3D Television - Fad or Here To Stay? - Page 78

But this increase in "3D panels", since pretty much all new decent quality TV's tout "3D", you can't really point to that as consumer interest in 3D without further analysis.

Again, not very useful without further research data.

"Lion King" 3D re-release would definitely fit my hypothesis that 3D sales will largely be attributed to periodic 3D novelty films like Avatar 2 and 3. "Lion King" was specifically re-released as a 3D film. Similarly, I believe Bieber was specifically created as a 3D film.

But there are too many unknowns here to draw many conclusions. Did the 3D versions make so much because the 3D versions charge more per ticket? Did many theater-goers attend primarily because the 2D versions were sold out? It's feasible, after all, how many people go out to a film, find out the super-deluxe version is sold out, then go to the second or third theatre in the multiplex that still had seats.

It's a snapshot view of the first weekend's revenue split between 2D and 3D. It is useful:

1. You can see that the Q3 movies have a higher % (for 3D) then the summer movies do.

2. The 2D to 3D conversions, for the most part, have a lower % then the native 3D or 3D Rendered movies do.


All movies are subjective when it comes to popularity with movie goers. 3D isn't going to make a bad movie good. But it might make a good movie better.

Then you have the issue of the International box office which of late have had higher 3D revenue %'s then the American box office. Hollywood movies have become global entertainment, not just for Americans.


It is what it is. Only those who are negative about 3D will try to bring up the points you are as "reasonable doubts" in an attempt to skew the results. Some movies have almost all the theaters showing the movie in 3D while others have about 50% and still others are inbetween. There is enough of a variance to account for your "reasonable doubt" citings.

The rise in panel production is due to Samsung and LG which are competing against each other and banking on increased interest in 3D market.

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/busi...02700320F.HTML

And, 3D also had the potential to make a good movie worse than it's normal version. If they get crazy with unneeded or poorly done 3D effects, it can become very distracting to a lot of people.

True. Several in this forum have reported companies will include 3D as a feature on some of their mid-level sets hence the need for more panels. But the fact that one's new TV would have 3D might then spur interest after the purchase itself so further analysis will be required to see if that does become the case. Perhaps the sale of additional active shutter glasses will give some statistical clues to work with since most sets do not come with enough pairs for the average household.

I'm not so sure Titanic is going to do that well.

HOGO, looks like it may be a very interesting movie. Or at least from the previews shown on TV it looks like it will be. Reviews by the newspapers here in Chicago are somewhat mixed. Michael Phillips for the Chicago Tribune although he liked it and gave it 3 stars, but it also read like he was not real impressed with it. While Roger Ebert for the Chicago Sun Times really liked it, and gave it 4 stars, and even said. "With 'Hugo," Martin Scorsese creates 3-D the way it should be."

Whether it points to consumer interest or not, it does suggest that 3D is more and more likely here to stay. Having 3D as an available option and having 3D actually used by a certain number of people are two different things.

Which really hasn't happened. The big difference this new rebirth of 3D has brought is the sense of depth to the movie. The "cheesey" pop-out effect is pretty much regulated to the horror genre.

AFAIK, there are no sales stats for active shutter glasses.

And many of the new 3DTVs (from LG and Vizio) don't use ASGs. They use cheap passive polarized glasses and a whole bunch are usually included with the TV.

Blu-ray 3D: A big hit in the U.S


http://www.blu-raydisc-reporter.com/...it-in-the-u-s/

That is debatable, some will say it has with certain movies.

As much as some people dislike quality of picture with the TV's that use the passive glasses, compared to active glasses. It quite likely is liked by a lot of consumers, just because of the fact they usually include a whole bunch of passive glasses with the purchase of those sets.

Unfortunately for the active glasses, which I also think work a lot better than the passives do for TV's. This might be something that ends up like Beta vs VHS did, where the technically superior format, was not the end winner of consumer based VCR's. Although even if it does, I think the higher end no compromise type sets probably will still stay with the active glasses.

With so little broadcast material to watch, it is not surprising so many discs have been sold with Bluray being the only true source of 3D entertainment (gaming not included). Yet that 3.5 million figure might not be as impressive as the article suggests - with little else to turn to, is it not unreasonable to believe the average owner has ten discs in his or her library? That could suggest about 350,000 consumers account for that 3.5 million figure.

Has any information on the subject been compiled?

We can also conduct our own unscientific survey here with each forum member letting us know how many discs each of them owns.

Absolutely true. Some buy the set for the 3D feature, some for they believe they will get better 2D quality instead and some simply because they had no other choice. It can create converts or do little to expand interest in the feature.

Attached is an article from CNet focusing on that subject but what might be a more interesting read are the comments that follow.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-...ird-dimension/

And some like those type of effects. As an avid poster in the 3D Central forums, there are threads where members are asking which movies have lots of pop-out effects.

Like all entertainment, it is subjective . . . one man's junk is another man's gold.

Each technolgy has it's strengths and weaknesses. As long as consumers buy and use their 3DTVs, 3D-TV will flourish.

If you have DirecTV, you do have access to lots of 3D content. Much more then if you have Comcast.

Also keep in mind that 3D BDs are not available at the major rentailers like Blockbuster, Netflix and Redbox.

From all that I have experienced having a 3DTV and reading the posts from those that also have one, the concensus seems universal - you watch 3D spordically. Approx. 95% of my viewing is in 2D. Of course it is different for those that are gamers ( I am not). Their 3D usage is much higher.

