3D tv, would you?

[mike-s]

Seeing as the state of origin is the first life game on free to air to feature 3d, and there is supposedly a severe lack of people wth 3d tv's in nsw (estimates have it at under 10 sets in Sydney as of close of business yesterday). I figure i might as well ask, the ridiculous quantity of money these tv's are commanding aside, would you bother?

I'm not sure i could be bothered, especially with the lovely dorky glasses.

[philbo]

no chance. I couldnt justify spending the money and plus i hate wearing glass unless its a bright summer day. And i bought a end of season 32" lcd for bout 3rd of what the price is on them

[Gosling1]

they are expensive at the moment - but that will change.

Inside 10 years, if you *don't* have a 3D tele, you would be considered a neanderthal !!

the dorky glasses are here to stay as well.........you cannot get the 3D effect without them. I thought Avatar was stunning (not the script or the plot ) but the effects were fantastic.

[Ratmick]

Personally I think it's a load of wank.

It's not just the outrageously-priced TV, it's the expensive goggles that make you look like a dork (one set per person) and the need to sit the exact distance and right angle to the TV.

We won't go into the dearth of TV programmes actually broadcast in 3D.

Mick

[Gosling1]

Mick - they said exactly the same thing about widescreen LCD and plasma TV's, and HD programming only 10 years ago mate .... Hell, I can't even convince my dad to upgrade to a HD widescreen TV, because he is convinced that the picture is no better !! .

At the moment, yes, 3D content is thin on the ground. No surprises there, its new technology. One of the things that has me more than a bit interested, is that the PS3 is already capable of playing 3D discs, so for thousands of punters out there, Sony already has a foot in the door for playing 3D content at home.

The glasses............yeh, what can you say. At least they look a bit better than the shitty cardboard blue/red numbers we used to get at the pictures 20 years ago !! the best ones out there are those electronically-activated jobbies, apparently they work the best of the lot.

Over the next few years, just about every major movie being made, will be done in 3D. Normal TV shows won't be far behind, just as they all fell into line with HD content in movies and TV shows....

[Ratmick]

Yep and in ten years Gos I may consider buying one because as sure as fook none of the units that are being sold today will be around. By then will have been replaced by better faster and cheaper units.

By then we'll probably have the PS8 as well...and it'll make you coffee and service your car, as well as being a hot skanky biatch in the bedroom, albeit in a Japanese manga sort-of way (Sony wants you to have the full 'Sony' experience).

There is also a difference between movies made with 3D in mind, such as Avatar, and ones that have had 3D thrust upon them post-production. The ones where it's been done as an after-thought to weasel more money out of unsuspecting punters invariably will turn out to be crap movies in 3D.

Push comes to shove do you really need to see 'Up' in 3D? Great animated kids' movie (I liked it) but what extra does 3D give it? I haven't seen it in 3D but I'm guessing jack shit.

And to tell you the truth what really turned me off the entire 'early-adopter' thing is Harvey Norman's stupid fooking ads with pseudo-excited passers-by gushing how great it was and Harvey himself pushing the damn things.

Mick

[Reedy]

if they had the 3d porn channel i would.


boom-chica-bow-wow (in 3d)

[mike-s]

It'll take a lot of convincing for me to go for this, got to agree with Gos, it'll become more common, but we'll see. Personally i'm not too interested in it however, as it kind of peaked at high-def for me.

And no i can't help but having those red'green glasses stuck in my mind.

[laidback]

Certainly don't see myself buying one of these atm. Haven't watched a movie in 3D yet but if it's as good as they say then when MotoGP, F1, WSBK and WRC gets with the program that may be another story.

[robracer]

I'm with Mick but I will go one further.....I am going to wait till 4D comes out

[javaman]

As with any "new" technology let the first suckers pay the premium. Remember HDDVD, Sony Betamax anyone?

[Glen]

They're not really that exxy. If you want to buy a big LED TV at the moment they're about 3.5. On the weekend I could've got a 55" Samsung 3D LED for 3.9k. The current ones are the first generation 3D's so they're not necessarily great and there are still bugs with them. Like everything though they'll come down in time and they'll get better

They look pretty trick but wearing the glasses would be a pain. We're going to buy a new LED but I'm not that fussed whetehr it's 3D or not

[MrWasabi]

Firstly, this technology is not new, by far its pretty darn old the first 3D movie was made back in the early 1920's. By the 1950's you had quite a lot of movies playing in 3D, im pretty sure house of wax was one of them, but i wasnt born back then and i cant remember all my facts at the moment. It was forgotten and left to rott back then because its difficult to shoot costs a lot more money, and if its not done right, it could look very tacky (but lets face it, 1950's horror movies were just that). Thankfully avatar got it right and the 3D effects werent tacky at all, they actually helped sink you into the movie.

I reckon TV manufacturers saw how much money Avatar grossed and they wanted a piece of the pie, so they decided to dust off those plans they drew up in the 50's where you needed to wear red/blue paper glasses and refined a few things.
Quicky jumping on board were the networks, because every network wants to be the first to do something.

I dont know why people are whinging about the glasses, you are watching tv, not trying out for a fashion shoot, yes they are not very "Gucci" but unless you are going to sit there with a mirror to check yourself out, who gives a shit?

The glasses are a pain not because you have to wear them, but because if you have mates over to watch a movie, you are going have spare glasses laying around for all to enjoy the movie. Some manufacturers are charging as much as $300+ for a set so thats a lot of dosh to spend on a pair of glasses which may only be used occasionally.

I can see this technology going one of two ways, 1. It dies in the ass like it did in the 50's because its not good for day to day viewing and it should stay in the cinema, or 2. It takes a long time for it to mature into a mainstream technology due to the fact that the TV's are expensive to buy, and the glasses, as well as less than 1% of shows on tv arent being broadcast in 3D at the moment...oh thats right...only 2 shows in Australia so far...

If it goes the way of option 2, prices of 3D TVs will remain high, while your current high def equipment like plasma led lcd etc will become a lot cheaper.

Anyway thats my 2 cents, here is an article that will help 3DTV go the way of option 1, and my personal preference. I think 3D movies should be kept at the movies, as a novelty we can enjoy every now and then.

[ZXR750]

if they had the 3d porn channel i would.


boom-chica-bow-wow (in 3d)

You realy want to be that close for the money shot. No thanks.

[Supafrog]

Have they realeased the 3d tv's in small sizE? ie: 34cm yet?