3D Television - Fad or Here To Stay? - Page 16 - AVS Forum
View Poll Results: 3D TV - Is it a Fad?
Fad - Current Theater Hype! 0 0%
Here to Stay - Bring on the content! 0 0%
Can only happen if we have standards! 0 0%
Voters: 0. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #451 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 03:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
prepress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 3,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by fire407 View Post

You may be right about me taking it too personally. I just don't understand what the uproar about the new technology is. It's really simple---if you don't want it, don't buy it now. If in the future all new TVs have the technology, then you will still have the option of if you want to use it or not. We're actually having a poll before there are any 3D channels available and most people have only seen poorly setup store displays. I can't believe the ignorance of the people that still think that there are no standards. Someone says it, or makes it a poll choice, and a huge amount of people believe it. Again, I won't be as frustrated in a few months. There will be lots of positive talk on this forum about the new 3D tech. As I've said before, not all 3D will be equal and some will actually suck, but there will be some movies and sports that will look fantastic. Let's see what a similar poll will look like in a couple of years.

Off the top of my head, I think those standards should involve, among other things, no proprietary glasses. Those that come with a Samsung TV will work with a Toshiba, and so on. Even better, no glasses, plus some way to mitigate the disorienting effect the tech has on some people.
prepress is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #452 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 08:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Joseph Dubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,970
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
"But I would disagree with you on screen size as it relates to immersion. I'm not saying you're wrong... I just have a different opinion. IMO the more of your field of vision you can cover, the more immersive. Only when you sit so close that the image is degraded does it detract, but at 1920x1080, that's pretty darn close to even a very large screen."

Hi Mega,

As you said, there is no right or wrong in this exchange of opinions. That was the point I was trying to make when referring to the size of my KD34XBR960 as opposed to it's picture quality.
Joseph Dubin is offline  
post #453 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 09:56 AM
Member
 
Veeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
At this point comparing 3D/2D to mono/stereo is apples to oranges. I don't walk into my home theater or any theater and have to don a giant helmet in order to get stereo sound or surround sound.

For some people, having to wear 3D glasses for something that is not essential to the story is like having to wear the most uncomfortable pair of headphones ever when adding the extra channels adds nothing to the story and only detracts from the enjoyment of the movie.

IMO



PS - I still don't see the angle on how this is going to revolutionize sports viewing. Racing for instance? Would they have a camera mounted on a wall at the exact spot of where a crash is going to happen or where the cars round a corner so you could get the sensation of the cars driving into your face? Or would they have to have a 3D camera in a car so you could feel like you're driving? What about baseball or football? Batter's belt-buckle-camera? QB helmet cam? Doesn't seem all that appealing to me. Again, my opinion.
Veeper is offline  
post #454 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 10:58 AM
Advanced Member
 
cpto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: East Hanover, NJ, US
Posts: 627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think misleading ads will hurt sales, since almost all of them show 3D images extending beyond the edges of the set. I think the ads promise much more than can be delivered. The local BB Panasonic demo looked good to me and a friend for about 5 minutes. After that - for whatever reason - we found it more distracting then beneficial. It was a relief to take the glasses off - something I've never felt using current circularly polarized lenses in theaters.
cpto is offline  
post #455 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 11:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fire407's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,527
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by prepress View Post

Off the top of my head, I think those standards should involve, among other things, no proprietary glasses. Those that come with a Samsung TV will work with a Toshiba, and so on. Even better, no glasses, plus some way to mitigate the disorienting effect the tech has on some people.

The glasses are a big deal right now, but a lot of people posting still think that there are NO STANDARDS. The glasses compatibility issue will probably be solved very simply eventually. My guess is that future 3D setw will let you enter a code on the remote for whatever brand of glasses you have. Not much different than puttin a code in your remote to control a receiver or DVD player. Also, there will be third party glasses available that should drive the price down.
fire407 is offline  
post #456 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 11:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
prepress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 3,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by fire407 View Post

The glasses are a big deal right now, but a lot of people posting still think that there are NO STANDARDS. The glasses compatibility issue will probably be solved very simply eventually. My guess is that future 3D setw will let you enter a code on the remote for whatever brand of glasses you have. Not much different than puttin a code in your remote to control a receiver or DVD player. Also, there will be third party glasses available that should drive the price down.

