or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › 4 Reasons the 3D TV Movement is Already Dead
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

4 Reasons the 3D TV Movement is Already Dead - Page 11

post #301 of 398
I don't know if 3D is dead but it sure seems like the studios aren't doing anything to promote it. You can buy 70" 3D TV's for under $2K and 3D blu-ray players for under a hundred bucks, but in looking at some of the new major 3D releases the price sure will discourage people. On Amazon they show, Monster University at $30, RIPD at $30, The Hobbit at $30, Man of Steel at $30, Despicable Me at $33 and Smurfs 2 at $35. That's a lot of coin for many people, and you can't rent them from Red Box or Blockbuster.
post #302 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post

I don't know if 3D is dead but it sure seems like the studios aren't doing anything to promote it. You can buy 70" 3D TV's for under $2K and 3D blu-ray players for under a hundred bucks, but in looking at some of the new major 3D releases the price sure will discourage people. On Amazon they show, Monster University at $30, RIPD at $30, The Hobbit at $30, Man of Steel at $30, Despicable Me at $33 and Smurfs 2 at $35. That's a lot of coin for many people, and you can't rent them from Red Box or Blockbuster.
Precisely why folks buying 3D copies must WANT the 3D copies. On average, the 3D versions are 50% more than the 2D versions.

While I've seen the 2D versions hit the bargain bins at Best Buy and Walmart for $4.99-$9.99, I've yet to see any 3D movies in bargain bins. The lowest prices for them are usually on release week, when they 'might' get down to $24.99. Otherwise, they're usually $29.99 or higher and it's been that way since 3D BDs began coming out.

I agree that lower prices would help drive market penetration, but that's probably not going to happen too soon. Look at the prices of CDs. They remained at about $15-$17.99 for a ridiculously long time considering a CD with jewel case and insert costs a fraction of that mass produced.

CD prices only began going down when mp3 sales killed hard copy retail sales.


Max
post #303 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by djbluemax1 View Post

If you're going to try to correct someone, at least try to do it correctly.

DATUM is the singular of data.

I did it correctly. Thanks for your pedantry and for entirely missing the point. "Datum," a word no one ever uses anywhere except possibly academic circles, is the grammatical singular of data. The expression "anecdote is the singular of data" is a point. What we call "data" in the world is the sum total of a bunch of anecdotes, none of which on their own tells us much, the collection of which is what we call "data."
Quote:
As for there being multiple SKUs and versions of something on Amazon, I don't know about anyone else but if I'm NOT looking for the 3D version, I look for the cheapest version that's labeled Blu Ray, and that's generally NOT the 3D version.

There are times on Amazon where even finding the cheapest item is challenging. As someone who orders from Amazon 40 times a year, I can attest to this. My story, of course, is "anecdotal." I'm quite sure Amazon has lots of data about people not buying the cheapest one.
Quote:
Can't even keep track of your own posts?
LOL

I'm going to stop responding to your petty little rants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

8mile13- I partially agree with your point about glasses-free 3DTVs. Many people on AVS say they're waiting for glasses-free 3D, but I think they're a minority overall. I think glasses-free has the opportunity to appeal to the casual viewer who hasn't much thought about 3D in the home and doesn't want to figure out the glasses. My concern is that such people wouldn't specifically seek out a glasses-free 3D display in the first place, for the post part. It would need to be a cheap, standard feature. There's still a lot of unknowns here, but my best guess is that glasses-free will help 3D slowly inch forward.

Sure, it will help things "inch forward" but what do you imagine inching forward? The reality of 3-D in the home as it stands today is this:

* Cannot be rented on disc
* Virtually no channels on cable / virtually no content on cable
* Very limited streaming options that are likely to be reduced going forward (I have this on very good authority by the way).

So let's pretend that glasses free sets ship in 2014 that aren't terrible but are sold at a premium. They are sold to enthusiasts who buy BluRay. In other words, the addressable market is ~5% of the home video market. How does this expand in the face of a declining number of households that purchase BluRay and no real prospects for increases in streaming/rentals? And then what motivates the next group to pay any premium for the glasses free feature? Even if the glasses free feature eventually becomes free (2016?), the content picture is so bleak by then that 3D adoption remains tepid. The idea that something catalyzes change here strains credulity.
Quote:
Your numbers are guesses, first of all. Then even if we take your highest guess, 20%, we're still left with a large percentage of growth in purposeful 3D purchases in 2012 vs 2011, even if we were to assume purchasing mistakes never occurred until 2012. Accept it for what it is: a positive trend over one year. Let's see wait and see how 2013 turns out.

