3D TV: Boom or bust?

[skydiver30960 0]

Who wouldn't vote for boobies 60" across? I know, but also weigh in on the OTHER issue at hand.

The wife and I are contemplating a new flatscreen and I'm wondering what everyone thinks about 3D. I'm aware of the different ways manufacturers generate the 3D image and the pros and cons of each. I'm more interested to hear what you all think about the movement in general: will we be seeing more and more 3D entertainment, such as movies, shows, and games? Or, is it a fad that's going to go the way of the Dodo and Betamax?

Elvisio "Dude, you're smudging the screen" Rodriguez

ETA: I know, I left off an option for "don't waste money on a TV at all" or "read a book." My addiction is simply far too well entrenched to suffer such frivolous thoughts.

[ryoder 1,590]

None of the half-assed gimmicks currently being promoted as "3D" really is.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[ShcShc11 0]

If it was before Avatar, then it is a fad.

But it can't be anymore. Too much money has been spent on 3D to let it fail. All TV manufacturers are betting on 3D to the extent where their TV division would bleed red if they closed it down.

Samsung especially is incredibly bullish on 3D tv to the extent where they are using Galaxy's profit to fund 3D R&D.


Cinema owners put too much investments in 3D to the extent where they would pressure studios to make 3D. 2007 had 15% of the 3D we have today (thank you Avatar again).

...hell the Chinese Gov is betting on 3D.


So no. too much money has been invested to make it just a fad.

[quade 4]

Sitting next to me on the table less than a foot away from this keyboard is the "2012-13 Content Sampler" for one of the major film studios in Hollywood. It's a collection of trailers for Blu-ray release this client has been working on. It's 47 minutes long and only about half of it is in 3D. This includes trailers for films which were originally shot in 2D, but they believe people will want to see in 3D.

Right now it's a chicken and egg problem.

There are very few consumers who have actually bought screens capable of showing 3D because there is little content available for them to watch. Yes, you will be able to eventually buy just about everything in 3D, but right this moment your options are limited.

Then there is the question of 4k...oh, excuse me...Ultra High Definition. Which currently nobody offers, but is just around the corner (according to some optimistic folks in the industry).

I personally, would not buy a 3D display right now. I have one sitting right behind me and it's a wonder to behold, but I, a person in the industry who creates the content, simply can't justify the cost (right now). To me it makes no sense whatsoever to pay that much more to watch the dozen or so titles I'd be interested in seeing that way. People complain all the time about how much more 3D costs to see in the movie theaters, but it's a pittance compared to how much more you'd have to spend to get that experience at home.

When the price of home 3D comes down AND the availability of content goes up, then I might consider it, but right now I'm giving it a pass.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[oldwomanc6 58]

I probably won't ever buy one.

Three out of the four people in my immediate family have problems with it. My daughter and I get slightly sick, and my son is blind in one eye.

It would be a waste of money for us.

lisa
WSCR 594
FB 1023
CBDB 9

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Who wouldn't vote for boobies 60" across? I know, but also weigh in on the OTHER issue at hand.

The wife and I are contemplating a new flatscreen and I'm wondering what everyone thinks about 3D. I'm aware of the different ways manufacturers generate the 3D image and the pros and cons of each. I'm more interested to hear what you all think about the movement in general: will we be seeing more and more 3D entertainment, such as movies, shows, and games? Or, is it a fad that's going to go the way of the Dodo and Betamax?

Elvisio "Dude, you're smudging the screen" Rodriguez

ETA: I know, I left off an option for "don't waste money on a TV at all" or "read a book." My addiction is simply far too well entrenched to suffer such frivolous thoughts.

I love mine... THAT is all :)

[Lastchance 0]

The only 3-D TV's I've seen are in the stores. I know of nobody that has actually bought one. Pretty soon the big fad will be holographic TV projecting the image into your living room.

I may be getting old but I got to see all the cool bands.

[champu 1]

From a business sense, I agree, I don't see it as a fad, and I'm sure you'll see more and more content produced to go with the hardware push that has been going on.

The problem I have with 3D is that, unlike the 480 to 720 to 1080 to 4k transitions, it is a different medium, not just a different format. A lot of folks seem to be thinking of it as simply a different format. It's hard to argue that something didn't need to be shot at a higher resolution or that the extra resolution doesn't add to or detracts from the experience, but you can easily make the argument for 3D. Some people have integrated 3D into the experience quite well but I predict that most uses of it, as more and more content is produced, will not fair so well. Kinda like the consumer trend where people shoot video of things where a photo would have served the situation better.

But, the industry is what it is, and the next time I buy a TV because I want one that's lighter or bigger or something it will more than likely necessarily be a 3D television. I just hope I'll be able to turn the 3D off for the next decade or so while content providers learn when to say, "no."

[JohnMitchell 16]

Best Buy bet heavily on 3D being the next big thing and it's costing them heavily right now. A few gadget-philes I know have purchased them, but I don't care to wear glasses at home to watch TV. I barely enjoy doing it for the occasional 3D movie at the theater. Not an important feature for me.

