Let the 3d tv wars begin!

bigaudiofanatic

I have been a few commercials for new 3d tv's from Panasonic and Samsung "none from Mitsubishi yet". This should get interesting and should help prices drop as well.

Sherardp

bigaudiofanatic wrote: »

I have been a few commercials for new 3d tv's from Panasonic and Samsung "none from Mitsubishi yet". This should get interesting and should help prices drop as well.

Haven't seen it, don't care to see, and won't buy into the technology. I personally don't see many people who already own plasmas, LEDs, LCDs, etc., going out to splurge on this. Let alone there has to be more content besides Avatar. I personally think it's another gimmick, but we shall see.
Imagine going out to spend $200.00 per set of glasses for each family member also.

I would like to game in 3D, I imagine something like Modern Warfare 2 being intense in 3D. Other than that you can count me out on this one.

wutadumsn23

Sherardp wrote: »

Haven't seen it, don't care to see, and won't buy into the technology. I personally don't see many people who already own plasmas, LEDs, LCDs, etc., going out to splurge on this. Let alone there has to be more content besides Avatar. I personally think it's another gimmick, but we shall see.
Imagine going out to spend $200.00 per set of glasses for each family member also.

I would like to game in 3D, I imagine something like Modern Warfare 2 being intense in 3D. Other than that you can count me out on this one.

+1,000

-Jeff

grif32

Sherardp wrote: »

Haven't seen it, don't care to see, and won't buy into the technology. I personally don't see many people who already own plasmas, LEDs, LCDs, etc., going out to splurge on this. Let alone there has to be more content besides Avatar. I personally think it's another gimmick, but we shall see.
Imagine going out to spend $200.00 per set of glasses for each family member also.

I would like to game in 3D, I imagine something like Modern Warfare 2 being intense in 3D. Other than that you can count me out on this one.

Glasses are $75 - $100 per pair not $200.. There will be a lot more then just Avatar 3D as well. Sports, Games etc..

But I agree, I went to the Sony Style Store and checked out the 3D Demo. As soon as I put the Glasses on I noticed a Flicker and could not watch it. IT was getting me sick.

I think it's still 3 - 4 years away. I am happy with my new 50G10 Panny Plasma.

RuSsMaN

Cool, another good reason to stop watching the idiot box altogether.

Cheers,
Russ

polkatese

There's gotta be a way to watch 3D without the glasses, something like a 3D screen coating layered on the display to give the same effect, in the near future.

packetjones

I think it will never take off as long as glasses are required.

Slinger182

sherardp wrote: »

haven't seen it, don't care to see, and won't buy into the technology. I personally don't see many people who already own plasmas, leds, lcds, etc., going out to splurge on this. Let alone there has to be more content besides avatar. I personally think it's another gimmick, but we shall see.
Imagine going out to spend $200.00 per set of glasses for each family member also.

I would like to game in 3d, i imagine something like modern warfare 2 being intense in 3d. Other than that you can count me out on this one.

wutadumsn23 wrote: »

+1,000

+1001

cstmar01

don't really care for it. Yeah maybe going to a movie once and a while is ok but apart from that count me out. I'm not going to now go and upgrade anything and have to sit with those glasses on, just no, not worth it.

If I can do it without the glasses on, sweet that would be cool to see. The only thing I will like about this is it may help drop prices on non 3D stuff which I personally would like, but thats about it.

comfortablycurt

Anyone who buys into this is a moron. (IMO)

I'll never have a 3d TV in my house. I'm planning on upgrading my TV to a 40"ish entry level LCD/plasma sometime this year, and that will probably be my last TV upgrade...ever. Unless it breaks before I die. In which case, I may just do without it.

bigaudiofanatic

That is one good thing about the 3d tv's coming out is regular tv's will continue to drop in price.

steveinaz

yet another useless gimmick...much like integrating the internet into BluRay players--I couldn't care less...

BAD ASP

bigaudiofanatic wrote: »

That is one good thing about the 3d tv's coming out is regular tv's will continue to drop in price.

I hope you're right about that. My current Mits dlp is getting a little long in the toothe. I would like to buy a new panny 58v10 but I have seen them come down a couple hundred bucks since the holidays and I'm inclined to wait a little longer just to see.
3D is pretty gimmicky, I'm not sure if I'm ready to sit with special glasses on over my regular glasses etc. Time will tell eh!

Huck344

I think sports and **** will dictate whether or not 3D will catch on.