Sure, they are guesses, but not guesses made by some chump on the street. And the information on numbers of households / discs per household are not exactly guesses out of thin air, they use the sales data. They paint an ugly picture, even if you look at 94% growth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

3D glasses in a home group viewing situation make it almost impossible for the group to have a real shared experience, where they can turn to each other and laugh at something on the screen, or ask if someone would like another beer or snack; or just stroll in and out of the room and keep taking peeks at the screen from time to time. It is just an unnatural isolating viewing experience, more akin to groups wearing night vision goggles than standard home TV viewing.

A great glasses free 3D TV technology would change all that, and allow people to share the viewing experience, much like they share the 2D home viewing experience now, and even more so on special occasions, such as watching the Superbowl together, etc. We are a social animal species, and 3D glasses tend to isolate us from the group. It is not the 3D experience that is the problem, it is the 3D glasses isolating effect that is. Once they are gone, I feel 3D will really take off and be around for the long run.

I think it will be too late. I also don't believe the glasses free 3-D tech is going to be good enough to wow anyone into paying for BluRay discs and I don't believe it's going to catalyze some other content renaissance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post

I don't know if 3D is dead but it sure seems like the studios aren't doing anything to promote it. You can buy 70" 3D TV's for under $2K and 3D blu-ray players for under a hundred bucks, but in looking at some of the new major 3D releases the price sure will discourage people. On Amazon they show, Monster University at $30, RIPD at $30, The Hobbit at $30, Man of Steel at $30, Despicable Me at $33 and Smurfs 2 at $35. That's a lot of coin for many people, and you can't rent them from Red Box or Blockbuster.

And Blockbuster is going through another wave of store closings, it seems. Disc rental outside of Redbox is more or less dead in the U.S. unless you subscribe to Netflix. And Netflix's DVD business loses customers every quarter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by djbluemax1 View Post

Precisely why folks buying 3D copies must WANT the 3D copies.

All the high prices prove are that the studios are asking more for the 3-D versions not that people "must really want them."

The correct way to promote the format is to stop charging more for it.
Quote:
While I've seen the 2D versions hit the bargain bins at Best Buy and Walmart for $4.99-$9.99, I've yet to see any 3D movies in bargain bins. The lowest prices for them are usually on release week, when they 'might' get down to $24.99. Otherwise, they're usually $29.99 or higher and it's been that way since 3D BDs began coming out.

They manufacture few copies, so they aren't going to be pricing them for volume sales. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Quote:
I agree that lower prices would help drive market penetration, but that's probably not going to happen too soon. Look at the prices of CDs. They remained at about $15-$17.99 for a ridiculously long time considering a CD with jewel case and insert costs a fraction of that mass produced.

Yep, and after the vinyl/cassette replacement cycle, CD sales went down every year.
Quote:
CD prices only began going down when mp3 sales killed hard copy retail sales.

MP3 theft actually killed hard copy sales, not MP3 sales. MP3 sales were more of desecrating the corpse.
post #304 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

Sure, it will help things "inch forward" but what do you imagine inching forward? The reality of 3-D in the home as it stands today is this:

* Cannot be rented on disc
* Virtually no channels on cable / virtually no content on cable
* Very limited streaming options

The obvious answer is that those 3 you list above could change over the years to come. And, 3D Blu-ray sales could continue to grow as they have been. And, with new hardware there's the potential for much better 3D console games.
post #305 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

The obvious answer is that those 3 you list above could change over the years to come. And, 3D Blu-ray sales could continue to grow as they have been. And, with new hardware there's the potential for much better 3D console games.

1) Disc rental is gone in the U.S., sorry. It's not coming back.
2) Cable is reducing 3-D not adding it. I know people think "well, this will turn direction and change back. History tells us few technologies see that happen.
3) Streaming could pick up, but at least one major streamer is going to reduce its commitment to 3-D long before any number of people with glasses-free TVs exist. Could they completely reverse course 5-6 years from? Yes, but why would they? The only 3-D source you will likely find at that point is ~15 Hollywood movies per year. Why is anyone going to try to make that happen in the home when everyone in the whole ecosystem is going to be focused on the UHD transition?

