I'm with you on the Blu-ray boat. I own 2 Blu-ray machines because I wasn't going to spend the money for the necessary replacement with DVD machines. I own a total of 4 Blu-ray discs: 1 UK movie and 3 UK TV series. That's it because the cost of Blu-ray content is way too high. However, my many DVD's look surprisingly great unconverted, so I do get enjoyment from the players, but not from the content as much as I would like. Digital media is far less expensive, especially today, to manufacture in mass quantities than analog ever was, and yet the studios have NEVER priced the content accordingly. DVD's can sell for as little as $4 and still make mountains of money and Blu-ray for a few dollars more until demand is higher. We consumers, at some level, are always being ripped-off.
3DTV - Do you care?
- Thread starter brad1138
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 58
- Views 5K
I'm with you on the Blu-ray boat. I own 2 Blu-ray machines because I wasn't going to spend the money for the necessary replacement with DVD machines. I own a total of 4 Blu-ray discs: 1 UK movie and 3 UK TV series. That's it because the cost of Blu-ray content is way too high. However, my many DVD's look surprisingly great unconverted, so I do get enjoyment from the players, but not from the content as much as I would like. Digital media is far less expensive, especially today, to manufacture in mass quantities than analog ever was, and yet the studios have NEVER priced the content accordingly. DVD's can sell for as little as $4 and still make mountains of money and Blu-ray for a few dollars more until demand is higher. We consumers, at some level, are always being ripped-off.
I've heard that 3D without needing the glasses is already in the works. To be honest, this is really the only way it is practical. The glasses are a pain and are expensive. They also suck up battery power in a hurry.
The problem with the AV industry is that they can't let the consumer have time to embrace the tech he has just bought. Weather it's a new sound format, a new DVD player or a new, better TV they just can't wait to make what we just bought obsolete.
The problem with the AV industry is that they can't let the consumer have time to embrace the tech he has just bought. Weather it's a new sound format, a new DVD player or a new, better TV they just can't wait to make what we just bought obsolete.
Not at all interested. Mainly because I practically just bought my TV and I'm not interested in buying another for a while just for a feature with such limited use right now. I have a PS3 so I could use it with that, but that's not really enough to convince me that I have to have it.
I think it's kind of cool but I would not buy one. We have a 3D TV on our display and I watch it sometimes with customers. It can be fun for a bit but I couln't imagine watching the whole movie that way. I think it gets a little old.
For 3D TV to be successful it needs to do away with the need for glasses. I have read articles from a few who claim some knowledge that glassless 3D is 5 or more years away despite Toshiba selling them (first gen glassless 3D) in Japan this Christmas season. No matter how far away glassless 3D is, 3D won't become mainstream until it arrives.
Until then, 3D TV will remain pretty much a nich technology with not much content.
Until then, 3D TV will remain pretty much a nich technology with not much content.
I think 3D will stick around, but I think the public is already getting tired of it -- the bloom is off the rose as they say. The only way it will really go away is if movie patrons start going more to the 2D showing of 3D movies to avoid paying the extra bucks. Video games will probably keep it alive.
I cannot imagine having to wear 3D glasses watching all of prime time.
I cannot imagine having to wear 3D glasses watching all of prime time.
The 3DS is coming out in a few short months, no glasses, but according to reports, it still has a very definite sweet spot. I remember when my dad got HDTV many years ago, what a pain in the ass it was trying to view it from even a slight angle. Really off-putting. I think fixing that issue, if it's possible, is more important than the glasses/no glasses thing.
On another note, I saw Megamind in 3D a few weeks back and Tangled last night, not in 3D. Quite frankly, once I got caught up in each movie, I quickly forgot about 3D and not 3D. Both good movies by the way.
On another note, I saw Megamind in 3D a few weeks back and Tangled last night, not in 3D. Quite frankly, once I got caught up in each movie, I quickly forgot about 3D and not 3D. Both good movies by the way.
I have to agree with the majority here. 3D in it's current form will just be a novelty for the masses and a must have for the wealthy that can afford to throw away all the relatively new flat screen HD sets they have and purchase new sets all over again. We have 3 HD sets and 2 SD sets. Only use 2 of the HD sets on a regular basis and even then only one has an HD feed. Don't have a Blue ray either (except for my sons PS3).
The timing is awful.
Ross
The timing is awful.
Ross
I vote Other please explain, so here it goes: I really don't know yet. I liked the demos that I have seen, but until it drops to the 500s for a 40 in 3D LCD, I don't think it will be mainstream. Once it drops to mid-500s, I think it has a fair chance of catching up.
Its going to be all about marketing. Most people just got their HDTV or they were shopping for one in the last 6mos. Now they are being told that the $2000 set they bought is obsolete. Their is a load of HDTV'S in warehouses and in the pipeline. Until those are moved, I dont think 3D is going to appeal to the mass. The movie studios, and producers are going to be slow in trotting out 3D (except animation) until their is an actual market.
For me, the expeirence of 3D in the movie theater is much more appealing then sitting at home and watching it, especially when someones kid, throws or breaks the glasses!
For me, the expeirence of 3D in the movie theater is much more appealing then sitting at home and watching it, especially when someones kid, throws or breaks the glasses!
Do I care about 3D?.Heck! I don't even care about HD,guess that why I have a VIP622 with an SD package(AT250)?.
3D is neato coolo but it's a gimmick. I'm still waiting to get the real HD I pay for instead of the low bit rate HD lite that everyone (except Bluray) is passing off as top quality. Let's work on that first instead of 3D.
I have a friend that has a patient on real 3d. Holographic it will be out in a while and will put this garbage that is called 3d out of business so to speak. He is working with companies now to get the unit usable for touring live shows then the market will be high end etc. The stuff out now is just not ready fro prime time.
I don't think it'll become "mainstream" until there is a universal 3D standard of how it will be "viewed" and affordable. Whether it's with glasses or not, there needs to be a standard, not all this NVidia 3D Vision with Nvidia compatible video card or proprietary 3D glasses, 3D LED TV, 3D blu-ray player, etc. etc. crap.
It didn't take too long for HDTV's to go from 300lb CRT's to very affordable LCD's costing about $200 for a 720p 32", or the Blu-Ray / HD-DVD war, so I think this will happen pretty soon, but then again, the long term effect of using 3D glasses "daily" probably hasn't been researched too deeply. Right now it's a neat effect, but who knows what using these shutter glasses will do to your eyes or brain over the long term.
It didn't take too long for HDTV's to go from 300lb CRT's to very affordable LCD's costing about $200 for a 720p 32", or the Blu-Ray / HD-DVD war, so I think this will happen pretty soon, but then again, the long term effect of using 3D glasses "daily" probably hasn't been researched too deeply. Right now it's a neat effect, but who knows what using these shutter glasses will do to your eyes or brain over the long term.
I was an early convert to HDTV and still love it compared to SD. However, 3DTV is not worth the small bernefit at the present time. It requires a 3DTV, 3D Bluray player, and the annoying glasses. The glasses seem to be about $125 each, which is way too much when we often have 6 or more people watching and a lot of small kids that can easily do away with a pair or more of glasses. Having to watch it from the center is very limiting (how do 6 people sit in the middle?) I have watched 3D at Disney World that is amazing with people watching from all over a large auditorium and I think without glasses. When that version of 3D arrives without glasses and without the limitation of siting in the middle at a reasonable price, I'm all for it. But until then, not interested. The 3D that I saw at Disney World was really 4D as it included physical effects like wind and smell. I think that the 3D video was holographic.
Until there are no glasses it won't become mainstream. Halographic video like the Star Wars chess scenes would catch on instantly and become the norm in no time.