Personally, I think the timing is too soon for 3D to make it big. We had CRT's for decades and then came the flat screens, so everyone gradually moved to that technology over the past 10+ years, but only once prices started becoming affordable. Moving to 3D so quickly after flat screens have become the norm will just turn people off.

wingnut4772

Absolutely no interest. Maybe someday if it can be done without the glasses.

superjunior

slinger182 wrote: »

+1001

+ 1002

cstmar01

Huck344 wrote: »

I think sports and **** will dictate whether or not 3D will catch on.

sounds like a tropic thunder quote btw.

haha sorry I love that movie.

Poee7R

All this 3D stuff is kinda funny, regardless I now own a 3D set.

Bought myself and the wife a new tv for Christmas, a Mitsubishi DLP (I'm a Mitsu DLP fan). I noticed when it was being delivered that it had a bunch of ad's on the box about it being a 3D set. I have no interest in it being 3D, but thought it kind of cool that it was.

Will I ever use it as a 3D display.... nope, probably not. I dont know how gimmicky it is, but I dont ever see myself spending a couple benji's on the glasses.


Dave

Upstatemax

All TV's will move into 3D capability within a few years...

Same as 1080p became the standard. How do they do that? Only make 1080p sets so you have almost zero choice.

Like it or not, I remember people rambling on about how they will never buy into 1080p, flat panels, blu-ray... Guess what, EVERY person I heard that from has a 1080p flat panel in the living room with a blu-ray player under it.

comfortablycurt

Upstatemax wrote: »

All TV's will move into 3D capability within a few years...

Same as 1080p became the standard. How do they do that? Only make 1080p sets so you have almost zero choice.

Like it or not, I remember people rambling on about how they will never buy into 1080p, flat panels, blu-ray... Guess what, EVERY person I heard that from has a 1080p flat panel in the living room with a blu-ray player under it.

I can see your point...but this is starting to move into something slightly different. They're now asking us to go out and spend a couple hundred buck on a pair of glasses(for each viewer...for the record) that we have to wear when we're watching movies/TV. I don't know about you...but I'm never going to go out and spend a couple hundred bucks on 3d glasses for watching TV at home.

Also, once it starts to integrate itself into the market, it will be realized that the cheapo $200 glasses aren't good enough. Then the market will be flooded with $1000 a pair 3D glasses that "make a night and day difference" over those cheapo's that you foolishly bought.

The Monster Cable brand 3D glasses should be due to hit the market anytime now.:rolleyes:

At the movie theaters? Ok...it's a cool gimmick, but I don't, and never will, have any desire to bring that gimmick home. Another stupid thing for people with too much money to waste it on IMO.


All TV's moving to 3D in the next few years? We'll see, but I doubt it. This is a little different than the switch from a CRT TV to a flat panel, or the switch from DVD to Blu-ray. A flat panel TV is still just a TV. They're just a lot nicer than they used to be.

A Blu-ray player fills the exact same purpose as a VCR did all those years ago. Yes, it's a different physical medium, much better picture and sound, but it still serves the exact same purpose...playing movies.

Now they're trying to get us to wear 3D glasses at home...which I don't think(and this thread attests to) really appeals to that many people.

wutadumsn23

Upstatemax wrote: »

All TV's will move into 3D capability within a few years...

Same as 1080p became the standard. How do they do that? Only make 1080p sets so you have almost zero choice.

Like it or not, I remember people rambling on about how they will never buy into 1080p, flat panels, blu-ray... Guess what, EVERY person I heard that from has a 1080p flat panel in the living room with a blu-ray player under it.

LOL, I made no such claim, lol. I really hope it doesn't catch on, last thing I want to have to worry about is HAVING to buy a new TV because it won't work if I don't. Just got my Sony SXRD fixed and it is as good as the day I bought it, planning on upgrading in the near future to a 65" Panny plasma, and it is not 3D capable. All I need is to spend $2500 on a TV that will be obsolete in a few years.

-Jeff

cwilliams

Huck344 wrote: »

I think sports and **** will dictate whether or not 3D will catch on. .

Funny you should say that...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/03/02/3d-tv/index.html

dvran

+1 on the pron, would be interesting to watch in 3D.

I can't wait till TVs are holographic. I'm 30 years old so I hope I can witness this in my lifetime.

concealer404

Huck344 wrote: »

I think sports and **** will dictate whether or not 3D will catch on.

Does anyone REALLY want a money shot in 3D flying at them?

polktiger

Biggest problem with 3d glasses - people that wear glasses! 3D glasses could be free, and I wouldn't wear them. What is the point as I can't see clearly without them. I am not going to start wearing contacts just so I can watch 3d TV.

cnh

dvran wrote: »

+1 on the pron, would be interesting to watch in 3D.

I can't wait till TVs are holographic. I'm 30 years old so I hope I can witness this in my lifetime.

I'm with you though much older. I think I'll hold out for the Star Trek Holodeck series 4000?

