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. 356B

    356B Icon

    908
    1
    Oct 11, 2008
    Northern...
    Another Fox Business News wannabe......I like his glasses though, and I think I'll get one of the those 4K TVs, just because I can......calm down...just kidding. :eek2: check that, I think I'll get a 3D printer this summer.......not kidding.
     
  2. tsmacro

    tsmacro Hall Of Fame

    2,380
    59
    Apr 28, 2005
    East...
    Yes enough people are watching at movie theaters to make it worth the movie makers money. But at home it seems there's not enough demand for broadcast 3-D for even one of the most popular channels, ESPN, to keep their channel up and running. If more people wanted 3-D at home they'd be offerring more and more 3-D channels, like what happened with HD. It wasn't too many years ago that we were always waiting to see what HD channel would be available next. That hasn't happened with 3-D channels, the day when broadcasters are shown there's enough money in it to make it worth their while it'll happen, but not before and it seems now isn't that time.
     
  3. BillJ

    BillJ Icon

    863
    6
    May 5, 2005
    Actually when offered in both 3D and 2D several big name films have had higher 2D sales. This was what I mentioned some time ago from personal observation in the tickeet line. Even young customers were opting for 2D when they could have had 3D for only $1 more. That tells me even in theaters the novelty of 3D isn't selling anymore.
     
  4. 356B

    356B Icon

    908
    1
    Oct 11, 2008
    Northern...
    Ha....! not where I live.....but perhaps our kids in PoDunk are technically challenged.....or can afford the extra dollar.
     
  5. Rduce

    Rduce Legend

    337
    9
    May 15, 2008
  6. James Long

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

    46,189
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Hmmm ... a couple bucks more for the price of the movie ticket to see it in 3D (if one is in to seeing movies in a theater) vs paying more for a 3D TV and glasses for everyone or a more expensive glasses free 3D TV. To me it seems that there is more commitment in setting up your home to be able to watch anything in 3D than there is to make a movie by movie choice to buy a ticket for a 3D showing.

    Is 3D bringing people to the theaters who would normally wait for the PPV / rental? or are they just skimming some of the theatrical audience who would still see the movie in 2D?
     
  7. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,626
    391
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Regardless of which side you are on... I think what we see time and again is... the things that people want tend to stick around. It's fine to say things like "beta was the best, but VHS won somehow"... and while beta might have been technically the best, it didn't matter... because VHS was marketed better and got more people to buy-in.

    HD took a little bit to get going, but once it did... here we are today with most channels in HD and very few channels left in the wish pile.

    3D, on the other hand... has come and gone a couple of times... each time it comes back with better home-technology... but so far it has not taken hold.

    IF there truly were lots of fans out there wanting and demanding 3D... we would be seeing more content, not less... and more channels, not less.

    This thread now has a misleading title... because it presumes that Dish is falling behind in 3D... when the reality appears to be that other providers are scaling back 3D content...
     
    2 people like this.
  8. James Long

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

    46,189
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    The market came to a point where "there can only be one". And the winner was the one supported by more manufacturers.

    We had a "there can only be one" point with BluRay as well.

    I'm glad we don't have an "there can only be one" point with Apple vs Android vs Windows on phones (although a winner is emerging). :)

    It is a chicken and egg situation. But as I see the crests of interest in 3D wax and wane the current one is cresting at the top of the seawall. The next wave will likely be the one that makes it over the top and floods the market with a good technology that works.

    There is a demand for 3D ... it remains unsatisfied despite decades (lets call it "over a century") of improved technology. People have accepted that we will have 3D in the future. We're just not there yet.

    The title is ironic ... and the premise has been disputed since the thread started. DISH decided to wait for better technology and while they were waiting the wave receded. DISH still supports 3D on their top of the line receivers ... they are not out of the game. But there is less content to carry.

    There are still more important areas where DISH needs to "catch up". The wane in 3D takes the pressure off for linear channels. They can still do VOD and on demand.
     
  9. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    23,205
    1,173
    Nov 13, 2006
    Remember when MNF was on abc in hd for a couple years, then it was gone for another three or four before it came back.. This may or may not be the same thing with 3d (I think its going to be loved on a few particular films going forward, but its not the end all be all for all films. See avatar 2 and 3 in the next few years) , but I still think 4k will be much bigger than 3d in the long run to be honest.
     
