Had my first proper look at 3D television today.
It was a large, 40"+ Panasonic showing an animated feature.
Was I impressed?
Yes.
Not sure what it would be like to watch for a couple of hours, but immediate impressions were very good.
I soon forgot I had the silly glasses on.
The 3D effect was a little like watching a live play.
Two animals were running around a caravan park, and you could certainly see the depth of the park area, in the way you can see the depth of theatre stage.
Quite unlike ordinary television.
I imagine the feature I was watching was designed to show off 3D, but at the moment I am thinking my next television purchase will be 3D-ready.
What are your thoughts on 3D telly?
|
>> What are your thoughts on 3D telly?
Dead in the water. Its a fad.
|
>>Two animals were running around a caravan park, and you could certainly see the depth of the park area, in the way you can see the depth of theatre stage.>>
That was the window Iffy, not the telly ...
|
...That was the window Iffy, not the telly ...
Doh - thought it was too realistic to be true.
As regards 3D being a fad, I suppose that's always a possibility.
But less likely the more ordinary non-techie consumers like me are impressed by it.
|
Recently, for a few minutes, I watched a demo, showing a football game and was not impressed. It reminded me of those old pop birthday cards. All the players seemed flat and two dimensional. I have since purchased a non 3D TV.
|
|
I read somewhere recently that the next generation of glasses free 3D will be on the market soon. Also that the current system has flopped. I would not have one even as a gift.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 1 Apr 11 at 16:52
|
>> Recently, for a few minutes, I watched a demo, showing a football game and was
>> not impressed. It reminded me of those old pop birthday cards. All the players seemed
>> flat and two dimensional. I have since purchased a non 3D TV.
>>
My thoughts exactly, having watched the Sony demo set in Heathrow T5 a few times (with supplied glasses), cardboard cut-outs against a backdrop.
The BBC are less than enthusiastic:-
www.reghardware.com/2011/03/08/bbc_3d_tv_strategy/
Sales are poor:-
www.reghardware.com/2011/02/07/toshiba_3dtv_sales_are_poor/
Poor sales in Europe and North America:-
www.reghardware.com/2010/12/22/world_3d_tv_demand/
|
>> The latest and greatest 3D film flopped spectacularly at the box office.
>>
That's more about the content and publicity than 2D / 3D.
I am a bit of a 3D sceptic however.
|
|
A storyline might have helped, its true.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 1 Apr 11 at 21:25
|
"Dead in the water. Its a fad."
That's what my dear old dad said about colour TV!
|
Well we have a 47" LG passive 3D model and I am really, really pleased with it.
A few things:
- this is about as large as the passive models get because all the technology is on the screen - not the glasses. We use the "cheap" polarising glasses. The ones from the cinema work ok too.
- because the glasses are cheap it doesn't matter too much you break them - unlike the active 3D models where glasses are around the £100 mark
- the active models also can produce flickering when looking at another source apart from the telly. Beat frequencies and all that. I think that is what causes people to report headaches and so on.
- you don't have to run the TV in 3D mode. It can pick up 3D from a few different formats. The PS3 with 3D games are simply awesome - not that I play them that much!
- with 3D movies it feels like the telly is too small because you get some depth into and out of the screen you get the impression you are looking through a porthole. A smaller screen would feel a bit cramped IMHO.
- the LG's seem to need True Motion turning off to improve the sharpness of the 3D image.
|
"I soon forgot I had the silly glasses on."
I think they come in pink-rimmed, glitter-coated, star-shapes for guys who 'sparkle'.
|
...I think they come in pink-rimmed, glitter-coated, star-shapes for guys who 'sparkle'...
I admit I preferred Mrs Slocombe's.
|
|
I don't remember her glasses, put I do remember her large pussy.
|
...put I do remember her large pussy...
You would.
Anyway, back to 3D telly....
|
|
The 3D never works for me, so the whole "3D TV" thing is a spectacular waste of time and money IMHO.
|
>> The 3D never works for me,
It seems likely that one of your eyes isn't working. Or the active glasses weren't switched on!
I'd rather not have it - more of a distraction for me I think. But then I've always thought the pictures were better on the wireless anyway.
|
|
Both eyes work fine, just without stereopsis, so my view of the world is effectively 2D. Doesn't present any problems apart from the inability to do magic eye puzzles.
|
|
Jeez! I hope you manage to keep that Airbus away from tall things!
|
>> Jeez! I hope you manage to keep that Airbus away from tall things!
