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

Is the future of 3D in doubt?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by thelucky1, Nov 3, 2010.

  1. Nov 5, 2010 #101 of 211
    hdtvfan0001

    hdtvfan0001 Well-Known Member

    32,456
    258
    Jul 28, 2004
    Magic. :D

    Remember...they are electronic devices. ;)

    Having seen multiple versions...they do indeed work. In the end, it depends on the content as much as anything to do with the glasses.

    For that reason, I still firmly believe 3D will reach critical market mass if and when non-glasses-based delivery is available.
     
  2. Nov 5, 2010 #102 of 211
    Hutchinshouse

    Hutchinshouse Hall Of Fame

    4,632
    0
    Sep 27, 2006
    1000% agree (as long as picture quality is not compromised)
     
  3. Nov 5, 2010 #103 of 211
    hdtvfan0001

    hdtvfan0001 Well-Known Member

    32,456
    258
    Jul 28, 2004
    ...or the models...uh....presenters.... :D
     
  4. Nov 5, 2010 #104 of 211
    Groundhog45

    Groundhog45 Hall Of Fame

    4,581
    89
    Nov 9, 2005
    Cedar Park,...
    Definitely in wait and see mode here. I hope they do find a way to do away with the glasses, and in something bigger than 20 inches.
     
  5. Nov 5, 2010 #105 of 211
    itzme

    itzme Hall Of Fame

    1,651
    21
    Jan 17, 2008
    I, for one, have really enjoyed the ESPN 3D NCAA games. After 5 minutes I forget I'm wearing the glasses.
     
  6. Nov 5, 2010 #106 of 211
    Garry

    Garry Legend

    244
    0
    Jul 4, 2006
    What ESPN spends or doesn't spend doesn't concern me. And what resources Directv is spending on 3D doesn't prevent them from doing other things.
    I don't happen to have a 3D Tv (yet) but I would like the opportunity to eventually get one and watch 3D programming. Even if I don't get such a tv, I would never want to deprive others of the experience if that is what they want.
     
  7. Nov 6, 2010 #107 of 211
    RAD

    RAD Well-Known Member

    16,476
    133
    Aug 5, 2002
    Dripping...
    From http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/3d-rapidly-moving-into-cultural-mainstream-106773488.html

     
  8. Nov 6, 2010 #108 of 211
    RAD

    RAD Well-Known Member

    16,476
    133
    Aug 5, 2002
    Dripping...
    +1
     
  9. Nov 6, 2010 #109 of 211
    hdtvfan0001

    hdtvfan0001 Well-Known Member

    32,456
    258
    Jul 28, 2004
    I just checked...the sky is not falling.... :D
     
  10. cartrivision

    cartrivision Hall Of Fame

    3,862
    0
    Jul 25, 2007
    That little factoid is completely meaningless and irrelevant to whether or not the future of 3DTV is in doubt, unless one is interested in trying to figure out how much some of the various players are going to lose if 3DTV fails to expand beyond being a niche market.

    I really doubt that. It's going to be years beyond 2011 before 3DTV has any level of market penetration that we might be able to interpret as a sign that "it's going to make it".... if it ever reaches that point.

    I just don't see it happening. There simply is not enough 3D programming to justify the hardware investment (at premium prices) to all but a select few early adopters, and that small audience of early adopters is not going to be anywhere big enough to to support current 3D providers like ESPN 3D, let alone encourage other programmers to invest in providing 3D programming, so it will end up in a vicious cycle of failure.... not enough 3D sets will be sold because there is not enough 3D programming available, and investment in 3D programming will not be made because there are not enough 3D sets out there to justify it.

    The fantasy of the hardware manufacturers that 3D is going to be the next big thing that will drive large numbers of people to replace their TV sets with 3D capable TV sets... similar to what they just did with HDTV, is just that.... a fantasy of the hardware manufacturers. Since much of the TV viewing public just very recently upgraded to HDTV, they are not about do it all over again for 3D.
     
  11. sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,602
    372
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    I finally got my setup rewired and added the 3D BluRay for my first taste of 3D. WOW is all I can say! It is better than I imagined.
     
  12. itzme

    itzme Hall Of Fame

    1,651
    21
    Jan 17, 2008
    ain't it, though! :grin:
     
  13. Richierich

    Richierich Hall Of Fame

    8,489
    7
    Jan 10, 2008
    However, it is a Niche Product and it is Awesome but it will not be Universally Accepted. Football in 3D is Definitely Different and AWESOME but don't think I would like to watch the Local News in 3D!!! :lol:
     
  14. RAD

    RAD Well-Known Member

    16,476
    133
    Aug 5, 2002
    Dripping...
    Haven't you tried out the 3D on DirecTV?
     
