The Future of 3D TV

[Apoc]

I am not a fan as I think the technology is both immature and not proven to the mass market. It may become the next DVR, it may become the next HD-DVD... I think it's too early to tell.

If you were buying, would you look for it, steer clear of it or be indifferent?

[D_Eclipse9916]

A friend just bought one, its....amazing honestly. Im glad I didnt buy a tv in the past 6 years as the jump from HD, 720i, 1080p,1080i, flat screen, flat panel, 24hz, and now 3DTV. Its cool that they are evolving that rapidy, and its good but I already have three expensive hobbies, im lucky im not all that into the latest and greatest tvs/cell phones/etc.

[WRXtranceformed]

If they can develop one where you don't need glasses, then I'm in. Apparently that's in the works. For video games 3D would be AWESOME. Wearing 3d glasses in my own home is obscenely gay though. Tech needs to move along a little more quickly before I would pull the trigger on one.

[Evan]

retarded.

not only do I and all my friends have to wear glasses while watching a movie, but I have to spend $200 on each pair of them.

consumer reaction so far has been very meh, but it may just catch on in brute force fashion since just about every new tv and every new movie coming out now is 3D

[ScottyB]

i was about to ask what you do if all your friends come over. brb, gotta spend 2 grand on glasses we can all wear that will be obsolete in a year unless you want to look at a split-up picture meant for viewing in 3D.

if they can pull of no-glasses 3D that would be amazing, but i'm sure when that day comes you'll have to take out a 2nd mortgage to buy one.

[Apoc]

It's surprisingly hard to find TVs with "good specs" that you don't pay extra for to get 3D. I think Evan is pretty close to right in that manufacturers have latched on a way they can upsale and/or hook people.

I agree the technology is fairly useless until the glasses get nixed. I'm just not sure if I'd buy a TV was capable "just in case" and not use it or look for one that specifically does not support it.

[BLINGMW]

Wearing 3d glasses in my own home is obscenely gay though.

agreed, no interest.

[G.Irish]

I think 3DTV's are an incredibly dumb idea that no one asked for. First of all, there's very little content I'd want to see in 3D in the first place. The only thing I might remotely want to see in 3D is Sci-Fi, and even then, not everything. Certainly not a bunch of stuff that was crappily converted to 3D. And certainly not enough stuff to warrant me paying extra to have the 3D capability.

Two, I don't want to wear glasses.

Three, this is simply something the movie studios came up with so they could gouge the shit out of movie goers. TV manufacturers are now pushing it to try to get people to upgrade their TV's again just when the majority of people have finally switched to HD. Fuck that.

Now we're even seeing some of the Android tablet makers putting 3D setups. Right, who wants to watch 3D home movies taken with a tablet?

[Apoc]

You know what an excellent indication of 3D's future is?

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/28/penthouse-launch-worlds-3d-porn-tv-station/">http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/28/penthouse-launch-worlds-3d-porn-tv-station/</a><!-- m -->

If anyone can push it to broadly acceptable technology levels, it's the porn industry.

[Ken]

I agree the technology is fairly useless until the glasses get nixed. .

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-31021_3-20018534-260.html">http://news.cnet.com/8301-31021_3-20018534-260.html</a><!-- m -->

It's a start I suppose, so yeah I'd probably wait until they develop that further.

[JustinG]

Everything that I have read indicates you should wait. Within a year or so we will prob see 3d with no glasses needed. Personally, watching it with the glasses on gives me a huge headache, so im not even slightly sold on it. I did make sure my blu ray player was 3d capable though just in case I decide to upgrade in the future.

[Seantn1k]

One good thing to note is that the $200 dollar glasses are going away. There have been major strides in moving back to just polarized glasses like the ones you use at the theater. I didn't think it was going to make it to market in the next year and half but LG has come out with something recently. This should help to drop the previous 3d tech prices. $100+ for a set of glasses is crazy talk. :vomit:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/lg-cutting-cost-3d-glasses-68725">http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/lg-cutting-cost-3d-glasses-68725</a><!-- m -->

[BLINGMW]

One good thing to note is that the $200 dollar glasses are going away. There have been major strides in moving back to just polarized glasses like the ones you use at the theater. I didn't think it was going to make it to market in the next year and half but LG has come out with something recently. This should help to drop the previous 3d tech prices. $100+ for a set of glasses is crazy talk. :vomit:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/lg-cutting-cost-3d-glasses-68725">http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/lg-cutting-cost-3d-glasses-68725</a><!-- m -->

whoah whoah whoah. ANY TV can use the polarized glasses. I've watched a 3D movie or two mine and it works pretty well. What's going to be different about a "3D TV" then? Just that it comes with a pack of glasses I could steal from the movie theater?

[NTIman]

3D doesn't do anything for me. Even at the theater, I have yet to see any quality movie or content in 3D. To me, it's just a visual gimmick to make up for sub-par content in the first place.

I don't really keep up with the TV technology anyway, I couldn't tell you what are good specs and what are bad.