>>
Its OK, an Airbus has Cruise control, ABS and ESC. :-)
|
And pilots who both go to sleep at the same time?
I do hope not:)
Pat
|
>> What are your thoughts on 3D telly?
Ok-ish... www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?t=4351&v=f
|
We bought a new TV 6 months ago, and so looked at 3D.
Weren't impressed at all. If 3D works I think it has to be on a really big screen where the edge of the picture is out of your peripheral vision (like iMax). With even the biggest TVs the picture frame is well and truly in your peripheral vision, and so you get an odd (to me) transition between 3D and non-3D at the edge of the screen, which Mrs & I didn't like.
Bought a 52" Sharp Aquos something-or-other. Very pleased.
|
There's a shop with a 3D TV on display near my work.
I have to look away from it as I walk past, as the fuzzy picture makes my feel sick.
As for wearing 3D glasses, I fing my normal glasses enough of a pain!
|
Just a fad, on a 30 year cycle...the 1950s...the 1980s...and now the 2010s
The technology will be much, much better come 2040, and the majority of people will still be quite happy with 2D pictures, and unprepared to pay more for 3D.
|
>> Just a fad, on a 30 year cycle...the 1950s...
AH! The House of Wax, - Super film, a classic!
|
I am going to wait for 2070 myself, or maybe 2100 ...
|
|
we will have a holodeck by then!
|
Or time travel meaning I could go back to a 50's drive in and watch High Noon ...
|
|
3D TV. A wonderful con overall.
|
I was in an M&S when someone was really interested in the demo TV. Trying it out and I hung around. They had not realised (until I pointed out) that not all TV was going to be 3D. Like not all TV will be HD even if your TV supports it.
And don't debate HD TV here ;-)
|
Shopping channel QVC is pushing a 3D telly today.
Samsung 43" plasma for £568.20.
That's reasonable money for a big 2D set.
You need to buy the glasses, but you wouldn't be left with too much egg on your face if 3D conked out in a year or two because you'd still have a decent television to watch.
tinyurl.com/3m9n2o9
Last edited by: Iffy on Sat 2 Apr 11 at 07:38
|
Iffy!
you are a QVC watcher?
|
...you are a QVC watcher?...
One of the presenters, Julia Roberts, is very fit in a late middle-aged sort of way.
blogs.qvcuk.com/julia_roberts/
Some of the technology shows are quite watchable, a sort of enhanced window shopping.
For example, they had an Acer dual screen laptop on the other day which has a touch screen where the keyboard usually is, and an ordinary screen, same as other laptops.
I'd not seen this machine before, and I learned a bit about it from watching the QVC presentation.
Here's a PC World link: tinyurl.com/3dy8a3m
|
>>...you are a QVC watcher?..
My wife is one, but she would not recommend them for plants and shrubs.
|
>> One of the presenters, Julia Roberts, is very fit in a late middle-aged sort of
>> way.
Nice looking lady but late middle age is older than me. She is not older than me!!
|
Indications are 3D might be more than a fad.
Star Wars creator George Lucas reckons it will take over in the same way colour took over from black and white.
www.katu.com/news/entertainment/118989774.html?ref=morestories
What happens to 3D in the cinema must have a bearing on 3D at home, although 3D gaming on the Playstation is reckoned to be brilliant, so that's a small market on its own.
Sky are showing the golf Masters in 3D, and other sports, particularly boxing, are reckoned to be vastly better in 3D.
I had a look in a large Currys yesterday, and there are 3D TV ranges from Sony, Samsung, Panasonic and LG.
Also 3D Blu-ray players.
It's fair to say there's more hardware than content available at present, but 3D does seem to be gaining a foothold.
|
"Star Wars creator George Lucas reckons it will take over in the same way colour took over from black and white."
I think he's in the minority amongst film directors, although for teenage sci-fi movies like Star Wars it might find a niche
|
Agree Iffy
However 3D cinema, well it was good at first but now i would just rather see it normally - and i refuse to pay the extra "tax" the cinema's charge you for watching the movie in 3D (on top of the glasses if you havent got some already)
Our local big American chain "cinema, and world" certainly charge this "tax" under the pretence that its to pay for use of the 3D projector.