That would be more consumer-friendly, for sure. We'll need to see how proprietary the companies want to be with their stuff. While leaving room for innovation, I think the basic tech needs to be the same across the board.
prepress is offline  
post #457 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 12:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
Ghpr13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Fairdale,KY
Posts: 815
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think the TV manufactures are going to have to include the glasses with the TV to get "Joe sick-pack" to close the deal. If the average Joe wants to buy a new TV and he's told he can have this latest and greatest 3D unit for, let's just say, $500 more...OK, that could be doable, but then he's told that he'll have to pony up another couple of hundred for the glasses to see 3D, that's when 2D will seem better to go with.

It's not like a game console with one controller that you can take turns with...your not going to pass around you glasses. Now if you're gaming, then maybe you would, but not viewing a program/movie.

IMO
Ghpr13

Info=Knowledge=Understanding=Better TV!
I see dead pixels!
Ghpr13 is offline  
post #458 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 02:10 PM
Senior Member
 
[KYA]Mega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX, USA
Posts: 436
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Dubin View Post

Hi Mega,

As you said, there is no right or wrong in this exchange of opinions. That was the point I was trying to make when referring to the size of my KD34XBR960 as opposed to it's picture quality.

Just so you know, I completely appreciate the benefits a good CRT can have over newer digital technology. I currently still have a CRT monitor as my main display on my computer. The reason is because I play some fast-paced games that benefit from 120Hz frame rates. Only VERY recently have some LCD computer monitors started supporting 120Hz input rates (most 120+Hz displays still have a 60Hz inputs, and internally increase the refresh). The sad thing is, it is hard to get 120Hz support for older monitors from Windows 7 since it assumes nobody uses CRTs anymore, and 120Hz can damage most LCDs, but that is another topic.

Okay, sorry for the off-topic info, but I just wanted to acknowledge what Joseph was saying about CRTs.

[KYA]Mega is offline  
post #459 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 02:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fire407's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,527
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghpr13 View Post

I think the TV manufactures are going to have to include the glasses with the TV to get "Joe sick-pack" to close the deal. If the average Joe wants to buy a new TV and he's told he can have this latest and greatest 3D unit for, let's just say, $500 more...OK, that could be doable, but then he's told that he'll have to pony up another couple of hundred for the glasses to see 3D, that's when 2D will seem better to go with.

It's not like a game console with one controller that you can take turns with...your not going to pass around you glasses. Now if you're gaming, then maybe you would, but not viewing a program/movie.

IMO
Ghpr13

I really don't expect Joe Sixpack to buy a top of the line TV right now whether it has 3D or not. And you're right, the glasses expense is only going to discourage him further. However, there are enough enthusiasts that do buy top of the line TVs---look how popular the Kuros were even though they were very expensive. In two or three years, even the lower tier TVs will have the 3D tech. They will still work fine as 2D sets. I would imagine that the glasses would be included with the TVs then, and extra glasses will be a whole lot cheaper than they are today. Also, by the time the tech becomes commonplace and Joe Sixpack has it, it will probably even be better(more transparent glasses when open) kind of like Blu-ray being better and cheaper now than when it launched.
fire407 is offline  
post #460 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 05:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joseph Dubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,970
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by fire407 View Post

I really don't expect Joe Sixpack to buy a top of the line TV right now whether it has 3D or not. And you're right, the glasses expense is only going to discourage him further. However, there are enough enthusiasts that do buy top of the line TVs---look how popular the Kuros were even though they were very expensive. In two or three years, even the lower tier TVs will have the 3D tech. They will still work fine as 2D sets. I would imagine that the glasses would be included with the TVs then, and extra glasses will be a whole lot cheaper than they are today. Also, by the time the tech becomes commonplace and Joe Sixpack has it, it will probably even be better(more transparent glasses when open) kind of like Blu-ray being better and cheaper now than when it launched.

