1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

3DTV - Why The Hate?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by Alan Gordon, Mar 29, 2010.

  1. Beerstalker

    Beerstalker Hall Of Fame

    3,521
    66
    Feb 9, 2009
    Peoria, IL
    Ok, you were right about the 35 million part. I missed where he said it would increase tenfold in 2011. I think that number is most likely highly exaggerated though.

    As far as getting theaters to switch over I really don't see that happening. They have already invested large sums of money into getting their screens and projectors set up to work with their current polarized setup. They won't want to have to scrap all of that and switch over to using shutter glasses. Not to mention it would kill their ticket sales because not very many people would be able to bring in their own shutter glasses to see the movie, and their is no way the theater companies are going to loan people glasses that cost them $150 (sure they might get a bulk discount, but they will still be very expensive).

    They will stick to the current polarized process with very cheap glasses. Especially since most of those glasses get turned back in and they can send them off to be cleaned and re-used.

    I would be interested in them offering a discount to people bringing in their own glasses though. You can buy polarized glasses online for under $5, so if you bought a pair for yourself and got a $2 or $3 discount on your movie tickets for bringing your own they would pay for themselves in a couple of trips.
     
  2. Athlon646464

    Athlon646464 Gold Members DBSTalk Gold Club

    3,045
    66
    Feb 23, 2007
    Uxbridge, MA
    [​IMG]

    A picture of Gunnar Optics 3D prescription glasses.

    http://ces.cnet.com/8301-31045_1-10427251-269.html?cnn=yes

    **************************************

    XpandD, a major manufacturer of 3D glasses, plans to make 3D glasses that work with all systems - a universal set of glasses.

    "Mr. Ami Dror, XpanD's Chief Strategy Officer, explained the near future of the 3D glasses market and XpanD's plans to release Universal 3D glasses in an interview on FoxBusiness."

    Link: http://www.xpandcinema.com/news/

    Another quote from the XpandD web site:

    "3DTV and XpanD universal 3D glasses are also revolutionizing the 3D cinema business model. Owners of XpanD universal glasses are coming to the cinema with their personalized glasses. As a result, the cinema owners and the studios do not need to pay for 3D glasses anymore, making 3D cinema distribution and exhibition less expensive. The cinemas are using their unique position and becoming a point of sale for universal 3D glasses, and can profit from these sales"

    Link: http://www.xpandcinema.com/news/43/

    It looks as though the model for now is to sell them at theaters, as well as online, BB etc. I agree with you in that handing someone a $150 pair of glasses in a crowded theater doesn't make sense, but they may figure out how to solve that. Maybe a sensor in the glasses that sets off an alarm? :hurah:
     
  3. Beerstalker

    Beerstalker Hall Of Fame

    3,521
    66
    Feb 9, 2009
    Peoria, IL
    That is interesting, I'm not sure exactly how that will work. Maybe they have figured out a way to make glasses that have polarized lenses to work at the theaters, but can also work as shutter glasses for at home.
     
  4. Jeremy W

    Jeremy W Hall Of Fame

    13,447
    0
    Jun 19, 2006
    XpanD's system uses active shutter glasses, just like consumer 3DTVs. I doubt they care about making glasses that also work with RealD's competing passive polarized format.
     
  5. Beerstalker

    Beerstalker Hall Of Fame

    3,521
    66
    Feb 9, 2009
    Peoria, IL
    Ah, that makes more sense. I was thinking they used polarized in the theaters like RealD. Looks like there aren't nearly as many theaters using their setups compared to RealD.
     
  6. DMRI2006

    DMRI2006 Godfather

    448
    2
    Jun 13, 2006
    After reading a few reviews about the new Samsung 3-D TV, I can't believe there's a real consumer movement to adopt it as a format. The glasses are $150 each (you get only 2 with the TV), they're not even interchangeable from one manufacturer's set to the next -- so good luck with that '3-D Super Bowl viewing party' someone might have in the next few years where you ask your buddies to "bring your glasses!", lol. Not only that but the fact 3-D drains the brightness out of the picture (up to 25% or more, I believe I read) makes it tough on bright rooms and takes away from the image itself. Then there's the whole issue of how long most people can stand to watch content at a time.

