 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.243.208.93
In Reply to: RE: Nope posted by Jazz Inmate on February 12, 2010 at 13:45:00
FYI, I've seen the capabilities of 3D done correctly for HT on 40+ inch JVC television with special light-weight polarized glasses (CigGraph conference, New Orleans, last summer) and it's a highly addictive, immersive experience for most folks.Trust me, many video enthusiasts and even a lot of doubting Thomas hold-outs will want 3D when it arrives, especially if it isn't priced beyond their means in this somewhat volatile economy.
Here's a clue: Not everything will be produced in or transferred to 3D and no one would want to watch all programs that way anyway, BUT for some events, films, new animation and group demos, the new 1.4 HDMI supported 3D standard will pave the way for more involving, diverse viewing.
Even your Play-Station 3 will probably be adaptable to the new 3D processing, so we'll see how quickly you change leotards after the roll-out and SONY gets fully on board. ;O)
Cheers,
AuPh
Edits: 02/15/10Follow Ups:
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.These are 3D Achilles heels.
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?
2: Colour and contrast are much reduced over standard hi def t.v. imagery.
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.
4: Content will be few and far between worth watching.
5: Some people get headaches and nausea from the effects.
6: There is no consumer demand crying for 3D.
3D will be to video what DVD-A and SACD were to audio a NICHE!
4K broadcasting, NOW THAT IS SOMETHING TO FOLLOW! Double the resolution of 1080p.
BTW, 3D for video gaming, well the future of video game will not see using t.v.s anyways. The future will be gamers wearing glasses or helmets with small OLED video displays synched to each eye. The 3D effect can then be done and gamers will play via virtual reality sorta like Nintendo Wii on steroids.
Edits: 02/15/10
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
The system that is said to require no glasses requires you to sit in the " Head in a vice" sweet spot. There is no way to make 3D viable in room to multiple viewers without glasses to give the effect.
Avatar's success was based on a big screen experience and much hype. There is NO, ZIP, ZERO consumer demand for home 3D. Before Avatar did you hear any? Do not assume a lot of people going out to a movie theatre to watch a 3D movie as Avatar with any credible effect to consumers wanting to buy into it for home. Unless you have say an 90inch or larger screen t.v.s in home are TOO SMALL to be immersive and will only be a tiring gimmick forcing viewer to wear silly glasses all of time. Add the fact that the movie and t.v show makers will only use 3D in gimmicky and unnatural ways (as past 3D movies have demonstrated going back some 50 years. Don't forget 3D is nothing new) will add to the tiring effect of it all. Then again add as I said the lower contrast, brightness, colour and resolution well it's not a sustaining product effort. As I said 4K t.v. is the direction industry should go.
I'm sure it is impressive "done right", although Avatar was supposedly "done right" and I found it nauseating and unpleasant compared to good traditional film.My point is there will not be enough content "done right" to make it worthwhile. Thus my analogy to adopting 7.1 two years ago and still waiting for significant content that would justify the addition of two channels.
I have no problem admitting that I adopted a new technology too hastily. Unfortunately, I'm trading posts with someone who still thinks adopting HD DVD was a bright idea.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Edits: 02/15/10
I just talked to an A/V specialist last weekend (from whom I've purchased Gallo Reference gear) who absolutely raved about the 3D prospects of Avatar! He's seen it several times projected in different ways, but the IMAX 3D is apparently KILLER (I've seen it in 3D, but not the IMAX 3D). He is already gearing up for 3D sales (most of his clientele are high-end HT enthusiasts).
> > > "I'm trading posts with someone who still thinks adopting HD DVD was a bright idea." < < <
It WAS at the time (the region/zone blocking issues being what they are for the "BD cartel" nazis), and I have no regrets. My investment was minimal and I have lots of great films to show for it and two fine players that upscale DVDs well. My current BD set-up (with region/zone modified Oppo players) probably bests your own (even if SONY provided your system to you gratis in compensation for cheerleading efforts! ;^> ), but please, lets not get into the "mines bigger than yours" debate (you probably feel inadequate enough as it is! -grin).
