Why 3D TV is Dead - Lack of Standards
The reason 3D television is dead is the lack of standards. The international standards organization responsible is the Society of Motion Picture And Television Engineers (SMPTE).
As most in the industry know, the SMPTE standards process is horribly corrupt, dominated by a handful of companies including Dolby Labs and Warner Bros. The chief SMPTE engineer is a tool of the studios, and instead of good engineering, the only thing that's important at SMPTE is personal relationships.
Most reputable manufacturers have quit the process at SMPTE due to this corruption. This has left 3D with no possible standardization and a failed process. The ANSI is supposed to supervise SMPTE, but they refuse to do so.
...back to our 3D TV discussion page
3-D, not ready for prime time, or my money
by Joey (Mountain Top, PA, USA)
Just doing some initial research by the experts. After reading this and other articles, I have determined, that my initial enthusiasm, was just that.
After pondering information, logistics, cost, 3-D availability, wearing of glasses, I have decided to wait and see what will be available in the near future. This is not solely based on cost, but
on utility value. While it would be nice to view 3-D in my family room (30'X30'), children would not be able to comfortably wear the required and expensive glasses.
I just had a THX certified installer look at the installation site and he was drooling. There is a 2' dead air space behind finished dry wall. We discussed various electronic gear and its installation.
I knew that I desired to have all Klipsch speakers, in-wall/in-ceiling, with 65" Panasonic TCP65VT25 (not avail as yet). I may have the speakers installed now, and debating on the receiver, Yamaha RX-V2605BL, 7.2.
By the way, this will be a shared room, family/entertainment, music listening, adult conversation area. So no it will not be an over the top theater, not even a pop corn maker.
In case you are pondering cost, I have a $15k budget and am sticking to it. I have been know to go for a lot of bells and whistles, but not this time. I am behaving and using restraint.
Good luck to all who are or will take the 3-D plunge. Let me and others know how the waters are, LOL!
Jul 08, 2010
Regarding the Nintendo DS 3D freeview display (no glasses) will most likely be a screen with a lenticular lens surface. I won't get into the how's here. You can google lenticular 3D and there'll be lots of hits that describe the technology (which is much older than you think).
Jun 24, 2010
Nintendo's next-gen "DS" hand-held game system is going to be the "3DS", which promises fully-mobile, real-time 3D without the use of glasses.
I'm curious to see what Nintendo has that no one else has: 3D requires generating two discreet images from slightly different points of view, that our brains interpret as "Three Dee".
Old movies used red-blue separation, which works, but you lose a lot of the quality of the movie because you're always watching through the red / blue glasses, or there are "prompts" where you should put on your glasses or take them off.
The "iMax" scheme uses two projectors, polarized horizontally and vertically, with slightly different images, and requires that you wear "sunglasses" that are polarized horizontally for one eye, vertically for the other.
Current "at home 3D" uses "shutter" glasses that cycle left-to-right 60 times per second using liquid-crystal shutters built in to the glasses. So each eye becomes opaque 60 times per second, for a total frame rate of 120 frames per second.
In the late 80's, there were "stare-eaze" stereograms where you could focus on a distant point to view the "hidden" 3D picture. There are "true" holograms, etched in to glass plates with high-power lasers.
So how is Nintendo planning to do this, and how does this apply to "next gen" living room 3D???
3DTV -- Not yet ready
by Patrick (Brisbane Australia)
I have always been an early adopter of technology as far back as the Carter sound a type of surround sound.
3D TV I believe has a few more years yet to develop to get my $$$. What I have seen so far the Samsung C7000 is very good but I am not convinced the 2D quality is as good as 200Mhz sets. Had they released these sets in time for the Olympics or world cup soccer, I wonder how many more sets might have been sold.
The bottom line is those glasses put me off.
Dec 03, 2010
by: DM Canada
Not ready for 3D just yet....
I agree with your hesitation to jump into 3D at this time. I will be purchasing an LED/LCD TV soon and won't touch 3D yet.
I have tried the glasses with numerous sets here in Canada and so far I'm seeing too much flicker.
The glasses cost a lot, look ugly, not eyeglass friendly and need to recharge the batteries (in the glasses) regularly.
I'll wait and I do enjoy the 3D theater's BTW.
3D TV Not For Me
by Pat Kennedy (Ireland)
I don't think it will take off as the manufacturers want, the biggest problem is cost and those annoying glasses, I only bought a Sony Bravia last year and I'm not going to change until they get rid of the glasses and make it less expensive.
3D HDTVs in my view will come and go like Beta
by Mike (Meridian, Idaho)
This article is spot on. Sure a 3D TV sounds sexy and cool, but very few, I mean VERY few people will upgrade to a 3D V. The glasses alone are a turn off and going to a 2 hour 3D movie at the theater is enough for me and my kids. I don't see it taking off.
Pay for HDTV now and Pay again for 3D in 5 years? Costs
by Prof. Jagdish (Rohtak, Haryana, India)
Price difference in 3D and non-3d HDTV today is $500. Buying an HDTV today and then again buying a 3D HDTV after 5 years will be much costlier than $500 spent today.
3D technology is expected to considerably improve in next 5 years. Should an investment in HDTV be done today and replace it with 3D after 5 years OR go for 3D HDTV today itself?
...back to our 3D TV discussion page