  15. sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,602
    372
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    Yeah...Watched a replay of a tennis match today. I had to wait from when I got the TV b/c I needed help rewiring the HDMI to the TV since my AV receiver doesn't pass 3D.
     
  16. Paul Secic

    Paul Secic Hall Of Fame

    6,226
    23
    Dec 16, 2003
    I agree that 3D is a fad & will fail.
     
  17. hdtvfan0001

    hdtvfan0001 Well-Known Member

    32,456
    258
    Jul 28, 2004
    If I can get 2-to-1 or better odds...my money's on the table against that view. ;):D
     
  18. sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,602
    372
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    I wonder if many dead set against the 3D tech have even experienced it on a good set? It totally blows away the old red/blue glasses crap. I'm not saying it'll be useful for scripted TV, but it really is amazing for sports, visually driven movies, and nature shows.
     
  19. hdtvfan0001

    hdtvfan0001 Well-Known Member

    32,456
    258
    Jul 28, 2004
    Very good points. I also wonder how many people are dead set against it who haven't even ever SEEN good 3D on a good 3D HD set at all more than 5 minutes at a Best Buy or something. Obviously...you know better. ;)

    3D can be a stunning and impressive experience.
     
  20. susanandmark

    susanandmark Godfather

    468
    6
    Feb 15, 2007
    I saw Disney's newest 3D movie last night and was reminded again how much I really don't like/need 3D. We saw it in a big theatre, with "good" glasses and it still was annoyingly dark and, even worse, just not as sharp as watching a blu-ray in my home theater. (Not blurry, just generally softer than the razor crisp HD picture I've come to expect; and definitely softer than a traditionally projected film.)

    That little blurry edge to everything is increasingly annoying over time and I always feel like I'm constantly being "distracted" by a little bit of out-of-glasses area at the very edge of my vision. (That "something is just outside my line of sight" feeling.) It's also really hard for young kids to wear the glasses throughout an entire movie--relevant since so many of the 3D releases are animated. (By the by, this was a screening, so no 3D-less version was available.)

    And the logistical fact remains that 3D works best as a single foreground object. Whenever you had a crowd, or something flying into or out of a scene, it was definitely less clear and the effect just the tiniest bit "off" ... A big distraction as a movie watcher. (And this was using computer animation; the 3D gold standard.)

    Overall, the movie ("Tangled") was generally entertaining (not a Disney classic, but good and quite funny in a few spots) and, yeah, a couple of the 3D effects WERE cool, but I felt that occasional "wow" factor of 3D was easily overwhelmed by the annoyance factor. (I ended the evening with a slight headache.)

    I don't have any vision issues that prevent me from seeing 3D, and I don't wear glasses. I don't even out-and-out hate the technology. I just don't want it, or really see any scenario where I'll ever "need" it. (Unlike HD, which was intriguing from day one.) It still strikes me as nothing more than a gimmick and, for the reasons above, if I have the option to see something with or without, I'll choose without every time.

    My husband was even more adamant about it. And my son's initial, "wow, cool" dimmed quite quickly as he futzed with the glasses throughout the film. Two other couples, and their kids (various ages: 4-9), we talked to afterwards all had pretty much the same experience. Today I talked to about five other people (various ages, all adults) about the movie, and 3D, and all felt more or less the same. Some enjoyed it more than me, some less, but none found it essential or compelling, even in "Avatar," the 3D holy grail.

    I'm not trying to talk anyone into (or out) of liking/disliking anything. But the fact is, you can count our very high-tech, high-end electronics family as one who has no desire to "upgrade" to 3D. Ever. And I just don't think I'm the only one that feels that way. And if they can't convince someone like me, who has a dedicated home theater (projector, screen, etc) it's worth doing, I think they're going to have a major issue with the masses.

    As I said in another thread, if they release an ESPN 47 that exclusively covered curling my husband would be Jonesing for it within months, yet he has just zero interest in ESPN 3D. And, yes, he's only seen it in a Best Buy type setting, BUT I don't think that disqualifies his opinion ... especially as it made him sure he did NOT want to do what it takes to get that station in our home (the opposite of the intended effect of such displays), even knowing DirecTV offers it and we already have DirecTV.

    The attitude of everyone I've spoken with about 3D is very much "take it or leave it," at best, and outright dislike at worst. I've yet to find someone (though I know they exist) that thinks it's the be-all, end-all of exciting technology.
     

Share This Page