    If people WANT 3-D, have to have it, and this stuff sells -- fine. But it really looks to me like more a case of studios, manufacturers, and content providers trying to sell the "latest thing" and make a fast buck out of a gimmick than a real enhancement to home entertainment. But as always, we'll see. People don't even seem THAT interested in buying Blu-Ray high-def movies. What makes them think they'll be paying an even higher premium for 3-D?? It's a fad.
     
  7. DMRI2006

    DMRI2006 Godfather

    448
    2
    Jun 13, 2006
    Agreed. Never going to happen. They love the extra $4 or whatever they charge as a premium -- and it's only going to go up from here. Don't get me wrong -- I think you should bring your own glasses and not get charged the money for them every time, but I think it's a part of the package now. It's all about the revenue they're making.

    And the whole reason these movies are coming are because it's driving up ticket prices. AVATAR made a boatload of money, but its grosses were aided by 3-D. So was ALICE IN WONDERLAND and CLASH OF THE TITANS. Adding a premium on top of ticket prices is going to just generate more and more money, so we'll be seeing all kinds of movies now in 3-D. (Can't wait for STEP UP 3-D, that dancing will be great in 3-D!! lol).

    Of course, it all runs the risk of burning itself out as a fad. At some point people might stop going and refusing to pay the money. Personally I don't think the "new, modern" 3-D is that effective in theaters, after a while I no longer even realize I'm watching 3-D. ALICE was a total bust in it and I felt AVATAR was overrated -- but I know how many people feel otherwise.

    Still, 3-D has never proven to have long-term staying power. It'll be interesting to see if it keeps going and going or peters out. My money is on the latter, no matter how hard the movie studios and TV manufacturers try and shove it down everyone's throats.
     
  8. Athlon646464

    Athlon646464 Gold Members DBSTalk Gold Club

    3,045
    66
    Feb 23, 2007
    Uxbridge, MA
    From what I've seen and read, HDMI 1.4a (adopted on March 10th) helps solve some of the standards issue.

    There are also eyeglass companies planning to make 'universal' 3D prescription glasses (I linked to them in another post).

    None of this will work unless there is enough good content.

    From what I've seen and read, there likely will be. There will be a boatload of good movies by the end of next year, and the networks are getting behind it as well.

    In the past, there wasn't enough content. That will be the difference this time, IMHO.
     
  9. taz291819

    taz291819 Godfather

    385
    0
    Oct 18, 2006
    Xpand is popular in other countries, just not so much here in the U.S.. We have a Xpand theater here in Huntsville (Marshall Space and Rocket Center), and you get the "$150" shutter glasses handed to you as you walk into the theater.
     
  10. taz291819

    taz291819 Godfather

    385
    0
    Oct 18, 2006
    Right this second the glasses aren't interchangeable, but that will all change soon, with the release of the Xpand X103s.

    As far as the cost of the glasses go, well, you get what you pay for. I bought a pair for $60 for my display, but they're no where near as nice as the Xpand X102s, which I plan on getting soon.

    And if 3D becomes popular, the prices of shutter glasses will drop significantly, just like any other electronic item.
     
  11. susanandmark

    susanandmark Godfather

    468
    6
    Feb 15, 2007
    Hmm, AVS forum is doing a 3D poll here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1249605

    I know it's not a scientific sample, but it is representative of hard core geeks about this stuff, which is why I found the results interesting (and maybe even a tad surprising).
     
  12. billsharpe

    billsharpe Hall Of Fame

    2,652
    64
    Jan 25, 2007
    Southern...
    I'd agree the results are a bit surprising. I wouldn't quite call 3D TV a fad, but I have no interest in upgrading to view a few 3D sports programs just yet. I don't hate the concept or even having DirecTV devote a couple channels to the process, but I'm just not interested for now.
     
  13. hdtvfan0001

    hdtvfan0001 Well-Known Member

    32,456
    258
    Jul 28, 2004
    If 3D is a "fad", its a multi-billion dollar one...that's the kind of investment manufacturers, content providers, filmmakers, and others have in offering this new technology.

    It's also new, and one with more than one delivery option for the technology.
    Others have mentioned the fact that TI and others are working on glasses-free presentation.

    So its new, its not mature yet, but it is anything but a fad.
     
  14. Athlon646464

    Athlon646464 Gold Members DBSTalk Gold Club

    3,045
    66
    Feb 23, 2007
    Uxbridge, MA
    I agree - content will drive this puppy, and there will be a lot of content by the end of next year.

