Some reasonable arguments worthy of discussion, but don't write 3D off too quickly.

IMHO, the market already exists and is pretty strong even though the prospects for home theater are still up in the air. That, I suspect, will be determined by marketing and MSRP.

>>> "A 40 inch screen in a normal room will be way too small to get anything out of 3D. Only a front projection system may be adequate in size to get some credible effect." <<<

You apparently didn't see the JVC 40+ inch LCD TV and system that I had the opportunity to check out at CigGraph. The visuals virtually leaped off the screen. It was a very impressive presentation even when the rotated material being shown wasn't so great (Brendan Fraser in the otherwise terrible film Journey to the Center of The Earth for instance). The 3D presentation, even with such a lackluster film, was so eye-popping that you just didn't want to walk away from it.

>>> "These are 3D Achilles heels." <<<

But it's 3D Telephus which is king (Mysia TV) and will survive in spite of Achilles reluctance. ;O)

>>> "1: You need glasses and the better 3D systems require rather pricey glasses. You gonna have a Super Bowl party, go and buy what 6-8-10-12 sets of glasses. Yeah and your kids breaking these glasses as they use them?" <<<

True, but not for every system (there are 3 or 4 posible systems as I understand it, and at least one of them will require no glasses. If these competing systems are compatible and a protracted "war" over the 3D market can be averted then the future looks bright and multi-dimensional!

In most cases some of the polarized glasses are required. Most are comfortable, light weight and inexpensive so that replacement for damage won't break the bank. Again, it depends on which system is used.

>>> "2: Colour and contrast are much reduced over standard hi def t.v. imagery." <<<

Marginal loss of brightness and color resolution; yes, there may be a trade-off with some systems, but there will always be ways to compensate and with 3D images the immersive factor should more than make-up for any loss in other areas.

>>> "3: 3D for sports, PFFT! Really football for one from standard camera views are generally further away the 3D effect is minimal at best. Same for any of the other sports unless you set cameras on field where you are in the middle of the action, and that is not the way we watch sports." <<<

Before criticizing, maybe we should wait and see what can be achieved. Right now, you're speculating. We see things in stereo, but televised sporting events are only seen in 2D. So why can't stereo-optic cameras produce a more involving 3D interpretation of the action?

>>> "4: Content will be few and far between worth watching." <<<

Again, that's pure speculation, not to mean a matter of subjective judgment.

>>> "5: Some people get headaches and nausea from the effects." <<<

True, but that's a very small percentage of folks and as the 3D systems improve the side effects of watching stereo-optic films and sports should decline as well for most folks.

>>> "6: There is no consumer demand crying for 3D." <<<

That's a pretty weak argument. Avatar's worldwide success in 3D is a fair indication that there already is a demand for 3D product and that the demand will be there for 3D capable HT systems if the technology is perfected and interchangeable, backwards compatible with existing media (hardware and discs) and pricing makes it reasonably accessible to a wide audience.

Some version of MasterImage 3D will likely be the most accessible for many folks due to cost dependent upon application (see link), but it's still too early to tell which system or systems will prevail. Nevertheless, I wouldn't be too quick to write off 3D in home theaters if I were you.

>>> "3D will be to video what DVD-A and SACD were to audio a NICHE!" <<<

Perhaps, but SACD, and to a lesser extent DVD-A were great formats, albeit incompatible at the time. Some form of high resolution audio format will gradually replace the CD (probably BD-Audio, as Neil Young and Tom Petty have experimented with). The success of stereo-optic 3D will depend upon cost and whether it's compatible with existing media and other 3D systems. Of course demand will be a factor, but that's what marketing is all about. :O)

>>> "4K broadcasting, NOW THAT IS SOMETHING TO FOLLOW! Double the resolution of 1080p." <<<

I won't argue with you there, but 3D technology will be one of the areas of R&D that will further that prospect; it's part of the 1.4 HDMI standard that is expanding the perimeters of all HD.

Cheers,
AuPh

MasterImage 3D... (Open in New Window)

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - will you by a 3D setup? - Ole Lund Christensen 00:12:23 02/11/10 (26)

I don't see why not! - jedrider 21:32:37 02/17/10 (0)

Not on purpose. - Harmonia 18:22:48 02/17/10 (0)

RE: will you by a 3D setup? - jeromelang 08:04:27 02/16/10 (0)

Not likely at all. - Sondek 11:05:56 02/14/10 (0)

With this enthusiastic response, 3D is sure to be a success! - JimL 09:14:31 02/14/10 (0)

Nope - Jazz Inmate 13:45:00 02/12/10 (9)

"I feel like enough of a moron..." - I think that there may a good reason for it. Can we quote you? - Audiophilander 10:34:36 02/15/10 (8)

RE: "I feel like enough of a moron..." - I think that there may a good reason for it. Can we quote you? - Time_Stands_Still 15:04:13 02/15/10 (2)

Some reasonable arguments worthy of discussion, but don't write 3D off too quickly. - Audiophilander 23:36:26 02/15/10 (1)

RE: Some reasonable arguments worthy of discussion, but don't write 3D off too quickly. - Time_Stands_Still 11:13:33 02/16/10 (0)

Not surprisingly, you missed my point - Jazz Inmate 10:51:19 02/15/10 (4)

"I found it nauseating and unpleasant compared to good traditional film." - The world consensus differs. - Audiophilander 11:46:59 02/15/10 (3)

RE: "I found it nauseating and unpleasant compared to good traditional film." - The world consensus differs. - Jazz Inmate 15:03:56 02/15/10 (2)

Like I said, the world consensus apparently differs from yours; that goes for the overall impression of 3D too. - Audiophilander 16:27:59 02/15/10 (1)

RE: Like I said, the world consensus apparently differs from yours; that goes for the overall impression of 3D too. - Jazz Inmate 15:30:18 02/16/10 (0)

Not likely. - grantv 09:35:45 02/12/10 (0)

No, I will neither by, bye, nor buy one nt - Brian A 00:17:02 02/12/10 (0)

it's not that simple - Joe Murphy Jr 21:57:50 02/11/10 (1)

RE: it's not that simple - jeromelang 08:11:25 02/16/10 (0)

Absolutely not nt. - plantsman 13:32:06 02/11/10 (0)

RE: will you by a 3D setup? - Time_Stands_Still 12:21:34 02/11/10 (0)

RE: will you by a 3D setup? - JimL 11:25:13 02/11/10 (0)

RE: will you by a 3D setup? - mdavis 10:04:26 02/11/10 (0)

Maybe - 4season 09:52:35 02/11/10 (0)

RE: will you by a 3D setup? - HighEndWire 06:27:19 02/11/10 (1)

Perhaps after 3D, the next progression will be holographic technology(nt) - bob1 20:23:42 02/26/10 (0)

Follow Ups

Some reasonable arguments worthy of discussion, but don't write 3D off too quickly. - Audiophilander 23:36:26 02/15/10 (1)

RE: Some reasonable arguments worthy of discussion, but don't write 3D off too quickly. - Time_Stands_Still 11:13:33 02/16/10 (0)

Some reasonable arguments worthy of discussion, but don't write 3D off too quickly.

Post a Message!