The bottom line is, even with the eventual drop in prices, how many consumers will spend money on another monitor and another bluray player (and discard what they have now) in order to get 3D? It might be a small consumer market for quite a number of years since 3D is coming on the heals of the HD boom.

And why is everyone referring to me as "Joe Sixpack"?
Joseph Dubin is offline  
post #461 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 05:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TMcG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 2,800
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 336 Post(s)
Liked: 319
At least the 3-D move is pushing the HDMI 1.4 standard which also has 4k resolution standards. At least there will be an option for 4k equipment thanks to the big push to HDMI 1.4 for 3-D formats.
TMcG is offline  
post #462 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 05:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Alex solomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by fire407 View Post

However, there are enough enthusiasts that do buy top of the line TVs---look how popular the Kuros were even though they were very expensive.

Yeah, look where the Kuro is now, DEAD!!! Without the participation on the average Joe, it is very hard for 3D to succeed.

I want to hear opinions from people who don't have a dog in the fight.
Alex solomon is offline  
post #463 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 06:11 PM
Member
 
trinifox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Perhaps this will be (again) be driven by the content-producer/content-consumer relationship; We know which industry helped kill BetaMax; I am not too sure if it was Sony's monopoly on major studios helped kill HD-DVD; but what I am certain of it's not just a matter of having a capable device out there, the content has to be available and justifiable content too.

Also this discussion may be moot once we realize that the majority of persons fascinated with 3d TV in their home are in the 'NW' quadrant of the planet while the vast majority of the remainder are still heavily engrossed in consuming ultra-compressed torrent downloads on sub par non-scaling dvd players on a 4:3 box that was dumped in developing countries when the 'NW' consumer market for them dried up.

What will continue to gain momentum is "any content, any when, any time" with seamless transfer from device to device. Video & computing on mobile devices will continue command research and development dollar focus.

Looking at markets like Africa, India, Asia, The 'TwiHard Generation' it's all about mobile and 'social'. I have been to many of these places, folk barely have somewhere shelter at night or water but practically every one had a cell phone. Overlay tweets, sms, facebook posts on your video timeline on a device that you can take with you every where, you may have a winner.
trinifox is offline  
post #464 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 09:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
techman707's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Florida & New York
Posts: 9,348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMcG View Post

At least the 3-D move is pushing the HDMI 1.4 standard which also has 4k resolution standards. At least there will be an option for 4k equipment thanks to the big push to HDMI 1.4 for 3-D formats.

Your new HDMI 1.4 cable will probably crack and disintegrate from old age before you see consumer 4K units in the near future. Even 4K 3D, like used in DCI theatres, is a stretch.

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." -Ghandi
techman707 is offline  
post #465 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 09:15 PM
Senior Member
 
taskman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 268
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUJayhawk20659 View Post

Is it me or most of the people that say "fad" and I'll pass are the "senior" members?
I am 36 and love change, however I tend to see the older crowd as being "afraid" to change.
And in that being afraid excuses are made as to why i.e., extra glasses and etc.
I will/am jumping on it and will enjoy the heck out of it as long as it sticks around.

I would agree with depending on the topic, but as a 29 year old, you couldn't pay me to use 3D and it cant come close to reproducing 2D 1080P clarity. Its an inferior technlogy at least right now.

Taskman
taskman is offline  
post #466 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 10:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joseph Dubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,970
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Since the issue of age has been raised in a respectful way, I would like to point out that one getting older doesn't mean outgrowing one's "toys". We have two HT systems, a massive collection of DVDs and CDs, a karaoke, three shortwave radios and many sleepless nights being Met fans.

I think some might confuse "hesitation" with "prudence" when it comes to embracing 3D. With more responsibilities to shoulder as we become older, one becomes more careful with the manner in which his or her finances are dealt with. Yes, I would love to watch 3D at home, glasses, cost and all, but for those in our age bracket who have already invested a great deal of money on good quality HD monitors, to suddenly do away with them makes those original purchases feel like a waste of money.

