Will You Buy A 3D TV?

[MOVIEGEEK]

In order to watch 3D you need:
1. A 3D TV.
2. A BD player that supports 3D.
3. 3D glasses.
4. 3D Blu-ray discs.

I am not interested at this time and IMHO I think 3D will flop.

[freebird73717]

No.
I'm still using a CRT television. Guess you would call me a late adopter.

Just a gimmick if you ask me.

[overloaded_ide]

No, not me.
I see no real need for a TV anymore for anything.
We can get all kinds of fancy monitors for the computers, tuner cards, capture, surround sound, etc.. etc..
DVD players/burners, Blueray players, blueray/DVD/CD burners etc....
It is so much easier to just have all the movies on a hard drive taking up much less space than using disks, no need to get up and change disks, find disks for the movie you want, put away disks when done, worry about scratches and finger prints on disks etc...

Who needs a TV if you have a computer? Not me! Actually I don't watch TV and have not for years as fdor real TV, but AI do watch allot of movies, mostly older ones.

Kinda my point though is why bother with a TV that is useful for only 1 thing and then have to buy accessories to use it, when a computer does it all and all the parts do much more than just 1 thing.

As far as needing a special TV for 3D, I don't think so. I have watched some 3D movies at home and at friends on normal TVs and with the glasses the 3D worked fine for us. 1 TV was CRT, the others LCD or Plasma, don't know which as they weren't mine and I didn't care really.

The thing with 3D though is a persons eyes mostly it seems. People that need glasses to see the TV clearly have more trouble enjoying the 3D effects. If you wear 3d glasses and not real glasses the TV is blurry, if you wear real glasses and not 3D glasses the TV is blurry, trying to wear most 3D glasses over real glasses is a pain for most people to do.
One of the 3d movies I watched with friends several people had real glasses, they could not enjoy the movie as 3d even though it was working well on the TV so we started the movie over about 1/3 the way through and watched the NON-3d version instead.

[digitalnasties]

No, 3D tv is just a waste of time.

[johns0]

The thing with 3D though is a persons eyes mostly it seems. People that need glasses to see the TV clearly have more trouble enjoying the 3D effects. If you wear 3d glasses and not real glasses the TV is blurry, if you wear real glasses and not 3D glasses the TV is blurry, trying to wear most 3D glasses over real glasses is a pain for most people to do.
One of the 3d movies I watched with friends several people had real glasses, they could not enjoy the movie as 3d even though it was working well on the TV so we started the movie over about 1/3 the way through and watched the NON-3d version instead.

I bought clip on 3d glasses which work great to watch 3d movies since i need to wear glasses all the time,as for 3d tv i dont think it will ever catch on,what they need to do is make the technology so that you dont need to wear 3d glasses at all,something like the 3d pictures you see on items.

[LOWTECH]

Considering the poor quality of programmes in the UK and increased amount of adverts, it hardly seems worth the bother to watch the same rubbish in a different format at an extra cost. Mind you the USA has more adverts to ruin programme entertainment than the UK.

TV in general has become less watchable and less interesting as more time is spent on the computer...........

[HemLok]

I already own a great Blu-ray player. I won't be buying a new one to have full Blu-ray 3D support. I won't be wasting money on a 3D TV, either. Sorry but the concept of a group of people sitting around wearing glasses for 3D is simply stupid to me. I expected a better solution when we finally had 3D TVs. I'm saving my money. High definition 2D is more than adequate for me until a real 3D option comes to market and doesn't cost people an arm and a leg.

I actually find it insulting that many people have just purchased an HDTV to find out that, hey, sorry, you wasted money on an obsolete product because you need to buy a new 3D HDTV that costs even more money! They are pushing too much down the consumer's throat. IMHO, the industry and kiss off.

[gll99]

I'm a trailing edge guy but I never say never (paradox).

[V Bot]

When will we see the glasses that have TV capability? I could swear I saw something on them somewhere. The TV could pop up in a virtual appearance on the lens. Another question, when will we have the ability to beam someone up, like on Star Trek? Have you seen the invisible cloak?

[budz]

In order to watch 3D you need:
1. A 3D TV.
2. A BD player that supports 3D.
3. 3D glasses.
4. 3D Blu-ray discs.

I am not interested at this time and IMHO I think 3D will flop.

I it's gonna flop big time.

[usually_quiet]

No. 3D is OK for an occasional movie in a movie theater, but I would not want to watch TV in 3D on a regular basis.

If this works well enough, gamers will want to use it for a more immersive experience.

[j1d10t]

While I think 3D is fun for the occasional movie, I don't think it is a good enough reason to go out and buy a new TV just so you don't have to wear 3D glasses to watch a 3D movie.

[yoda313]

In order to watch 3D you need:
1. A 3D TV.
2. A BD player that supports 3D.
3. 3D glasses.
4. 3D Blu-ray discs.

I am not interested at this time and IMHO I think 3D will flop.

I it's gonna flop big time.

Yep


Anyone remember VIRTUALBOY????

[cal_tony]

Aside from the comments of others, I think the 3d process (trying to fool the human eye and brain) is a recipe for serious vision and or brain problems. Some people already experience temporary symptoms with just one movie visit.
Tony

[Noahtuck]

Anyone remember VIRTUALBOY????

Were you even born yet when that came out ??
LOL!!!

I remember when it first came out and i bought one for my son!!!
LOL!!!

3D will become the main stream when they build holodeck's or have 3D projection like they had in Total Recall...

