Comments on: Updated 3D TV: What they are not telling you

By: john

john — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:26:04 +0000

With digital OTA, the issue could be solved by broadcasting both versions at once: 2D on the main stream (.1) and 3D on a secondary stream. Of course, most people are busy watching the inferior picture quality on their cable or satellite, and they don’t even realize just how much content is already hiding in the OTA substreams.

Seriously, no matter what the broadcast medium, why couldn’t channels use this type of approach, broadcasting both versions simultaneously as separate digital streams?

By: 5 Reasons 3-D Will Come Home

5 Reasons 3-D Will Come Home — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:44:55 +0000

[...] it comes to 3-D. Some point to competing standards, others to the kitsch factor, and almost all point to the glasses. But not everyone’s a hater. In fact, Sony and Panasonic see the technology as a savior for their [...]

By: liptrill

liptrill — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:36:01 +0000

The “active shutter technology” you refer to must be the hardware dependent version of 3D that is significantly better than anything we’ve seen so far (red/blue, polorized light). I’m all on board for this.

I would guess that as soon as people get over the newness and found ways to make it more convenient – it would add significantly to any video/movie experience. It would probably require changes to the ways in which films are made, since currently the viewer only experiences depth in a compressed 2D form…

By: Vid-Biz: 3D TV, News Corp., New Hires

Vid-Biz: 3D TV, News Corp., New Hires — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:53:24 +0000

[...] Vid-Biz: 3D TV, News Corp., New Hires 3D TV Not All its Cracked Up to 3Be? Even with a new TV you’ll still need to wear the glasses, and the content becomes unwatchable for those not wearing glasses. (TV by the Numbers) [...]

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:25:38 +0000

LOL Grady, nice rant!

By: Grady

Grady — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:17:26 +0000

Words can’t express how annoyed I am about this… so I made a video to articulate why exactly it is that I hate 3-D. Enjoy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAEZ5WO20GI

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:59:02 +0000

Sam B, I don’t know if the glasses with the Panasonic are the same as the theater, but they are not blue/red, they are “active shutter”. Either way, I’ve updated the post.

By: Sam B

Sam B — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:54:30 +0000

Robert,
Yeah they were. The ones they use in theaters now don’t distort color at all, and the 3D is amazing. I highly recommend it =).

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:52:28 +0000

Sam B., ah, that makes some sense, thanks. So the 3D glasses that came with the Coraline DVD were blue/red?

By: Sam B

Sam B — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:50:08 +0000

Just out of curiosity, have you seen any of the new 3D movies in theaters over the past few years? The technology they use now is not the red-blue, headache-inducing glasses like the Superbowl/Chuck promo, but instead it relies on projecting two images simultaneously on the screen. It is about a million times better (both in clarity, realism, and non-headache-inducingness) than the blue/red glasses technology that TVs are using now. I saw Coraline in 3d at the theater and was blown away, and I was sadly disappointed when I bought the DVD that the 3d is nowhere even close to the same.

That being said, I’m not sure if this new 3D television they’re making uses this dual projection tech, but if it does then its well, well worth the investment.

By: squiggleslash

squiggleslash — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:25:19 +0000

I’m not friggin’ wearing the glasses. Sorry, not going to happen. I consider my peripheral vision to be important, and I also like to have my head at a comfortable angle when watching TV. I also, FWIW, have always found glasses uncomfortable and have been glad for vision that doesn’t need them.

3D is not like HD. HD was necessary, because SD was crap. There’s never been anything good about NTSC or PAL television, with washed out colours and horizontal lines across the screen, and getting rid of them for the virtually print quality of LCD or Plasma 720p or 1080p couldn’t come soon enough. I was on board as soon as I could afford a TV.

3D doesn’t add to that. It adds inconvenience, discomfort, and a reduction in quality, and all so that a filmmaker can occasionally create a cheap thrill by throwing something at the screen (which half the time ends up breaking into two as it gets closer.)

I can’t wait for this fad to be dead. And if it’s not a flash in the pan, then I don’t expect to be watching as much in future.