or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Community News & Polls › 3D Television - Fad or Here To Stay?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

3D Television - Fad or Here To Stay? - Page 2

post #31 of 2615
Not a fad. It is here to stay. Went to see Avatar 3D in the theater and had to wait 2 extra screenings because it was sold out...

That being said, stndards are a must (think VHS/Beta Max-Blue Ray/HD DVD). Let's not do that again please.

But it will become commonplace as time goes on, possibly culminating in holographic entertainment, perchance?
post #32 of 2615
Quote:
Originally Posted by rexb610 View Post

If i had the extra money to buy newer 3DTV set, a new receiver (support for HDMI 1.4) and new blu-ray player although PS3 will get the update..sure i would have jumped on to 3D now.

I have to change all of my components (except PS3) just to get 3D. I saved for and built my current system piece by piece just cross the line to HD world (1080p, blu-ray, HD audio etc.) and not in a hurry to replace those with this new feature,fad or gimmick.

The way i look at it is that there are still a lot of different ways to get 3D and a lot of different versions so i'll enjoy and be content with what i have right now and see how the 3D pans out.

Maybe in 2 or 3 years when there is no need for 3D glasses, i'll jump on it.

I am in a very similar boat, but just bought a 58" plasma for the living room rather then firing up the theater for TV shows... but I didn't buy a 3D TV!

Thumbs down for glasses and any hint of multiple standards...
post #33 of 2615
Bring it on!

I'm overdue for a home theater upgrade anyway, so I fully intend to buy 3D-ready gear. The additional cost is small enough not to be a factor, so why not? If the content doesn't appear, well, the equipment can still play 2D content.
post #34 of 2615
Today's 3D will be the View-Master of yesteryear
post #35 of 2615
Fad or not...I am way more into Ht then the average person and I will never chase 3D.
post #36 of 2615
Hate to show my age, but......

The first 3D movie I saw was way back (actually it was way, way, way, way back) in 1937 during the great depression.

The glasses were those red & green cardboard type. It was a 10-15 minute short with a speeding car negotiating sharp curves where "things popped out at you" as they showed up in the cars headlights. No plot. Just a random series of scary acts. Still gives me a fright (and headache) just remembering the experience.

Ah...the good old days, when a Saturday afternoon double, or triple-feature movie only cost a kid 12 cents, the streetcar ride was 3 cents and a large ice cream cone a nickel.


post #37 of 2615
Definitely a fad unless they make a standard. Right now it's ridiculous.
post #38 of 2615
3D is an eventual must for home TV, but not until you don't need glasses to see it.
As long as you need glasses: it's just a fad.

Today at theatres, and Samsung warns for home 3D television: not to be watched by pregnant women, the elderly, and while intoxicated.
post #39 of 2615
3D is basically DOA, the people who bought the Samsung TV / Players still have nothing to watch other than Monsters vs Aliens.

Although the World Cup could change my mind...
post #40 of 2615
I'm waiting for Goofy's 'How To Watch Your New 3D TV' from Disney
post #41 of 2615
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.
post #42 of 2615
Once the porn industry jumps on the 3D bandwagon these TVs are gonna sell like hotcakes, even if it means you have to wear glasses to wear it.

If I were a large TV manufacturer I'd try to do anything I can including subsidizing to make the major adult studios crank out 3D blu rays.

You may laugh but it would do miracles for sales.
post #43 of 2615
Having worn glasses all my life, I don't give a damn about having to wear glasses to see 3D. Boo friggin' hoo, people. You need glasses to see 3D?! OHHH NOOOO! TRAVESTY!

I don't think it's a fad but I don't think it'll be a standard, either. Somewhere in between.
post #44 of 2615
I don't mind wearing the glasses in a theater, but for at home? No way! I'm rarely glued to my set when watching TV at home. I'm reading the paper, looking up something on the computer, fixing dinner, etc.

I have to wear the 3D glasses over my regular glasses and I can deal with that in the theater, but not for regular viewing.

A friend of mine has 3D for computer gaming and I think that has more promise, but the glasses he uses makes it almost impossible to see the keyboard! No, I can't type just by touch as I don't set my fingers at the home position.
post #45 of 2615
I say "Fad".

However a lot of marketing pressure will mean plenty of 3D sets will be sold.

Wearing glasses... these are a pain. Firstly, they're expensive. I'll have to buy 9 pairs for my 9-seat theater! I certainly won't tell my friends that they must bring their own... Also, if one is wearing prescription eyeglasses already, then have to don the 3-D glasses, wouldn't that be awkward and uncomfortable?

Will there be content? Very little I think.

Remember all the hoopla about 7.1 channel gear? How many movies are out in 7.1 channel?
post #46 of 2615
Eventually it might get to the point where every new TV being produced is also 3D capable but when you consider how long the adoption of HD took before it got mainstream, I really can't see this taking off any faster. I bought my first HDTV back in 2002 and there was one channel available in my area.

