3D Television - Fad or Here To Stay? - Page 21

+1

These people literally had YEARS advance notice (not including the extra 5 month extension) of what was coming. Some people think the government should provide EVERYTHING for them. In a country where way too many people have no medical insurance and, believe it or not, there are STILL some actually starving, only a government made up of idiots would spend billions of dollars to fund digital tuner boxes. If they had to do something so stupid, they should have sent it out for bid (for American companies ONLY) and distributed the boxes themselves....to the VERY needy.

Gee, maybe we should blow a few billion more and have another "cash for clunkers", that really got the economy moving.

Some people think that whatever the government gives out is a free ride, but if you're an American taxpayer, in the end, you're paying for all this nonsense. That's not correct, what I meant to say was that you're paying some of the interest the government owes, because the principal is never reduced, it just keeps growing. I really feel bad for the next generation and can't imagine how they're going to pay the tab.

Since China is getting close to bankruptcy itself, I understand they're going to call in the 85% of the Amercan Debt that's owed to it!

And the United States will simply start the printing presses rolling to give them their money. Which means our money will be confetti.

Not if you pay everything by wire transfer or plastic.

And how many airmiles do you get by paying with plastic?
If China goes bankrupt, who'll make the next generation of 3D TVs?

Korea.

And if not Korea, then Mexico, Malysia, Thailand.... or FIRE

(only teasing you pal, since you're the most ardent supporter of 3D)

I would say one of the most since Lee and others want to see it happen. I don't think I could manufacture any TVs though.

No matter who makes them, we won't have the money to buy them after the confetti party.

I have read a lot here about peoples thoughts on 3D... Having experienced both Theatre and TV versions I think I can say that it is here to stay. Why? the answer is simple; progress! Evolution kicks in and the good ol colour tele has a 21st century facelift. In my humble opinion 3D TV will be great for Sport, Documentaries and Movies. I heard all the same arguments that I read about here when HD was released, people telling me that they won't buy one, now try and find a flat screen without HD; the same will happen to 3D whether you like it or not. I'm for one looking forward to purchasing a nice new 3d 50" Samsung, which incidentally is cheaper by several hundred pounds to the 42" HD Samsung that I paid for 4 years ago when HD first come out.

I would say fad but hopefully its the first step towards having multi layer screens that allow viewing without glasses.

Today's 3D is a way to make money to develop tomorrows multilayer screen and then advertising "replace your crappy 3D tv today for a new real 3d tv without glasses"

This thread is now fading out. However I would like to share my experience last night with my conventional Samsung 40" 1080P LCD TV. I calibrated it myself when I bought it a few years ago using over the shelf software. Nothing special but it looks really great. Anyways I was watching Shrek on it. Not a blu ray but a conventional DVD of all things playing on an ancient Panasonic RP62 non upscaling DVD player hooked up via component. The picture was so convincing and lifelike things would pop in your face and the depth was amazing. It truly looked 3D itself with a lot of depth to the picture. As things would move toward you it would pop right in your face.

My point is with a properly calibrated screen its really all the 3D you need. I am willing to bet that my conventional 2D TV looks more realistic and 3D like then a poorly set up 3D TV.

Maybe it's all YOU need, but I want something better. You're watching a fairly low rez DVD, and if you compare that to a full HD 3D Blu-ray the difference is night and day. For an idea on how good 3D Blu-ray can look, read this:
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/foru...-on-3d-blu-ray

http://gizmodo.com/5560724/test-show...are-disgusting


Although I'm sure glasses at home would be a bit less nasty.






A bit.

Hi Fire,

Bluray of course offers the highest quality-type picture available but that doesn't mean it's anywhere near the disparagy between VHS and DVD or SD and HD. When a high-quality DVD (i.e., Shrek, Star Wars, etc.) is upconverted by a good player and fed via HDMI to a properly callibrated HD monitor, the results are amazing.

I DO FEEL however, that the bigger the screen, the more essential it is to have bluray, for detail at 480p (even when upconverted) begins to lose it's crispness and vibrancy as the screen increases in size. Sort of like 32 inch sets - they might appear sharper because the picture is more compact and only needs 720p to present a top quality HD picture whereas larger ones need the full 1080p to make up for the detail that becomes lost in the expanded viewing space.

I've seen the bluray demonstation discs in stores with side-by-side comparision between that and standard DVD and the lesser quality of the DVD side is greatly exagerated - my DVDs don't look anywhere near as blurry or faded as the demonstration made it to be. Don't forget bluray advertisements say "up to six times the resolution of standard DVD" which also means depending upon factors such as the upconverting chip, monitor size and use of HDMI, the difference in the visual effect can also be much less.

I can see, on the other hand, where true 1080p resolution might be necessary for 3D.

I agree completely with you. I've been looking to replace my SD DVDs as they become available in Blu-ray and in many cases (too many, if you ask me), the Blu-ray discs of many older pictures, where they didn't have original negatives for digitizing, don't look much better than the SD DVDs, if at all.

Most SD DVDs today are dual layer that hold about 8gigs if needed. However, I recently saw recodes of Blu-ray discs done by experts using the x.264 codec @720p. The average movie winds up between 2-4 gigs total. If done from a good Blu-ray, they look spectacular. It just goes to show you what they "could" have done with a regular DVD disc if they "really" wanted to.