The problem with 3D is that it is being introduced upon the heals of the HD revolution. Perhaps the AVS survey should have added a fourth option for consideration - is 3D practical at this time for the millions who have purchsed HD monitors over the past half decade? I am sure many who said it was a fad would have selected that answer instead.
Joseph Dubin is offline  
post #467 of 2615 Old 05-21-2010, 11:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fire407's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,527
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Dubin View Post

Since the issue of age has been raised in a respectful way, I would like to point out that one getting older doesn't mean outgrowing one's "toys". We have two HT systems, a massive collection of DVDs and CDs, a karaoke, three shortwave radios and many sleepless nights being Met fans.

I think some might confuse "hesitation" with "prudence" when it comes to embracing 3D. With more responsibilities to shoulder as we become older, one becomes more careful with the manner in which his or her finances are dealt with. Yes, I would love to watch 3D at home, glasses, cost and all, but for those in our age bracket who have already invested a great deal of money on good quality HD monitors, to suddenly do away with them makes those original purchases feel like a waste of money.

The problem with 3D is that it is being introduced upon the heals of the HD revolution. Perhaps the AVS survey should have added a fourth option for consideration - is 3D practical at this time for the millions who have purchsed HD monitors over the past half decade? I am sure many who said it was a fad would have selected that answer instead.

People keep talking here like EVERYONE already has a fairly new HDTV, and this new tech would force them to scrap it and buy the new tech. That's not the case at all. There are always some people in the market for a new TV. I keep repeating myself, but go to any Best Buy tomorrow and you will see people there buying TVs. It's people that are just buying into HDTV, and people that have had a HDTV for the last 11 years that needs replacing, and people that just want a second or third TV. The same will hold true even two or three years from now when the 3D tech will be in every tier of TV sold. So even though very few people are buying the 3D tech now, it will increase gradually until a huge number of people have it in their homes. Also, we are discussing this right NOW before there are any 3D channels, only one 3D Blu-ray movie, and only two manufacturers even selling 3D TVs. In a month or two, when the channels are available and Sony and LG and Toshiba have their 3D TVs available, then the public will have a better idea of how 3D can look. When someone comes over to my house this fall and sees football in 3D, or a great looking 3D Blu-ray, then they really might feel the pressure to buy into it. Obviously a lot of people don't want to feel that pressure, even though no one is going to force them to replace their current setups.
fire407 is offline  
post #468 of 2615 Old 05-22-2010, 07:43 AM
Advanced Member
 
Ghpr13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Fairdale,KY
Posts: 815
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by fire407 View Post

People keep talking here like EVERYONE already has a fairly new HDTV, and this new tech would force them to scrap it and buy the new tech. That's not the case at all. There are always some people in the market for a new TV. I keep repeating myself, but go to any Best Buy tomorrow and you will see people there buying TVs. It's people that are just buying into HDTV, and people that have had a HDTV for the last 11 years that needs replacing, and people that just want a second or third TV. The same will hold true even two or three years from now when the 3D tech will be in every tier of TV sold. So even though very few people are buying the 3D tech now, it will increase gradually until a huge number of people have it in their homes. Also, we are discussing this right NOW before there are any 3D channels, only one 3D Blu-ray movie, and only two manufacturers even selling 3D TVs. In a month or two, when the channels are available and Sony and LG and Toshiba have their 3D TVs available, then the public will have a better idea of how 3D can look. When someone comes over to my house this fall and sees football in 3D, or a great looking 3D Blu-ray, then they really might feel the pressure to buy into it. Obviously a lot of people don't want to feel that pressure, even though no one is going to force them to replace their current setups.

Anyway you look at it there are just to many negatives with 3D at this time vs 2D HD. First, you speak of when channels of 3D programing become available people will see how great 3D looks. I don't disagree at this time that 3D may look really great (like I said before, I loved Avatar at IMAX), but the problem comes down to how many people will be able to get the programing? Right now ESPN, DirecTV, and Dish have committed to each having one 3D channel (I haven't read anything about cable companies yet, but lets say some of then will offer a dedicated 3D channel too). So right off the bat, you will need to subscribe to a cable or sat company, and I'm sure 3D channels will be consider a "premium" channel. No OTA 3D for free, which a lot of people out there are getting their HD OTA. And many swear by the quality of the OTA HD picture vs cable/sat compressed signals.
We're still waiting to get all our subscribed channels converted to HD, yet contracts and other costs are holding things up on many channels that still are broadcasting in SD.

