3D TV; will it take off?

jammygit

There's a lot of information and opinion about concerning 3D TV sets for the home. I'd like to know what people think of 3D. Will it be a success, or a passing fad? And who will use it?

I am doing a project on 3D for my Masters, and would welcome opinion from Boards.ie members on 3D TV. The project includes a survey which takes 5-6 minutes max to complete.

If you'd like to express your opinion on 3D please follow this link (or copy and paste into your browser). If I get enough responses I'll publish some of the key points of the survey on this thread.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/XNQ2ZXV

Note that this is an anonymous survey, you cannot be identified by participating!

andy1249

I bailed out of that questionaire half way through , I cannot possibly see how such banal questions could be relevant.

My friends think I should get a 3DTV ? Agree , Disagree Im sorry but I think that type of thing is just irritating nonsense.

cnocbui

I think 3D will more likely tank than take off. Personally I think it is a gimmick.

We don't even have pervasive true HD broadcasts yet, so 3D is pie in the sky IMO.

AARRRRGH

Saw 3D TV in Harvey norman today. Very impressive.
But at over €2000 for the TV and nobody broadcasting 3D content yet it cant stand up.
And if SKY broadcast in 3D they will charge extra for it and that will stop it growing too. I think its doomed unless the equipment comes down a lot and the networks supply the content without extra charges.

akaSol

Sky have plans to add 3D as a supplementary fee to its existing HD line up as a result allot of the current football matches are shot using 3D equipment.
Unfortunately there are supposedly 45 3D movies in the next year or so to add home movie content to the mix.
However BBC are supposedly shooting a new "Natural World" in 3D, as well as Samsung producing a chip that will mimic the 3D effect from a 2D HD content.
Just waiting for the Samsung 40" to become available....

>Sol

Stinicker

I think Sky will effectively kill 3D in in its infancy if they do not include it in the ordinary HD pack. On Channel 217 you can get the demo channel now but it is only available to Sky world HD customers who are paying €73/month for poxy British soccer and older films. For that money I'd rather get a Rapidshare premium account and a very fast internet connection and give myself decent choice. I have Sky+HD and tbh after the 1st month the new shiny look of it had lost its appeal and the content is quite poor. BBCHD in FTA has more interesting stuff Ray Mears tonight was fascinating in Canada.

The Tv's are also too much in their infancy and in maybe a year or two I might get one but until they get enough content out there is still no point and I'd rather spend the money on a 3D cinema ticket. Plus I guess 3Dtv will only be a success in darkly lit rooms like projectors and I can see they being more for films really.

cnocbui

They don't seem even close to sorting out standards yet: http://www.cable-satellite.com/csi/3D-leaps-out-of-small-screen.php

Sky looks to be implementing a system that uses 1080i, thus delivering images with half the resolution of the higher spec 3D option.

The killer is bandwidth. There was a recent question over on the satellite forums as to why there are not more HD satellite channels from the BBC and the answer was a lack of capacity on the Astra satellite/s:

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055863737&highlight=satellite+capacity+astra

So if the current satellites don't even have the capacity for more than a couple of HD channels, I don't see how 3D is is going to be delivered unless they adopt SKYs low-fi solution.

Realistically, for hi fidelity 3D it looks like a significant investment in infrastructure will be required, not least of which would be a new satellite.

So until standards and bandwidth have been sorted out, I wouldn't be considering buying any hardware. I don't see 3D being something for which there will be widely available sources to view for many years to come, if the introduction of plain old HD is anything to go by.

AARRRRGH

I think you are right there.
Unless there is a high frame rate it also suffers really badly from strobing.

Elessar

Saw a 3d TV display in Harvey Norman myself yesterday. All I can say is WOW, it is very impressive, not only was there incredible depth to the picture, the demo video had things popping out of the screen at you (and had me jerking back!). I can imagine this would be incredible for a horror movie.

I can see it taking off personally. But only for movies. In the next year or two you're going to see every second movie in the cinema in 3D. It's a money spinner for the studios and inevitably that will lead people to want to watch 3D movies at home. So there will be a market there.

What I can't understand is, why do you need a new TV set? Regular TVs should be able to display the picture, all you'd need is the glasses no?

cnocbui

No.

super_furry

Not while people have to wear special glasses.

