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

Dish Needs to Get Moving on 3D

Discussion in 'DISH™ High Definition Discussion' started by Michael1, May 18, 2011.

What is your current interest in 3D?

  1. I own a 3DTV and am anxious for more 3D content

    28 vote(s)
    25.0%
  2. I don't yet own a 3DTV but am planning to buy within the next 6 months

    11 vote(s)
    9.8%
  3. I own a 3DTV but am not really interested in 3D content

    19 vote(s)
    17.0%
  4. I don't own a 3DTV and am not planning on investing in 3D in the near future

    54 vote(s)
    48.2%
  1. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,183
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Why do the better sets bother with 3D? There has to be a cost difference ... both in development and in parts. If 3D is useless why do the companies that build these sets bother?

    The simple answer is that they see a future in 3D. Perhaps they are wrong. But they still see some reason to invest the money needed to have 3D in their sets.
     
  2. 356B

    356B Icon

    908
    1
    Oct 11, 2008
    Northern...
    What I find hard to comprehend is this almost bitter, negative resentment of a 3D format, it seems personal.
    Is it just debate or does it go deeper? Like I said, to each their own.
     
  3. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame

    4,357
    219
    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    The mfgs keep hoping that 3D will catch on in the home despite all evidence to the contrary. I mean come on let's get real here. We'll soon be down to one channel with 3D and that mostly a 'demo' channel. None of the premiums seem interested in it, nor does Amazon or Netflix. So just how is the market for 3D to grow? Certainly not from the mostly 'B' movies done in 3D, nor the cartoons.

    I've been sorely disappointed by most 3D movies I've seen that it no longer carries value for me.
     
  4. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame

    4,357
    219
    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    I think you're reading much more into it than is there. While I'm not enamored of 3D as much because of a lack of good 3D content as the damned glasses, I don't hate it. In fact I use the 2D w/depth that my TV has that gives me some 3D effect fairly often.

    Well, at least I would if Mitsi would get off their dead butts and get a tech out to fix my set! But that's a story that will be talked about a lot in a different thread.... :(
     
  5. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,183
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    TV manufacturers are willing to back up their opinion with their money.


    Many of the top box office films have 3D versions. Movie studios are willing to back up their opinion with their money.


    Perhaps not for you ... but the industry is still supporting 3D.

    It may have been too early for a full time sports channel. But there is still a place for 3D. Perhaps on the back burner but still on the stove.
     
  6. jerrylove56

    jerrylove56 Godfather

    468
    14
    Jun 14, 2008
    North Alabama
    The people vote with their $BUCKS and 3D at this time is not an option "most" consumers want. Manufacturers will have to devise another "greatest" widget. I just don't think the new enhanced videos now being peddled will work either.

    Still think a set that can enhance the most "senses" is the answer. This is probably far-fetched, but a set with technology to radiate scents would sell.
     
  7. 356B

    356B Icon

    908
    1
    Oct 11, 2008
    Northern...
    It could be a demographic thing. I live in a PooDunk town and the only movie house has movies often in 3D. The kids/young adults are keeping the place open.....? The over 50 crowd...not so much.
    Hell, I don't have a "Smart Phone" or a iPad, and my adult children tell me my iMac will soon be a relic of the past.....
     
  8. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,183
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    "This movie really stinks" would be a good thing? :)
     
  9. TBoneit

    TBoneit Hall Of Fame

    2,294
    7
    Jul 27, 2006
    The answer is simple as to why 3D is slow to catch on at $1000+ a 3D tv is past the sweet spot of price benefit for most, IMHO.

    I paid under $200 for a 32" HDTV delivered as a cheap gift to replace a 19" HDTV. Under $500 is the sweet spot for many as I see it.

    TB
     
  10. Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,396
    585
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    Movie houses had Smell-O-Vision in the 50's. Didn't catch on.
     
  11. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,192
    183
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    I think you've over-complicated what's going on. In order to be taken seriously as a upper-class TV, it must feature 3D (even if glasses aren't included). A similar situation to the thousands of better TVs that came with the CableCard capability 7-8 years ago. Very few took advantage of it, but many thought they would benefit from it.
     
  12. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,183
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    So 3D is something considered a standard feature of a top of the line HDTV? Not bad for a technology that is being portrayed as useless.
     
  13. Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,396
    585
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    RE: Cost. While initially there was R+D, and tooling up costs, once 3D was perfected in the manufacturing lines, it's probably cost effective to make all of one run 3D than two runs 75% just HD and 25% 3D HD.

    For many people even if they're looking at two sets almost identical, but for $100 they get 3D, many would choose the latter even if not fully invested in its worth. YMMV, and for some there's 0 mpg.....
     
  14. MCHuf

    MCHuf Legend

    147
    0
    Oct 9, 2011
    Pretty soon there will be less 3D channels then there are now, this certainly didn't happen with HD. The facts speak for themselves. People just aren't that interested in 3D in the home, despite the good amount of 3D tv's sold. The vast majority of people don't discuss tv on internet forums and really couldn't care less about most high-end features. Just look at bd audio. 5.1/7.1 sounds great and all bd players can output it. But how many people have 5.1/7.1 sound systems? If it doesn't work just by turning on the set and plopping down somewhere in the room to watch it, it just won't catch on. When 3D viewing becomes that easy, then it will become big.
     
  15. 356B

    356B Icon

    908
    1
    Oct 11, 2008
    Northern...
    I think the 3D market is DVD driven. I'm shopping a new TV now and everything I read about "Smart TVs" performance mentions 3D in a big way. The consumer reviews are the most telling, it's a demographic thing. Older buyers not so much, young adults with a couple of bucks are driving a significant portion of the market. Most reviewers professional and consumer oriented never mention 3D performance positively on Satellite or Cable.....why? because the delivery system is inadequate for their taste. DVDs with 3D capabilities according to the reviews I've been reading are no different and in some cases better then the theater experience.
    To each their own.
     
  16. SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,262
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
    Last I heard, there was only a small handful of actual television manufacturers at the board level. I would imagine that each one of them only has a few basic CPUs and motherboards to which other modular components are added. Say, there's a couple with 3D and a couple without. That's going to lead to quite a few TVs sold worldwide with 3D capability built in at the board level. At that point the branded sellers feel they might as well promote the feature and snag a few buyers that are into certain WOW factor items, whether they really need them or not.

    I don't think people are buying 3D TVs in any quantity. They're buying TVs that just happen to include 3D.
     
  17. BillJ

    BillJ Icon

    863
    6
    May 5, 2005
    As several reviewers have said, if you want the best quality 2D picture available, buy a 3D TV. Their reasoning is not that will even necessily use the 3D feature but that manufacturers are only putting their high tech 2D on their top of the line TVs and those TVs also feature 3D. It would be interesting to know how many buyers of 3D TVs pay additional for the glasses if not included or buy extra glasses if only one or two pair are included. That would give us a measure of what role 3D played in their purchase decision.
     
  18. Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,396
    585
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    Pretty sure you mean Blu-ray! And have you any cites of sites for those who are saying DVDs with 3D are better than theaters?

    [FWIW, I view DVDs with the same distaste as many view SD....]
     
  19. 356B

    356B Icon

    908
    1
    Oct 11, 2008
    Northern...
    Sounds like whatever folks say you want to pick a debate, fight.....about 3D TV......? come on. To each their own, can I be any clearer?
     
  20. Paul Secic

    Paul Secic Hall Of Fame

    6,226
    23
    Dec 16, 2003
    At Target people are buying HD TVS like crazy, but I havn't seen any 3D glasses any place in the store.. Personally I have one bad eye, so I don't need 3D.
     

Share This Page