As far as Blu-ray movies, IMO, I think the biggest blunder with 3D movies might turn out to be the release of Avatar in 2D now, instead of holding off with a 3D version. When that 3D version does come out, there will be so many comparisons made between the 2D & 3D versions that if that 3D version isn't as great as the theater version it could really put a wrench in 3D home viewing. During the mean time, people who have gone out and bought the 2D version have been saying how well they like it...that it was just as good with out the 3D...now what will motivate these people to want to purchase the 3D version when it comes out (and pay a premium price)?

fire407, please don't think I'm trying to argue with you, cause I'm not. I'm enjoying these "conversations" as a exchange of information and opinions...nothing more.
Ghpr13

Info=Knowledge=Understanding=Better TV!
I see dead pixels!
Ghpr13 is offline  
post #469 of 2615 Old 05-22-2010, 08:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bakerwi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The Peach State
Posts: 2,861
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghpr13 View Post

As far as Blu-ray movies, IMO, I think the biggest blunder with 3D movies might turn out to be the release of Avatar in 2D now, instead of holding off with a 3D version. When that 3D version does come out, there will be so many comparisons made between the 2D & 3D versions that if that 3D version isn't as great as the theater version it could really put a wrench in 3D home viewing. During the mean time, people who have gone out and bought the 2D version have been saying how well they like it...that it was just as good with out the 3D...now what will motivate these people to want to purchase the 3D version when it comes out (and pay a premium price)?

fire407, please don't think I'm trying to argue with you, cause I'm not. I'm enjoying these "conversations" as a exchange of information and opinions...nothing more.
Ghpr13

Ghpr13,

I agree with you on the Avatar point. I saw Avatar in IMax 3D and I occassionally removed the glasses to see the difference as did my family (wife and 2 kids) and we agreed that we would have enjoyed it just as much had it been in 2D. I did notice that the picture looked darker in 3D and the fact that it was in 3D didn't add anything to picture in my opinion.

However, if some see value in 3D then they should invest accordingly. I know what 3D is supposed to be, but for my viewing habits and enjoyment I PRESENTLY find no value with its current and proposed content.


Respectfully,
Willie

Pioneer Elite PRO-151FD

Zektor MAS7.1

Classé CA-2200/CA-5200

Oppo BDP-105, Denon DVD-5910CI, Cambridge 752BD, Cambridge 640C V2

Paradigm Signature S8, Paradigm Signature ADP1

Paradigm Signature ADP3, Paradigm Signature C5

REL R-505 Sub (2)

Oppo BDP-93, BDP-103D, Pioneer BDP-320

Sony BDP-S790

bakerwi is offline  
post #470 of 2615 Old 05-22-2010, 11:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
73shark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: KC, MO area
Posts: 2,256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 50
I liked Avatar better on my 110" at home better than 3D at the theator. Just didn't seem like it was real in 3D.

In space, no one can hear you scream . . .
73shark is offline  
post #471 of 2615 Old 05-22-2010, 11:26 AM
Senior Member
 
bayareakirk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'm greedy enough that I'll take all I can get if I can afford it - but not at the expense of giving up what's really important.

If I was buying a TV that had one of the best 2D pictures available, but also had 3D ability - I'd be happy to buy it. It would be like getting a sunroof in an already great car. For some people it might even be like getting all-wheel drive instead of two-wheel drive. A cool feature you will fully appreciate once in awhile - but not necessary to appreciate what makes the car great.

Now, if the TV with the best image in my price range lacked 3D - I'd buy it with barely a care.
bayareakirk is offline  
post #472 of 2615 Old 05-22-2010, 02:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
danieloneil01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Dickinson, Tx
Posts: 3,381
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Id much rather 4k projectors with content over we-tad-ed 3D. It's the very definition of gimmick.