WithCheesePlease

Will 3D TV take off? Well, for people like myself with only one good eye and as a result for whom 3D has no effect I sincerely hope not!!

Link: TV industry turns blind eye to non-3D viewers

Tomk1

In Cork they were showing a U2 concert on the 3D-TV, blown away by it, not only was there real depth but it is holographic, Bono just walked out of the screen, truly amazing, going to put away €40 a week so by next year I can buy one (as prices will come down and tech improve).
Just a note on what I read on other threads here on boards.
1. You can watch in 2D or 3D mode.
2. The glasses are polarized (no batteries).

AARRRRGH

Tomk1 wrote: »

In Cork they were showing a U2 concert on the 3D-TV, blown away by it, not only was there real depth but it is holographic, Bono just walked out of the screen, truly amazing, going to put away €40 a week so by next year I can buy one (as prices will come down and tech improve).
Just a note on what I read on other threads here on boards.
1. You can watch in 2D or 3D mode.
2. The glasses are polarized (no batteries).

The U2 concert was part of the demo they have in Harvey Norman. I thought it ws the weakest part of the demp, so wait til you see the rest if you thought that was good

Kashkai

It's a marketing gimmick. They haven't even gotten HD fully off the ground yet. Who wants to have to sit in a darkened room wearing stupid specs to watch bog standard tv programme. If you just have to have that 3D "immersive experience", go outside into the real world.

Then there's the value for money aspect. If you want the 3D experience, go to the cinema. At 10 euro for a cinema ticket, you get to see at least 200 3D movies for the price of a new 3D tv. Of course it'll take a long time to produce. 200 3D movies but not as long as it'll take them to launch 3D channels judging by the HD debacle.

jammygit

Many thanks to those who have taken this survey, and posted comments. Your participation is gratefully appreciated.

I will be closing off the survey on or about Saturday 17th April, and will post key findings on this thread as promised once the initial analysis is done.

In the meantime, please feel free to participate if you have not already done so. Your contribution makes this survey more meaningful and relevant. :)

Capt'n Midnight

cnocbui wrote: »

They don't seem even close to sorting out standards yet: http://www.cable-satellite.com/csi/3D-leaps-out-of-small-screen.php.

Didn't read this link or the survey

But if standards are different most people will wait and see.

IIRC most 3D TV's come with one pair of goggles.
Most families have children.
Goggles aren't standard yet are they ??
cue lots of disgruntled punters


In most other EU countries people have bought new telly's during the DTT changeover. It was a case of killing two birds with one stone, you get digital / widescreen / thing TV in one go.

So in theory getting the 3D standardised by the time we go to DTT would be the ideal time, except that anyone who wants digital here already has it.

As for our EU neighbours, most of them have already splashed out on big TV's so they probably don't want to change over again soon especially if there is a no universal standard.

I have not tried the goggles that only allow one eye to see the screen at a time, but it's possible to get a generic one that only lets each eye see alternative frames. These could be used on older TV's too so there is a very low cost solution too, that people could try before dropping a grand on a fad.

Richersounds.ie: John

jammygit wrote: »

There's a lot of information and opinion about concerning 3D TV sets for the home. I'd like to know what people think of 3D. Will it be a success, or a passing fad? And who will use it?

I am doing a project on 3D for my Masters, and would welcome opinion from Boards.ie members on 3D TV. The project includes a survey which takes 5-6 minutes max to complete.

If you'd like to express your opinion on 3D please follow this link (or copy and paste into your browser). If I get enough responses I'll publish some of the key points of the survey on this thread.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/XNQ2ZXV

Note that this is an anonymous survey, you cannot be identified by participating!

Jeez JammyGit - just done the survey - felt like I was back in school (or booking a Ryanair flight!)

Love to see the results!

ATB,

John Mc

trap4

I'm surprised to hear so much negativity towards 3D. I went to see the 3D LG unit in Harvey Norman (Limerick) on Tuesday and was highly impressed. Especially considering it's a passive system, using the same polarised glasses as were given out at the cinema. So there's no extra cost associated with the specs - just hold on to the ones you get at the omniplex.