IMO they make enough from the overpriced popcorn, crap hotdogs and black fizzy syrup and the like - did you see that programme on channel 4 recently it costs more to make the paper bag for the popcorn ( < £1) and they sell it for over £3 a bag!
Last edited by: Redviper on Wed 6 Apr 11 at 13:28
|
>> Star Wars creator George Lucas
The man who brought us Jar Jar Binks? :)
|
I can't get on with active shutter glasses. The flicker irritates me. I had a demo of a TV in Comet a couple of weeks ago, and found the experience not a patch on the passive polarised glasses set up in our local cinema (my only other experience of 3D). Apart from the flicker, I also found the experience to be akin to a pop-up book with a sense of 2D characters in a 3D space.
Although the film itself was so-so, I found Avatar at the cinema to be a breakthrough experience. Totally immersive, and added so much to the sheer spectacle of the film. I think it has value for the cinema, and possibly televised sporting events, but I think the whole 3DTV thing is quite overhyped. That said, I have yet to try a passive set up on a TV.
|
...That said, I have yet to try a passive set up on a TV...
Nor have I, but from what I read most people think active is superior.
I tried three more actives yesterday, and didn't notice flicker on either of them.
Standing in a tin shed surrounded by 100 other tellys is not the best testing environment.
|
I wonder what the record is for having the same film on different formats?
There must be someone out there who bought their favourite film on Betmax, then on VHS, then on "Digitaly Remastered" VHS, then Laser Disc, then DVD, then Blu-Ray, and now 3D Disc.
(Not to mention the "Director's Cut" special editions).
|
>> Indications are 3D might be more than a fad.
>>
>> Star Wars creator George Lucas reckons it will take over in the same way colour
>> took over from black and white.
>>
I don't suppose they are re-releasing the Star Wars films in super 3D any time soon, are they?
|
...I don't suppose they are re-releasing the Star Wars films in super 3D any time soon, are they?...
It says in the article Lucas is working on it.
Easy to be cynical.
I saw the original Star Wars film in the Odeon, Leicester Square, London, and was blown away by the sound and feeling of movement as Luke used the force to attack the rebel starship, or whatever it was called.
Much better experience than my local fleapit cinema.
If anyone can do a good job of updating that film to 3D, Lucas can, and I would love to see the result.
If you are worried about being exploited, don't watch any films or television.
Last edited by: Iffy on Thu 7 Apr 11 at 10:16
|
|
Have seen 8 or 9 films in 3D and have yet to see one where 3D improved the viewing experience. Worst are where the 3D has been retro-fitted where the process makes the film dark and gloomy. Would always seek out the 2D version when available. It's a gimmick cinema would be better off without. An intelligent film with a decent storyline doesn't need gimmicks.
|
Animations in 3D can be fantastic, Toy Story, Ice Age and the like.
The director can plan the shot with millimetre precision to give the best thrill to the audience, that would be much more random with live action. I've seen some crackers with my kids over the last year.
|
|
Have see Toys Story 3 in 3D and 2D . It's a brilliant film in either but I preferred the 2D version
|
>> Animations in 3D can be fantastic, Toy Story, Ice Age and the like.
>>
>> The director can plan the shot with millimetre precision to give the best thrill to
>> the audience
Which is why Avatar worked beautifully. Mostly computer generated, and intended from day 1 to be 3D. This was my first experience of 3D, and nothing I've seen since has got close to it.
|
>> This was my first experience of 3D, and nothing I've seen since has
>> got close to it.
I'd be more inclined to see something in 3D at the local cinema if they didn't add an extra £2 to the already extortionate ticket price.
|
"If anyone can do a good job of updating that film to 3D, Lucas can"
I'd like to see Star Wars remade so that it stands up to the post production of the prequels - rather than just prodding and poking it, inserting a few CGI monsters here and there.
|
I still tend to regard TV as something to have on in the background so I would rarely benefit from a 3D apart from the occasional film
I have seen a few 3d films at the cinema and have to admit my reaction was more of a 'Meh' than anything else.
It all goes down to what you watch and how you watch it. Some mates of mine are real audio/video geeks and love the 3d stuff - especially the sport
|
Impressed by 3D television? - Zero