As for console games, while I think it's likely these will be the worst-selling consoles ever by a wide margin, I am confident gamers will embrace 3-D. I am less confident PS4 and Xbone will embrace 3-D heavily, given the lack of much discussion around 3-D at either launch and the lack of post-launch peripherals ever being a bit hit. Still, between computer gamers and such, 3-D gaming will likely grow over time. It's a niche, but a perfectly fine/fun/harmless one. For me, I'd rather see Oculus Rift grow and get 10x better than see 2-D screen-based 3-D gaming grow. The potential of Rift is amazing.
post #306 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

1) Disc rental is gone in the U.S.

Evidently, and I concede that we're largely having a U.S. centric discussion as that's what we have data for. It's different for me here in Japan, as there's no streaming option and rental is still strong. Occasionally there are 3D discs available, and I've rented one before.

For broadcast 3D, I think it's largely too early for it to be viable. There's just not enough people with 3D TVs yet. My understanding is that 3D channels have been poorly executed as well. ESPN 3D wasn't even available to many (most?) people. Games were shown days late. Other 3D channels do/did just recycle the same small amount of content again and again. I don't think there's any guarantee that 3D broadcasts will be much of anything, but I think it needs at least 5-10 years of people buying 3D capable TVs before it has a shot at being anything other than an experiment. The other challenge is the increased complexity of shooting in 3D. Even many movies with big budgets choose not to for that reason. It's not a straightforward upgrade like 4K.

I haven't heard of any 3D games on the new consoles yet, although there's only a handful of games to look at. I think here, too, 3D will become more worth the developer's time as more people get 3D capable TVs. At least now the hardware should be powerful enough to handle an acceptable resolution (720p) in 3D. I agree the Oculus Rift is great and I'll happily jump on it if it takes off. It's still 2D screen based 3D by the way. It has a wide field of view and head tracking, but it's otherwise stereoscopic 3D the same as TVs.

So there are opportunities for 3D to grow, some more feasible than others. And I think the data for 3D Blu-rays speaks for itself. So I think 3D will manage to slowly inch forward over the years. It will need years though.
post #307 of 398
This was back in June of this year http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-06-12/with-espn-calling-it-quits-the-writing-is-on-the-wall-for-3-d

I think the gaming market may be a 3D growth segment, but very slowly. Both my sons, age 21 and 18 couldn't care less about 3D and in fact are debating whether to even bother picking up a PS4 or Xbox one. These were kids that camped out overnight in a Canadian winter to grab the first sales of previous generations. I know because I was there with the credit card smile.gif

Pete
post #308 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airion View Post

Evidently, and I concede that we're largely having a U.S. centric discussion as that's what we have data for. It's different for me here in Japan, as there's no streaming option and rental is still strong. Occasionally there are 3D discs available, and I've rented one before.

Noted, I am fairly ignorant of the non-U.S. rental market. Here, our few remaining rental stores are disappearing and Netflix literally loses disc-rental customers every single quarter. All we have left is kiosks, which only stock recent titles and do not carry 3-D.
Quote:
For broadcast 3D, I think it's largely too early for it to be viable. There's just not enough people with 3D TVs yet.

3-D is in ~25% of U.S. homes.
Quote:
My understanding is that 3D channels have been poorly executed as well. ESPN 3D wasn't even available to many (most?) people. Games were shown days late. Other 3D channels do/did just recycle the same small amount of content again and again. I don't think there's any guarantee that 3D broadcasts will be much of anything, but I think it needs at least 5-10 years of people buying 3D capable TVs before it has a shot at being anything other than an experiment. The other challenge is the increased complexity of shooting in 3D. Even many movies with big budgets choose not to for that reason. It's not a straightforward upgrade like 4K.