I stood watching for about 10 minutes as the demo cycled through different programmes - animations, U23D, American football. I was able to see the 3D effect consistently throughout and it was especially impressive on the footie as I could so easily determine the flight of the ball, distance of the throw, etc.

IMHO this is going to be huge for sports. The rep told me they'd had a large audience of shoppers throughout the week standing in front of the telly, almost universal in their praise of what they were seeing. He said a number of pubs have put in pre-orders. Of course a passive system like this is way more appropriate than active (shutter specs) in a pub situation.

eddiem74

For those interested in catching DEMO, see here:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055890946

Dermot224

you can view 3d on a standard tv using glasses. Channel 4 showed 3d programmes every night for a week some months ago. why buy a 3d tv

big_moe

Dermot224 wrote: »

you can view 3d on a standard tv using glasses. Channel 4 showed 3d programmes every night for a week some months ago. why buy a 3d tv

that was the old style anaglyph 3d that you needed red/green glasses for. the new 3d TVs use stereoscopic 3d. anaglyph makes the colour & movement brutal whereas stereoscopic has perfect colours & movement

Capt'n Midnight

big_moe wrote: »

that was the old style anaglyph 3d that you needed red/green glasses for. the new 3d TVs use stereoscopic 3d. anaglyph makes the colour & movement brutal whereas stereoscopic has perfect colours & movement

actually C4 used a dark blue / amber system that wasn't as hard on the eyes

big_moe

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

actually C4 used a dark blue / amber system that wasn't as hard on the eyes

eugh same diff. its still anaglyph which is crap

Calibos

<Snip>


Mod Comment:

That's not helpful - comments like that are really unwelcome.


Ritz

Kashkai

Was in Harvey Normans yesterday killing time when I came across their 3D demo. There was only one woman standing in front of it (so much for the "huge" interest in 3D) and after about 10 seconds she took off the glasses and said what a load of sh1te! I tried them on and watched a clip of monsters v aliens and some football. Ok so there was a 3D effect but it honestly was no big deal. My kids thought I looked silly wearing the specs and they couldn't understand what was wrong with the tv as the picture was so blurry (without the specs). They tried the glasses too but weren't even interested in the animated content.

It's just a quirky concept that won't take off, unless they can do away with the need for specs at some point. As anyone with kids will know, the specs would soon go missing or end up broken.

Freddie59

I suppose (in this neck of the woods anyways) 3D will be hugely driven by one thing - Sky. Having watched the Avatar movie in the cinema I too was blown away by the first 15 minutes or so - but then it all became familiar.

Am I right in saying that 3D is not HD? If that's the case, it will be the biggest stroke pulled since 'HD Ready' TVs ("ah them HD Ready sets are shyte - you'll be wanting a full HD one!").

But it WILL take off. It's the next evolutionary step in TV. No two ways about it. Many said colour TV was a gimmick. Look at what happened.

But will you then also need a 3D Blu-Ray player? Then a HD3D Blu-Ray player? The mind boggles!!

Capt'n Midnight

Freddie59 wrote: »

But it WILL take off. It's the next evolutionary step in TV. No two ways about it. Many said colour TV was a gimmick. Look at what happened.

Sound was a gimmick that was an instant hit.

Stereo took a lot longer.

Colour movies took a long time to become the norm, many epic films were in colour in the 1930's but as late as 1962 big budget action films were still made in black and white. just about everybody stared in The Longest Day.

3D-ish TV started ages ago and even though the modern technology is so much better I'm unclear of the standards / standards wars which have cost consumers so much in the past.


Smell-o-vision is where it's at.

ongarite

I think it will take off but not till prices drop.

I was in Harvey Norman and spent a while watching Monsters vs Aliens 3D on their demo Samsung model. I was impressed with the what is watched.

The Panasonic model is even better than the Samsung version so I'd be looking forward to seeing it demo'd.

The real test will be when Avatar comes out in November with the 3d Blu-Ray version. Will the consumer still be accepting of the technology or will it be a fad.

Freddie59

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Sound was a gimmick that was an instant hit.

Stereo took a lot longer.

