Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

This is an Interesting thread, and there are good points made about the nature, and the present situation of 3D.

The most recent 3D arrival seems to have been pretty frantic, with many traditional expectations of what 3D should, or would "do".

Alister makes a good point that Cinema is one small fraction of the 3D world. I would venture to say that along with Documentary, Natural history, and Science programing, 3D could soon be defining a new Artform" within the Arts and Entertainment.
Already, using computers and software, Video and Music can be amalgamated (for lack of a better word), and this is starting to open up new territories that were unknown and unavailable before. It seems it is only a matter of time until 3D video will get involved somehow.

A very loose analogy to the present 3D arrival, was the arrival of the audio Synthesizers in the 1970's and 80's.
Alot of people and companies hailed the " World changing nature" of the Synthesizer, and at the same time, many also thought (or worried) the Synthesizer would "retire" traditional modes of making music.

In time, the Synthesizer has settled into augmenting traditional modes of making music, yet it has also rounded out a new area, or field of music too.

Interesting things I have learned about 3D
 

Sony, Samsung, Panasonic X6D create industry standard for active 3D glasses
Sony Global - PANASONIC, SAMSUNG, SONY, AND XPAND 3D JOIN FORCES IN ‘FULL HD 3D GLASSES INITIATIVE’

An article on poor performance caused by theatres ( thanks to those that pointed out the problem )
A movie lover?s plea: Let there be light - Boston.com

I have read many articles about TV sales, It is a mixed bag. An interesting note on one article stated that 3D television sales stats are unreliable as many televisions sold are 3D but the buyers intent was not for 3D.

From what I have learned the future of 3D is here, however it is limited. It is in the hands of the tech and movie industry as to whether it flurishes or not, the glasses are a stumbling block for many people. Years ago as I walked through the electronics retailers I could see HD TV, it was beautiful. However I found many people who just did not care about (or see) the beauty of HD. That puzzles me. What I can't see in walmart or in best buy as I walk past is 3D. There may be a set of glasses lying around but I have not noticed any, and I do not see any employees pushing 3D. Last but not least, in the U.S. theatres are dying. Suprisingly, 3D has increased their business, not surprisingly, many customers will not return because of their poor job.

Thanks all for the education and opinions, keep them coming.

Donny

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

How do you figure that one? The US has been in dire economic troubles for the last ten years or so. And since buying food is more important than going to a theater, many people do not go to theater at this time. Once the economy bounces back up, people will be going to the movies much more again.

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

I think the trailer for Harold & Kumar 3D makes the perfect point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ks8iWmz928#t=1m02s

Watch from about 1:02 to 1:50

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

There are a couple of manufactures making reasonably priced passive TVs, Vizio and LG, along with more expensive sets, I think JVC for one. However the resolution is half per eye, combined you are getting the full HD and depending on how close you are to the set it may not be noticeable. Some people claim to see horizontal lines in the image when viewing the set. However next year newer versions of "passive" sets should be out that allow for full HD quality using RealD type polarized glasses. This link is not very informative but may help: Samsung and RealD to co-develop new active-shutter 3D technology

In this case Samsung is apparently using screen refresh to change the left and right eye polarization and image to create a set that will use passive glasses and the "active" technology is kept in the set.

I think a big step for 3D to take hold will be when glasses free technology is more robust, especially if some sort of holographic display could be developed. However that is a few years down the road it seems.

I also think that some other development angles with 3D may solidify its role in the publics mind. As Alister Chapman noted that some productions are served better with 3D, as those determining factors are sorted out and reasons for 3d viewing become more apparent it will help. I also am hoping that things like the Lytro camera may create a whole new schema for video, allowing the viewer to change how the scene is percieved. Obviously that could be several years out, but for things like "natural history and science" videos that Alister noted, viewing capabilities could take on a whole new twist. Even with standard stereoscopic video the ability to change the L/R aspect may have possibilities. That probably makes every producer cringe since they work hard to get the L/R properly set, sorry.

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

Interesting. If they can make that full HD active screen for passive glasses at an affordable price for everyone and if it does not break much, that would certainly give 3D a major boost.

I think passive glasses are fine. Much easier than glasses-free technology. Certainly when I watched Harry Potter in the theater, the glasses caused no problem. They fit right over my prescription glasses. They were so light weight that I did not even feel I had them on. Even people who do not wear prescription glasses are no strangers to sun glasses, so I really do not see how needing the RealD 3D glasses would be something people would mind.

