Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[redelitev6]

 Had a look at a 3d tv demonstration in currys today -WHOA !  this is the way forward for tv ! one of the films was of a rather nice girl in a bikini climbing out of a swimming pool -nice effect! pity about having to wear the glasses though!

[tunnie]

My employer is banking on 3D TV, I am not fully convinced. You have to give it 100% with those glasses, the more expensive kind of panels the 3D Glasses are £100 a pop 

I saw half a game of football, I had a headache... Too much in your face graphics. Avatar got it right, they added depth, not things jumping out at you, but give a real depth to what your watching.

3D Computer games though? Now thats going to work...

[Martin_1962]

3D definately two minds on it.

Effective but gave me a head ache

Some loss of resolution by the look of it as well.

THe headache aspect was a no way for me.

[Lizzie_Zoom]

I  have never liked the idea of wearing glasses to see a film, and find them very uncomfortable.

Until they find a system where glasses are not necessary I am not interested.  Apparently there are many voices in the tv industry who are saying the same in effect; with glasses 3D is going to be limited.

It is just a gimmick, and HD is ok by me!

[tidla]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9gY653SGj0[/media]

make me chuckle ever time

[Dishevelled Den]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9gY653SGj0

make me chuckle ever time

Yes, he is very funny.

[millwall]

I  have never liked the idea of wearing glasses to see a film, and find them very uncomfortable.

Until they find a system where glasses are not necessary I am not interested.  Apparently there are many voices in the tv industry who are saying the same in effect; with glasses 3D is going to be limited.

It is just a gimmick, and HD is ok by me!

same here happy with hd

[freecall666]

Im happy with HD, and have watched 3D movies on it with no problems, but some off these 3D movies are S**T.

[feeutfo]

Very happy with HD, and I think that's going to be the problem, a lot of people have just forked out for a new Panel TV, and I for one won't be buying another for some time.

But yes, the Demos are very very good from what I've seen. Defo a credible 3d image that makes the original Avatar 3d at the cinema look pre historic. Full depth, unlike the one or two layers at the cinema.

If only they could do away with the glasses, is that possible?  :-?

[freecall666]

in china they use lens's on the screen, think that the next gen to come out. make's tv bigger.

[Chris_H]

I don't know if anyone has noticed that programme producers are not making very much of interest.  Why they would spend a relative fortune on producing stereoscopic 3D programmes I cannot fathom.  Now if a set manufacturer bought a production company?

No.

Still doesn't stack up.

[TheBoy]

I think it will a harder convince than, for example, HD. Esp with the glasses (and the Active type being expensive).

And even with the fact most aren't keen on the idea yet (and the demos and regular programmes are OTT with the effect), most people in a position to spend £1000 on a new TV have likely bought a new, large panel TV in the last 3 years.  Assuming they weren't daft enough to go plasma, its likely it they will last a fair bit longer yet.

3D won't be enough to make most people upgrade TVs. And I know more people dropping Sky (the only place to get 3D) than taking it on. Those that are taking it on are doing so purely for sport, and current 3D sport broadcasts are unwatchable (due to the desire to over emphasise), and who wants to sit for hours with the stupid glasses on?

[Proz]

3D definately two minds on it.

Effective but gave me a head ache

Some loss of resolution by the look of it as well.

THe headache aspect was a no way for me.

I was the same sitting watching Avatar i found it gave me like a muzzy head , not far of a headache .
I was all for it and so sure it was the way ahead untill this ... now im not so sure  :-/

[Banjax]

isn't watching a live game of football at the ground actually 3D...in fact isn't everything in 3D normally, free of charge (as long as you have vision in both eyes and hence can perceive depth). No, whats being peddled now is an optical illusion, now I don't know about everyone else but I dont watch a car driving into the distance in a movie and think...."thats odd, why is that car getting smaller and smaller" do I? because my brain quite happily processes the information and takes the leap that the car is travelling away from the point of view rather than shrinking. in the same way that theres literally nothing on a clean snooker ball running across a table to show you its rolling rather than sliding, but your brain processes the info and makes the correct assumption. if you want to pay a few grand for some trick photography be my guest 

as tunnie says tho, interactive entertainment could utilise the technology better, although nowadays games are incredibly good at giving depth to the screen without the stupid glasses.

plus i wear glasses so you have to put glasses over glasses - its all a bit.........meh 

[Kevin Wood]

The problem with 3D is that, ignoring how realistic the picture is it or isn't, you have to be 100% absorbed in the programme to the exclusion of anything else for it to work.

When's the last time such a programme was broadcast? The media industry no longer have the capability to produce such a programme. The tv thus remains a distraction to sit in the corner babbling sh1te and throwing out pictures, and my Fony CRT set does that just as well.

It's just the latest gimmick to get the stupid to part with their cash and upgrade IMHO.

Kevin