[yoda313]

Were you even born yet when that came out ??
LOL!!!

Uh yeah!

[pepegot1]

Throw away your newly acquired flat screens, it's time to get the latest and the greatest-3D TV. Just away for the big boys to grab your dollars and fatten their pots-the one they hide and the one they wear. Too much, to soon, slow down. HDTV has a way to go. 3D should be a flop as it was in the past. I remember seeing Vincent Price in the 3D movie the Fly. It flopped then, and it will now.

[Lawbringer]

While I think 3D is fun for the occasional movie, I don't think it is a good enough reason to go out and buy a new TV just so you don't have to wear 3D glasses to watch a 3D movie.

Actually, you STILL have to buy and wear 3D glasses to watch 3D movies on 3D TVs. Except every TV manufacturer has their own glasses, and they're not interchangeable

[MOVIEGEEK]

Actually, you STILL have to buy and wear 3D glasses to watch 3D movies on 3D TVs. Except every TV manufacturer has their own glasses, and they're not interchangeable

True and they still haven't standardized the format, for instance if you buy a Panasonic 3D BD player it might not work on a Sony 3D TV.
There are two formats in the US: one uses interlace for each eye(top field=left eye), the other use two frames in 1080p next to each other(frame 1=left eye).

[Soopafresh]

I'm thinking of the Steve Martin movie "The Jerk", where his invention soon caused people to go cross-eyed.

[Lawbringer]

I'm thinking of the Steve Martin movie "The Jerk", where his invention soon caused people to go cross-eyed.

I did get a headache after watching Avatar.

[16mmJunkie]

Hummmm I'll never say never, but we just purchased our first 42 inch Samsung Plasma and are enjoying it along with the Blu-Ray player. I've always owned almost all the tech that comes out. Cable Guy came over the other day as we had issues with the HDTV DVR that comes with our cable provider, took one look at my setup and was dumb founded. Beta, LaserDisc, VHS, SVHS, Worldwide Format Player, DVHS, DMR, DVD, Blu-Ray, Media Center PC took him by surprise!! Then, I took him to the 8mm,16mm Projection Home theater down the Hall!

He would have flipped on the transfer studio upstairs.


If the Light ain't Bright, It ain't Right!!

[zoobie]

Hummmm I'll never say never, but we just purchased our first 42 inch Samsung Plasma and are enjoying it along with the Blu-Ray player. I've always owned almost all the tech that comes out. Cable Guy came over the other day as we had issues with the HDTV DVR that comes with our cable provider, took one look at my setup and was dumb founded. Beta, LaserDisc, VHS, SVHS, Worldwide Format Player, DVHS, DMR, DVD, Blu-Ray, Media Center PC took him by surprise!! Then, I took him to the 8mm,16mm Projection Home theater down the Hall!
He would have flipped on the transfer studio upstairs.


If the Light ain't Bright, It ain't Right!!

I used to work for a security company. This is a classic case. He'll probably come back with his buds and rip you off...just sayin'...They bring it on themselves

[Constant Gardener]

I suspect there's not much needed to turn a 240 Hz TV into a 3D unit, so such capability may be common in a few years. Would be fun for video games and visualization tools. I'd certainly consider it when our TV dies; perhaps by then the funny glasses won't be needed.

[16mmJunkie]

I used to work for a security company. This is a classic case. He'll probably come back with his buds and rip you off...just sayin'...They bring it on themselves

Doubt it, someone always home here! And knowing I have a nice home I'm not without security. Of course, even the best protection has faults. Nothing here worth a life, only material items...can be replaced.


If the Light ain't Bright, it ain't Right!!

[SatStorm]

No!
Maybe in the far future and only if glasses won't be needed.

[fitch.j]

There are 4 different types of 3D TV being worked on at present

2 types require you to wear glasses, and 2 types dont.

LG and Philips are working on auto-stereoscopic displays, these do not require you to wear glasses to view it.

The others are working on either using 3D glasses like you get at the movie theatres (RealD type lenses) or with Active Shutter glasses that open and close each lens in front of each eye alternately 60 times a second, so each eye sees 30 frames a second and your brain interprets that as a 3D image. This method is meant to be vastly superior to all other methods, but requires expensive glasses that have to be plugged into your TV!....not good for watching the football in the pub!

Anyways....no i wont be getting it!

[filmboss80]

This would have been a good poll question -- much better than "What's your shoe size."

As for my answer: no, I would not have such a TV for a variety of reasons; but mostly because it would be too much of a hassle constantly trying to figure out where my wife or kids left the 3D glasses. I have enough problems just finding the remote.

[edDV]

In order to watch 3D you need:
1. A 3D TV.
2. A BD player that supports 3D.
3. 3D glasses.
4. 3D Blu-ray discs.

I am not interested at this time and IMHO I think 3D will flop.

Add to that Discovery and Comcast (others likely to join) are building a 3D channel for movies, sports and animations.

Selected Golf and NFL football will be first to receive the 3D treatment.
http://corporate.discovery.com/discovery-news/discovery-communications-sony-and-imax-announce-pl/
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/05/discovery-imax-sony-form-3d-television-channel/
http://blog.comcast.com/2010/03/masters.html
http://blog.comcast.com/2010/04/the-masters-goes-live-in-3d.html

As usual, I will watch demos and be a late adopter.

[fritzi93]

I'm skeptical. When a large proportion of households have it, and there's enough worthwhile content available, maybe then.