM
Member
 
darksets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 35
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

I respect anyone's right to dislike 3D, for whatever personal reasons he or she may have, but insulting the technology and people who like it with judgmental terms like "denial," "stupid," and "gimmick" is uncalled for. As someone who loves 3D technology and has spent a considerable amount of time thinking about why it engages me so thoroughly, I find these comments nothing but offensive. At best, they're uninformed, and at worst they're unjustifiably provocative for a thoughtful forum such as this.

I was called dead in this "thoughtful forum" but I didn't see anyone object to it. Someone else called me a troll. If you are going to attack me instead of the content of my comment I'll return the favor. Whenever I see "AVS special member", I assume it means
a dealer or industry insider of some sort. Such people have a substantial personal interest in what transpires in the industry and I take what they say with a grain of salt. I would advise all other regular members of this forum to do the same. This is a great
forum and has been the source of a lot of excellent information for me but you must be able to read between the lines.

I am just a regular movie fan who is looking for the best audio-visual experience of his favorite films. I was criticized because I "dislike 3D for whatever personal reasons", so let me explain what those are. First of all I hate the idea of wearing some special
glasses to watch a movie and having my vision distorted for any other task. Then I would prefer the hardware manufacturers to concentrate into improving the 2D picture instead of expending their energy and capital into the unnecessary 3D technology.
Can we please have better contrast, light rejection, brightness and color fidelity instead? There is a huge legacy of 2D films which would be great to enjoy at the best possible presentation modern technology can make possible. And yes 3D versions of classic
2D movies are as gimmicky and repellent as colorized B&W movies. Finally I hate the idea that if I want to buy a new TV or projector I have to pay for 3D capability. And if this insanity continues we might soon have to see our tv channel lineup make room for 3D exclusives, and get more compression and loss of fidelity to accommodate them. I call on all true movie fans to boycott this latest attempt of greedy industry executives for profit at any cost, until 3D dies its deserved death.

Tasos
darksets is offline  
post #284 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 08:50 PM
Member
 
Noonin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by darksets View Post

I was called dead in this "thoughtful forum" but I didn't see anyone object to it. Someone else called me a troll. If you are going to attack me instead of the content of my comment I'll return the favor. Whenever I see "AVS special member", I assume it means
a dealer or industry insider of some sort. Such people have a substantial personal interest in what transpires in the industry and I take what they say with a grain of salt. I would advise all other regular members of this forum to do the same. This is a great
forum and has been the source of a lot of excellent information for me but you must be able to read between the lines.

I am just a regular movie fan who is looking for the best audio-visual experience of his favorite films. I was criticized because I "dislike 3D for whatever personal reasons", so let me explain what those are. First of all I hate the idea of wearing some special
glasses to watch a movie and having my vision distorted for any other task. Then I would prefer the hardware manufacturers to concentrate into improving the 2D picture instead of expending their energy and capital into the unnecessary 3D technology.
Can we please have better contrast, light rejection, brightness and color fidelity instead? There is a huge legacy of 2D films which would be great to enjoy at the best possible presentation modern technology can make possible. And yes 3D versions of classic
2D movies are as gimmicky and repellent as colorized B&W movies. Finally I hate the idea that if I want to buy a new TV or projector I have to pay for 3D capability. And if this insanity continues we might soon have to see our tv channel lineup make room for 3D exclusives, and get more compression and loss of fidelity to accommodate them. I call on all true movie fans to boycott this latest attempt of greedy industry executives for profit at any cost, until 3D dies its deserved death.

Tasos
It's an unfortunate reality now that we can't pick the features we want in a new TV Ala Carte. To make money, the big electronic corporations bundle something they think will catch people's attention with the cheapest thing they can manufacture and hope the masses won't notice. I would love to have bought a really great TV without "smart" functions my DVD player already had, and skipped 3D all together. But, the fact is that I have both, and better PQ TVs come with it, whether you want it or not. The good thing is that a lot of people are finding that it's kinda cool to watch a movie in 3D. You don't have to, but it's there if you want to try it. As far at being a video purist. it's going to be a tough path to follow. High End Audio has a market for people who want to listen to tube amps in 2 channel stereo from LPs, but when it comes to video, you're going to have to get over it. Calling it a gimmick may be somewhat accurate, but that will beg people who like it to jump on your depiction.
Noonin is offline  
post #285 of 367 Old 05-26-2013, 09:16 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Joseph Clark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 10,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by darksets View Post

