I checked out some 3D TV's today

Discussion in 'Technology' started by Mirage, Sep 21, 2010.

  1. Mirage

    Mirage Administrator Staff Member V.I.P.

    I stopped by Best Buy and checked out some 3D TV's today. I was expecting to be impressed but I was very disappointed with the direction of this technology.

    First off, each brand has their own 3D output frequency, so you can't use Sony glasses on a Panasonic TV, and vise versa. This means if you want to have a bunch of friends over to watch the Superbowl in 3D, they'll either all need to have the same glasses as your TV brand, or they will have to go buy new ones. Unless you are feeling generous and are willing to stock up on a bunch of extras to keep on hand for such events.

    This is absolutely terrible from a marketing perspective. They should have all used the same frequency. It really limits the benefit of such TV's if you ask me.

    Personally I don't think 3D TV makes much sense until there is an option to do so without special glasses or contacts. If you are setting up a room specifically for movies then that's one thing, but if it's your TV for everyday use, it needs to be something you can turn on and watch right out of the box without special accessories. Especially if you ever plan to watch your TV with other people. I think the idea of 3D TV is pretty cool, but I don't think it's worth it at the cost of changing contacts or having to put on special glasses just to watch the news or your favorite sitcom.

    All that being said, I don't believe it's possible to really duplicate that 3D look with today's technology. We'd need hologram type multilayer displays before we can really get there. Until then, 3D is cool as a novelty, but it's just not practical for everyday home use.
    Sim likes this.

  2. SmilinSilhouette

    SmilinSilhouette Registered Member

    Seems like a dumb fad idea like quadrophonic systems of the 70s: expensive & never caught on. Just waiting to be thrown on the scrap heap of sounded cool, but it wasn't.
  3. CaptainObvious

    CaptainObvious Son of Liberty V.I.P.

    That's pretty much my thoughts on them as well. From a marketing perspective it's insane that they aren't universal, who wants to buy a bunch of glasses so everyone who comes over can see the TV? I also agree with the idea of it being hard to come home and just turning your TV on. It's already a pain in the ass sometimes finding the remote now I have to find and wear glasses JUST to watch TV every single time? No thanks, it's just not worth it to me.
  4. Bananas

    Bananas Endangered Species

    You guys are looking at this from the wrong perspective:lol:...perhaps being a little [strike]one[/strike] two dimensional.:sigh:

    All bad jokes aside. 3D TV for the home is not a leap it is a progression, I bet everyone of you watches a flat panel TV that is under 8 years old, even if you dont plan on upgrading to 3D by the time you purchase a new TV you might have little option other than 3D, dont believe me try going to Best Buy and buying a CRT!

    There is one very important factor to 3D TV's and that is they dont have to be used as 3D TV's, you can take the glasses off and watch 2D TV as you do now. The manufacturers to ensure the best potential from their factories will not want multiple lines, they will stop producing vanilla panels. The draw backs of 3D are very limited, the biggest(and only) being price and the glasses.

    The price will fall soon enough, plasmas used to cost more than a family car, now they are only a few hundred, 3D TV's are nowhere near as expensive as plasmas were.

    As for the glasses, prices will fall gradually, you will be able to buy family packs etc.. its not that weird feature if you think about it, most people with games consoles will have a few spare controllers....why not glasses! Another thing with the glasses is that their is talk of a few manufacturers working on a universal system, either that or some clever person in Asia will invent one and sell it as a third party peripheral.

    Quadrophonic failed because it did not have the secondary support, the commercial interest in making 4 channel was just not viable. 3D TV has the commercial interest, both the Film and the Sports broadcasters are already on the case, the only hurdle they will face is bandwidth.

    Edit; I should point out, I think 3D is here to stay however I think it will also be quite short lived, probably less than a decade before the next big leap in home entertainment.
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2010
  5. Mirage

    Mirage Administrator Staff Member V.I.P.

    Oh, I realize that. With a switch of a button you are in 2D mode. Kind of how you can change your surround sound to stereo or mono if you really want to. That's not my complaint though. My complaint is that the glasses should have been made to be universal. As far as I'm concerned they should have been made to work with the polarized frames you can get at your local movie theater WITH the price of your ticket. Then everybody would have a few extras lying around.

    It's definitely here to stay. There's no way around it. If you've seen 3D, you probably loved it. Most people did, that's for sure. I'd say it's the black and white to color switch of our generation. How long that switch will take to really materialize into something the mainstream will accept is yet to be seen.