Curt, I loved that discussion of the 3D glasses and Monster....definitely gonna get some $1000 dollar Monster 3D shades hope they come in Apple computer colors? Why I may have to turn in my Videophile card if I don't have the BEST!

Polktiger, I'm with you. I wear glasses too....no contacts for me! 3D has always driven my 'crazy' because I have to find a way to fit the gear over my glasses and then I get to look through two lenses so I really never see as well as a normal sighted person with no glasses.

cnh

Upstatemax

comfortablycurt wrote: »

I can see your point...but this is starting to move into something slightly different. They're now asking us to go out and spend a couple hundred buck on a pair of glasses(for each viewer...for the record) that we have to wear when we're watching movies/TV. I don't know about you...but I'm never going to go out and spend a couple hundred bucks on 3d glasses for watching TV at home.

Also, once it starts to integrate itself into the market, it will be realized that the cheapo $200 glasses aren't good enough. Then the market will be flooded with $1000 a pair 3D glasses that "make a night and day difference" over those cheapo's that you foolishly bought.

The Monster Cable brand 3D glasses should be due to hit the market anytime now.:rolleyes:

At the movie theaters? Ok...it's a cool gimmick, but I don't, and never will, have any desire to bring that gimmick home. Another stupid thing for people with too much money to waste it on IMO.


All TV's moving to 3D in the next few years? We'll see, but I doubt it. This is a little different than the switch from a CRT TV to a flat panel, or the switch from DVD to Blu-ray. A flat panel TV is still just a TV. They're just a lot nicer than they used to be.

A Blu-ray player fills the exact same purpose as a VCR did all those years ago. Yes, it's a different physical medium, much better picture and sound, but it still serves the exact same purpose...playing movies.

Now they're trying to get us to wear 3D glasses at home...which I don't think(and this thread attests to) really appeals to that many people.

The glasses are not $200... Samsung's BRAND NEW ones are $150, within a year, it will be half that or they are going to bundle them with the 3D TV's.

3D will not be for everyday TV, it going to be an option for movies and gaming.

Not to mention, the Samsung 3D tv's are priced pretty well. The new 50" 7000 series Plasma is cheaper than my 2 week old 50" 860 series plasma. The 8000 series is cheaper at it's launch than what the 860 was.

So it's obvious the tech to make a panel 3D is not expensive. When I say within the next few years the standard for TV's is going to be 3D, that does not mean you are forced to watch 3D. They are just going to be 3D capable. Just like how almost every new TV is 1080p capable, you don't have to watch a 1080p source, but you can if you want.

BTW, I am not a huge 3D fanboy, my brand new plasma is not 3D. I could trade it back in right now and get a 3D one, but I am not. I don't want it right now, I might in the future when 3D is more the standard they work out the bugs that are bound to happen.

Fireman32

concealer404 wrote: »

does anyone really want a money shot in 3d flying at them?

roflmao

Ranger0912

Although tempted to pan this technology as a fad that will never take off it will be intriguing to see how it evolves. Recall that it wasn't that long ago that even the best of the "big screens" most of which were projection, couldn't remotely compare to the Trinatron. I've watched with interest SONY's progress with the OLED technology (soon to be available in a 25" version) and, based on what I've seen in the last ten years, am reluctant to dismiss anything. Guess I'm just not the skeptic I used to be.

Huck344

concealer404 wrote: »

Does anyone REALLY want a money shot in 3D flying at them?

:eek::eek::eek::eek: Definitely not. But **** always seems to be at the cutting edge of technology. **** was one of the big influences in blu ray winning out over HDDVD.

Personally, I wouldn't want to watch **** in hi-def, let alone 3D.

holt

I'll wait before biting on this technology when I feel like I haven't wasted money on having a 7.1 surround over a 5.1. 3D may make animations more appealing, **** more appealing (hate to think of what is coming out of the screen towards your face in that one), and maybe some action films, but I can't think what it would add to any classics already out there. Kinda like all that colorization that Turner did to old films which just didn't work. I mean, why would a film like Wim Wenders, Paris, Texas, benifit from 3D? I don't watch TV because the content doesn't appeal to me, so that won't push me towards it.

And yes, I can see a big market in the future for "moded" 3D glasses and Internet sites that will offer "how to crack the copyright protection" that will undoubtedly be embeded in the lenses of standard market glasses with subsequent lawsuits and such. Then I'm sure there will be huge and bitter debates over whether expensive specialty frames offer a "deeper, richer, more liquid 3D field" over stock frames. And, most importantly, whether a certain "E" word glasses company who offer cheaper 3D glasses, marketed with the freely used term "reference", have spawned an Internet cult of brain washed trolls.