Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
IMHO the problem with 3DTV is the lack of reasonably priced content. It is very difficult to find 3D Blue Ray disks to rent. There is almost no 3D content available on TV.
Unless this is corrected 3D TV will never be more than a gimmick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
168 Posts
Well it could be because only the mid to high end TV!s here have 3D capability also Its a rather inexspensive feature to add to a TV and it's all about Marketing.
Proably in the Asian market they are either cheaper or even the basic models have 3D built in.Hence the better market penetration.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,432 Posts
I agree with Andya. I keep reading about 3D stations launching everywhere over seas, SES sat sytems having a 3D bird up there (Astra), new products coming and so on. Here in NA, it appears almost dead but they sure crank out the 3D movies at the box office. I wish I could pick up Sky3D from NB. They have awesome shows all the time.

As for BluRays, why do they ave to be almost twice as much than DVD when it's 3D equivalent comes out? Do we really need all the combo's of digtal disc, regular version, 3D version, downloadable version and finally, the DVD version?

To me, in NA, they are here to milk us to no extent. Just look at what they did with Transformer 3D. They have a regular 3D version coming out on 4 discs or the limited ultimate with 7 discs. If 3D does survive, it won't be thanks to NA but over seas. I wonder what CES will be promoting this year. 3D tablets?
 

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Researchers say the lower penetration rate on this side of the Atlantic is because North American consumers favor large, inexpensive TV sets with fewer features whereas Chinese consumers are enthusiastic about richly-featured sets with 3D, LED backlighting and smart TV capabilities
i.e./ we prefer quantity over quality
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
168 Posts
I disagree with we want "quanity over quality".Most can only afford the lower end big screens because of the economic times we are in.In my case i want the best pic possiable and most quality high end picture quality comes with 3D whether you want it or not.
Like i said originally,3D could be added to lower end TV,s but the N.A. marketing approach has been to get us to spend more for more.Duh did I just say that?
I also agree with Danster.Everytime you want to buy a quality 3D Blu ray movie you gotta pay for a digital copy (which I never use or give to an I phone/tablet owner), an extras DVD (Which most of us never watch) and a regular SD DVD copy,all for that low low price of $38 and all taxes extra.LOL
How many do i have to buy before I have spent enough money to buy another big screen TV.LOL.Not many!
I have two 3D movies.Cars 2(i got for my grandson) and Avatar which I got free from Panasonic.
I make an upper end salary and I could buy more if I wanted(as I enjoy 3D) but to pay that kind of money to get a 3D DVD That you proably would only watch once or twice, (that costs miminal dollars to make) is ridiculous.
Also i would suspect also there is a lot of cheaper DVD,s in the Asian market that are counterfit copies which has been an issue in the past.
I am Just saying there is a lot of reasons why it appears or is percieved that 3D is not growing in the N.A. market.Which it isn,t.
 

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
.Most can only afford the lower end big screens because of the economic times
People are buying flat panels like crazy so clearly they can afford it. It appears that many North Americans prefer a 60" set with fewer features than a 42" or 47" with all the bells and whistles whereas in other countries, its the reverse.

Those other countries are also buying 3D sets because those sets have better 2D picture quality and Internet connectivity, things that aren't as important to North American viewers.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,432 Posts
I tried to show people the PQ of a 3D TV compared to a regular TV and they just don't buy it. They are also the same people that think that because Bell Sat is digital, they are getting the best picture on their TV....in regular definition. How are you supposed to make them get off that idea and tell them look, 3D TV are WAY better TV for picture in HD and you also get the 3D gimmick in the future. Doesn't work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
344 Posts
I am a gadget nut and always get tech stuff before most people but I couldn't care less about 3D. I just bought a new tv and did not get 3D. I do not want to have to where glasses while watching tv. I tend to multi task. I also find the 3D effect pretty lame anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
168 Posts
Well the 3D content I have watched(AVATAR) at home on my Panasonic 65VT30 has been great.Mind you I believe this type of animated filming and animated films in General lean to a better 3D experiance anyways.
Yes the glasses are a bit of a pain,and to some upsetting,but it works fine for me.I have not played yet with the 2D to 3D conversion ,that my TV has yet,but think with sports like football it may enhance the overall experiance of watching sports.
If I watch CSI do I want 3D ,NO.But with certian media I find it works great.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
I am a gadget nut and always get tech stuff before most people but I couldn't care less about 3D. I just bought a new tv and did not get 3D. I do not want to have to where glasses while watching tv. I tend to multi task. I also find the 3D effect pretty lame anyway.
I'm a toy junkie as well and had exactly the same attitude about 3D.

Until I viewed and purchased a new LG Passive 3D TV.

Passive is the same technology as the Real3D used in the theatres and uses the same polarized glasses. No batteries, no charging, no infrared link, inexpensive, no flicker, no headaches, no ghosting/cross-talk and a nice bright image compared to most Active 3D on LCD. The glasses are extremely light and very inexpensive to purchase. LG also makes a set of clip-on's for $25 that attach to your glasses and flip up and out of the way like flip-up sunglasses when I need to go away from the TV. Hardly even know I'm wearing them.

In fact I actually prefer my 3D at home now compared to the theatre as the image is sharper, brighter and provides a very similar immersive experience as the screens get bigger and bigger for the home.