You've cited multiple problems that are difficult to resolve: (1) Once bitten, twice shy. Broadcasters have tried, failed and are unlikely to try again. (2) Cost and logistics. Billions will be spent to upgrade everything to 4K. The idea that effort will be expended to do 3-D, which requires unique shooting angles and other things, is unlikely.
Quote:
I haven't heard of any 3D games on the new consoles yet, although there's only a handful of games to look at. I think here, too, 3D will become more worth the developer's time as more people get 3D capable TVs. At least now the hardware should be powerful enough to handle an acceptable resolution (720p) in 3D. I agree the Oculus Rift is great and I'll happily jump on it if it takes off. It's still 2D screen based 3D by the way. It has a wide field of view and head tracking, but it's otherwise stereoscopic 3D the same as TVs.

So as far as the consoles go, I haven't seen evidence that Microsoft or Sony cares about 3-D. I think that matters a lot. I understand Oculus Rift is also 2-D screen based, but the virtual reality approach is very different than what TVs are doing. It's synthetic, but to me dramatically more immersive by its very nature.
Quote:
So there are opportunities for 3D to grow, some more feasible than others. And I think the data for 3D Blu-rays speaks for itself. So I think 3D will manage to slowly inch forward over the years. It will need years though.

Generally speaking, formats don't "inch forward", they either grow big or die. That's why I'm so bearish on this. I see no catalyst for bigness and many signs of ultimate dying.
post #309 of 398
I'm certainly more optimistic, but it's also good to keep my perspective (as a regular consumer of 3D) in check. It's a fun discussion in any case. Thanks for your insights.
post #310 of 398
One of the detriments to the acceptance and growth of 3D in the home has been mentioned by ROGO but really needs to be more closely examined Probably no place else but here on AVS Forum of course. That is the Passive vs Active presentation of 3D to the viewer. If 3D took off and suddenly became a major buying decision for the consumer we could see a scenario like VHS vs Beta or Blu-Ray vs HDDVD, Especially if we're considering 4K or OLED. For instance, why does Sony offer TV's with both technologies? If they think one is better why don't they just promote that? For most it's a minor concern now because most don't think they'll ever watch 3D anyway but if that scenario were to change, then what? A technology war. Hot damn! Now were talkin..
post #311 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post

One of the detriments to the acceptance and growth of 3D in the home has been mentioned by ROGO but really needs to be more closely examined Probably no place else but here on AVS Forum of course. That is the Passive vs Active presentation of 3D to the viewer. If 3D took off and suddenly became a major buying decision for the consumer we could see a scenario like VHS vs Beta or Blu-Ray vs HDDVD, Especially if we're considering 4K or OLED. For instance, why does Sony offer TV's with both technologies? If they think one is better why don't they just promote that? For most it's a minor concern now because most don't think they'll ever watch 3D anyway but if that scenario were to change, then what? A technology war. Hot damn! Now were talkin..

 

Heh.  You appreciate a good kerfuffle then.  :)

 

I suppose that VHS vs. Beta, and Blu-Ray vs HDDVD, had radically higher stakes though, because you could buy a product that just would not work with any released products a year later.  In the case of 3D, regardless of the display, the format is the same.

post #312 of 398
Or we could start a rumor. Like, Sony, LG, and Samsung are abandoning LCD technology to concentrate of the next generation of plasma's.
post #313 of 398
Who would believe it?
post #314 of 398
Probably no body here but there are still folks that think they need to change the gas in their plasma's. And unfortunately even here some think that LED is a real technology, thanks to Samsung and their border line false advertising.
post #315 of 398
+1
post #316 of 398
Worse yet, these same people are probably voting.
post #317 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post


I did it correctly. Thanks for your pedantry and for entirely missing the point. "Datum," a word no one ever uses anywhere except possibly academic circles, is the grammatical singular of data. The expression "anecdote is the singular of data" is a point. What we call "data" in the world is the sum total of a bunch of anecdotes, none of which on their own tells us much, the collection of which is what we call "data."
Use whatever expressions you want, the fact is, the DATA from one source is objective and measured and can be confirmed, the anecdotal information is one person's experiences, i.e. not necessarily true or reliable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by djbluemax1 View Post

Can't even keep track of your own posts?
LOL
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

I'm going to stop responding to your petty little rants.
Hey, you were the one who claimed that I was the only person claiming "fake 3D sales" when you didn't even realize that I was quoting and responding to your post where you tried to make the leap from one person's used BD bargain hunting experience to all of a sudden "a lot of fake 3D sales". It's not my fault that you can't recall what you've typed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

