3D in the Home? Do you care? - Page 13

I have 3D on both of our TVs, one 42" and one 60" panel. We like it a lot and everyone we demo it for is pretty impressed.

Like a previous poster said, the cruise control analogy is apt. It's not for full time viewing, or just half paying attention viewing...it's strictly a movie night experience but it is a really cool one. Avatar was awesome.

3D gaming is cool. I played Uncharted 3 on my new PS3 in 3D and it was sweet.

Couple of notes for you-
Glasses free s3D has been commercially available since March 2011. Unfortunately, that technology is only practical for single viewers and that single viewer must hold his head still in one position. There have been several attempts to track a viewer's eyes to hold the 3D effect when they move but it is still not very good. Other prototypes have been demonstrated that permit several viewers at once but these also need to be in a precise location. Maybe someday, but reality is that there are very very few that insist on glasses free s3D. Most people accept the glasses as OK for the special viewing that is normal when the program is in s3D. 2D will always work for casual viewing. FWIW- Sometimes when I am shooting s3D I shut off autostereo monitor and switch to 2D as holding my head still for for long shoots gets tiresome. It's these times I wish my 3D camera was passive display, requiring glasses.

Holographic projection is not science fiction. We have it on several levels, from stage holography that major news networks have recently used, mainly as a wow demo for the ratings and smaller kiosk displays for advertising. The Star Trek Holodeck is, indeed, still a concept in science fiction. I suspect that when producers figure out how to use the stage holography for something practical, we will see more of it. Kiosk holography is commercial and being used throughout the world.
I think that stage holography or even holodeck will be quite awhile before we see story book motion pictures appear with this form of technology. It will require a whole new way to present a story, probably as it was shown on Star Trek, where the viewer becomes a part of the story and your interaction updates the story, maybe more suited for a game environment as opposed to a passive viewer medium. I think that would be fun! BTW- I love games on my Kinect and often wondered when they would create a Kinect s3D. I play in front of my 110" projector.

dukstuf- I can't decide if you are a troll or sincerely bitter 3D hater. I say that because elsewhere you posted you have been a Disney artist for many years. That is what puzzles me because, maybe you didn't get the memo, but Disney is one of the primary promoters of stereoscopic 3D, not just in new productions but also conversions of the classics. If you want to see what Disney is doing, visit the theme parks where you can see how they embrace and promote stereoscopic 3D in most of the theme park presentations. I don't know where Disney hides you but all the Disney creators I have met all are excited about where this 3D is going and look forward to giving the Disney fans new and exciting movies and presentations in stereoscopic 3D. PS- I don't work for Disney, but I am a stockholder. So, that in a small way makes me your employer. I also visit Disney theme parks every other month.

Thanks for your knowledgeable input, Don.

The first stereoscopic device in my home was my fresh on the market Nintendo 3DS and its glasses-free 3D display. Loved the 3D, but I was very annoyed by the narrow viewing position. I also got the Fujifilm 3D W3. Its glasses-free display is practical for taking and reviewing pictures, but it's terrible for showing other people or even for relaxing viewing on my own. Later I got a 3D projector which requires active shutter glasses, and to me this was the breath of fresh, comfortable air: the viewing ease of 3D glasses. When I hear people saying they'll wait until glasses-free 3D, I figure they either don't know what they're in for or probably aren't interested in 3D enough to pay the premium a high quality glasses-free display would more than likely require.

Likewise with holograms. We have things called holograms, but when people talk about it in relation to stereoscopic 3D, they're wanting the Star Trek Holodeck. The plausibility of such a thing is not what some people hope.

Light passive 3D glasses, which fit over prescription glasses without need for a second thought, is the best answer for those who are bothered by glasses.

Airion-

Curious about your experience- When you watch your active display for more than 2 hours in a seating, do your eyes get tired? This is the one issue I have had with my active projector system. because I want to edit 3D that requires as much as 10 hours a day of viewing 3D I went passive knowing that I would suffer two problems but I gained on never getting eye fatigue. The first problem is still annoying and that is the resolution reduction, but I accept it and use the 3D passive for viewing mostly motion and scene timing, not end use picture quality. Still, I know that one day I will upgrade to the new 4K passive and that will resolve that issue. The second negative is not an issue for me as an editor which is the vertical viewing restriction. As an editor, I can position my passive for optimum vertical viewing and this issue becomes minimal to non existent.

