Ok...Holidays are now over, so, how about 3D now?

SBS is the current defacto standard, any new 3D TV will accept it. 3D television is going to struggle with image quality/bandwidth issues for the foreseeable future however, especially with the introduction of 'interlaced' passive sets.

I think it's here to stay, but at what capacity is up to manufacturers. If no standards are established then it will continue to be just an extra feature (like 120hz or similar) but if they introduce standards to increase the ease of use and the tech gets more affordable so more people can get it and in turn more content is produced for it, then I think it can be something that's on par with what HD was to SD (albeit in a more limited capacity, it could be huge, in they way that HD was, for movies, games, and on demand content but it won't have as great of an affect on cable and ota tv watching (which HD didn't even have much impact on that area anyway. IMO).

It's all up to the hardware manufacturers and content producers, 3D will be as big as the amount of content available and how easy it is for people to get it into their homes.

I don't think the new poll will ultimately be substantially different from the original poll ..

Yes, I think it's definitely here to stay, as it is now starting to be a more standard feature inclusion in the new sets coming out.

How COMMONly it will be used is going to depend on content, not just movies on disks, but how many channels are available with 3D content.

I like that Mark Cuban started HDNET in "the day", but didn't find his comments about never seeing a superbowl in 3D very helpful. Interesting to note that his potential opportunity has just been swiped, with the announcement of 3NET.

Here to stay for these reasons...

#1. All HDTV manufacturers are incorporating 3D

#2. Many People will use 3D if they already have it in their new HDTV

#3. Movies are incorporating 3D like never before

#4. Most children movies are in 3D now, and that will influence the future

#5. More and more games will be going 3D

Can we please just skip to 4K?

Voted bring on the content... just got my set, I do not understand the almost "rabid" hatred of 3D...

I still think it's a fad, unless they really up the "good" content. I am so tired of seeing "3D" ads that have the cheap throwing-something-at-the-screen trick. There's some Nic Cage movie coming out and of course there's the "PRESENTED IN 3D!" logo and then immediately cut to the ax/knife spinning towards the screen. And of course I rolled my eyes at the spinning sunglasses in the Resident Evil 3D trailer. WOW, SPINNING SUNGLASSES?!?!? IN 3D?!?!?! Yeah, I'm going to run right out and get a 3D set for that crap.

For every Avatar or Tron, there seems to be a hundred "cheap trick" films like that. And I still don't think 3D looks that great. Avatar and Tron looked great, but moreso when things stood still. Whenever there was movement, it still got all blurry (viewed both in IMAX).

Something I just watched was originally made for 3D: A Christmas Carol (the CGI one). It was almost distracting how many times a made-for-3D shot showed up in the 2D presentation. I'm guessing there were about 40 finger-pointed-at-the-screen shots. Don't think I missed anything by not seeing it in 3D....

Anyways, I think it will remain a fad or niche, at least as far as home-viewing goes.

3D is an amazing experience. Definitely not for lazy user and brand name buyer. Calibration is crucial.

It was a fad in the '50s, then the 80's, and now in the 10's - every 30 years we take another stab at it.

Let's see what they bring to us when 2040 rolls around before we rush to judgment.

I watched Avatar 3d in theater. While I could see the effects, my gf could not. Seems like there are quite a few people who are unaffected by 3d. I had her watch Coraline at home and once again she cant tell a difference.

I even explained what she should be seeing. I think maybe she can physically see the effects, but is unaware because she doesn't look at those sort of details. She is one of those who really argues the merits of HD as well. Yes, her eyesight has been checked (20/20). Hell, I have worse eyesight than her.

I would consider her the majority. People who can merrily watch non-hd content and live their lives without it.

The only way this format will be instituted is if it is forced, ala digital transition. It will be a niche if not. There is not a big enough difference for the common person to switch.

This please!

Fad for the foreseeable future.

Right now its a compromise technology, not a next step. Most 3D is less crisp and detailed than 2D. Most of the time the 3D objects in the foreground lack believable "mass" and it feels like I am looking at a pop-up book. I shouldn't have to give up on one area to get another. B&W to Color to HD were all clear steps forward without the drawbacks. 3D is not there yet.


PS. I do believe the poll this time will have a better showing for the "Not A Fad" simply because of human psychology of wanting to justify your purchase instead of admitting you might have bought the new "Betamax".

I truly believe those who are against 3D are the ones who can't afford it, or didn't buy into it when they did have the money.

It can only add to the experience for me, and those I know... Especially the DEPTH value in gaming.