Sure, they are guesses, but not guesses made by some chump on the street. And the information on numbers of households / discs per household are not exactly guesses out of thin air, they use the sales data. They paint an ugly picture, even if you look at 94% growth.
I'm sure there are plenty of businesses out there crying about how their sales only grew 94% in a year in this economy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by djbluemax1 View Post

Precisely why folks buying 3D copies must WANT the 3D copies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

All the high prices prove are that the studios are asking more for the 3-D versions not that people "must really want them."
Once again, a poor attempt at obfuscation. I pointed out the fact that 3D versions generally retail for at least 50% more than the 2D versions, which means that consumers buying the 3D versions must actually want the 3D versions to ay a 50% premium over the non-3D version, unless you're trying to claim that a significant % of those sales went to absolute morons who don't realize their paying 50% more for something they don't want? Instead you just toss a red herring about studios charging more for the 3D versions. YES, THAT WAS STATED.

Your 'point' is a red herring because it has absolutely nothing to do with addressing what I stated. The 3D copies cost more. Only an idiot would pay more for them unless they actually are buying the 50% more expensive copies specifically because they WANT the 3D. 3D sales have increased 94% in 2012 vs 2011. For your red herring to have ANY meaning whatsoever, the 3D BD prices would need to have been raised 94% or more between 2011 and 2012. They haven't. The prices of retail 3D BDs (and the premiums over 2D versions) have remained about the same in the past few years, i.e. that is real 94% growth in sales of the format.

Don't bother responding. I'm unsubscribing from this thread after I post this reply. There has been no new info added to the argument and the only people arguing that 3D is dead are simply bringing up the same old arguments with the same skewed perspectives. I still don't understand why some people have such a huge personal agenda with trying to harp on about 3D's demise. A post earlier in the thread summed it up pretty simply, "If I don't like sushi, I don't try to convince everyone that sushi sucks and it's going to be gone soon. I just don't go to sushi restaurants".


Max
post #318 of 398
post #319 of 398

^Makes no sense

 

EDIT: My comment wasn't addressed to ALMA.  It was addressed to a post that appeared just after his and before mine that apparently was removed by the originator or a moderator.  I'm betting the latter.

 

I believe him to be the owner of multiple accounts, and I dimed him out.  He has a similar "signature" ending, and his accounts had only 2 posts to them.  I found 4 instances of him, two of which were started that morning within 20ish minutes of each other.


Edited by tgm1024 - 11/8/13 at 2:19pm
post #320 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by djbluemax1 View Post

Use whatever expressions you want, the fact is, the DATA from one source is objective and measured and can be confirmed, the anecdotal information is one person's experiences, i.e. not necessarily true or reliable.

By your "logic" (and by the quotes there, I mean you are not employing logic), there is no data, since all data is composed of things that are not necessarily true or reliable. This is why people remain ignorant. They think they understand how the world works in some bizarre academic way.
Quote:
Hey, you were the one who claimed that I was the only person claiming "fake 3D sales" when you didn't even realize that I was quoting and responding to your post where you tried to make the leap from one person's used BD bargain hunting experience to all of a sudden "a lot of fake 3D sales". It's not my fault that you can't recall what you've typed.

That's not actually what happened. The thread shows what happened. I'm not the only person who claimed anything about 3-D sales.
Quote:
I'm sure there are plenty of businesses out there crying about how their sales only grew 94% in a year in this economy.

I'm sure you have no idea what your'e talking about. But the fact remains that 94% more than some tiny number is still some tiny number.
Quote:
Once again, a poor attempt at obfuscation. I pointed out the fact that 3D versions generally retail for at least 50% more than the 2D versions, which means that consumers buying the 3D versions must actually want the 3D versions to ay a 50% premium over the non-3D version, unless you're trying to claim that a significant % of those sales went to absolute morons who don't realize their paying 50% more for something they don't want? Instead you just toss a red herring about studios charging more for the 3D versions. YES, THAT WAS STATED.