Cheers,
AuPh
> > I just talked to an A/V specialist last weekend (from whom I've purchased Gallo Reference gear) who absolutely raved about the 3D prospects of Avatar! He's seen it several times projected in different ways, but the IMAX 3D is apparently KILLER (I've seen it in 3D, but not the IMAX 3D). He is already gearing up for 3D sales (most of his clientele are high-end HT enthusiasts). < <Hooray for him, but there are maybe three films of Avatar's hype released each decade and it is impractical to buy a new display and other hardware for these few titles...despite the saps who make up his clientele. I saw it on IMAX 3D and as I've said before, it did not wow me. It seemed like many staggered 2D layers and not real 3D. I preferred the visuals in an HD broadcast of an Avatar ad I saw on my kuro plasma. The color and detail was much more attractive than it was in the theater. Frankly if you put the images side by side, I don't see how anyone would choose the 3D unless they are into gimmicks for the sake of gimmicks.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Edits: 02/15/10
> > > "there are maybe three films of Avatar's hype released each decade and it is impractical to buy a new display and other hardware for these few titles..." < < <
A lot more 3D films are on the way, most with less "hype," but since hype seems to be what you're all about I could see how that might impact your impression of this relatively new more involving cinematic experience. The bottom line is that GAME CONSOLES will probably lead the way, just your revered PS3 tipped the balance in BD acceptance.
I find it rather amusing that you now seem to be doing a 180 in respect to what has become a hot movie and game playing technology when I'm pretty sure that SONY will be in the vanguard of marketing the new 3D format to gamers and film enthusiasts as it gets rolled out this year.
> > > "Frankly if you put the images side by side, I don't see how anyone would choose the 3D unless they are into gimmicks for the sake of gimmicks." < < <
Immersing one's self in a more involving, realistic film experience isn't gimmickry unless you perceive most technical advances to film as gimmicks. Was Cinemascope a gimmick? How about Technicolor? Is surround sound a gimmick? Is the whole concept of "home theater" a gimmick? Arguments could be made that all technical advances to film entertainment were gimmicks when first introduced, but it's a slippery slope. You'd better give some serious thought to which side of the anachronistic fence you really want to root yourself if you're going to start cheerleading the world's last Luddite colony. ;^>
AuPh
> > A lot more 3D films are on the way, most with less "hype," but since hype seems to be what you're all about I could see how that might impact your impression of this relatively new more involving cinematic experience. The bottom line is that GAME CONSOLES will probably lead the way, just your revered PS3 tipped the balance in BD acceptance. < <
Junior was lucky to get a PS3. He ain't getting a new display. And my point about hype was that this whole push for 3D is to capitalize on the hype of Avatar. Once that's gone, all you're left with is a gimmick and memories of a winter blockbuster. For future reference, people who are deeply into jazz are not all about hype.
> > I find it rather amusing that you now seem to be doing a 180 in respect to what has become a hot movie and game playing technology when I'm pretty sure that SONY will be in the vanguard of marketing the new 3D format to gamers and film enthusiasts as it gets rolled out this year. < <
I was never into Sony for the sake of Sony--that was your misinterpretation of why I adopted Blu-ray and spoke on its behalf. Sony can build all the 3D gear it wants; I won't be buying any. I wouldn't even download the 3D update for the PS3 if I could help it. But the PS3 downloads updates automatically.
> > Immersing one's self in a more involving, realistic film experience isn't gimmickry unless you perceive most technical advances to film as gimmicks. < <
This coming from a guy who wasn't even interested in lossless audio for movie tracks.
> > Was Cinemascope a gimmick? How about Technicolor? Is surround sound a gimmick? Is the whole concept of "home theater" a gimmick? Arguments could be made that all technical advances to film entertainment were gimmicks when first introduced, but it's a slippery slope. You'd better give some serious thought to which side of the anachronistic fence you really want to root yourself if you're going to start cheerleading the world's last Luddite colony. < <
Was Jaws a gimmick? No. Was Jaws 3D a gimmick? Yes.
Case closed.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
