Is the 3D fad over?

BlueFox

ESPN is giving up on 3D. It never really caught on at home, and is currently declining in home acceptance. Other than the occasional movie release, it appears it will not survive, at least in its current format.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/13/tech/gaming-gadgets/3d-tv-dead/index.html?hpt=hp_bn5

polkfarmboy

3d video games!!

jephdood

I heard at CES there was basically no 3d technology representation. The video side was all about 4k.

Personally, I can't stand 3d. It's a novelty watching the effects for about 5 minutes.. then I want to just take off my stupid glasses and watch the movie.

mhardy6647

I kind of think that TV itself is a fad, so I am probably not the right person to be commenting about 3-D TV :-)

Willow

Never knew it was a thing!

tonyb

Not a big fan either of the 3d stuff. 4K is nice but too expensive and no broadcast in 4k makes it almost dead on arrival.

EndersShadow

Unless the video is truly shot with the intent to make it "Truly" 3-D then its pointless. The best 3-D movies are animated movies as by animating the entire thing in 3-D they can truly take advantage of 3-D. And as a person with glasses already, adding another set just stinks.

I have seen 2 movies in 3-D: Toy Story 3, and The Hobbit. I missed out on Avatar which I REALLY REALLY want to see in 3-D on my TV but cant without buying a new blu-ray player.

Otherwise unless its a MAJOR release I see no point in 3D, and even then I am VERY selective. They charge you move for the movie to basically rent those stupid glasses since you are supposed to "recycle" them after the movie and if you keep them for the next 3D movie its not like you get a discount on the movie.

Home 3-D is expensive since you also need a set of glasses for each person and they to my knowledge have yet to come out with universal glasses for home use. So if I have more people than glasses I cant do 3D and if someone has their own pair of glasses chances are they wont work with my TV unless we have the same make and model. And heaven forbid they forgot to charge them or bring extra batteries....

polkfarmboy

There are many 3d glasses for $25 that work on nearly all projectors and there are also glasses that use a vesa port so thats a uneversal thing. I agree things like ghost rider are said to be 3D but are actually converted a big problem is the directors not knowing how to shoot 3D. One awesome 3D movie is judge dredd as they basically combated and revolutionized the filming process by inventing a camera that shoots close up shots in 3d and the results are stunning. Resident Evil is also just great in 3D with big far out pans

I have a 3D plasma and its garbage and I have owned 4 3D projectors and DLP at 144hz is smooth, ghost free with no flicker. 3D movies sitting far backdont work, you have to get closer to the screen than normal to truely be immersed and get the magic of the effect

badchad

Personally, I just don't care for 3d. Even in theaters, I don't quite get a sense of "depth" that I would if I were viewing something "real".

From a business perspective, I don't see 3d going anywhere until you can get it without glasses. Something like 30% (or more) of the population wears glasses, and that is a huge chunk to exclude from your sales. If it was going to take off, we'd have tons of 3d channels now, but instead they're folding.

4k might help, but I was really underwhelmed when I viewed a 4k set in Bestbuy. In my current setup (12' from the TV), I don't think I'd see any benefit from 4k until I went front projector (100" or more). Will be interesting to see the next innovations in display technology.

Syndil

Not sure about home 3D (haven't experienced it) but 3D done well in theaters is absofreakinlutely amazing, I don't care what the naysayers say. That said, if the "done well" part is lacking, then of course not many people are going to know what potential it has.

If you want to see the potential of 3D, you have to see Avatar in 3D, or Coraline. IMO these are two of the very best 3D movies ever made, and the 3D does add an incredible amount to the experience. In fact after watching Avatar at home after seeing it in 3D at the theater twice, it didn't even seem like the same movie. Was very much a letdown.

Here's a list of the 20 best 3D films. Not surprising that Avatar is at the very top:

http://www.empireonline.com/promotions/20-best-3d-films/

But before you can say 3D is a gimmick or that it adds nothing to the film, you have to have experienced some of these in 3D in the theater, IMO. In fact 3D is pretty much the only thing that brings me to the theater any more. If I'm going pay to go to see a movie, I want to see the best, most feature-laden version of it I can. If it's in IMAX 3D, that's what I'm going to see. Avatar in IMAX 3D was mind-blowing.

scottyboy76

I saw a news report the other day explaining that the chinese market wants two things from hollywood movies, 3d and action.

Hollywood responds because they know how much of their market is presently in china, and they know full well where the growth is going to be.

jephdood

Agree to disagree. I saw Avatar in 3D, Imax 3D, at home in 3D and 2D. Out of all of those, I'd much rather watch the movie at home in 2D. As I said, the effects were cool for about 5 minutes, and then I wanted to take off the glasses. The 3d effects were a distraction to me from the movie itself.

Syndil wrote: »

Not sure about home 3D (haven't experienced it) but 3D done well in theaters is absofreakinlutely amazing, I don't care what the naysayers say. That said, if the "done well" part is lacking, then of course not many people are going to know what potential it has.

If you want to see the potential of 3D, you have to see Avatar in 3D, or Coraline. IMO these are two of the very best 3D movies ever made, and the 3D does add an incredible amount to the experience. In fact after watching Avatar at home after seeing it in 3D at the theater twice, it didn't even seem like the same movie. Was very much a letdown.