I was called dead in this "thoughtful forum" but I didn't see anyone object to it. Someone else called me a troll. If you are going to attack me instead of the content of my comment I'll return the favor. Whenever I see "AVS special member", I assume it means
a dealer or industry insider of some sort. Such people have a substantial personal interest in what transpires in the industry and I take what they say with a grain of salt. I would advise all other regular members of this forum to do the same. This is a great
forum and has been the source of a lot of excellent information for me but you must be able to read between the lines.

I am just a regular movie fan who is looking for the best audio-visual experience of his favorite films. I was criticized because I "dislike 3D for whatever personal reasons", so let me explain what those are. First of all I hate the idea of wearing some special
glasses to watch a movie and having my vision distorted for any other task. Then I would prefer the hardware manufacturers to concentrate into improving the 2D picture instead of expending their energy and capital into the unnecessary 3D technology.
Can we please have better contrast, light rejection, brightness and color fidelity instead? There is a huge legacy of 2D films which would be great to enjoy at the best possible presentation modern technology can make possible. And yes 3D versions of classic
2D movies are as gimmicky and repellent as colorized B&W movies. Finally I hate the idea that if I want to buy a new TV or projector I have to pay for 3D capability. And if this insanity continues we might soon have to see our tv channel lineup make room for 3D exclusives, and get more compression and loss of fidelity to accommodate them. I call on all true movie fans to boycott this latest attempt of greedy industry executives for profit at any cost, until 3D dies its deserved death.

Tasos

I have a little time, so I'll take the bait, although I suspect it's a waste of time. First of all, your assumptions about "AVS Special Member" are wrong. The term simply refers to the number of posts someone has accumulated. It's another of your fallacious "assumptions." You're creating conspiracies where there are none. I'm just what you claim to be - an AV enthusiast who enjoys sharing ideas and thoughts with other enthusiasts. Secondly, although you would have us believe you're the one who's been offended here, in fact it's you who initiated personal attacks instead of simply saying why you didn't like 3D in the first place.

You say, "Denial from people who invested in 3D hardware and really, really want it to succeed. ... I understand you need to feel good about your overpriced hardware purchase but that doesn't make 3D anything more than a gimmick like the colored black & white movies." Don't you have a clue how patronizing this sounds? You "know" you're right. You "assume" you understand others' motivations and feelings, then you proceed to make blanket characterizations about the foolish people who buy into the 3D hoax being perpetrated by greedy and unimaginative manufacturers.

I say the manufacturers have given those of us who believe in what 3D can add to the visual experience exactly what we've wanted for a long, long time. And they've done it at a very affordable price. I have 3D camcorders and software that let me create my own 3D videos for a fraction of what the pros have to pay for the privilege. And I can watch it on very affordable 3D displays that cost only marginally more than a similar 2D set. This gives me great joy, yet your comments suggest that I'm nothing more than a blind dupe. You can't see why that offends me?

Another part of your comment is simply specious. You say that our need to justify our overpriced hardware "doesn't make 3D anything more than a gimmick like the colored black & white movies." While I would agree that colorization of B&W films is almost universally a bad idea, it's bad because it violates the filmmakers' intent. By adding color, you change the perception of the film in its entirety. A film shot in 3D and intended to be shown in 3D reflects the filmmakers' intent completely. These things that you equate are in fact polar opposites. You may not agree that filmmakers should shoot in 3D, but that doesn't make you right. Neither does assuming that you "know" things that are clearly wrong (what an AVS Special Member is), or presuming that you understand why I do what I do or feel what I feel. That's not your prerogative.

Joe Clark

Joseph Clark is online now  
post #286 of 367 Old 05-27-2013, 06:45 AM
Senior Member
 
CMonMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

I have a little time, so I'll take the bait, although I suspect it's a waste of time. First of all, your assumptions about "AVS Special Member" are wrong. The term simply refers to the number of posts someone has accumulated. It's another of your fallacious "assumptions." You're creating conspiracies where there are none. I'm just what you claim to be - an AV enthusiast who enjoys sharing ideas and thoughts with other enthusiasts. Secondly, although you would have us believe you're the one who's been offended here, in fact it's you who initiated personal attacks instead of simply saying why you didn't like 3D in the first place.