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

r.e. the Harold & Kumar 3D trailer:

Yes, the Wow/Amazing factors are still in the very act of jumping the shark, but I think the digital format and technical know-how has made this recent 3D surge, "Stick".

Hopefully, 3D it will play an important role once it develops its own visual language and demonstrates its many values,
despite some early corny and clowny uses, (r.e. the Harold & Kumar 3D trailer)

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

I picked up a Vizio E3D420VX - 42" 1080p, passive 3D, WiFi, Netflix, Youtube, etc... for $649 at Costco. I originally wanted to buy an internet enabled TV, came across this one, and figured I'd go the extra $100 for the 3D capability. In 2D mode it's a good looking image, although there's too much contrast drop-off as you move off axis to the left or right. 3D mode uses standard circular polarized glasses and looks quite good, even at 1/2 resolution. 3D effect gets ghosts as you move off axis in the vertical direction. Remote control includes a QUERTY keyboard (but miniature sized.) My TV service, FIOS from Verizon, has a modest amount of 3D content, both live and on-demand.

Passive glasses add to the WAF (wife acceptance factor.) Also easy to have guests, as I've got hundreds of passive circular glasses left over from work projects. All in all, worth the $100 premium.

http://www.costco.com/images/content...PDF/930420.pdf

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

I have purchsed a 3D TV and several movies. I do seek out 3D movies at the theater. I create my own 3d stills with a pair of Canon g7's. I also have a 3d Gopro rig and a Sony HDR-TD10 camcorder. I have not had any problems with eyestrain. I love 3D. I am not using my 3D TV as much as I would like since my cable provider does not have 3d content available. I don't mind the active glasses.

Very important. I am hoping other manufacturers besides Fuji will produce 3d still cameras.

I don't shoot for a living but I do see an emerging market for 3d still and video photography.

Shooting fast action stills is a problem as there are no good ways to do this now. My G7 rig takes to long to sync the cameras and focus.
Editing 3d video takes a powerful computer. I just replaced mine with a high end i7 and 27" 3d monitor. There is a very steep learning curve for 3d editing. The avaialble software is expensive and buggy.

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

Things not looking good at all:

3D TV falls flat as broadcasters tune out

Andrew

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

A lot: I see a 3D movie in the theater about once per month. If I had a 3D TV I would probably do more.

Never a problem with the Dolby Real3D and Christie 2K. Got a bad headache once with an IMAX film 3D presentation.

I love it.

It's definitely in the top 10. As important as high frame rates (which is to say, not that important, but it would be nice to have).

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

3D will probably not happens (or fails again if you prefer), because the ones that are supposed to sell it to us, are making stupid marketing strategy.
They just want to increase their sales by selling the same old s..t under a new name.
they want 2D to 3D converter everywhere, they do not want real 3D.
There are tons of 3d screens and blu-ray readers available, even for cheap.
Where is the content ? Where is Avatar 3D blu-ray , supposed to be THE 3d thing.
Most of the 3D movies are locked with a purchase of a screen if not ever released to the BD market.
Ok, so each time you want to see a 3D movie , you need to purchase a new Samsung screen ?
That is totally silly.
So there is a big disapointing industry emerging, the 2d to 3D conversion of old block buster.
What a nice way to provide consumer the proof the 3D is just a failure. already seen old movies badly converted to 3D. Great !
And the same for camera. Yes you got 3D feature on almost new smartphone or digital camera today.
(most of them asking you to do 2 shots while shifting a little bit the camera). Hey two lens is to expensive !
And the few consumer camera shooting really 3D, are just incompatible with blu-ray format. (most shooting 1080i60 instead the required 1080p24).
Then they will complain that sales go flat, the consumer is not interested...the product is not ready yet for the market....blah, blah....

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

My two cents: I am not the least bit interested in the current 3d technology. When 3d can be done without the glasses I'll reconsider it. There is an occasional movie that can use 3d to enhance the experience but so many lately remind me of gimmick movies made in the 1950s. I guess the kids will go see movies like that, but then they like YouBoob.

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

Glasses free 3D is here.

Lenticular glasses free 3D will be implemented in just about every fixed viewing distance environment in the next couple years. This will include Phones, Ipads, Computer screens, tvs on airplanes, etc.

3D may take longer to be broadly accepted in the home. However, we spend so much time starring at these other screens that it will find its way there soon.

3D is here to stay. Period.

Re: 3D's success, your current opinions please.
 

I definitely prefer glasses over lenticular displays! I like to move my head (and other parts of my body) while watching a movie.