    Way more 3D than there was HD in the second year of HD, BTW.

    There will be live, VOD and BD - as well as very comfortable glasses. If they eliminate the glasses, that's just a delivery thing (and would be great), but it's the content that will drive this.

    Did I mention content? :grin:
     
  15. Paul Secic

    Paul Secic Hall Of Fame

    6,226
    23
    Dec 16, 2003
    There are probably 135 million people watching SD on tube sets, and many can't afford new TVS due to the economy.
     
  16. Athlon646464

    Athlon646464 Gold Members DBSTalk Gold Club

    3,045
    66
    Feb 23, 2007
    Uxbridge, MA
    Some here seem to think that if 3D is not mainstream by the end of June, it will be a failure.

    HD has been around for more than a decade, and it's just now getting to the point where if you go to buy a new TV, you pretty much have to buy an HDTV.

    The prevailing wisdom by those backing this version of 3D is that it will get into more homes faster than any of the last 'big things', such as HDTV's and DVR's.

    Hell - even CD's took about 5 years to catch on. DVD's about the same.

    I remember the reason I bought my 1st HDTV, it was because there was stuff I watched and was interested in that became available to my address in HD. So I took the plunge. This year I bought my second HDTV (after about 8 years with the first one).

    For me, it was content driven. There will be a lot more than just a few 3D movies to watch by Christmas 2011. People will want to watch.

    This will happen relatively overnight, as new tech goes - about two years. It's not going away.

    :)
     
  17. susanandmark

    susanandmark Godfather

    468
    6
    Feb 15, 2007
    Yeah, but that's what I (and others) think at-home 3D is. It's the TV industry getting hooked on the idea of people buying new sets for new features ... Like they did with HD, creating a HUGE sales boon for the industry. Just like the music industry experienced with people trading their cassettes and/or vinyl for CDs. Or the movie industry with DVDs instead of VHS tapes. But plenty of other movie and music distribution technologies died on the vine (laser disc, UMD, Beta, HD-DVD, etc.).

    Right now the industry is trying to convince people of a need that I'm not sure exists or is even actually desired by the consumer, unlike the instances above where the switch actually worked. (We wanted clear, digital TV pictures. We wanted skip-free, seamless music.)

    3D won't really be a success until it is ubiquitous, just like those technologies above and that won't happen, even under the most optimistic scenarios, for five to ten years. I remember being in 7th grade when my friend's dad got a CD player. It was super expensive and there were hardly any discs. I didn't even see another CD player for 3-5 years and didn't get one myself until I was done with college. My life was not poorer for CD's absence. And it was probably only another four years before we traded all our CDs for MP3s. Like most Americans, I haven't purchased a CD in years.
     
  18. GregLee

    GregLee Hall Of Fame

    1,701
    19
    Dec 28, 2005
    Well, of course. What else should the TV industry be doing? They're entrepreneurs. You don't want them to develop new products and take risks, to be leaders?
     
  19. olguy

    olguy Hall Of Fame

    1,234
    0
    Jan 9, 2006
    And many of us want 3D television in our homes. As for your examples, they did not exactly take off with all the consumers. And there were strong advocates for each. And the losers all cried that the best was overlooked. Can you say Betamax, Laser Disc, 8 Track? So if it falls through and I don't have many movies or whatever to watch I still have an 82" DLP that cost less than many 60+ LCDs, LEDs, and Plasmas. Admittedly I'll be out the cost of the Mits adapter and several pairs of glasses. But we wanted it. We knew what we were getting and not getting and it's probably the best picture I've ever had in over 50 years of TV box watching.

    But I am honestly amused by the naysayers. Maybe they're right. Maybe they're wrong. Maybe they're trying to convince themselves they don't want one because they can't afford a new TV just now. I have no way of knowing the reasons for so many saying "it ain't gonna work" but I am truly amused.
     
  20. Herdfan

    Herdfan Well-Known Member

    6,456
    88
    Mar 18, 2006
    Teays...
    How about "I don't like it?"

    We took our daughter to see How to Train Your Dragon 3D last night and I came out of there with a headache. I called my mom today and talked her into taking my daughter to the new Shrek 3D this weekend just because of that. And Shrek is a movie I wanted to see, but I may just have to see if I can find a non-3D theater or wait for the Blu-Ray.

    Its almost as if us naysayers will be blamed if the format fails.
     

Share This Page