You say, "Denial from people who invested in 3D hardware and really, really want it to succeed. ... I understand you need to feel good about your overpriced hardware purchase but that doesn't make 3D anything more than a gimmick like the colored black & white movies." Don't you have a clue how patronizing this sounds? You "know" you're right. You "assume" you understand others' motivations and feelings, then you proceed to make blanket characterizations about the foolish people who buy into the 3D hoax being perpetrated by greedy and unimaginative manufacturers.

I say the manufacturers have given those of us who believe in what 3D can add to the visual experience exactly what we've wanted for a long, long time. And they've done it at a very affordable price. I have 3D camcorders and software that let me create my own 3D videos for a fraction of what the pros have to pay for the privilege. And I can watch it on very affordable 3D displays that cost only marginally more than a similar 2D set. This gives me great joy, yet your comments suggest that I'm nothing more than a blind dupe. You can't see why that offends me?

Another part of your comment is simply specious. You say that our need to justify our overpriced hardware "doesn't make 3D anything more than a gimmick like the colored black & white movies." While I would agree that colorization of B&W films is almost universally a bad idea, it's bad because it violates the filmmakers' intent. By adding color, you change the perception of the film in its entirety. A film shot in 3D and intended to be shown in 3D reflects the filmmakers' intent completely. These things that you equate are in fact polar opposites. You may not agree that filmmakers should shoot in 3D, but that doesn't make you right. Neither does assuming that you "know" things that are clearly wrong (what an AVS Special Member is), or presuming that you understand why I do what I do or feel what I feel. That's not your prerogative.


Hmmm.. I never realized the title was even there.. Apparently I am a "Senior member"..so I must be an expert lol. What is the XXX post counts = XXX titles ?

CMonMan is offline  
post #287 of 367 Old 05-27-2013, 11:11 AM
Member
 
darksets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 35
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

I have a little time, so I'll take the bait, although I suspect it's a waste of time. First of all, your assumptions about "AVS Special Member" are wrong. The term simply refers to the number of posts someone has accumulated. It's another of your fallacious "assumptions." You're creating conspiracies where there are none. I'm just what you claim to be - an AV enthusiast who enjoys sharing ideas and thoughts with other enthusiasts. Secondly, although you would have us believe you're the one who's been offended here, in fact it's you who initiated personal attacks instead of simply saying why you didn't like 3D in the first place.

You say, "Denial from people who invested in 3D hardware and really, really want it to succeed. ... I understand you need to feel good about your overpriced hardware purchase but that doesn't make 3D anything more than a gimmick like the colored black & white movies." Don't you have a clue how patronizing this sounds? You "know" you're right. You "assume" you understand others' motivations and feelings, then you proceed to make blanket characterizations about the foolish people who buy into the 3D hoax being perpetrated by greedy and unimaginative manufacturers.

I say the manufacturers have given those of us who believe in what 3D can add to the visual experience exactly what we've wanted for a long, long time. And they've done it at a very affordable price. I have 3D camcorders and software that let me create my own 3D videos for a fraction of what the pros have to pay for the privilege. And I can watch it on very affordable 3D displays that cost only marginally more than a similar 2D set. This gives me great joy, yet your comments suggest that I'm nothing more than a blind dupe. You can't see why that offends me?

Another part of your comment is simply specious. You say that our need to justify our overpriced hardware "doesn't make 3D anything more than a gimmick like the colored black & white movies." While I would agree that colorization of B&W films is almost universally a bad idea, it's bad because it violates the filmmakers' intent. By adding color, you change the perception of the film in its entirety. A film shot in 3D and intended to be shown in 3D reflects the filmmakers' intent completely. These things that you equate are in fact polar opposites. You may not agree that filmmakers should shoot in 3D, but that doesn't make you right. Neither does assuming that you "know" things that are clearly wrong (what an AVS Special Member is), or presuming that you understand why I do what I do or feel what I feel. That's not your prerogative.

