Who here has a 3D TV?
- Thread starter infinix
- Start date
My parents have one. Eh. It's okay but theres not a whole lot of selection out there right now for really good 3D movies other than the handful of crap that's been transfered to 3D over the last year, year-and-a-half or the CGI movies.
The one movie that started this latest craze (Avatar) isn't available on 3D Blu-Ray yet. My parents also only have two pairs of glasses and as the glasses cost over $100 they're in no real hurry to buy more.
I don't think the home market for it is there yet until the glasses become cheaper, the new technology that works without the glasses being a part of it becomes more available and even then I personally won't be interested in it until 3D without the glasses comes out.
Yeah, well for most of the TVs the glasses are part of the system and not just plastic things you wear on your face. They have small watch batteries in them and actually play an active role in what is happening for the 3D process.
It should be pointed out as well there's a way on the TV to make anything in 3D but the effect isn't too good on non-3D stuff.
Oh, I know all about the "Active 3D glasses" and being able to adjust the depth of 3D on the TV. That's all fine and good. It still doesn't justify charging that much money for a pair, especially given that almost every company out there will only provide ONE pair as part of the package when you purchase the TV.
My TV is 4D: width, height, length, and time from when I purchased it until it finally goes on the fritz or I tire of its existence. Did you mean forced-stereoscopic TV perchance?
Demoed it with the first 15 minutes of Avatar; it's just not the same as it is in the theater. I guess it depends on the amount of space you're viewing it in that makes you appreciate it (if you do to begin with). I seriously doubt I'll be buying one for a long time. I like what I've got, and I'm not forking over more cash over a current "fad."
2) At the moment, the only 3D TV that do not require glasses will work on the same technology as 3DS. A lot of people have reported that it is straining to the eyes after prolonged exposure.
Beyond that, I don't think there is anything else on the horizon besides actually developing holograms.
Looks like my pocketbook gets a break, then.
It may be unrealistic to hope for a glasses-free 3DTV system. Fine. Let them take as long as they need. I'm not putting on what amounts to a headset just to watch a movie.
Of course it has.. You just have to buy the Panasonic 3D kit.
Looks like my pocketbook gets a break, then.
It may be unrealistic to hope for a glasses-free 3DTV system. Fine. Let them take as long as they need. I'm not putting on what amounts to a headset just to watch a movie.
QFT.
I have no problem with occasionally seeing a 3d movie at the theater, if the 3d is done well like in Avatar or Toy Story 3... but I patently refuse to wear 3d glasses in my home.
I swear, I don't recall ever seeing electronics companies push something (3D) so hard for which there is this little consumer demand.
Ah, didn't know that was available yet.
I have no desire to do 3D at home. BUT, if a TV I wanted because it had the best 2D performance JUST happened to have 3D, too (as I believe they all eventually will), I wouldn't die on that hill.
I'd probably cave and buy it.
You must not have seen a properly set-up and configured HDTV.
Yeah, there's a very obvious difference in quality between standard definition and HD.
Similar threads