D.I.N.K

Double
Income
No
Kids
danieloneil01 is offline  
post #473 of 2615 Old 05-22-2010, 04:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joseph Dubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,970
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Hi Fire,

As I am sure you know, there are many other factors to consider besides the amount of people seen at Best Buy to determine the future of television sales. For example, in a survey conducted in February by the Opinion Research Company, an estimated two thirds of all Americans now own a HD set. An additional 12% expect to purchase one in the next year or so, bringing the total to approximately 75%. However, less than 5% of those surveyed said they plan to purchase a monitor equipped with 3D.

And how many of those expecting to purchase one will opt for the less costly entry level sets?

Also please note that very few have HD monitors dating back to 1999 - in fact, DVD was only in it's infancy at that time and analog sets ran supreme. The HD explosion began about five years later hence, no need for most to replace outdated sets any time soon, especially since the industry touted extremely long life-spans for those other than plasma.

Again, I don't think the debate over 3D is whether it will be a fad or not, but if it will be a practical from a consumer standpoint until it becomes a standard feature.
Joseph Dubin is offline  
post #474 of 2615 Old 05-23-2010, 02:49 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Johnla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 11,519
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by fire407 View Post

This is the FIRST TIME that we've been able to see 3D at home without the gimmicky red/blue anaglyph glasses.

Wrong, this is NOT the first time for 3D at home without anaglyph glasses! 3D shutter glasses systems and 3D movies on DVD to take advantage of them have been available for years. There is even a bunch of Imax movies released for that. Problem with those, were that they only work properly on CRT based TV's. The advantage to the new way they are doing it, is that it works on all TV's and not just CRT's providing that they have it built in.

http://www.xforce3d.com/3ddvdmovies.html

http://www.razor3donline.com/
Johnla is offline  
post #475 of 2615 Old 05-23-2010, 06:48 AM
Advanced Member
 
tvine2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: vermont
Posts: 820
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bakerwi View Post

Ghpr13,

I agree with you on the Avatar point. I saw Avatar in IMax 3D and I occassionally removed the glasses to see the difference as did my family (wife and 2 kids) and we agreed that we would have enjoyed it just as much had it been in 2D. I did notice that the picture looked darker in 3D and the fact that it was in 3D didn't add anything to picture in my opinion.

However, if some see value in 3D then they should invest accordingly. I know what 3D is supposed to be, but for my viewing habits and enjoyment I PRESENTLY find no value with its current and proposed content.


Respectfully,
Willie

Thats because J.C. did 3d the right way.The 3d was suppose to be background and not take away from the whole movie. TO add depth etc.To kind of look like real life,not to have things poking out of the screen on purpose like most 3d movies of the past.
tvine2000 is offline  
post #476 of 2615 Old 05-23-2010, 06:55 AM
Advanced Member
 
tvine2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: vermont
Posts: 820
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghpr13 View Post

Anyway you look at it there are just to many negatives with 3D at this time vs 2D HD. First, you speak of when channels of 3D programing become available people will see how great 3D looks. I don't disagree at this time that 3D may look really great (like I said before, I loved Avatar at IMAX), but the problem comes down to how many people will be able to get the programing? Right now ESPN, DirecTV, and Dish have committed to each having one 3D channel (I haven't read anything about cable companies yet, but lets say some of then will offer a dedicated 3D channel too). So right off the bat, you will need to subscribe to a cable or sat company, and I'm sure 3D channels will be consider a "premium" channel. No OTA 3D for free, which a lot of people out there are getting their HD OTA. And many swear by the quality of the OTA HD picture vs cable/sat compressed signals.
We're still waiting to get all our subscribed channels converted to HD, yet contracts and other costs are holding things up on many channels that still are broadcasting in SD.