I see you have so little time that you didn't address any of the points in the post you replied to, but instead you concentrated on the previous one.
Your over-emotional response centered around your 3D hardware seems to justify my point. Regarding the analogy with colorized B&W
movies, in the post you didn't address, I corrected my self by writing "3D versions of classic 2D movies are as gimmicky and repellent as colorized
B&W movies".

In my post I articulated the reasons why I am not a fan of 3D. Do you have anything to say on those points or is this discussion about you and how
offended you are?
darksets is offline  
post #288 of 367 Old 05-27-2013, 11:33 AM
Member
 
darksets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 35
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noonin View Post

It's an unfortunate reality now that we can't pick the features we want in a new TV Ala Carte. To make money, the big electronic corporations bundle something they think will catch people's attention with the cheapest thing they can manufacture and hope the masses won't notice. I would love to have bought a really great TV without "smart" functions my DVD player already had, and skipped 3D all together. But, the fact is that I have both, and better PQ TVs come with it, whether you want it or not. The good thing is that a lot of people are finding that it's kinda cool to watch a movie in 3D. You don't have to, but it's there if you want to try it. As far at being a video purist. it's going to be a tough path to follow. High End Audio has a market for people who want to listen to tube amps in 2 channel stereo from LPs, but when it comes to video, you're going to have to get over it. Calling it a gimmick may be somewhat accurate, but that will beg people who like it to jump on your depiction.

Yes, I'm not making any fans here. Being a video purist was always hard. In fact I think a lot of progress was made the last few years.
The days when one had to spend Sony G90 type of money to get a good picture are not that long gone. Unfortunately now we are getting
sidetracked by 3D...
darksets is offline  
post #289 of 367 Old 05-27-2013, 12:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 3,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 199 Post(s)
Liked: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by darksets View Post

Yes, I'm not making any fans here. Being a video purist was always hard. In fact I think a lot of progress was made the last few years.
The days when one had to spend Sony G90 type of money to get a good picture are not that long gone. Unfortunately now we are getting
sidetracked by 3D...
It doesn't matter if I'm a fan or not. I'm a fan of everybody that loves this stuff and it seems like you do. It's a big fat wonderful club that we all fit in but still allowing for differences of opinion. As a purist I think we still need to allow for growth and acceptance of new or evolving technology, like 3D and soon to be OLED and perhaps holographic displays. I wish I was younger and experience the technology of the 2050's and beyond. I consider myself a purist and find myself very impressed with the quality of well done 3D. It's too bad it's taken so long for somebody to push the envelope. I don't think we should discourage that type of passion. In the end we benefit.
andy sullivan is online now  
post #290 of 367 Old 05-27-2013, 02:39 PM
Senior Member
 
AVTrauma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vancouver, Wa
Posts: 387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
+1

The work done by those "greedy manufacturers to lull us into buying into the 3D craze" has many benefits for the consumers... which includes contrast, light rejection, brightness and color fidelity... all the things darksets wants!
I won't "attack" this poster personnally, but agree the tone set in the posts written by him/her to be offensively stated and also uninformed. I bought my set because of the 2D quality and have enjoyed the 3D experience it has provided me and the family (the optional 3D equipment was included at no charge, and the set was at a smoking hot price!).

I don't see how having an opinion against something that is purely optionall has developed into the venomous hatred as expressed in too many posts. rolleyes.gif
AVTrauma is offline  
post #291 of 367 Old 05-27-2013, 05:22 PM
Member
 
Barry C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 97
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 16
I wonder how many people who are negative on 3d have really had. a chance to experience it at its best. I have always been fascinated by that medium- had a Realist 3d camera in the 60s, shot large format lenticular 3d in the 90s, and now 3d camcorders today. I'm not really sure what a purist is but I do know what looks good to me. Unfortunately, not all 3d movies are of the Avatar quality and I've seen some really lousy 3d TV demos in stores. However, after much research, last year I purchased a new projector- Epson 5020- and chose it largely on its ability to show high quality 3d as well as 2d content. The immersive experience of sitting at home watching something like a good Cousteau underwater 3d IMAX blue Ray is nothing short of amazing. Those of us who truly love 3d really don't mind the glasses. Many of the latest generation are very light and comfortable.
Regarding the ongoing discussion, it's fair to say that on this forum, there are a great many real 3d fans. Many of us have varying degrees of experience with still photography, and video including 3d. I don't think there are too many people who like 3d here that are just trying to be trendy and falling for the latest gimmick. For instance, guys like Joseph Clark are about as knowledgeable about 3d and film in general as anyone you will likely run into. He probably could be described as a "video purist" in the medium of 3d. So I guess it's fair to say that purists come in all stripes.
As for me, I'm planning on fulfilling a lifelong dream in a couple of months by diving in the Caribbean with a 3d camcorder and housing. No gimmick to my way of thinking.
Barry C is online now  
post #292 of 367 Old 05-27-2013, 05:54 PM
Member
 
