Sure 3D is good, but... - SatChat ™ Satellite & Entertainment Forum

cockroach · 01-15-2010, 08:13 PM

I'm sure everyone of you is well versed with 3D, but while you all agree that 3D could be a much more welcome thing now, surely there must be some things that is going to hinder it from prospering. The lack of standards was seen to be a major roadblock, but as we saw with Sky, it's not too much of a problem, as everybody who is interested in producing content would certainly look at what 3D devices are using so that they would not be locked out of the 3D market.

What are the hindrances to 3D for you?

Topher · 01-15-2010, 08:39 PM

I think it's the glasses... or more appropriately, the fact that autostereoscopic 3D is still far from becoming a reality.

barbaric · 01-15-2010, 09:29 PM

I don't quite agree with that. Most people now cheerfully wear their glasses just to watch a good 3D movie. But yeah, 3D without glasses would be a great technology.

babydengue · 01-16-2010, 12:18 AM

I think it's the price of 3D TVs that is going to turn off thsoe who want to try out 3D at home. And from the looks of it, most 3D TV manufacturers have neglected to include glasses, or if they did, they only give you one pair. I think they should include 3 or 4, so that it would be great viewing for the whole family.

grover · 01-17-2010, 07:23 AM

I still think that 3D at home will be able to overcome these hindrances. The 3D experience is just awesome. Just look at how people enjoyed themselves watching Avatar.

checkered · 01-18-2010, 11:27 AM

But if you think about it, Avatar lasts for 3 hours. I don't think many people would like to wear their glasses everytime they want to watch something. So that would be one thing with 3D at home. For one, you would not want to watch 3D all the time, and two, there is hardly any content available that would make spending for a very expensive TV justifiable.

BillieG · 01-20-2010, 06:01 PM

I think broadcasters like Sky would want you to adopt to 3D. Can you imagine, when people switched from SD to HD, the premium channels became a hit... so much so that industry experts are saying that the advent of HD doubled the ARPUs of broadcasters, not a bad figure, considering that TV is a mature market.

BillieG · 01-20-2010, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by checkered

But if you think about it, Avatar lasts for 3 hours. I don't think many people would like to wear their glasses everytime they want to watch something. So that would be one thing with 3D at home. For one, you would not want to watch 3D all the time, and two, there is hardly any content available that would make spending for a very expensive TV justifiable.

That is bound to change though, isn't it. A lot of channels and broadcasters are planning to roll out their 3D content within the year or next year.

Olongoer · 01-20-2010, 07:51 PM

For my part, there will be hindrances at the start, just as HDTV had roadblocks early on, but technology is ever evolving and I think that 3D TV is not an exception!

NuRsInGaIde · 01-20-2010, 11:47 PM

DITTO!!!! I couldn't agree more!!!

01-15-2010, 08:13 PM	#1 (permalink)
cockroach Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 553	Sure 3D is good, but... I'm sure everyone of you is well versed with 3D, but while you all agree that 3D could be a much more welcome thing now, surely there must be some things that is going to hinder it from prospering. The lack of standards was seen to be a major roadblock, but as we saw with Sky, it's not too much of a problem, as everybody who is interested in producing content would certainly look at what 3D devices are using so that they would not be locked out of the 3D market. What are the hindrances to 3D for you?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

01-15-2010, 08:39 PM	#2 (permalink)
Topher Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 412	I think it's the glasses... or more appropriately, the fact that autostereoscopic 3D is still far from becoming a reality.

01-15-2010, 09:29 PM	#3 (permalink)
barbaric Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 194	I don't quite agree with that. Most people now cheerfully wear their glasses just to watch a good 3D movie. But yeah, 3D without glasses would be a great technology.

01-16-2010, 12:18 AM	#4 (permalink)
babydengue Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 142	I think it's the price of 3D TVs that is going to turn off thsoe who want to try out 3D at home. And from the looks of it, most 3D TV manufacturers have neglected to include glasses, or if they did, they only give you one pair. I think they should include 3 or 4, so that it would be great viewing for the whole family.

01-17-2010, 07:23 AM	#5 (permalink)
grover Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 151	I still think that 3D at home will be able to overcome these hindrances. The 3D experience is just awesome. Just look at how people enjoyed themselves watching Avatar.

01-18-2010, 11:27 AM	#6 (permalink)
checkered Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 188	But if you think about it, Avatar lasts for 3 hours. I don't think many people would like to wear their glasses everytime they want to watch something. So that would be one thing with 3D at home. For one, you would not want to watch 3D all the time, and two, there is hardly any content available that would make spending for a very expensive TV justifiable.

01-20-2010, 06:01 PM	#7 (permalink)
BillieG Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 132	I think broadcasters like Sky would want you to adopt to 3D. Can you imagine, when people switched from SD to HD, the premium channels became a hit... so much so that industry experts are saying that the advent of HD doubled the ARPUs of broadcasters, not a bad figure, considering that TV is a mature market.

01-20-2010, 07:51 PM	#9 (permalink)
Olongoer Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 303	For my part, there will be hindrances at the start, just as HDTV had roadblocks early on, but technology is ever evolving and I think that 3D TV is not an exception!

01-20-2010, 11:47 PM	#10 (permalink)
NuRsInGaIde Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 321	DITTO!!!! I couldn't agree more!!!