Here's a list of the 20 best 3D films. Not surprising that Avatar is at the very top:

http://www.empireonline.com/promotions/20-best-3d-films/

But before you can say 3D is a gimmick or that it adds nothing to the film, you have to have experienced some of these in 3D in the theater, IMO. In fact 3D is pretty much the only thing that brings me to the theater any more. If I'm going pay to go to see a movie, I want to see the best, most feature-laden version of it I can. If it's in IMAX 3D, that's what I'm going to see. Avatar in IMAX 3D was mind-blowing.

Sherardp

I enjoy the 4K my projector does. I just bought the 3D glasses and emitter for it a few weeks back. Watched a couple movies on it, and though it was nice and looked awesome I would say yes it is a fad. I'm glad I didn't dump more into it. 4K is the sweet spot and looks incredible on a 126" screen.

F1nut

3D was dead on arrival......just like all the other times it's been tried.

steveinaz

Is the 3D fad over?

I hope so.

Syndil

Are we talking 3D (surround) sound? There's a fad for you.

zingo

I'm glad it's dead as I don't like it, and never felt it added to a movie experience.

jbooker82

I don't think 3d is over. ESPN's 3d channel was a direct tv only deal so they limited their viewing options by making it an exclusive. I have some PS3 3d video games that are pretty cool, and I also watch 3D blurays. It just takes time for technology to be perfected, and accepted. Imagine where we would be if every nay sayer got their way.

jbooker82

scottyboy76 wrote: »

I saw a news report the other day explaining that the chinese market wants two things from hollywood movies, 3d and action.

Hollywood responds because they know how much of their market is presently in china, and they know full well where the growth is going to be.

Yea they are #2 in the world for movie market and are suppose to be over taking the USA for the #1 spot in 5-10 years. 3D will be come the normal, then if you don't have the equipment you will just have a regular 2D picture. Kind of like how HD channles are now with their audio. Most broadcast in 5.1 but if you don't have a 5.1 system you just hear 2 channel.

Tornado Red

I side with the crowd that says fad. 4k will likely be the next big thing in the home market. Hardware manufacturers need to promote the next big thing, 3d has run its course IMO and 4k is in the cue. Displays, players will all evolve to 4k and be backwards compatible to Blu-ray, dvd, cd, just like Blu-ray did. It languished a bit in its tussle with HDDVD until Sony opened its wallet with the movie companies and crushed the competition. I suspect a big financial push for 4k soon. I agree with others though that 4k won't be so terribly great with small displays, it'll shine with 60" and up. The evolution of home entertainment equipment will continue, money needs to be made and 3d has had its short day in the sun. I didn't think things could get better in 1983 than my Sony Profeel 27" studio monitor, Beta Hi-Fi vcr and 10' mesh c-band dish. All relics today, like me :cheesygrin:

cnh

The next big thing. Forget about films. Forget about 3D films. How would you "like" it if films DISAPPEARED forever, no more Directors, producers or actors and everyTHING became Video game/stories where YOU (that fairly pedestrian and often "unimaginative" public) gets to LIVE in the game as a character and DECIDE/STEER the direction and various outcomes of the story. No more writers, no more sit back and view, but IT BECOMES ALL ABOUT YOU, YOU, YOU. UN-REALITY TV IN THREE D. Forget your current uneventful life and go on a quest that never ends with others, brave strange lands and creatures, and so on.

Isn't this REALLY what "the people want"? And don't most V-games actually make more, represent a larger industry, than Hollywood? I think I read that somewhere. Developing a game is more lucrative than a Superman film! Don't think the big boys don't know that and aren't silently "leading" us there.

Ouroboros consuming its own tail! Can its "body" be far behind?

cnh

polkfarmboy

3D passive tech and 4K is where its going to be @ for the casual consumer. Passive 3D is great and the glasses only cost $3 a pop and add that to the fact that passive glasses only block 20% light unlike the 75% light stopping active shutterglasses

I love the LG passive sets but you only get 720p to each eye but the 4K will now get you 1080

Shizelbs

Blurays I don't care too much if they keep doing 3D or not. Video games, however, are awesome in 3D. More releases in 3D please.

Syndil

I agree passive is the way to go. Even Panasonic is ditching their active shutter glasses technology to go exclusively passive on their LED TVs.

obieone

Good riddance. I'd be more impressed with an ORIGINAL idea to come out of Hollywood, then SFX enhancements.

tonyb

obieone wrote: »

Good riddance. I'd be more impressed with an ORIGINAL idea to come out of Hollywood, then SFX enhancements.

Bingo....we just keep getting remake after remake. They have lowered the bar so far in the talent department, any idea is a good one to them.

headrott

tonyb wrote: »

Bingo....we just keep getting remake after remake. They have lowered the bar so far in the talent department, any idea is a good one to them.

Yep, and I have a feeling "Forbidden Planet" is next in the "hopper" for remakes. In fact, I am really surprised it hasn't been done yet...

No 3D for me, please.

exalted512

I think most new high end TV's in the near future will be passive 3D by default. We have a 3d TV, we haven't used the 3d in probably over a year though.
-Cody

Toolfan66

The only 3D is IMAX 3D with the really large screen, everything else is just "eh"

I have never played a 3D game so I cannot judge, but I bet it is awesome..

maximillian

3D on the Nintendo 3DS is OK. It does add to the experience. Part of the reason is because the screen tends to be close to your face. However, if you really get into the action and move around then the screen flickers a bunch. Generally I keep the 3D effect (slider) at half since I have heard that it gives one a headache after a while. At half I have played for over an hour without experiencing any ill effects.