darksets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 35
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by AVTrauma View Post

+1

The work done by those "greedy manufacturers to lull us into buying into the 3D craze" has many benefits for the consumers... which includes contrast, light rejection, brightness and color fidelity... all the things darksets wants!
I won't "attack" this poster personnally, but agree the tone set in the posts written by him/her to be offensively stated and also uninformed. I bought my set because of the 2D quality and have enjoyed the 3D experience it has provided me and the family (the optional 3D equipment was included at no charge, and the set was at a smoking hot price!).

I don't see how having an opinion against something that is purely optionall has developed into the venomous hatred as expressed in too many posts. rolleyes.gif

It is not exactly purely optional however, if it was I wouldn't have a problem. I already mentioned that 3d capabilities are included in all latest televisions and projectors and about
potentially making room for 3D channels in the limited cable tv bandwidth. Also the studios are spending their technical and financial resources in converting 2D films to 3D. I'm
still waiting for the blu-ray version of Gilda but hey we can enjoy the 3D version of Jurassic Park instead.
darksets is offline  
post #293 of 367 Old 05-27-2013, 07:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mpalmieri1203's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Pleasant Valley, NY
Posts: 2,641
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by darksets View Post

It is not exactly purely optional however, if it was I wouldn't have a problem. I already mentioned that 3d capabilities are included in all latest televisions and projectors and about
potentially making room for 3D channels in the limited cable tv bandwidth. Also the studios are spending their technical and financial resources in converting 2D films to 3D. I'm
still waiting for the blu-ray version of Gilda but hey we can enjoy the 3D version of Jurassic Park instead.

Quite a few assumptions. So anything a studio does that doesnt cater specifically to your needs is a waste of resources?

I enjoy 3D. I think it's just a ton of fun. I think your kind of fighting a losing battle here. For the most part if it's available in 3D you can also get it in 2D. What's the big issue? Most people can probably respect that you don't enjoy 3D. You seem to have a total disregard for others' opinions though.

mpalmieri1203 is offline  
post #294 of 367 Old 05-27-2013, 07:52 PM
Senior Member
 
Jetmeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 479
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
3d once in a while in the theatre is cool as I just saw Star Trek in 3d...............some scenes were great in 3d, others I would rather have had just 2d.

3D is built into the latest tv I bought and that is the only reason I may look into it, but I damn sure am not going to waste much money on it.

Not worth it....................


3d in the latest 2160P 4k sets is the only adavantage to those high priced tvs as NATIVE content may never be readily available on these but it should

in theory make the 3d better because of increased resolution , however that will be UPCONVERTED MATERIAL...so keep that in mind as well.
Jetmeck is offline  
post #295 of 367 Old 05-27-2013, 09:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
KJSmitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,606
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetmeck View Post


in theory make the 3d better because of increased resolution , however that will be UPCONVERTED MATERIAL...so keep that in mind as well.

When the first 1080p flat panels started selling we didn't have any 1080p material to speak of either.. Within two years blurays were coming out of the woodwork. Given the exponential growth of technology 2160 displays and sources won't take long to be common place either. Question is will an uncompressed movie, 3D or not in 2160 fit on a Blu-ray Disc? Hmmm.

I love technology and like someone else mentioned I just wish I was significantly younger to actually see and/or be a part of what transpires 50-100 years from now..