3DTV requires consumers to learn not only about HD, but glasses, Blu-ray, HDMI compatibility, new channels, which providers, which programming etc.

HD was a relatively easy concept to grasp by comparison and people still didn't get it.

It also requires more bandwidth from providers. Something the majority of which cannot deliver for HD content.

People hate the glasses so much a new tech is bound to come along before 3DTV in it's current form becomes mainstream. In which case why jump in now unless you just want to spend a lot of money for the novelty value?
post #47 of 2615
I went with fad but I guess I may be biased based on the fact I can't see 3D lol. There is a fairly large number of people with eye problems and that will turn people away from 3D, but as technology advances 3D may not have a significant effect on the price, I can't say I hate it but I hope I don't start see 3D only blue movies coming out.
post #48 of 2615
Quote:
Originally Posted by hemster View Post

I say "Fad".

Remember all the hoopla about 7.1 channel gear? How many movies are out in 7.1 channel?

I'm trying to forget
post #49 of 2615
Video gaming will push it forward.
post #50 of 2615
I voted Fad, but who knows... One thing's for sure, glasses are here to stay, at least in our lifetime. Shutter glasses have been around for some time now as they are the best way to give the illusion of stereopsis on a 2D plane. Eye doctors use them in conjuction with a computer program that creates varying levels of "3D" on an LCD screen to measure a person's depth perception. It can also be done with red/blue or polarizing filters but as everyone now knows, shutter glasses are much better.
post #51 of 2615
Man oh man does it ever put a smile on my face when looking at the poll and seeing that "Fad" is getting the vast majority of votes with 69%.

I cannot stand 3D. Avarice..... pure avarice.
post #52 of 2615
It is a Fad and a money grab.
See signature because Ebert's absolutely right.
post #53 of 2615
Just an expensive FAD like charging higher for old progressive scan DVD players when all they did was a change of firmware programing. FYI the current technique used in home 3D results in half the brightness since only one eye at a time, is seeing the image, while the other eye is blanked out.
post #54 of 2615
Quote:
Originally Posted by DasRaven View Post

It is a Fad and a money grab.
See signature because Ebert's absolutely right.

That's a horrible article

Quote:


1. IT'S THE WASTE OF A DIMENSION.

Just stupid. I can't comment.

Quote:


2. IT ADDS NOTHING TO THE EXPERIENCE.

Adds nothing? 70% of people who watched Avatar at the theater saw it in 3D. Clearly it adds something or there would never be such a bias.

Quote:


3. IT CAN BE A DISTRACTION.

Like just about anything else...

Quote:


4. IT CAN CREATE NAUSEA AND HEADACHES.

Of course it can if abused. So can 2D.

Quote:


5. HAVE YOU NOTICED THAT 3-D SEEMS A LITTLE DIM?

It's not that bad... Never bothered me

Quote:


7. THEATERS SLAP ON A SURCHARGE OF $5 TO $7.50 FOR 3-D.

True. However, installing and upgrading equipment for 3D projection is expensive too.
post #55 of 2615
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.
.

Perhaps it's more of a 'Long Experience' attitude. For the moment, we're talking about people putting a filter over their eyes at home.
post #56 of 2615
3D Porn Content is what's really needed to make a go of it but of course we'll tell our spouses it's for the World Cup or new ESPN 3D channel.

If it's going to hurt my eyes it at least should have a reward and didn't all our Mothers tell us it would make us all go BLIND!!
post #57 of 2615
3D in consumer TV is a low cost high profit feature for the manufacturer. They are leveraging it to keep prices up. I would expect them to not settle on a standard quickly- the more product cycles they put out before a final standard is set the longer it will enhance profitability.

Personally I hope that while they futz round with this we end up with sets capable of reproducing sources with higher refresh-rate and resolution. True 120 and 240hz capability for display of all sources including PC's and game systems would make my day.
post #58 of 2615
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.

Maybe the "seasoned citizens" have a better perspective since they've seen things like this come and go.

GO TIGERS!
post #59 of 2615
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMarco View Post

Once the porn industry jumps on the 3D bandwagon these TVs are gonna sell like hotcakes, even if it means you have to wear glasses to wear it.

If I were a large TV manufacturer I'd try to do anything I can including subsidizing to make the major adult studios crank out 3D blu rays.

You may laugh but it would do miracles for sales.

That's one reason HDDVD lost cuz the porn industry went BD.
post #60 of 2615
Until they can get it so nothing on your head is required, 3D will be a fad. Tried watching a 3D movie with my kids at home (red/blue old school glasses) and within 10 minutes both asked to switch back to 2D.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Community News & Polls
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Community News & Polls › 3D Television - Fad or Here To Stay?