I didn't even know Passive 3D existed and just spotted it by chance at FS a few weeks ago. Demo'd it for about 15 minutes and bought a new LG 55LW5600 on the spot. I truly believe that Passive will be the game changer now as the 3D for the masses due to convenience and price. Active 3D has gotten a lot better over the last couple of years so not knocking it but for me, Passive has completely won me over.

Of course you definitely need to be watching decent movies. Avatar, Tangled, Despicable Me and Monsters vs. Aliens are all exceptional in Blu-ray 3D that I've viewed so far. Others like Clash of the Titans 3D, not so much. The TV can also convert normal 2D sources into 3D and the effect works surprisingly well depending on the source material.

They threw in nine pairs of glasses with mine and 3 x free Blu-Ray 3D movies. (all Passive 3D TV's usually include at least 4 pairs) Glasses from the movie theatre work just fine as well. My biggest gripe now is the cost of the movies with most 3D Blu-rays being around $40 bucks. Ridiculous. They really need to get that down around $30 or less to help with 3D adoption.

3D is obviously not for everyone but it really is getting to be a cheap option now without a lot of the hassles previously associated with 3D. The 2D image on my TV is outstanding and that is the mode used about 80% of the time. The 3D is simply a treat once in a while for a nominal uptick in price so I figured, hey, why not. With a decent movie the 3D actually does enhance the viewing experience if used correctly by the movie makers. Avatar and Tangled being stellar examples of this.

The friends that I've had over so far to see the 3D image have universally been surprised at how much they enjoyed it compared to what their perception was from previous experiences with Active 3D. The nice thing as well is that both Active and Passive technologies can peacefully co-exist in the market so to each their own if they prefer one or the other. It's not like the VHS/Beta or Blu-Ray/HD-DVD wars of yore. Cheers!

P.S. For anyone with kids, Passive 3D is a no brainer. The glasses can take a beating, are cheap to replace if broken and no batteries required. You always can have enough pairs on hand as well and if you get the kids sized glasses from the theatre, keep em!

Edit: Currently LG, Toshiba and Vizio are the only Passive 3D suppliers that I'm aware of. Everyone else is using Active technology but I expect that will change as Passive is starting to get some traction now.



James
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
910 Posts
I guess Size does matter.LOL
Watching HD content on a very big screen, to many, is a big wow experience. I would rank it higher than watching the best 3D movie on a 42" screen :)

Panel size is the #1 factor for me following budget. Always good to get the biggest size that is current in the mass market. For now, it is the 60" which can be had for ~1K.

I suspect in Asian/Europe, the market/target audience is different and very much guided by the living space which is generally not very big. (eg 500 sq ft condo in HK is a good size there!!)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
453 Posts
its because most people who have watched somthing in 3D know it is nothing but a cheap gimmick and is not worth spending the extra 100-200 bucks on a new TV.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,102 Posts
Two things here:

1) I really don't see that many commericals avertiseing 3DTV its all about HDTV.When 3D first came out you saw ads all the time, now not as much.Also the glasses are another issue.

2) as for Blue-Ray, blame the consumer. If the consumer is willing to buy this from the producers, they'll keep on "MILKING" the consumer.Simple STOP BUYING all these different versions of such said movies and the proucers will finally get the hint.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,056 Posts
Passive 3D is certainly easier to live with, and the incremental cost for manufacturers is almost zero.

I can't handle the terrible low resolution of current passive 3D models though, it's like VHS meets 3D. I'll do it when full HD is available in passive

Adoption of 3D here has been stunted by the artificially high prices of the 3D tv's and especially the media. Most 3D blu-ray releases in North America carry a massive 30-50% price premium, versus a more reasonable 10% elsewhere. And seeing the titles with the most potential getting tied up in extremely lengthy and restrictive exclusives has also been a serious impediment to wider adoption.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
360 Posts
3D just seems to bother me. I don't like wearing the glasses for one thing and I don't like the affect it has on me after sitting there and watching it for a while and then taking the glasses off. My wife feels the same way. We have sat at friends places that have 3D and always tried on the glasses and done some demos at the stores and so far we are not sold on it. Every one has a different perception and their brain handles it in a different way. But I find that if you sit there for too long and then get and take the glasses off to go get a beer or something to munch on, I still fell like things are popping out at me. It takes a little while for my eyes to readjust back to reality. Almost like tripping out or something like that. And then add in the expensive cost factor, it's just not for me and I am not sold on it. As for now I love my 60" plasma in 2D Blu-Ray and I will stay with that until something better comes out after they get all this 3D thing figured out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
894 Posts
I'm with you on the glasses thing. I won't waste my time or money on 3D until you are no longer required to wear glasses. I'm a TV/Movies geek but 3D does nothing for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
It doesn't make sense to me to pay a premium for 3D where there is not much content out there. I used to rent DVDs often. Now with the rental local rental market all but dead, I cancelled my plans for a new OPPO blu ray player this year. People are voting with their wallets, and are going for quantity instead of quality, with Netflix, downloading etc. I'm not willing to put out the extra money just to accommodate a small market premium format. Remember those record sized (10 or 12 inch) laser disks, that were big in Japan, back in the 90s?, they just never took hold here. There are too many movie format upgrades coming along too often. The display technology is not there yet, and it needs to catch up. None of the 3D sets look watchable to me so far.
By the way are any of the 3D movies not animation? I found one list with Harry Potter, and maybe yet another Star Wars.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top