So 3D TV... Is it really worth it?

[TarJak]

Went to see a 3D movie with the kids today and whilst fun to see some of the specially desinged effects got a bit bugged by the glasses after an hour and a half.

Then read this: http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/hometech/no-glasses-required-as-3d-revolution-marches-on-20100305-pnaq.html?autostart=1 and got to thinking would I be bothered to watch 3D TV on a day to day basis?

I think probably not for general viewing, news sports etc. but for movies probably a yes and then only if they can get the no glasses thing working properly.

What do you reckon?

[Reece]

Not if I have to sit there wearing glasses!!:hmmm:

[Skybird]

Somehow, it simply leaves me uninterested.

[TarJak]

Maybe I'm missing something but I fail to see the point of general viewing 3D TV. A game show and news broadcast is more than adequate in 3D unless of course there is some major 3D element to the game or the story, but I just can;t see the point of a serious drama show puting this sort of effect in for anything other than novelty value.

[Reece]

A young rich kids toy!!:yep:

[Jimbuna]

Dowly will simply convince himself he's actually participating in the porn movie he's watching :O:

[Reece]

Dowly will simply convince himself he's actually participating in the porn movie he's watching :O:Yes imagine that poking at you in 3D coming out of the screen ..... Ahhh!!:eek:

[Jimbuna]

Yes imagine that poking at you in 3D coming out of the screen ..... Ahhh!!:eek:

Nah...not really. In dowlys case it'd loook like a small garden worm http://www.btsmods.com/Smileys/classic/Ah_fooey.gif

[Platapus]

I have an imagination, so I can visualize things in 3D without needing to see them in 3D.

I considered it a novelty when it first came out in the 50's, and I think currently it is a novelty also. Just like in the 50's it will die out when the fad passes to something else.

In industry and science, there is a need for 3d imagery, but not in the entertainment industry.

[DivingDuck]

Moin,

I´m all in for it. I consider it the future of cinema. I´ve been seeing 'Avatar' several times and some 3d animation movies in 3D. The important point is, it has to be the 'Real3D' technique, using differently polarized light for each eye. I agree that the red/green glasses are b*llsh*t. They only provide two different layers, two pictures separated by different color information at a slight offset. This is not what 3D is supposed to be. But the ploarizing technique uses film material captured with two cameras. Thus your brain is indeed tricked into interpreting the seen images as 3D. But we´ll have to live with the glasses issue, which I personally don´t mind at the slightest. There are only two other ways I can imagine to achieve 3D. First, you´ll have to keep a fixed distance to a screen that displays different pictures for both eyes, the other would be to implant the picture directly into your mind. Anyway, I´m a big fan of the new techniques and am eagerly awaiting any costumer market solutions.

Regards,
DD

[TarJak]

Ouch! http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/hometech/3d-tv-price-gouge-150-for-glasses-alone-20100310-pxoe.html