As for glasses complaint, I hear two problems here. 1. The vanity issue, mostly for those that have a self concious complex on how they appear to others. This is more of a psychological issue than actual physical. I'm not a psychiatrist but by opinion of these people is that they probably also have other issues needing counseling. 2. People hate to wear 3D glasses because they also need Rx glasses and hate wearing two pairs. Well, this hit home as my wife cant see distance and wears glasses to see the screen. I went to work with the assistance of a brilliant young lady at Lens Crafters here in town and we developed a pair of Rx shutter glasses for my wife that are light weight and optimized for our viewing distance of our home theater. Today, she can watch and enjoy 3D with perfect clarity and not need to wear two pairs of glasses. She still suffers the long movie eye fatigue, same as me.
Yesterday, we went to the theater to watch The Hobbit. I took a pair of my passive clip-ons for her glasses and she loved not having to wear two pairs of glasses in the theater. We watched over 3 hours with those passive glasses and not suffer eye fatigue.

As for the development of new tech on glasses free stereoscopic, I don't see the industry resolving this with the direction they are going. Every engineer I speak with on this are working in the same direction which I don't feel will ever resolve the issue for multiple viewers at wide viewing locations. As for holographic ( holodeck ) concept, I see great promise for the game environment but not for story telling. Gamers are far more friendly to new stuff than movie critics. Here the movie creators will need to completely modify their approach to story telling and this is going to be a very very hard sell, harder than going from stage plays to the big screen. But one day we may see some creative attempt to venture into this new artform after the technology is long developed. Will it sell? Probably have the same issues we have today with people who refuse to watch 3D and believe all story telling must remain in flatworld. And, I am also suspicious of those who, today clamor for this Holodeck concept. I suspect they will turn and reject it the same as they do other new technology.

Not at all, and that includes up to 7 hour 3D gaming sessions. For me the main problem with (DLP-link) active shutter glasses is their cost and availability, and to a lesser extent motion tearing associated with active. These are quibbles in comparison to my overall satisfaction with the experience, as well as the relatively low cost for a large image. I also usually choose to take out my contacts in the evening and 95% of the time I'm wearing the active glasses over my prescription glasses. It doesn't make a difference to me.

I will know how I feel about 3D in the next two weeks when m Epson 5020 arrives. I love movies, and if the 3D experience enhances the movie, then I'm all for it. 3D is in it's infant stages in tv, but it's an old concept. I remember when the stereoscopic pics of the early 1900's (no I wasn't here then!) showed 3D and those were amazing, the the 3D slide pics that we can buy that also are cool. But, if surround sound can enhance a movie, why wouldn't 3D on the visual side enhance it? Certain movies would be enhanced more were depth of space is required, and some, like stage productions probably would not be enhanced. I agree that the technology would be great if the 2D conversion to 3D was better developed, and that glasses are a pain. Maybe 5-10-15 years from now glasses will be obsolete (tvs already being developed with no glasses required) The point is, technology can be developed if the demand is there for it. I, for one, think that it is. I just called RedBox and they said that 3D rentals are coming in 2013. That will be a big plus and may knock the price down and increase the choices for 3D. On the other hand, if you could stream 3D, who needs to own a 3D BluRay DVD?

VuDu Streams 3D in Hi-Def [1080p] - it works fine.

Their pricing does not work fine in my opinion.

I'm guessing you are in the younger category then. The hint is the long gaming session, typical of a younger age bracket, but also that you seem to tolerate the long active shutter glasses session. I'm especially interested in this due to my age and recent eye exam diagnosis for glaucoma. My eye pressure is on the high side of normal. While the doctors claim this is asymptomatic, I have wondered if long periods of active shutter use can exacerbate the eye pressure and cause the fatigue. Would like to see any studies on this. I have seen that more people my age find eye fatigue common than younger people.
Currently, I don't need to wear glasses as I am one of the few lucky senior citizens with 20/20 vision but have slight astigmatism in left eye and is corrected using reading glasses so I can read 1 pt. text on my computer screen without straining. I just got my annual eye exam a few days ago.

Last I looked at Vudu their 1080p 3D was only coming in at 720p on my PS3. What device do you use to get 1080p on vudu 3D?
FYI- I can select 1080p for the file to stream but the data display on my projector always switches from 1080 to 720 during the program.

Accurately deconstructed. (I'm 30. That's still younger right?)

Given the way active shutter glasses work, I'm not at all surprised that they could cause problems for some people. I think they're more comfortable than glasses-free displays, but less comfortable than passive glasses. Luckily theaters already use passive glasses and 4k passive displays seem destined to rule the future. However I expect to stick to active for the foreseeable future given my tolerance, preferred screen size, and preferred budget.