  10. djlong

    djlong Hall Of Fame

    4,343
    57
    Jul 8, 2002
    New Hampshire
    What I meant by "commitment" was the incremental commitment of the specific event. Going to the movies? 3D is an extra buck or two and they hand you the glasses on the way in. You're already committed to making the journey (car, walk, subway, bus, etc) and spending money. After the initial purchase of 3D equipment, there's more "to do" for 3D at home. Making sure you haven't lost the glasses - that they're recharged, if it's active shutter, that you have enough for everyone. I honestly wonder if the idea of "I need 30 pairs of glasses if I'm going to have a 3D Super Bowl party?" has soured some on the idea.

    Make it glasses-free with a wide viewing angle and I think the last of the barriers will fall. Why? Because we already have lots of source material. Lots of 3D Blu-Ray players and lots of 3D Blu-Ray discs. I know that, when I'm buying movies from Amazon, I pay the extra $5 for the version that includes a 3D disc for when and if I eventually have 3D. That's one reason I did NOT buy "Oz", even though I liked it. They didn't have a Blu-Ray/3D combo pack.
     
  11. 356B

    356B Icon

    908
    1
    Oct 11, 2008
    Northern...
    4K..? there is no content and several news outlet media critics say you can't tell the difference. No it will be years before 4K is mainstream, similar to what happened in HD tech in the late 90's......very pricy, pretty pictures but no programing or carriers of programing. Hell.... I know a retired IRS agent who thinks HD is a scam, he says he sees no difference......he sounds kind of like a 3D doubter......How would you like him checking your tax return?
    3D RULES.......! :rolling:
     
  12. TBoneit

    TBoneit Hall Of Fame

    2,294
    7
    Jul 27, 2006
    I do not think 4k will ever be anything beyond a niche product in the home.

    What size screen do you need to be using to see the difference between 1080i (p) and 4k?

    My belief is that most TV sets being sold are of size where 4k would minmal at best results.

    If I had the Money to build a 20 seat home thearter than I would want 4k content and displays, I and most TV watchers can not afford or desire that.

    I have two 32" HDTV sets, a 24" HDTV and a 27" SDTV (Sony) in use. The SDTV gets as much if not more viewing as the HDTVs.

    TB.
     
  13. Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,399
    585
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    I could tell the difference on most 4K sets from ten feet away vs. standared HD sets. Must have seen 30 of them, this at CES early this year.

    But I certainly agree the uptake will be real slow.

    The first media to really pop will be BRDs.

    And never say never!!
     
  14. TBoneit

    TBoneit Hall Of Fame

    2,294
    7
    Jul 27, 2006
    Laxguy, Just curious what size sets?

    Thanks
    TB
     
  15. klang

    klang Hall Of Fame

    1,268
    2
    Oct 14, 2003
    Near...
    I saw 4K on display at the Sony store in Vegas. The resolution difference was quite apparent to me on the 55" set. There was a 1080p set right next to it.
     
  16. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,626
    391
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Wait... when did that happen? I don't remember that happening at all.

    I had an HDTV before many (except WRAL, the nation's first) of my locals were broadcasting in HD... but I don't remember MNF being in HD for a couple of years and then not being in HD for a few... that doesn't even make sense... after they invested in HD cameras and ran for several years, why would they have stopped and then started again?

    I don't remember that at all... Of course MNF moved from ABC to ESPN years ago... but it stayed in HD the whole time.
     
  17. Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,399
    585
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    TB-

    It was a real variety. Most were ca. 55-65". Some down to maybe 42" and a few were Mega sets over 100"
     
  18. Jul 5, 2013 #538 of 616
    lee635

    lee635 Hall Of Fame

    2,023
    2
    Apr 17, 2002
    I don't think there is the demand for 3d like there was with HD. There was a point where folks were waiting in line for hours to get a good deal at an after Thanksgiving sale on an HDtv even though their current tv was still working fine.

    What we may see is that as consumers buy a replacement TV for the one that just died, they may opt for one with 3d capability, but we're just not seeing folks stand in line to get a 3d tv.

    Thanks all. Lee
     
  19. Jul 5, 2013 #539 of 616
    356B

    356B Icon

    908
    1
    Oct 11, 2008
    Northern...
    We had family over the 4th and with the oppressive afternoon hot weather we cranked up the 3D Blu-ray, turned on the Samsung 3D TV and showed some 3D movies. The kids loved it, the adults loved it and a wonderful time in air conditioning was had by all..........Several had never seen 3D TV home style and spoke of getting one of their own.
    To each their own............
     
  20. Jul 6, 2013 #540 of 616
    Jim5506

    Jim5506 Hall Of Fame

    3,687
    37
    Jun 7, 2004
    I just read that after Wimbeldon, the BBC is dropping any further coverage in 3D, so, it appears the fad is fading across the pond, also.
     

Share This Page