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)
  2. I don't yet own a 3DTV but am planning to buy within the next 6 months

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

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

    54 vote(s)
  1. Orion9

    Orion9 Legend

    Jan 31, 2011
    I wouldn't say it is so much of "a future" in the way most consumers see it (as in I'll be using 3D for years and wondering why I ever bothered with that old 2D stuff) but rather, they can get enough money out if it over some period of time to recoup their investment plus a good/decent profit margin. This can be true if there is "a future" or if it is just a fad or a check-off item that people will pay enough for over whatever time it lasts.

    The CE field is very competitive and the usual model is to build the best product that you can this year, then ignore it and build whatever you think is the best product next year... repeat. Whether 3D takes off at a consumer level or not, by the time this is known, the TV makers will be introducing some other new thing to differentiate themselves from the boring old commodity-priced stuff that everyone already has.
  2. SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    Jun 6, 2009
    Based on the votes above so far, about 76% show no interest in 3D.
  3. James Long

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

    Apr 17, 2003
    The next thing seems to be interactive TV ... "apps" built in to the set so you don't need separate hardware. Adding technology developed for video games to allow people to control their TVs with hand motions. Cool stuff ... probably just as cool as 3D technology. Whether it is useful or a gimmick will be decided as time goes by.

    Glasses free technology with a wider range of seating angles and distances will help as 3D improves over the next few years.

    3D will still suffer from the "single camera viewpoint" that all TV is based on. It will never be just like being there live. In some ways TV is be better than being there (one cannot transport themselves around an event in a split second as easy as a director can switch to a different camera) but the viewer does not control the camera.

    The concept of 3D ... showing the same scene from the viewpoint of each eye to each eye ... works good for static shots. Keep your head perfectly still and let the camera and screen do the work. But the natural action of a human is to move their head. In real life a few inches of motion changes the scene much more than the difference between the two eyes presented in a 3D film. To make 3D more realistic one must be able to present more than two images (one for each eye). One must allow for head motion and have additional images present to let people interact more with the picture.

    It is that lack of realism that is holding 3D back.

    That being said, people are looking for more than HD in their TV. Consumers are buying 3D movie tickets. Supporting home viewing of what is available in the marketplace isn't a bad thing.
  4. SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    Jun 6, 2009
    Until they move holographics from ScFi to a practical function, 3D cannot be realistic. I would imagine that some form of holographic projection system in in the works in some lab somewhere by now. And I don't mean the gimmicky versions we've seen in some gadget shops.
  5. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    More that the high-end 2D features of a TV are all there to best facilitate 3D (higher scan rates, better video processing).
  6. 356B

    356B Icon

    Oct 11, 2008
    I'd venture to say "based on votes above so far" is not representative of the consuming public. To each their own.....
  7. GrumpyBear

    GrumpyBear Hall Of Fame

    Feb 1, 2006
    With ESPN 3D coming to an end soon, I think the public has spoken pretty clearly that in home 3D isn't something consumers are really interested in.
    Most high end TV's do have 3d built in to them, that's really because all TV makers buy from the same source and then modify the screen to them. 3D is just in its latest Fad state, and will disappear again. Between the needed glasses and how the colors are so muted with 3D, it just wont be taking off. Resolve the necessary glasses issue and make the colors as vibrant, then 3D will be a worthwhile feature.
  8. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    This really isn't about any of our individual love or "hate" or apathy for 3D... but channels for 3D seem to be fading or going away entirely.... box-office 3D movies don't seem to be raking in money because of 3D, but rather in spite of it now... by which I mean, people are going to see movies... not necessarily 3D movies...

    The "shine" has worn off on this iteration... and outside of the casual interest... there simple are not enough die-hards to support this as a big roll-out for any kind of "standard" right now... Who knows what role the down economy plays in all of this as well.

    But love it or hate it... or like me, indifferent to it... it seems the window is closing on this round of 3D... maybe in another 20 years we will see another cycle.
  9. davejacobson

    davejacobson Legend

    Mar 14, 2005
    I think there are alot of us that can say I told you that 3D would fail.The majority of the buying public will not spend extra $$$ or wear those silly glasses to watch TV.A good HD picture is really all most of the general public wants myself included.
  10. djlong

    djlong Hall Of Fame

    Jul 8, 2002
    New Hampshire
    It occurred to me that 3D has been like the cicada bug. Hiberates for a number of years, comes out and makes a lot of noise, then returns to hibernating for years.
    1 person likes this.
  11. Wilf

    Wilf Legend

    Oct 15, 2008
    I am in my eighties, and I can vouch that indeed that is the case.
  12. tsmacro

    tsmacro Hall Of Fame

    Apr 28, 2005
    And that's on a message board where you'd expect there to be more people pre-disposed to wanting the latest viewing experience, so I'd imagine for the general public that number is probably even higher.
  13. Chihuahua

    Chihuahua Legend

    Sep 8, 2007
    I doubt that 3D TV will really catch on quite some time to come.
  14. Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    Dec 2, 2010
    For many, but not all, values of "really", "catch on", and "quite some time"!
  15. Reaper

    Reaper Godfather

    Jul 30, 2008
    I think this has been the greatest thing about new technologies like in-TV apps and 3D TV emerging; the commodity-priced standard stuff has gotten pretty inexpensive.

    I went to buy a TV for my bedroom about a year ago and did not want apps or 3D (I have a Roku and an Apple TV, and don't care about in-home 3D). I was able to get a really nice 46" JVC LCD TV for just $500. I was pretty happy about that. :joy:
  16. Rduce

    Rduce Legend

    May 15, 2008
    Actually, I would say that it is a fairly good representation of how viewers around the country and the world feel about home 3D. This past spring the BBC announced that after a two year test they have concluded that viewers were less and less enthusiastic about 3D programming as less and less viewers were watching the 3D programming they were offering.

    HBO tech guru Bob Zitter told the TV Connect conference in London that he believes 3D TV is dead. “We (HBO) never thought that 3D with glasses was ever going to get off the ground,” he said. “Consumers have shown they do not want to wear glasses in the home. 3D with glasses is dead.”

    Then with Samsung’s announcement that “Considering our current technology, Samsung can make glasses-free 3DTV at the R&D level. However, it can only be viewed from a few viewing spots. To make naturally viewed glasses-free 3D TV, for instance in a living room where several people can watch TV from various angles, the technology needs to deliver 3D to at least 32 viewing spots,” the company said in a statement.
    “We believe that creating a prototype for lab-grade glasses-free 3D TV, broadcasting system and display will take about five years. For mass commercialization to become possible, manufacturing costs must come down and TV broadcasters will have to upgrade infrastructure, which includes securing transmission bandwidth. Attempts to put glasses-free 3D TV to market within the next 10 years will be difficult.”

    So, I think that for here and now home 3D with glasses is as it always has been, a gimmick and will slowly fade away just like it did 30 years ago and 30 years before that.
  17. 356B

    356B Icon

    Oct 11, 2008
    Fascinating how much energy is put into a negative.........3D movie schedule making is beefy for 13 and 14.....somebody obviously is watching. Then again the execs at Fox, Sony, Universal and DREAMWORKS could be idiots........right......
  18. BillJ

    BillJ Icon

    May 5, 2005
  19. djlong

    djlong Hall Of Fame

    Jul 8, 2002
    New Hampshire
    There's a difference between watching at a theater - an event where you're leaving the house - and watching at home where you're making FAR less of a "commitment".
  20. 356B

    356B Icon

    Oct 11, 2008
    Depends......on how into commitments one is.......to each their own.

Share This Page