So the 50% premium is a made-up fact, first of all. The people that buy BluRays are not always price sensitive, second of all. Third of all, buying on Amazon, at least, has become a minefield: You often find a SKU that's close and that's what you buy. A lot of people don't spend time agonizing over $5-10, even though AVSers with hundred-thousand-dollar home theaters apparently do. Fourth of all, retail is worse.
Quote:
Your 'point' is a red herring because it has absolutely nothing to do with addressing what I stated. The 3D copies cost more. Only an idiot would pay more for them unless they actually are buying the 50% more expensive copies specifically because they WANT the 3D. 3D sales have increased 94% in 2012 vs 2011. For your red herring to have ANY meaning whatsoever, the 3D BD prices would need to have been raised 94% or more between 2011 and 2012. They haven't. The prices of retail 3D BDs (and the premiums over 2D versions) have remained about the same in the past few years, i.e. that is real 94% growth in sales of the format.

You have just called thousands of people idiots. And, sorry, no, the availability of non-3D versions vs the 3-D versions has, in fact, changed a lot lately. Sometimes, the bundled versions are only available with the 3-D copy in tow, especially at physical retail. The idea that everyone buying a 3-D BluRay is seeking the 3-D copy is just wrong. How wrong? I don't know, but it's very, very wrong.
Quote:
Don't bother responding. I'm unsubscribing from this thread after I post this reply.

I bothered. It's a shame we can't continue this productive dialong.
Quote:
There has been no new info added to the argument and the only people arguing that 3D is dead are simply bringing up the same old arguments with the same skewed perspectives.

Like you, for example?
Quote:
I still don't understand why some people have such a huge personal agenda with trying to harp on about 3D's demise.

I have no agenda about anything, other than trying to see the future. In the future. it's hard to imagine a robust 3-D content market based on BluRay. It's pretty hard to imagine a robust BluRay market at all.
Quote:
A post earlier in the thread summed it up pretty simply, "If I don't like sushi, I don't try to convince everyone that sushi sucks and it's going to be gone soon. I just don't go to sushi restaurants".

The funny thing is, you're the one trying to convince people of something.

I'm sharing informed speculation that 3-D in the home is on life support, even though 3-D BluRay sales (and 3-D streaming, by the way...the >total< is what was up 94%, not discs alone) were up last year. The very small number of people who seek out those discs doubtless love them and enjoy them. Sadly, they don't make much of a market. And the number of people even using their 3-D feature is falling, not rising.

I'm not trying to get people to eat sushi or not eat it. I'm pretty clear on this: If you like 3-D, enjoy 3-D. But it's a mistake to interpret the small growth of 3-D home-media sales as some sort of sign that 3-D in the home is undergoing a robust growth phase. It's a niche hobby and one the industry is going to find it even tougher to support as overall disc sales continue to decline and disc rental essentially ceases to exist in the U.S.
post #321 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

By your "logic" (and by the quotes there, I mean you are not employing logic), there is no data, since all data is composed of things that are not necessarily true or reliable. This is why people remain ignorant. They think they understand how the world works in some bizarre academic way.
That's not actually what happened. The thread shows what happened. I'm not the only person who claimed anything about 3-D sales.
I'm sure you have no idea what your'e talking about. But the fact remains that 94% more than some tiny number is still some tiny number.
So the 50% premium is a made-up fact, first of all. The people that buy BluRays are not always price sensitive, second of all. Third of all, buying on Amazon, at least, has become a minefield: You often find a SKU that's close and that's what you buy. A lot of people don't spend time agonizing over $5-10, even though AVSers with hundred-thousand-dollar home theaters apparently do. Fourth of all, retail is worse.
You have just called thousands of people idiots. And, sorry, no, the availability of non-3D versions vs the 3-D versions has, in fact, changed a lot lately. Sometimes, the bundled versions are only available with the 3-D copy in tow, especially at physical retail. The idea that everyone buying a 3-D BluRay is seeking the 3-D copy is just wrong. How wrong? I don't know, but it's very, very wrong.
I bothered. It's a shame we can't continue this productive dialong.
Like you, for example?
I have no agenda about anything, other than trying to see the future. In the future. it's hard to imagine a robust 3-D content market based on BluRay. It's pretty hard to imagine a robust BluRay market at all.
The funny thing is, you're the one trying to convince people of something.

I'm sharing informed speculation that 3-D in the home is on life support, even though 3-D BluRay sales (and 3-D streaming, by the way...the >total< is what was up 94%, not discs alone) were up last year. The very small number of people who seek out those discs doubtless love them and enjoy them. Sadly, they don't make much of a market. And the number of people even using their 3-D feature is falling, not rising.