Colour movies took a long time to become the norm, many epic films were in colour in the 1930's but as late as 1962 big budget action films were still made in black and white. just about everybody stared in The Longest Day.

3D-ish TV started ages ago and even though the modern technology is so much better I'm unclear of the standards / standards wars which have cost consumers so much in the past.


Smell-o-vision is where it's at.

The first colour TVs were sold in Ireland around 1970/71. In around ten years almost every home had one. I don't think that can be called slow. 3D will be even faster.

Freddie59

ongarite wrote: »

I think it will take off but not till prices drop.

I was in Harvey Norman and spent a while watching Monsters vs Aliens 3D on their demo Samsung model. I was impressed with the what is watched.

The Panasonic model is even better than the Samsung version so I'd be looking forward to seeing it demo'd.

The real test will be when Avatar comes out in November with the 3d Blu-Ray version. Will the consumer still be accepting of the technology or will it be a fad.

Will a conventional Blu-Ray player play 3D?

lar77

Freddie59 wrote: »

Will a conventional Blu-Ray player play 3D?

No, you'll need a new 3D Blu Ray player ...... the new samsung one is €379 or about €149 in a few months ...

akaSol

The Sony BDPS370 is BD ready so awaiting firm ware upgraded in June probably 1080i

>Sol

CombatCow

I tested out the Samsung Series 7 LED 3D (UN40C7000) (€1,499) TV in pcworld in Jervis center today, they were playing a demo video with various scenes...sports,animation etc.

Not being a huge fan of even 3D cinema I though the demonstration was really great, there was a part with kids with waterpistols and the 3D effect of the water being sprayed at your face was fantastic, I actually flinched!

Neways, im not gonna be giving up my 40" LCD Samsung just yet, but If I found a bargain on the model above I may be tempted to upgrade sooner rather than later.....

big_moe

CombatCow wrote: »

I tested out the Samsung Series 7 LED 3D (UN40C7000) (€1,499) TV in pcworld in Jervis center today,

you sure it was €1499?? i was under the impression that the 40" was €1999. going by the link you posted its £1799 sterling, which works out around €2K

CombatCow

Yeah, when I saw the price on the UK site I was surprised too, it was deffo €1499 instore today.

*He also told me an additional pair of glasses were €80

akaSol

Your probably right Moe. The set probably does not have the Glasses at that price ,so two glasses @ €80 each....
I was toled there was a Sony set in or around that price to be released in the next few weeks.
This might be interesting about the Glasses in HDD if any one is thinking about 3D.
>Sol

Freddie59

lar77 wrote: »

No, you'll need a new 3D Blu Ray player ...... the new samsung one is €379 or about €149 in a few months ...

FFS. A con job. Glad I didn't buy a BR player yet.:)

Mayo Exile

A glassless 3D system would be far better surely? Experimental versions already exist, but cost wise the technology may be up to 10 years away from a possible commercial launch according to some.

trabpc

I have seen Avatar twice in the Cinema. Looked better 2nd time as I was Closer.

I belive the image needs to fill you whole Peripheral vision, as it immerses you more in the Film. But on anything smaller than 100" in the home, I can't see it working. I use a regular HD ready Projector with a 120" scren and I believe this is the only way in the home to view 3d content. anything smaller and you won't get the benefit.

(Sky 3d) I refuse to pay SKY a €15 sub a month just to view HD content. Should be made the norm now. although I love their new offer!!! of a free HD box ...just to temp you to paythe Sub.

So the idea of charging customes another €15 for 3D ... No thanks!

I am considering cancelling Sky €60 P/m and getting Free Sat.

So maybe 3D Blue ray is the way to go. However I have still refused to upgrade to Blue Ray. I unwilling to Pay the premium over DVD.

Slighty off point, 10 years ago I don't remember paying more for DVD than VHS. SO why pay more for 3D over Blue Ray, or Blue Ray over DVD etc. All this progression in technology should be evolutionary not an excuse to charge more.

It does seem it's another excuse to get people to upgrade to the latest/greatest.

It also seems some producers are deciding to release their fims shot in 2D in 3D. IS this really 3D.

Again Loved 3D in the Cinema. but less sure for home viewing.

I agree some of the Questions in the Poll are a bit stupid, also gave up on it.