    I don't honestly see anything specifically REPLACING 3D as a thing of the past anytime soon. I mean, what's next? Virtual reality? We aren't even sure of what we would want if that were available. And again, the individual experience doesn't necessarily mesh with the family TV idea, or throwing a Superbowl party. To a large degree, I would assume that far more people watch TV with other people than by themselves.

    Virtual reality will come to videogames before consumers even start wanting it for movies. And it won't necessarily mean you'll need a new TV or monitor anyway. In fact, if it weren't for Avatar, 3D would have come to videogames first as well. Technically the technology to make 3D videogames was far more attainable than that required to create 3D movies and other forms of captured video.
  6. kitchendame

    kitchendame Registered Member

    My complaint, in addition to the excellent points already made, is that 3D won't catch on because so many of us are multi-taskers; we don't just sit and watch tv. We get up and do stuff while we're watching (I prep dinner because my tv is in direct line with my kitchen counter); you can't do that with those glasses on. My sister reads a book during commercials. We have friends who crochet or do crafts of some sort while watching tv. The glasses wouldn't work for them.

    Of course, that also says a little something about how unabsorbing tv in general is these days, doesn't it?
  7. Bananas

    Bananas Endangered Species

    There are very few early generation products that are universal, the sales teams sell what the manufacturers give them and the manufacturers make what come out of the R&D labs. With multiple selections soon one will win favour either by price or by quality and that will then become the universal and fro their products will be built. At present though it will be the rat race of all the manufacturers saying theirs is best.

    You have to look at it from the manufacturers perspective, do they spend twice as much making a new TV panel technology that will work with your glasses, or do they spend half the amount developing a pair of glasses to work with their existing TV panels?

    If you want to use your glasses you have from the cinema you will also have to implement the technology they use in the cinema, basically you need to use a special screen and a special projector. From a consumer point of view you not only would have to make the leap from 2D to 3D but also from flat panel lcd/plasma to front projection TV, that is a serious leap to make, and when that leap comes with an even bigger price tag it would fail big time.

    If you could answer this question with any integrity you could be very rich.

    My suspicion is they will first try and get rid of the glasses, I did a little work last year that involved simulating imagery for auto3D (autostereoscopic) displays for shopping malls, it looks like its just finding its way onto the mobile market in the far-east.

    Just found this on youtube, I know originally they were having problems with it only working on tiny displays, but this one looks pretty big.

    YouTube - 3D TV Without Glasses! - Intel Booth, CES 2010
  8. dDave

    dDave Guardian of the Light V.I.P.

    Yeah I don't see the glasses catching on, never before have people had to wear stuff just to watch TV. (or even play most games for that matter(.

    I think that their best bet with creating 3-D without the glasses is to use multi-layered screens which can definitely be done.

    3D TVs are just the next step in making TV look and feel realistic, they've added color, surround sound, HD, etc. now they've added 3D to the mix.
  9. AnitaKnapp

    AnitaKnapp It's not me, it's you. V.I.P. Lifetime

    I guess I'm the only person in the world who doesn't like 3D and doesn't think it looks cool.

    I would much rather watch something in 2D. I saw Avatar in theaters in 3D. While I enjoyed the story, it took me a good hour to get used to the 3D, and it gave me a major headache.

    I do hope that it catches on a little bit so that it will drive down the prices for plasma and LCD, though.
  10. Altanzitarron

    Altanzitarron Tamer Of The LOLzilla

    Haha I pretty much spend my days demoing these bad boys to people who will never buy them. Everyone likes it minus a few who think that just because it's 3D there should always be something flying out of the screen regardless of what's being shown. The depth is impressive on the picture for sure and the 2D pictures are better than any other non-3D units we sell.

    A man came in to work a few days ago angry that we'd sold him a 3D TV when there wasn't much digital media on the market to support it. When I explained that more and more titles were becoming available along with TV channels he said that We had been short sighted for selling the TV before there was much out for it :lol: I've never known an early adopter to be so angry about adopting early.

    Will it take off for everyday viewing? I doubt it. I imagine people will only really break out the glasses for films, documentaries and gaming but I don't think the feature is going anywhere. It'll probably be one of those extra functions that most people hardly ever use, one of those things you brag about when you get a new TV: "Oh AND it can do 3D!".

Share This Page