I'm not trying to get people to eat sushi or not eat it. I'm pretty clear on this: If you like 3-D, enjoy 3-D. But it's a mistake to interpret the small growth of 3-D home-media sales as some sort of sign that 3-D in the home is undergoing a robust growth phase. It's a niche hobby and one the industry is going to find it even tougher to support as overall disc sales continue to decline and disc rental essentially ceases to exist in the U.S.

It's one thing to read what someone writes, it's another to actually comprehend what it is that's being said. You seem to lack on the latter.
post #322 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy4daisy View Post

It's one thing to read what someone writes, it's another to actually comprehend what it is that's being said. You seem to lack on the latter.

I am more than certain I comprehend what is being said.

The incessant accusations that I have an "agenda" to promote when I clearly have no such thing nor can any reasonable person speculate what motivation would be behind such an agenda speak for themselves. One side of this discussion is telling the other to enjoy what they like. The other is doing things like saying, "You are incapable of comprehension."

So, yeah.
post #323 of 398
3d bluray rentals not only haven't disappeared but there's even more providers than the last time i looked into it.
post #324 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

3d bluray rentals not only haven't disappeared but there's even more providers than the last time i looked into it.

 

I can only find some weird holes in the wall like these guys: 3DParty and 3D-BluRayRental, who by the way seem pretty cool.  I'm not betting on their survival though.

 

 

post #325 of 398
God never closes one 3D viewing option, without also opening another.wink.gif


Netflix 3D
Netflix now offers 3D streaming for select titles in the United States with the following devices:
Sony PlayStation 3 (connected TV must support 3D)
LG TV Series: LM6200, LM6400, LM6600, LM6650, LM6700, LM7600, LS5700, LS5750, PM4700, PM6700, PM6900, PM9700
Additional device support coming soon!
If you have a compatible device, you can find 3D titles by looking for the 3D logo.
Please note that 3D streaming requires an Internet connection speed of at least 6Mb/s, while 12Mb/s will deliver our highest 3D video quality.

Netflix apparently does not feel that 3D is dead.
post #326 of 398
Maybe now that Dish has decided to close all of the remaining company operated Blockbuster stores a few innovative folks will consider opening a smaller more videophile oriented store catering strictly to blu-ray and 3D blu-ray movies and games. I could live with $7 a pop for a 2 day rental.
post #327 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

God never closes one 3D viewing option, without also opening another.wink.gif


Netflix 3D
Netflix now offers 3D streaming for select titles in the United States with the following devices:
Sony PlayStation 3 (connected TV must support 3D)
LG TV Series: LM6200, LM6400, LM6600, LM6650, LM6700, LM7600, LS5700, LS5750, PM4700, PM6700, PM6900, PM9700
Additional device support coming soon!
If you have a compatible device, you can find 3D titles by looking for the 3D logo.
Please note that 3D streaming requires an Internet connection speed of at least 6Mb/s, while 12Mb/s will deliver our highest 3D video quality.

Netflix apparently does not feel that 3D is dead.

 

(?)  Why the dedicated devices?  Is this a CPU-bandwidth issue?

post #328 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

(?)  Why the dedicated devices?  Is this a CPU-bandwidth issue?

I can only speculate as to why that is, and they did say that they will be adding more TV models to the approved list. They may be testing models first to make sure that they can process their feed correctly, in order to avoid having a flood of customer complaints about viewing failures.
post #329 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

3d bluray rentals not only haven't disappeared but there's even more providers than the last time i looked into it.




I can only find some weird holes in the wall like these guys: 3DParty and 3D-BluRayRental, who by the way seem pretty cool.  I'm not betting on their survival though.


if you think 3d is already dead then naturally you wouldn't be betting on the survival of new businesses in that market.
post #330 of 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

3d bluray rentals not only haven't disappeared but there's even more providers than the last time i looked into it.

I can only find some weird holes in the wall like these guys: 3DParty and 3D-BluRayRental, who by the way seem pretty cool.  I'm not betting on their survival though.

if you think 3d is already dead then naturally you wouldn't be betting on the survival of new businesses in that market.

 

I'm one of the ones that doesn't think 3D is already dead.


Edited by tgm1024 - 11/8/13 at 2:21pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › 4 Reasons the 3D TV Movement is Already Dead