[ryoder 1,590]

Quote

Pretty soon the big fad will be holographic TV projecting the image into your living room.

I've heard Vivid Entertainment is really excited about the possibilities of holographic TV.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[normiss 818]

This. For a LOT of consumers.

[skydiver30960 0]

Thanks for the opinions, everyone. It seems that DZ.com as a whole has just about the same feeling that I do: that it seems interesting, but isn't working in its present iteration.

...which bothers me. I think I'm most enamored by what I think 3D SHOULD be, and maybe COULD be at some point in the future. But I think the sci-fi "holographic progression" kind of 3D isn't coming anytime in the NEAR future, and surely will require a quantum leap in equipment.

So, I guess I'll take it off the "required" list but not be afraid to pick it up if the price is right for a novelty option on an otherwise solid TV.

Thanks!

Elvisio "and as far as Vivid in 3D is concerned, NO POV shots!" Rodriguez

[JerryBaumchen 1,389]

Hi John,

Quote

I don't care to wear glasses at home to watch TV

I was around in the '50's when 3D first came along. I hated wearing glasses to watch it and I will not do it now, not even in a theater.

There were also 3D comic books and when I figured out how it worked, I made my own 3D drawings. The neighbor kids could never understand how I did it.

JerryBaumchen

[Squeak 17]

I votes BOOBIES, 'cause i HAVE a 60" 3D TV, it came with the 3D component, it wasn't a personal requirement

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[skydiver30960 0]

Quote

I votes BOOBIES,t

The most surprising thing for me is that more people DON'T. Especially in a "multiple votes allowed" poll, how can one NOT?

Elvisio "motorboat" Rodriguez

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

I votes BOOBIES,t

The most surprising thing for me is that more people DON'T. Especially in a "multiple votes allowed" poll, how can one NOT?

Elvisio "motorboat" Rodriguez

Ownership

[Shotgun 1]

Part of the 3D experience at the movies is that it's so big. I haven't seen anything on a 3D TV, but unless the screen is big enough to fill the whole room, I can't imagine I'd find it very enjoyable to watch.

I don't see it as being much more than a fad, unless maybe the gaming stuff is enough to make it stick around. But my opinion on this subject doesn't mean much....

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Part of the 3D experience at the movies is that it's so big. I haven't seen anything on a 3D TV, but unless the screen is big enough to fill the whole room, I can't imagine I'd find it very enjoyable to watch.

I don't see it as being much more than a fad, unless maybe the gaming stuff is enough to make it stick around. But my opinion on this subject doesn't mean much....

Oh I think it looks pretty good on a 17" XPS lappie

[FlyingRhenquest 1]

Don't care for them. None of them are really big enough to provide an immersive experience, and the 3D effect isn't really all that good.

Deliver a floor-to-ceiling model that actually looks like I'm looking into the room being projected, I might go for it. I'm not paying anywhere near what that would cost, though, assuming the 3D could be done well enough to convince me.

Buy a regular HD flat screen and a Tivo. The Tivo is an actual advancement on how you watch TV (remote code: "select play select 3 0 select" turns the skip-forward option of the remote into a 30 second skip, ideal for skipping commercials :-)

I'm trying to teach myself how to set things on fire with my mind. Hey... is it hot in here?

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Everything else aside, I find it distracting. I don't like alot of the HD stuff. I don't need to be able to see the blades of grass on a ball field or the dust on a table in a movie.

[quade 4]

Got a spare $20k for a 4k, uh, I mean Ultra High Definition?

http://www.techhive.com/article/2013108/got-20-000-lg-s-first-ultra-hd-tv-arrives-in-u-s.html

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Squeak 17]

Quote

Everything else aside, I find it distracting. I don't like alot of the HD stuff. I don't need to be able to see the blades of grass on a ball field or the dust on a table in a movie.

Dude seriously, my 60" is fucking AWESOME for watching the MotoGP, the detail is amazing and the digital slo-mo, is great. I LOVE IT, just for that.

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[mr2mk1g 10]

I don't know what it's like over your side of the pond - but for the UK - try buying one without 3D. They've all got it. There are a couple of low end models with generally crappy specs... but anything 'decent' has 3D by default. Been that way for about a year or so.

[MrCat 0]

I had no interest in a 3D telly then two weeks ago my mate filmed a few our our wingsuit flights in 3D and it just looks incredible.

So my 3D telly is arriving on wednesday!!

Jump more, post less.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Everything else aside, I find it distracting. I don't like alot of the HD stuff. I don't need to be able to see the blades of grass on a ball field or the dust on a table in a movie.

Dude seriously, my 60" is fucking AWESOME for watching the MotoGP, the detail is amazing and the digital slo-mo, is great. I LOVE IT, just for that.

Yuppers.. the 3D LED rocks it AND is a hell of a lot more efficient than my old plasma.