Cheers

Love DIY
KJSmitty is offline  
post #296 of 367 Old 05-27-2013, 09:27 PM
Member
 
barnabas1969's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Melbourne, FL
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
@darksets: Whatever dude. My 2011 Samsung PN64D8000 was one of the top two or three sets available when I bought it... for BOTH 2D and 3D. It had the most accurate color of any set in the price range and was was rated #2 of all the commercially available sets in 2011. The only two sets that beat it were the $10K Panasonic Kuro and the Panasonic VT series... by a nose... and whether or not the VT beats it is debatable, depending on whom you ask.

So... your rant about the 3D feature is pretty pointless. If you want a great 2D picture, you're probably going to be buying a high-end TV... and it will come with a 3D feature built-in. I don't know if the 3D feature will actually cost you any money... but why argue about that... it's not an option. Sorry. High-end and mid-range cars (and most "economy cars") come with power windows and locks these days too... whether you want them or not. Wanna complain about that too?

Hey "Barry C"... please post those 3D videos of your diving experience here. I'd love to see them. I've been contemplating the purchase of one of those masks with the built-in HD cameras... I hadn't thought about 3D, but it would be very cool. I've always wanted to share my experience with my family. It would be very cool to be able to show it in 3D!

Oh... and I LOVE to watch movies that are well-done in 3D on my TV. I don't mind the glasses at all. I understand why some people don't like it, but any F-tard who can't understand why some people like it needs to just stop posting stupid stuff!
barnabas1969 is offline  
post #297 of 367 Old 05-28-2013, 05:08 AM
Advanced Member
 
CheYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 613
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by darksets View Post

It is not exactly purely optional however, if it was I wouldn't have a problem. I already mentioned that 3d capabilities are included in all latest televisions and projectors and about
potentially making room for 3D channels in the limited cable tv bandwidth. Also the studios are spending their technical and financial resources in converting 2D films to 3D. I'm
still waiting for the blu-ray version of Gilda but hey we can enjoy the 3D version of Jurassic Park instead.

Why bother with the conversion anyway, that movie is stupid and anyone who likes it is just fooling themselves into like some type of "classic" film.

CheYC is online now  
post #298 of 367 Old 05-28-2013, 08:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 3,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 199 Post(s)
Liked: 181
Since the theme of this thread really asks the question "IS 3D DEAD"? We're not just talking about 3D blu-ray movies. Is the lack of 3D programming on the major TV channels like ABC,CBS,NBC,FOX,USA,TNT,TBS,SIFI,PBS,OPRA(kidding). the real reason 3D is stagnating in this country? I imagine the cost of top quality 3D cameras and equipment to the individual studios has a lot to do with it, but we do have 3D broadcasts of the Super Bowl, All Star Baseball Game, The Masters, the Olympics (no individual studios involved here). With more and more households containing 3D displays will there be a saturation point reached where the networks decide to take the plunge?
andy sullivan is online now  
post #299 of 367 Old 05-28-2013, 10:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mpalmieri1203's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Pleasant Valley, NY
Posts: 2,641
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post

Since the theme of this thread really asks the question "IS 3D DEAD"? We're not just talking about 3D blu-ray movies. Is the lack of 3D programming on the major TV channels like ABC,CBS,NBC,FOX,USA,TNT,TBS,SIFI,PBS,OPRA(kidding). the real reason 3D is stagnating in this country? I imagine the cost of top quality 3D cameras and equipment to the individual studios has a lot to do with it, but we do have 3D broadcasts of the Super Bowl, All Star Baseball Game, The Masters, the Olympics (no individual studios involved here). With more and more households containing 3D displays will there be a saturation point reached where the networks decide to take the plunge?

I enjoy 3D but I don't think it would find success on network programming.

As I've said before I think one of the main competitors or blockers of stronger 3D adoption are tablet devices. Many people watch and surf. The active shutter glasses can make that slightly more work.

mpalmieri1203 is offline  
post #300 of 367 Old 05-28-2013, 04:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mtbdudex's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 4,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 189
So the rhetorical question then should be "was 3D ever truly alive" from a consumer viewpoint rather than a manufacturer viewpoint.

Heck - I bought a few blu-rays in the 3D combo pack, then stopped, nobody I know at work buys 3D blu-rays either......so where is all the market trend data showing?


Sent from my 32GB iPhone4 using Tapatalk
mtbdudex is online now  
Reply Latest Industry News

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