And tablets (slates) were a fad in the early 90's, a fad in the early 2000's, and now a 'fad' again in the early 2010's. I hope apple realize that the tablet PC concept is just a fad that will be dead in a year or so.

Sorry but I have spent thousands on audio and visual equipment and I still do not care about 3D.

I think 3D will stay around this time...but it may take quite a while for everyone to jump on board.

I personally, have purchased in the last two years... A New Plasma, Blu-ray Player and Receiver (all non-3D).

There is NO WAY, I'm shelling out more coin at this point.

I just had to buy a new projector since my IN72 power ballast esploded. The upgrade to 720p was justified, the upgrade to 3d wasn't. While the current lower end 3D capable 720p projectors are favorably priced, I invested in an older 720p native projector instead. It is far too early to invest in this technology, it is a crap shoot. I am fiscally conservative though. I always buy 2 - 3 years behind the latest and never feel like I am missing out. Saves money and feelings as well.

Kind of bad timing for 3d to come out right now with the economy still working its way back. Had it been released in 07, more people would likely have adopted.

Ultimately, as with all things, the consumer votes with a wallet .. ( I was going to say cash, however, that form of trade seems to be dying out as well much to the dismay of the few of us left that use it) ..

Having lived thru the phases, crazes that CPanther95 mentioned, I wish the format well .. but the fact is, during each and every one of the periods the studios attempted to push 3-D .. we the people rejected it ..

Maybe this time it has a fighting chance, don't ask me .. if I had a crystal ball, I'd be a rich man .. it certainly does seem to be a pretty good divide between the likes and not likes ..

3D is being used in a much bigger way now. It is used as a draw to the movies that use it, and it's working. (Avatar for Example) Producers wouldn't spend extra if it didn't help push movie sales, especially for children's movies. (They are the future) Most I have seen are using 3D now, and Disney is on board in a big way. = It will be adopted more and more. You may not be forced to use 3D one day, but I bet every HDTV will incorporate it, and a larger % of movies coming out will be in 3D.

I am not planning on buying 3D capable equipment anytime soon. I just put together my home theater 2 years ago and should be set for the next 5 years unless a new audio codec comes out that is better than the current HD audio formats.

Fad as long as you need to wear glasses.

A simple summary, those have 3D at home, loved! Those don't have 3D at home, hated!

3D theater experience is different from those at home theater 3D. Also, the only 3D I consider good are those shown at IMAX 3D theater. The regular 3D theater, I thought the 3D was horrible.

what good is 3d when almost nobody has a receiver that can pass hdmi 4.1??
I have a 3d TV and 3d blueray player but need to uplug hdmi and bypass my one yr old receiver for 3D from cable. Fortunately oppo bdp-93 has 2 hdmi outs as a work around to get both 3D and master audio for blueray movies.

and 3D is way better experience on the big screen (movie theater) then it is on my 58" tv. Much more immersive.

It was a fad in the early history of motion pictures and it's still here so I think its a fad that's here to stay. The difference now is that with digital implementation, it can be done much better but I think it has a ways to mature for the home theater market.

There are several things holding it back including cost and lack of media (movies on BD), lack of standardization between systems used by manufactures (types of shutter glasses, etc.), and lack of 3D home theater equipment (lots of 3D "Ready" projectors, but no solid 3D home theater system yet (I'm not referring to flat screen televisions here, which are of course plenty).

It's interesting to note that there were far fewer 3D televisions and displays this Christmas in stores (at least in my area), than there were last year. I think 3D has received a lot of negative publicity and its a real mish-mash of offerings right now. Some televisions require adapters, some are now passive, and it goes on and on. I do think the move to passive glasses as LG is doing, will help some of the issues.

When more movies are available for reasonable prices on BD, and some a bit more technical evolution takes place, 3D will become mainstream, but it will be secondary to 2D content for some time.

You haven't heard of the JVC RS40, RS50, RS60 Projectors?

This thread would be proof that the killer if there is one, is just going to be misinformed people mis-informing other people on it.

Many of the comments here show a total lack of knowledge and understanding.


It does work better in my theater than my living room. 65" display -vs- 106" display.

If anything? Maybe it will have more people will buy'n bigger displays. I am all for that.

I wish I knew. I'm in the market for a new receiver and all the old HDMI 1.3 boxes are now easily purchased at a large discount. Can't decide if I should go after a 1.4 receiver or not.

i will use this as my exact opinion as well. although i saw avatar twice in 3d and the christmas carol.. it wasnt a must have thing for me like bluray and lossless audio.. it is neat to see at the big movies but i dont really have the desire to see it at home.. the glasses are more annoying than the small visual addition they add.