As far as Blu-ray movies, IMO, I think the biggest blunder with 3D movies might turn out to be the release of Avatar in 2D now, instead of holding off with a 3D version. When that 3D version does come out, there will be so many comparisons made between the 2D & 3D versions that if that 3D version isn't as great as the theater version it could really put a wrench in 3D home viewing. During the mean time, people who have gone out and bought the 2D version have been saying how well they like it...that it was just as good with out the 3D...now what will motivate these people to want to purchase the 3D version when it comes out (and pay a premium price)?

fire407, please don't think I'm trying to argue with you, cause I'm not. I'm enjoying these "conversations" as a exchange of information and opinions...nothing more.
Ghpr13

Well according to HOLLYWOODINHIDEF.COM we will see avatar in 3d in nov.2010,it will be bundled with the panny 3d tv.A few months after you''ll be able to buy just the 3d disc.
tvine2000 is offline  
post #477 of 2615 Old 05-23-2010, 07:36 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
jdskycaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 669
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by fire407 View Post

You may be right about me taking it too personally. I just don't understand what the uproar about the new technology is. It's really simple---if you don't want it, don't buy it now. If in the future all new TVs have the technology, then you will still have the option of if you want to use it or not. We're actually having a poll before there are any 3D channels available and most people have only seen poorly setup store displays. I can't believe the ignorance of the people that still think that there are no standards. Someone says it, or makes it a poll choice, and a huge amount of people believe it. Again, I won't be as frustrated in a few months. There will be lots of positive talk on this forum about the new 3D tech. As I've said before, not all 3D will be equal and some will actually suck, but there will be some movies and sports that will look fantastic. Let's see what a similar poll will look like in a couple of years.

You seem to be the one who is "fired" up here. Just because many do not think this technology is ready or provides an effect worth paying for at this time does not mean they hate it or would never watch it. I have paid extra to take the kids to see several 3D pictures in the theater but have no desire to place it in mine any time soon.

Standards? There may be some baseline standards in place but the fact that even something as simple as glasses that are not interchangeable is crazy. If the manufacturers really want this technology to take off they need to get together and create value for those that are willing to be early adopters. There are many that have already been recently burned by war between HD DVD and Bluray. Who wins here? Samsung? Panasonic? Pretty hard for me to defend what they are doing at this time.

JD
jdskycaster is offline  
post #478 of 2615 Old 05-23-2010, 09:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
orion456's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
If you saw Harry Potter in 3d, then you know that software can turn 2d into 3d and it was amazing. They will soon have a chip that can do this in real time, making 3d any time you want out of all the old TV material.

The ability to have instant 3d with piles of old content will make 3d a lasting technology.

You can't do this without glasses, but many people already wear glasses so its nothing to them to put them on.

3d is here to stay for sure this time. Avatar showed that 3d can truely be emersive and the IMAX view of it was astounding.
orion456 is offline  
post #479 of 2615 Old 05-23-2010, 10:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Joseph Dubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,970
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by orion456 View Post

If you saw Harry Potter in 3d, then you know that software can turn 2d into 3d and it was amazing. They will soon have a chip that can do this in real time, making 3d any time you want out of all the old TV material.

The ability to have instant 3d with piles of old content will make 3d a lasting technology.

Actually there are already many films produced in 2D that have been re-processed for 3D for use in home theater with the shutter glasses system which have received mixed reviews.

And again, the most important factor will be consumer reaction. The same was thought of 3D movies and comic books back in the early fifities at a time when people were thrilled just to have a small screen black and white TV set with fuzzy pictures (a much bigger gap of quality than HD is with 3D) and never took off. Not implying that history will repeat itself but just want to point out that nothing is a sure thing.

But I believe many are getting ahead of themselves forcasting new types of technology being just around the corner. Now, if Avatar is re-released in 3D with anaglyph glasses, I'm certainly going to buy the DVD again (I enjoy even the limited effect with those red and blue glasses). Discs like that are more realistic from a consumer standpoint, at least for the immediate future.
Joseph Dubin is offline  
post #480 of 2615 Old 05-23-2010, 07:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fire407's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,527
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Dubin View Post


However, less than 5% of those surveyed said they plan to purchase a monitor equipped with 3D.

What a shock!. With NO 3D CHANNELS AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW, and ONLY ONE Blu-ray movie included with one brand of TV.
fire407 is offline  
Reply Community News & Polls

Tags
Polls

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