For an analogy, I like to use eating Sushi. I love it but I only eat it 3 or 4 times a month.

yes..I was well aware of when they started checker board
you need to look to Mitsubishi for the innovation on that...

that is very different and clearly before this forum even started

I counted 2010 vs 2011 Samsung models..again that mirror the time frame of this forum

why would I be looking at other markets for 3D TV...clearly does it not make the most sense to count the market I am in?

There are a several other products....blu ray recorders and large glassless 3D panels...available in other markets
Some...the blu ray recorder,specifically, has been available for quite some time in asian markets...and I haven't seen any news about those models being released in the US

Does that really affect what I was talking about...2010 vs 2011 products available in the US

Not as all...my count remains as it was...3x

By the way..I am glad you are keeping notifications that you receive when someone replies to the forum

Again..I have to say its both creepy and hilarious at the same time

Honestly...it sounds quite productive..keep me posted on how it works for you...

Clearly you have not been able to accurately describe the accuracy of changes I corrected in my posts


as for telling a lie..really?.....You clearly are way off base
Between your assumptions and your forum posting e-mail notifications you have created fantasy

because it not even close to reality..lol

But again....really, you have emails sent to you for new posts in this thread?

I have to tell you...I am laughing as I type this.....

Its just quite over the the top

...take a look at this..
http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3...3DInformation/
.I dont work in this division...but..I "could "..like you try to relate my division to this one.....which would be worthless like your "manufacturing" connection you mentioned a while back

by the way..I corrected this post because I moved the link

just in case your "email" thread posting notification told you otherwise




Warren

In 2011 there are some VERY mid range sets that are 3D capable..vs 2010
in 2012..if the blu ray players are an indicator..3D TV should be available in 3rd tier brands

Also...now there are different quality levels of 3picture quality as well...just as the 2D

I have seen some passive displays that I said .."next"

I didn't like the 2D or 3D picture quality

to be fair...as I am thinking about one particular TV from 2010...LG's top line full LED backlit LX 9500 LED...3D quality wasn't nearly as good...due to the cross talk as a couple of the high end plasma displays...I thought the Samsung C8000 LED was better, than the LG 9500...but still not as good as the plasma technology 3D


Warren

You're right about bluray players - most I see are now 3D equipped and can go for as little as $99.

For the average viewer (not the videophlie) is there a noticeable difference in 3D quality between these $99 models as opposed to the higher priced ones? Let's assume we are talking about the same manufacturer (Samsung, Panasonic, etc; - not Coby, etc.) and that one has a good 3D monitor as opposed to one you would say "next" to.

Warren.....

It was so nice here, when you were gone for roughly two days...

What is it with you, do you lose all your arguments with your wife, and then come to these forums and try to make up for that?

I'm done with your childish games, and your constantly going off track, trying make up or change rules as you go along, in order to try a win a argument. Sorry Warren, you may live in the fantasy land of Warrenworld, but the rest of us do not. So your weak attempt at making up "your" rules for the rest of us, do not apply at all!


Anyway, you have now become a member of my Ignore list, You are only the 3rd person to be added to my Ignore list. So because of that, I will not see your reply to this. And I'm sure you will probably write up one of your drawn out mini manifestos as a reply.. But I will not see it, so go ahead and waste your time doing it. Unfortunately though, I will see some of your posts if they are quoted by someone else replying to one of your posts or rants.

I would say not. They use common parts like the drive and the HDMI chip, The only real difference between them is which SoC they are using. None are bad per se.

Which were limited to PC based games as that was the only true stereoscopic full color 3D content available at the time.


You can also use a 3D format converter like the one Mits sells that converts the popular 3D formats like Frame Packed and Frame Compatible and outputs Checkerboard.

Thanks Lee,

Gather it's then the set that does the real work.

Mostly the big difference is, the higher priced players usually offer and come with more options and bells & whistles, over the entry level ones. Quite a few of them are also turning into media streaming devices. And then there is also the universal multi format players like Oppo and a few others, that will also play SACD's and DVD-Audio discs.

And which probably also upset more than just a few early adopters.....



Yes, but if I had one of those early sets. I think I'd rather go with one of the 3D Blu-ray players that can also output in checkerboard, rather than add another device in the connection chain. As to if it would it make any difference over using a add on adapter, I really don't know. But usually anytime you can cut down on extra connections and extra cabling, it's rarely a bad thing.

Thanks, John.

Suspected it was more bells and whistles that would be unnecessary for one basically looking to play back discs. That's why I just purchased a new entry-level Pioneer receiver for our second HT system to replace a Yamaha that developed distortion through the right surround channel (checked speaker and wires first). Wanted good quality sound but did not need extra perks like more power (since this is for the den), satellite radio, video up-conversion, etc. but has what I would need - the latest pro-logic, dolby and DTS offerings and outputs for front/back center speakers which I can use with older receivers in storage to get discrete 7.1 from bluray down the road.

Only thing bugging me is that even though I got it on sale and with free shipping from Crutchfeld, some places are now selling it for as much as $50 less. The upside is that Crutchfield has a sixty day return policy and they do make good if problems develop after that time expires so I don't have to worry about returning it.

I doubt it.


And that limits you to just 3D BD. You can't watch 3D content that is Frame Compatible. Sports, TV shows movies, specials, etc.

Sure - but that isn't what he asked. He asked about 3D quality performance: