dslreports logo
 story category
Sorry, Consumers Still Don't Like 3DTV
Despite Slowly Dropping 3D Set Prices

3DTV marketing ramped up significantly this year, though the vendor sales pitches continue to fall on deaf ears for a number of reasons. Despite the hype, data suggests people generally find the technology expensive, 3D content limited, and the glasses annoying. 3DTV set sales haven't taken off, and they show no sign of doing so -- as many simply see the functionality as an uninteresting gimmick. New Data from Retrovo continues to support this, showing that despite the fact that one third of all shoppers plan to buy an HDTV in the coming year, only a small fraction of them plan to make it a 3D-capable set.

Click for full size
According to Retrovo, price is becoming less of a reason for consumer disinterest, with annoying glasses and a lack of compelling content being the driving reasons for low 3DTV adoption:
quote:
As price premiums begin to erode we see the need for glasses and lack of compelling content to watch are becoming the big concerns among TV buyers as 30% of respondents say glasses are still a problem and 40% say there’s not enough programming to watch. Passive glasses could help but many who have seen them say the image isn’t as good as active glasses. Content will continue to be an issue until there are enough blockbuster shows in 3D like the Super Bowl, the Academy Awards, and more movies like Avatar to make everyone want to go out and buy a 3DTV set.
New content however is a chicken and the egg scenario, with broadcasters not wanting to spend more on 3D content until 3D sets take off, and 3D sets not taking off until there's more content. Even once the industry gets past that hurdle, there's still the fact that current 3D technology remains kind of a cheesy gimmick -- something nobody involved in selling or analyzing this product seems willing to admit.
view:
topics flat nest 
page: 1 · 2 · next

SimbaSeven
I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
·StarLink

SimbaSeven

Member

Sets are getting cheaper..

We picked up our Panasonic 42" Plasma (1080p, 600Hz Refresh) for a little less than $600. We love it, but it does put out quite a bit of heat. Not a bad thing, especially during the winter.

Unfortunately, it didn't come with glasses.. and when I found the cost for the glasses (around $400), I was like "Holy sh*t!!". I couldn't really justify the cost.

Sure, I have an HTPC connected to it that can do 3D Bluray through PowerDVD, but the cost of the glasses.. if they'd go down to like $100/pair (or less), I could handle that.
Happydude32
Premium Member
join:2005-07-16

Happydude32

Premium Member

Re: Sets are getting cheaper..

quote:
Sure, I have an HTPC connected to it that can do 3D Bluray through PowerDVD, but the cost of the glasses.. if they'd go down to like $100/pair (or less), I could handle that.

Last December I purchased the Sony 3D starter kit for $350 on Amazon, included two pairs of 3D glasses, the 3D transmitter some Sony 3DTVs need and a copy of Alice In Wonderland in 3D. In the spring they came out with new glasses that were a tad bit lighter and charged via micro USB. So I bought another starter kit. This time $150 for two pairs of 3D glasses and a copy of the third Chronicles of Narnia movie in 3D, not a bad price considering The Voyage of the Dawn Treader in 3D is going for about $40 bucks alone.

After not doing it for a while, I finally updated my online content on my TV and now I see Sony has their own 3D app that features quite a bit of demo material in 3D, along with some music videos, sports clips, movie trailers and such. Some of it pretty impressive.

heat84
DSLR Influencer
join:2004-03-11
Delray Beach, FL

heat84

Member

Re: Sets are getting cheaper..

said by Happydude32:

quote:
Sure, I have an HTPC connected to it that can do 3D Bluray through PowerDVD, but the cost of the glasses.. if they'd go down to like $100/pair (or less), I could handle that.

Last December I purchased the Sony 3D starter kit for $350 on Amazon, included two pairs of 3D glasses, the 3D transmitter some Sony 3DTVs need and a copy of Alice In Wonderland in 3D. In the spring they came out with new glasses that were a tad bit lighter and charged via micro USB. So I bought another starter kit. This time $150 for two pairs of 3D glasses and a copy of the third Chronicles of Narnia movie in 3D, not a bad price considering The Voyage of the Dawn Treader in 3D is going for about $40 bucks alone.

After not doing it for a while, I finally updated my online content on my TV and now I see Sony has their own 3D app that features quite a bit of demo material in 3D, along with some music videos, sports clips, movie trailers and such. Some of it pretty impressive.

3D glasses that need charged? What? And why would they cost $400? I thought all 3D glasses were the same.

notsofast
@k12.ca.us

notsofast

Anon

Re: Sets are getting cheaper..

Glasses cost a lot because it's a guaranteed income stream once you buy the TV as you lose or break them or you want more poeple to be able to watch TV with you.

In addition, one of the unknown gotcha's to the glasses are that they typically are matched to the manufacturer of the TV, so if you bought a sony TV with Sony glasses, and then later replace the Sony TV with a Samsung (or whatever), you will need to replace the glasses to match the TV and that's more $$ for the TV maker.

vpoko
Premium Member
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA

vpoko to heat84

Premium Member

to heat84
said by heat84:

3D glasses that need charged? What? And why would they cost $400? I thought all 3D glasses were the same.

3D TV's usually use active shutter glasses where liquid crystals darken at the right moment to prevent an image from getting to one eye. The frames alternate between left-eye and right-eye and you get a stereoscopic image because each eye is only getting the correct perspective. This requires expensive, active 3D glasses.

This is different from how 3D is done in movie theaters, where two projectors are used. Each projector puts out circularly-polarized light, one clockwise, the other counterclockwise. Each lens only allows the correct polarization through (horizontal/vertical polarization can also be used, but doesn't allow for head-tilting). The polarized light method allows for cheap glasses, but can't be done at home (or at least isn't in most 3D TV's, though maybe some manufacturers have figured it out, I have no idea since I haven't been in the market for a TV for a while).
PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR

PDXPLT

Member

Re: Sets are getting cheaper..

Visio has 3D TV's that use passive glasses.

I don't think 3D will really take off until autostereoscopic multi-view (i.e., no-glasses) TV's hit the market. It'll be awhile.

heat84
DSLR Influencer
join:2004-03-11
Delray Beach, FL

heat84

Member

Re: Sets are getting cheaper..

said by PDXPLT:

Visio has 3D TV's that use passive glasses.

I don't think 3D will really take off until autostereoscopic multi-view (i.e., no-glasses) TV's hit the market. It'll be awhile.

4D will be out by then.
zed2608
Premium Member
join:2007-09-30
Cleveland, TN

zed2608

Premium Member

Re: Sets are getting cheaper..

said by heat84:

said by PDXPLT:

Visio has 3D TV's that use passive glasses.

I don't think 3D will really take off until autostereoscopic multi-view (i.e., no-glasses) TV's hit the market. It'll be awhile.

4D will be out by then.

tecnichly it already could be considered 4d depth height and length and 4th dimension is time

heat84
DSLR Influencer
join:2004-03-11
Delray Beach, FL

heat84

Member

Re: Sets are getting cheaper..

said by zed2608:

said by heat84:

said by PDXPLT:

Visio has 3D TV's that use passive glasses.

I don't think 3D will really take off until autostereoscopic multi-view (i.e., no-glasses) TV's hit the market. It'll be awhile.

4D will be out by then.

tecnichly it already could be considered 4d depth height and length and 4th dimension is time

So 3DTV's have flux capacitors in them? What happens when you put on channel 88?
zed2608
Premium Member
join:2007-09-30
Cleveland, TN

zed2608

Premium Member

Re: Sets are getting cheaper..

said by heat84:

So 3DTV's have flux capacitors in them? What happens when you put on channel 88?

rofl get a dvr and travel though 4d
zed2608

zed2608 to SimbaSeven

Premium Member

to SimbaSeven
said by SimbaSeven:

We picked up our Panasonic 42" Plasma (1080p, 600Hz Refresh) for a little less than $600. We love it, but it does put out quite a bit of heat. Not a bad thing, especially during the winter.

Unfortunately, it didn't come with glasses.. and when I found the cost for the glasses (around $400), I was like "Holy sh*t!!". I couldn't really justify the cost.

Sure, I have an HTPC connected to it that can do 3D Bluray through PowerDVD, but the cost of the glasses.. if they'd go down to like $100/pair (or less), I could handle that.

i can see it now instead of where the tv remote i misplaced it we will have where the 3d glasses that cost me an arm and a leg go

Tomek
Premium Member
join:2002-01-30
Valley Stream, NY

Tomek to SimbaSeven

Premium Member

to SimbaSeven
said by SimbaSeven:

the cost of the glasses.. if they'd go down to like $100/pair (or less), I could handle that.

I got the sony TV, which was not that more expensive than regular model, but was perfect size. No 3D glasses given, so we never justified spending extra money on something we probably wont have patience to watch.

dbirdman
MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa

dbirdman to SimbaSeven

MVM

to SimbaSeven
said by SimbaSeven:

if they'd go down to like $100/pair (or less), I could handle that.

When I purchased a 55-inch Samsung earlier this year I went with 3rd-party glasses for well under $100 that work perfectly. I note that Amazon lists more than one brand of third-party for Panasonic that are under $60 per pair.
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

tmc8080

Member

not 3dtv, Smart (IP CONNECTED) TV

HDTV will actually grow a brain.. or more to the point, a smart operating system! Sure, this will push up the price of a TV, but it's ANOTHER nail in the coffin of overpriced laptop & desktop PC's.. to have a MULTIMEDIA READY & MULTIMEDIA PLAYING TV that has an operating system & a basic (firmware/hardware) upgradeable set of components inside and is something short of an integrated all-in-one PC/TV (closer to a tablet HDTV than a HTPC--home theater desktop).

3dtv? Not gonna happen... super high res "smart" tv's will happen first... 1600-4000+ line resolution standard is already cooking up in Japan to become the next big thing.
talz13
join:2006-03-15
Avon, OH

talz13

Member

Re: not 3dtv, Smart (IP CONNECTED) TV

said by tmc8080:

3dtv? Not gonna happen... super high res "smart" tv's will happen first... 1600-4000+ line resolution standard is already cooking up in Japan to become the next big thing.

I don't get the point of that either, unless your entire wall is the display... I'm happy with my 720p projector and 1080p TVs. Again, I'd rather see bitrate increases with the current resolution than higher resolution.

The change from SDTV to HDTV was such a leap, but really? SDTV was "good enough" for 40 years! I don't see 4k TV being anything more than an incremental upgrade to what we have now.

SimbaSeven
I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
·StarLink

1 recommendation

SimbaSeven to tmc8080

Member

to tmc8080
said by tmc8080:

Sure, this will push up the price of a TV, but it's ANOTHER nail in the coffin of overpriced laptop & desktop PC's.. to have a MULTIMEDIA READY & MULTIMEDIA PLAYING TV that has an operating system & a basic (firmware/hardware) upgradeable set of components inside and is something short of an integrated all-in-one PC/TV (closer to a tablet HDTV than a HTPC--home theater desktop).

You're an iPad user, aren't ya? Why are you adding PC's into this arena? You're comparing apples to oranges and newbs to advanced users. As for networked multimedia, most HDTV's have that capability already.
said by tmc8080:

3dtv? Not gonna happen... super high res "smart" tv's will happen first... 1600-4000+ line resolution standard is already cooking up in Japan to become the next big thing.

Hell, we can't get decent looking HDTV.. I doubt we'll ever get into SHDTV within this decade or even the next. They need to make HD actually look like HD first before they even leap into the next generation.

heat84
DSLR Influencer
join:2004-03-11
Delray Beach, FL

heat84

Member

Re: not 3dtv, Smart (IP CONNECTED) TV

said by SimbaSeven:

Hell, we can't get decent looking HDTV.. I doubt we'll ever get into SHDTV within this decade or even the next. They need to make HD actually look like HD first before they even leap into the next generation.

That's the ISP's' fault from compressing the signal/feed whatever you call it.

battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000

battleop to tmc8080

Member

to tmc8080
It's not going to happen until they come out with a decent way to navigate the web. I've not found a tv with web built in that has a remote that's as easy to control as a PC or iPad. A cross between a Wii remote with a QERTY keyboard and Xbox Kinect would be the ticket.

Danorexic
@rr.com

Danorexic

Anon

Re: not 3dtv, Smart (IP CONNECTED) TV

Check out LG's latest sets. Their new tv's have a remote similar to the Wiimote for navigating. It's a lot nicer than a normal remote, but a keyboard would definitely help. Typing on screen is a bit annoying, but the wiimote-like remote helps.

N3OGH
Yo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano
Premium Member
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs

N3OGH to tmc8080

Premium Member

to tmc8080
The 50" Sony panel I purchased last month is IP enabled. You can watch Netflix & You Tube videos on it over Wi Fi. It's all ready gone through 1 self initiate software upgrade.

I didn't even consider a 3D panel. It was nice to look at it in the store, but I see it more as a gimmick than a feature.

Plus, I wear glasses for distance vision. Who wants all that weight (2 pair) on their face for hours on end? No thanks.
Happydude32
Premium Member
join:2005-07-16

Happydude32

Premium Member

Re: not 3dtv, Smart (IP CONNECTED) TV

quote:
The 50" Sony panel I purchased last month is IP enabled. You can watch Netflix & You Tube videos on it over Wi Fi. It's all ready gone through 1 self initiate software upgrade.
Why would you want to though? You Tube looks like dog shit on my 55” Sony. I signed up for a free trial of Netflix and canceled within weeks once I discovered how poor the online streaming selection is. The only thing I found worth a damn was the Starz content, which will soon be gone. Anyhow, in two separate instances, once with Salt and once with Easy A, I started streaming the movies on Netflix as they started playing on one of the Starz channels. I switched back and forth to compare the two sources many times. In both instances both the audio and video quality was superior on Starz HD then it was streaming on Netflix. And no, it’s not my internet connection, I have a 50Mb connection, and everything is hardwired with CAT 6, I don’t believe in that crappy wifi technology people use out of convenience.
quote:
I didn't even consider a 3D panel. It was nice to look at it in the store, but I see it more as a gimmick than a feature.
When I was looking at new TVs at the end of last year to replace my ancient 42” Sony HDTV I purchased back in 2006, all I did was consider 3D as every TV at or above my minimum price point was 3D. 3D is standard on most all moderate to high end TVs.
quote:

Plus, I wear glasses for distance vision. Who wants all that weight (2 pair) on their face for hours on end? No thanks.
I need to wear prescription glasses 24/7 and have since I was 7 years old. I am extremely near sighted and have bad astigmatism in my right eye. I have no problem with wearing 3D glasses, I mean I already where one pair of glasses, what difference does another make? I don’t find them ‘heavy’ (really come one, these things don’t weigh more than a few ounces, it’s not like they’re 10 pounds)

N3OGH
Yo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano
Premium Member
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs

N3OGH

Premium Member

Re: not 3dtv, Smart (IP CONNECTED) TV

Hey man, it's just my opinion.

It's fun to have a few beers and laugh at "Downfall" parody videos about how much Hitler hates the iPad with your buddies in the living room instead of the back room where the computer is.

As for the 3D thing. It's my face. I find them uncomfortable. Again, just my opinion.

The TV I got was about $1600 and it has a stunningly beautiful picture. I couldn't be happier with it.

YMMV.
WernerSchutz
join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX

WernerSchutz

Member

Re: not 3dtv, Smart (IP CONNECTED) TV

I have 3 3D TV's (2 Samsungs 46/55 and an Vizio (Ithink) 32"). The Samsungs can do 3D conversion on the fly from 2 D material. Not as good as the original 3D, but I LOVE IT.

After the Lasik 6 years ago and not having to wear regular glasses, I can put up with the 3D ones despite the unpleasant memories, they are worth it.

LOVE IT. The 55" Samsing cost me a fortune when it came out, but I bought it FOR the 3D function and Netflix enabled right out of the box. One of the best purchases ever made, besides my H1 and M105 military trailer.

N3OGH
Yo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano
Premium Member
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs

N3OGH

Premium Member

Re: not 3dtv, Smart (IP CONNECTED) TV

When I did my research, I decided to shy away from the Vizio panels. They don't do their own manufacturing, and once a set is out of warranty, they will often tell you it is un repairable if you try and get it fixed for something "major".

Panasonic, Sharp, and Sony all manufacture in house, and offer excellent customer service.

I settled on the Sony due to my previous experience with a Sony big screen. The last one I had was a 55" LCD rear projection unit that gave up the ghost only after lightning struck the pole outside my house during the hurricane in August.

I've always had good luck with Sony products, so I'm willing to pay a little more for them. Again, I was not disappointed.
WernerSchutz
join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX

WernerSchutz

Member

Re: not 3dtv, Smart (IP CONNECTED) TV

I do not buy Sony products out of principle, although they have excellent products given their track record with rootkits and mangling excellent HW o protect their "intelectual property".

I do not buy Japanese cars, either.

N3OGH
Yo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano
Premium Member
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs

N3OGH

Premium Member

Re: not 3dtv, Smart (IP CONNECTED) TV

If you're buying a car theses days, chances some of the parts came from Japan.

Or China
Or Mexico
Or Germany
Or Canada
Or........?
gaforces (banned)
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA

gaforces (banned) to N3OGH

Member

to N3OGH
I already dont like having to wear glasses, or headphones. So 2 pairs of glasses and headphones is just too much. They would have to provide prescription 3d glasses at a very low cost.

I do find the higher resolution 1080p blue ray movies with a nice samsung panel is most preferable than cable or dvd.

ATSC OTA broadcast looks pretty great too.

djrobx
Premium Member
join:2000-05-31
Reno, NV

djrobx to tmc8080

Premium Member

to tmc8080
For "smart TVs" to work, the OS has to be something unified that people will stand behind, develop for, and continue to support.

Smart TVs already exist today. Samsung even has TV Apps. But I see this as a re-hash of old "Smart phone" OSes where the market will be full of mediocre "junk" that adds a little value that average people don't care much about.

It will be even harder for this concept to work for TVs, because the user experience is so easily replaced by inserting an external box. Few people care that they need to add a tiny box to get the AppleTV experience. Or it can come from a game console like the XBox 360. Or your contet provider's set top.

My 50" Panasonic plasma TV is from 2003. It still works great. Why would I want to bundle the UI element into it when that component is evolving so much more rapidly than the display technology?

What you describe might make sense as a giant touch-screen wall that you walk up to and interact with. But I think that's somethng entirely different from a teleivision, and I thnk we're a long way off before we see such a thing hitting the mainstream.
ISurfTooMuch
join:2007-04-23
Tuscaloosa, AL

ISurfTooMuch

Member

Re: not 3dtv, Smart (IP CONNECTED) TV

Although I like the concept of an IP-connected TV with apps, I have to agree. The problem is that, unless you have a unified, open platform, manufacturers will quickly stop developing apps for older models of their sets as they move on to work on the next great thing. Hell, that happens now with connected Blu-ray players. Active development for any one model might last for a year to 18 months after it's released, then you'd better be happy with what you have because it's all you're going to get on that player.

For Internet streaming, I think that devices like Apple TV and the Roku are the way to go. I have a Roku, and I couldn't be happier. While it doesn't have all the content it could because the big media companies aren't going to jeopardize their cable revenue stream by jumping into IPTV, it does have many interesting things to watch, especially when you factor in all the private channels you can get if you know how. And, since this is Roku's business, they have an incentive to keep the boxes up to date, as opposed to TV manufacturers, where apps are mainly just something to throw in so they can talk about it in sales materials.
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd to tmc8080

Premium Member

to tmc8080
I highly doubt that a TV design will kill the PC. just like Tablets wont and the cloud wont.

the computer in the home with its own onboard storage and processing will exist for a good amount of time to come because the cloud will never catch up to local storage period.

our bandwidth might increase and sure someday maybe true 1080p can be streamed off the net... but hey look you just hit your cap and that 3D 1080p movie just cost you an overage.
Rekrul
join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

Rekrul to tmc8080

Member

to tmc8080
said by tmc8080:

HDTV will actually grow a brain.. or more to the point, a smart operating system! Sure, this will push up the price of a TV, but it's ANOTHER nail in the coffin of overpriced laptop & desktop PC's.. to have a MULTIMEDIA READY & MULTIMEDIA PLAYING TV that has an operating system & a basic (firmware/hardware) upgradeable set of components inside and is something short of an integrated all-in-one PC/TV (closer to a tablet HDTV than a HTPC--home theater desktop).

"Did you see C.S.I. last night?"

"No, I missed it. My TV crashed and I had to do a firmware update, then re-install all my apps."

"At least you still have everything. Sony just sent out a firmware update that removed a bunch of features from my TV!"

"Well, did you hear about Bob? He jailbroke his TV so that he could install un-official apps and Sony bricked his TV! He says they told him that he'll have to pay $500 to get them to restore the firmware!"

Bill Neilson
Premium Member
join:2009-07-08
Alexandria, VA

Bill Neilson

Premium Member

Went through a "I want a 3DTV" stage

but the utter lack of any significant programming and ACTUAL GOOD 3D Movies is what made me wait
mrschultz02
join:2007-09-10
Wallingford, PA
Asus RT-AC88

mrschultz02

Member

Not enough GOOD content.

I got a Samsung 46" LED set in late spring, the bluetooth glasses are super light, they dropped the price to $50 a pair but need to go lower. The glasses shouldn't cost more than $20 or $25. They had a deal for free glasses that I only found out about by accident reading reviews of the TV, the stores were ignoring the deal and not giving out the glasses, but there was a website to get them that was only spreading by people posting it in reviews.

When the 3D is done well it looks way better than in the theater (shutter glasses don't block as much light as the ones in the theater). And that's the big problem, so far I think I've seen 3 movies that the 3D was done well, and a bunch of others that the 3D does nothing for the movie or is done poorly and you would rather watch it in 2D. Stuff shot live with a good 3D camera looks real, stuff that has gone through 2D to 3D conversion doesn't.

So overall the extra $200 for the 3D TV and the extra cost of the 3D blu-rays has been mostly a disappointing experience.

TheBionic
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium Member
join:2009-07-06
united state

TheBionic

Premium Member

Not interested

I am picking up our second HDTV tonight. Honestly 3D was never even a blip on my radar. I'm just not interested, and don't believe I ever will be. They're simply barking up the wrong tree. I don't believe 3D Tvs will ever be a success.
mdlund0
join:2011-08-02
Lawrence, KS

mdlund0

Member

An uninteresting gimmick.

I am one of those luddites who sees this "functionality as an uninteresting gimmick". I've crapped on this movement from the get-go for being an unwanted technology that electronics vendors were pushing to make up for decreasing revenues on ordinary HDTV sales as prices dropped. Same thing goes for SHDTV or UHDTV.

Morac
Cat god
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ

Morac

Member

Eventually everyone will have one

When looking into what's available in the HDTV front, practically all of them now include 3D functionality, though many don't actually include the glasses.

So people as people buy HDTVs they'll end up with 3DTVs, by default even if they can't actually watch any 3D content.

Personally I think 3DTVs are better for gaming than for TV watching. I don't have one though so this is just my gut feeling.

••••

tim_k
Buttons, Bows, Beamer, Shadow, Kasey
Premium Member
join:2002-02-02
Stewartstown, PA

tim_k

Premium Member

not for me

Avatar was the first and only 3D movie I've seen. I know the active shutter glasses should work better but I had such a headache from eye strain from watching Avatar, that I don't want to even take a chance with it.

sleasyridr
@comcast.net

sleasyridr

Anon

Love my 3D tv

First 3d tv was active glasses. very expensive glasses $130 and alot of issues with ghosting. The glasses where heavy and had to be charged and the flickering gets annoying.
Then I traded it for a passive 3D tv and I love it. Difference in picture resolution barely noticable but the lack of flicker and ghosting makes it 100 times more enjoyable and glasses cost $5.99 a pair. As far as lack of content I disagree. Amazon has 130 titles in 3D and Comcast has 2 full time 3D channels as well as on demand 3D content including Starz and HBO. There is now a web site that rents stickly 3D blurays also. On top of that some of the 3D games on the PS3 are awesome on my tv. I got a good price for my tv package and I would recommend a passive 3D tv to anyone who thinks they want one. My only complaint about lack of content is that Blockbuster and Netflix by mail do not carry 3D Blurays yet.

Oh_No
Trogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL

Oh_No

Member

Every TV is a 3D TV

If you find a TV from 1950 it is a 3D TV also.
Any TV can be 3D with an external box that will regulate the left and right frames and sync it with shutter glasses. Sega Genesis did this with a 3D attachment in the late 80s.

The whole 3DTV thing is a joke as the prices are way over what it should really cost.
When they start coming out with 3DTV tuners/blueray for $50 to $100 or 3D built in to sat/cable boxes then many more people will start using it with whatever TV they already own.
If anyone already has a 120hz or 240hz TV then they can view 3D TV at the same resolution as any overpriced "3D TV" with a cheap external box.

If you want to buy a new TV then the only 3D TVs worth buying is polarized screens that will work with thin nonpowered glasses. Any 3D TV that uses shutter glasses is just a regular TV with the 3D attachment.
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

elray

Member

Meaningless 3D

It just gives the majority of purchasers a headache.
firedrakes
join:2009-01-29
Arcadia, FL

firedrakes

Member

Re: Meaningless 3D

most 3d content sucks. then price and last but not less. those dame glasses

DaveDude
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey

DaveDude to elray

Member

to elray
i just cant watch 3d tv. Plus you have to wear the silly glasses.

Danorexic
@rr.com

Danorexic

Anon

3D is improving but still needs work

We recently picked up a newer 3Dtv from LG. It uses passive glasses so you can pick up a pair of 2 for around $10. That's way better than the $100-$200 active shutter glasses. The available content is definitely a bit of a hurdle. I imagine providers like DirecTV will continue to add more programming for 3D in the coming year or so. 3D is still new, so it really isn't surprising that there isn't a ton on TV yet. Remember when HD first started coming out?

Another thing is the availability of movies in 3d. Movie studios really don't seem to want this to succeed. Some movies are put onto 3D blu-ray but can cost between $35-$40. Some movies that were 3d in theaters aren't released onto BluRay in 3d or there's an exclusive waiting period. They don't even allow you to rent 3D blu-rays from places like Redbox! It's nearly impossible to justify spending almost $40 on a 3D movie that most likely isn't worth the full price.

sleasyridr
@comcast.net

sleasyridr

Anon

Re: 3D is improving but still needs work

Check Amazon they have 130 3D movies including recent releases. I agree I would never pay that price to buy a movie. You can rent 3D Blurays for $5-8 each at this site.
www.3d-blurayrental.com
I have the LG passive 3D and love it.
BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium Member
join:2000-01-13

BlitzenZeus

Premium Member

3D? Most content still isn't 1080p

Most of the 1080p content these days is only blu-ray movies, and video games. While a few claim to have some 1080p content, the majority of the content is still 720p. The average consumer can't really tell, or care either unfortunately. So until the providers are truly capable of delivering 1080p content they can't really support a large amount of 3D content either.

On an ironic note, certain providers allow you to watch an unlimited number of free on demand, but limit how much internet data you can use, however they mostly use ip based systems for their on demand these days. It's all data...

•••••••••
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA

Sammer

Member

It's the stupid glasses!

As long as 3DTV requires those stupid glasses it will not be a mainstream success.

DownTheShore
Pray for Ukraine
Premium Member
join:2003-12-02
Beautiful NJ

DownTheShore

Premium Member

Call Me When...

...they come out with a viable holographic TV. Other than that, I don't need another pair of glasses on top of the pair I already wear.

Let's see:

- Put on my normal glasses to see what I'm doing

- Take off my glasses in order to read or work on the computer

- Put on my normal glasses plus 3D glasses to watch TV

- Keep putting on and taking off both pairs of glasses when I'm both watching TV and surfing the web

Nope, not gonna happen.
axiomatic
join:2006-08-23
Tomball, TX

axiomatic

Member

lazy eye.

Trust me. I wish the 3D effect worked on me. I might be interested in this tech if it did but I suffer from severe eye dominance and the effect is just lost on my poor old lazy right eyeball.

Why on earth TV manufacturers focus in on a technology that does not work on everyone is totally beyond me though. If you can trust Wikipedia eye dominance is observed by 2/3 of the US population. That's a pretty large group of people that can only observe small portions of the 3D polarization technique. Sure most of them can see the effect with their glasses on, however I'm part of a much smaller group that my glasses don't even wake up my right eye.

Guess I should have been forced to wear a eye patch in my youth eh? Arrrr!

No sorry I'd rather see TV manufactures dump the 3D gimmick and focus on better color/contrast/resolution in the TV's they make.
WernerSchutz
join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX

WernerSchutz

Member

Re: lazy eye.

TV manufacturers should not focus on TV's having screens since there are a lot of blind people in the US,also.

antdude
Matrix Ant
Premium Member
join:2001-03-25
US

1 edit

antdude

Premium Member

Bah to 3D.

My eyes can't see 3D so I don't want it. I am not going to watch 3D with one eye and with my current eye glasses either.

printscreen
join:2003-11-01
Juana Diaz, PR

printscreen

Member

Re: Bah to 3D.

Do you have good depth perception in the real world? In other words, do you see in 3D in the real world?

antdude
Matrix Ant
Premium Member
join:2001-03-25
US

antdude

Premium Member

Re: Bah to 3D.

said by printscreen:

Do you have good depth perception in the real world? In other words, do you see in 3D in the real world?

Yes, but my eye sights are poor especially with my right eye. I am near sighted.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

dvd536

Premium Member

Nausea, Dizziness, Glasses

Until this is all dealt with, 3D will remain what it currently is: A FAD.
Sorry NO SALE!

r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium Member
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX

r81984

Premium Member

Re: Nausea, Dizziness, Glasses

Nausea and dizziness is rare, most people dont experience it.
I never had nausea or dizziness watching 3D movies or watching anything in reality.
I would think if 3D movies make you dizzy then walking down the street with both your eyes will make you dizzy as you will see everything in 3D.

I really dont see how 3D movies makes people sick.
I imagine if you do somehow get sick from 3D movies you are the type that get sea sick from a rocking boat.

itacud
@pacbell.net

itacud

Anon

Want the best 3D 4D 5D? Without glasses, HMDs etc

Psilocybin
Heated Man
join:2009-06-18
Cleveland, OH

Heated Man

Member

3DTV sucks

The current concept sucks. Get rid of the glasses and offer more content. Then maybe I will consider.

aztr0
join:2007-10-28
Brooklyn, NY

aztr0

Member

3D

The issue with 3DTV is the glasses. Nobody wants to wear stupid goggles just to watch TV. So until the day where 3DTV is accomplished without the need for glasses. It will not pick up. Not to mention, not everyone can handle 3D. Personally I get a bit sick lol.
page: 1 · 2 · next