As for BD, there's enough room on a Blu-ray disc to do virtually anything they want...IN TOP QUALITY.....especially with some of the amazing algorithms used in today's codecs.

Well put, Techman.

The James Bond films that were newly re-mastered frame by frame looked so much better than the original releases years before. There was such improvement that it was like watching the series for the first time all over again.

And when our Panasonic DVD recorder went on the fritz, we replaced it with a newer Panny recorder that included upconverted playback. The price of the recorder was about the same as an entry-level bluray player. We also purchased an upconverting player that cost only $69 for our HT system in the den - about half the price of the same type of bluray player. This was our first experience with upconversion and we immediately noticed the improved quality via HDMI compared to 480p via component.

When done right, standard DVDs and players can produce vibrant pictures that can hold their own to bluray. My worry is, however, that the industry leaders (those saints of integrity) will revert to producing DVDs and DVD players that meet the minimum set standards in order to push consumers closer to bluray. As you might suspect, I don't trust them when it comes to business ethics.

Yes, the picture is so crisp and detailed, it now drives you bananas to see Everyone Smoking in the first few movies!

What theatre do you go to that allows smoking, let alone smoking in the first few rows?


You give them more credit than they deserve. Everything they already do is the minimum they can get away with and still sell whatever it is they're pushing. I don't think they really want to sell SD DVDs anymore. I just wish I hadn't bought hundreds of SD DVDs, especially when they come out with Blu-rays of the same pictures I already have. They also seem to keep creeping the prices up on standard DVDs. I guess it's to make the Blu-ray pricing look more attractive. I think if they priced new Blu-rays like Avatar, they would sell many more Blu-rays.

In some cases I have the 4:3 letterbox of a movie, then the 4:3 anamorphic....and now the Blu-ray. They got me three times for the same picture....and then they want to use HDCP.

Just saw this poll:

Fad, fad ,fad.......I'd put money on it.

Yah, but there aren't too many people to take the other side of your bet.

"You give them more credit than they deserve. Everything they already do is the minimum they can get away with and still sell whatever it is they're pushing. I don't think they really want to sell SD DVDs anymore."

Hi Techman,

Actually, I give them no credit at all. Those Bond films I mentioned are great, but why didn't they re-master them in that manner to begin with? And why originally release the earlier ones in mono and then a few years later in DTS 5.1? Because this way many of us would purchase the same film twice. Same with those "super bit" discs. And now the same manipulation is being applied to bluray and 3D, making it necessary to buy players and monitors a second time as well.

Don't know, however, if I will go so far as to accuse them of producing 480i DVDs at minimal standards established by the industry at this time - my recent purchases still look fantastic being upconverted. Won't give them credit for high standards, either. I believe quality control is still in the hands of the Steven Speilbergs and James Camerons who don't want to see their artistic creations compromised. If it was left to the corporate heads, we'd be seeing diluted junk.

They just don't care one way or another. The BEST example I can give you is an MGM release of "The Hallelujah Trail" from 1965. It was a non-anamorphic letterbox transfer that had SO MUCH DIRT in parts, it looked like the print was dragged on the floor. As bad as the print was, they could have used a "clear pic" wet gate for the transfer. At least you wouldn't have seen the scratches or dirt. They just don't want to spend "too much" money. However, on new films it's much different and easier for them to make a beautiful Blu-ray.

All the People Smoking in the Movie! - Not the Audience! We know better now days!

Oh! -lol

I agree. I think the Hollywood companies are pushing to get get more down-loadable medium out there so they can have more controls over their products, IE: copying, amount of time you can view it, where you can get it, but this is not going to take over anytime soon. Not with the current way to down load over the internet, and the fact that many don't have access to high speed internet yet.
I know with Dish if I use their "On-Demand" service, I get the movie in just a few minutes, but there's only like 10 to choose from. When I tried to down load a movie with from Dish's on line catalog, it took 7 hrs to down load. That's using their 722k DVR and a 10Mb internet connection.
Never down loaded another movie that way again.

Ghpr13

The problem, here, though, is your prejudicial perspectives about them, and your implicit abrogating of our own responsibility, collectively, as consumers in the consumer marketplace. Business ethics dictates that they must learn what their customers value, and then provide that at the highest price consumers are willing to pay for it. To do anything else is direct and actionable disrespect against investors. So the responsibility for keeping high-quality DVD players on the market rests solely in the hands of us, consumers, which we either fulfill or abandon through our purchasing behaviors. If you continue, as we have, insisting on only paying less and less and less for DVD players, and we don't offer substantial profit motivation for CE manufacturers to make high-quality DVD players, then they would be idiots to make them for us. They're not idiots. They're responsible, and so yes, high-quality DVD players will go the same route as high-quality VHS players -- but because we consumers will drive things that way.

We're already hearing of problems in 3D land - sets aren't working as they should and are being returned. In LG's case, actually re-called! Back to the drawing board! (While even the 2D sets are coming up with problems due to manufacturer's trying to go too thin!)

"The sky is falling!"