If you only watch 3d shows your not watching much tv or movies then are you ?

Another flaw of this is lack of content........................

Then next would be lack of QUALITY content........and I don't mean the plot of the movie either....................

Well they work for me. The Samsung glasses fit comfortably over mine -I think being able to remove the nose clip makes the difference.

I have a little Playstation branded 24" 3DTV and everytime I tried to play a game in 3D I immediately get a headache. I'm not sure if its because I have to wear the 3D glasses over my prescription glasses, or if I'm just not "compatible" with the way 3D works. I haven't tried any 3D movies.

I do love the way 3D looks in games, though. For example in Black Ops when you aim down sight, it really looks like you're looking down the barrel of the gun.

have a 3d tv and blu ray players (TV came with 3d wasnt a selling feature I was looking for, bought 3d blu ray just so i could if wanted to.) HOWEVER I hate 3-D and would rather watch a crystal clear 2D image.

I couldn't care less about 3D at this point. There's only a few movies worth watching in 3D, and I'd see them in theaters if I wanted to that bad. Even then, it's not a big deal.

Sure, we may eventually see more good movies with well done 3D, but I'm not holding my breath.

What I'm worried about is the next gen game consoles. Will they push more 3D games? Will I care then?

My replacement Sony TV is 3d, it wasn't my choice. so went looking for 3d glasses and found some ps3 glasses for $20. its great and the price is right for glasses but no content. Directv only has one ppv channel and 3 reg channel its as bad as the early days of HD, renting movies is the only alternative for me,

I have a 3D TV, 3D bluray Player and 3D receiver, but I have yet to buy any 3D glasses. I am not into 3D.

Sounds to me like you bought the expensive stuff and ran out of money.

Would you buy a car, a garage, and then not buy gas, claiming you're not into driving?

Well I saw Life of Pi in 3D and definitely would consider it as one of the most well done films in 3D.

Got a couple of 3D capable Tv's...active glasses..and currently looking at a 3rd unit

First off...I think Plasma is a better 3D experience than LCD/LED

Though I think the same plasma sets have a better 2D picture as well

I watch it maybe 5% of the time...so it would never make my decision...I was just looking for a good 2D picture. 3D was just a bonus

But to put it in perspective...every car I have owned..except the old hand me down I had as a teenager, has had cruise control

I have used it about 5% of the time over the 30 years I have been driving




Warren

Life Of Pi 3D ... Big +1! Will definitely be adding that to my Blu-ray 3D collection!

My 52" Samung LCD from 2008 still rocks. I still love the picture quality and my home theater set-up (HTPC, Xbox 360, PS3, HD comcast, 7.1 surround HD audio) still works. If i find the need to buy a new set LED TV 55" or bigger (maybe when we get a newer bigger home in the future), i might get a new set with built-in 3D and and upgrade my receiver and speakers. Other than that, i don't really care right now.

Flat panel TV technology has come a LONG way since 2008

Assuming you have a 650 or 750 series series Samsung...those were good TV's
I have a 650 from that period and used to own a 750 as well

Compared with the upper tier LED Samsung's today...there have been major strides and today's TV's are WAY less expensive than those of 4-5 years ago.....like 50% less and are better in every way

in 2008 as I recall....a 750 series Samsung in a 52" was about 3K
Today a 7100 series is about $1600 in a 55"

I find it interesting that the new poll here has 39% owning a 3D capable TV and another 11% that want it...an over 50% total number



Warren

I can stream in 1080p/HDX 3D to my Western Digital TV Live Hubs with no issues on a 10mb DSL connection.

I already wear glasses, so having two pairs on at the same time is not ideal.

Same here

All my equipment support it but , I do not care for it.
I just like a picture on my 114" screen to be as sharp with the perfect black level and color as is it possible.

relevent equipment
Oppo 103
JVC RS45/X30
Carada screen

Ray

+1!

I wear glasses also and the Samsung 3D glasses have a removable nose-piece making then quite comfortable imo.

If more 3D movies would be released, I guess that the technology would lift off rapidly. One of my friends has a 3D LG tv set and I gave it a go, but to be honest I would change my current tv with a SMART Samsung instead. I find it more interesting for the moment.

Me and my oldest boy both wear glasses ..No problems for us to sit through a 2 hour movie with the 3d ones over them ..My family really enjoys 3d movie nights on the weekends