3D TVs are coming out now

[Station]

Originally Posted by Ansur

I'm still confused why widescreen TVs aren't in the same aspect ration as movie screens. Why go 16x9 when you're still cutting the format or dealing with black bars? Why didn't they make them 2.39:1? We could have watched movies in their full format and have a standard aspect ratio.

They do make those, but you'll get black bars for tv and movies formatted the other way. The only way you'll do away with black bars is to get 3 different tv sets or try to standardize the entire film industry. Take your pick. I love my hd tv and blu-ray, but i think this whole 3-d thing is getting a little out of hand. I don't mind it when they make a movie for that purpose, but there are a lot of upcoming movies that are being delayed and ported for 3d after the fact and its getting gimmicky really fast. i think the advent of 3d televisions are just going to push that trend. I think the only thing you need for a 3d tv is a 250Hz or better refresh rate. Vizio is coming out with an LED tv that has that for around a grand later this year, so if you're thinking of buying, I'd wait till then. I'm excited about what it will do for video games though.

[FreydNot]

I've worked in the 3D industry for 11 years. The company I work for mostly focuses on science and industrial since they tend to have the funding and the tools to take advantage of the technology. We are happy to sell to anyone, but those two make up the majority of our business.

I think it will be an uphill struggle getting the average consumer to jump on the 3D bandwagon. Nothing will move at all until there is content. Now that the studios are making 3D movies and there is a standard for sending 3D across HDMI we should start seeing things move forward in the consumer space.

3D consumer TV's have been around for a few years. I have one in my living room now. It is a DLP based rear projection TV which does stereo very well. Unfortunately, it probably won't be compatible with the upcoming 3D capable blu-ray players, but that is the life of an early adopter.

There are several DLP projectors that are 3D enabled now at reasonable prices (for consumers). Without a doubt they give the best 3D experience when using active shutter glasses.

nVidia has been pushing their 3D Vision solution to turn video games into 3D for a while now. It's pretty cool stuff which gives you off the shelf games in stereoscopic 3D right now (games like WOW, Resident Evil 5, Call of Duty 4 etc). Unfortunately, LCD just doesn't preform very well at 120Hz. They have to play some tricks to hide the slow refresh of the display. This results in the glasses blocking out more light then you would expect. It's as if you were wearing sun glasses. DLP projection technology doesn't have that problem.

When it comes to Hollywood films, there is a wide range of 3D quality. Low quality 3D makes your head hurt and doesn't make you want to see more 3D films. Good 3D adds to the experience and doesn't take you out of the experience.

Just my $.02...

[TheInfamousBiGD]

I don't see the point of 3D all the fucking time. A movie for 2 hours ok. TV shows are mostly shitty as it is now, if this kicks off TV shows will start concentrating more on throwing shit on your face rather than a good story; And video games in 3D to me is a no no.

[DWarrior]

Originally Posted by spooky

You are fucking with us, right?

Do you never listen to the director commentaries? That alone is worth the money for the DVD switch, never mind being able to use an actual widescreen format. I used to buy shitty letterbox VHS tapes before DVD so I didn't miss the 40%+ that was cut off the sides of the movie, but made the whole thing much lower in resolution.

Hence, I said DVD was a useful invention because it added features over VHS, so I can appreciate switching over. Blu-Ray and HD DVD, on the other hand, merely make a movie prettier. The point is that I can see why switching over from audio cassettes to CDs or from VHS to DVD makes sense and why I personally did it, whereas I don't see much value in higher def video or 3d (in the way it's done now, merely making existing movies in 3d, it's conceivable that it will result in a new genre that can only be effective in 3d, if I knew what that was I would be looking for venture capital).

I mean, I guess the story in the movie stays the same, if that's your point, but what the fuck, man? You liked seeing just half the movie or having those annoying black bars on the top and bottom of the tiny old school square screen?

I don't believe this is a physical restriction of VHS, but rather of the industry at the time, the TVs were all 4:3. Besides, I see no reason why movies couldn't be made at 4:3 and just show MORE picture (fit a 16:9 in the center, then show more above and below). Matt B will have to chime in here, but this reason is nonsense afaik.

And on you complaining about the 3D crap having depth of field...the blurry backgrounds are fucking blurry in the 2D presentation as well, why the hell are you complaining about it being a problem in 3D? You fucking see that way, man, and it's a guided tour the director takes you on, if he wants you ignoring the focus of the scene and looking at some other shit that is irrelevant, he'd point the camera at it. Pay attention to the film/story and you won't have that problem anymore. Making everything in focus would be unnatural and confusing, as the eye doesn't see that way, 3D isn't supposed to enhance YOUR senses, it's meant to enhance the visuals of the movie.

Except I don't see the world that way. When a play takes me on a guided tour of the story, the surroundings aren't blurred. When I'm on a museum trip, the stuff around isn't blurred. It's weird to be able to focus on an object in a 3d scene and it have a vision blur. And like I said, the silvery glow of the stuff is hardly an enhancement of the senses.

Also, if EVERYTHING is made in 3D, you'll still always have the option of just watching every other frame without the aid of glasses, resulting in a regular 2D experience. Don't fight progress, man, even if video games and a tiny number of films are all that's ever done with this, it'll be worth it to play HALO in 3D. Nevermind all the peripheral and unexpected advancements that may happen as a result if widespread adoption happens. Remember, it's an added feature, it's not forcing a replacement.

ok, so justify 3d by saying it can lead to something actually good/useful. I can agree with that, but I'm pretty sure I can still say it's not useful. I can appreciate Blu-Ray allowing for more data storage in the same physical volume, but I still say Blu-Ray movies are unnecessary.

Just out of curiosity, do you frown on surround sound, too? I mean, mono still plays the music and says all the words, right?

I'm indifferent towards surround sound. If I awoke to never hear audio/video in surround (or stereo for that matter), I wouldn't miss it. To take it to an extreme, I seriously believe I wouldn't miss color in video, I don't find myself enjoying BW films any less (although it's very possible that it's more challenging for the director to effectively film when certain colors look very similar in b/w, so it may be necessary for that reason).

[Junkenstein]

If you have such a narrow definition of "necessary" and "useful" than no technological adavancement really fits it.

[DWarrior]

Originally Posted by Junkenstein

If you have such a narrow definition of "necessary" and "useful" than no technological adavancement really fits it.

Light bulbs, batteries, sphygmomanometers fit

iTouches and HD DVDs do not

[Junkenstein]

So you dont like entertainment, basically.

[spooky]

How about doctors being able to do lapriscopic surgeries using 3D? What about ships being able to navigate shallow waters with a 3D sonar setup or some 3D ocean floor map? Architects being able to demonstrate to a client how the lobby will look in their new $100 babillion dollar tower through a physical walkthrough? What about the notion of digital sculpture or some other kind of new art form that wasn't really possible before? Military heads up displays becoming interactive with the actual environment in front of them?

It's difficult to think of a profession that couldn't make good use of the technology.

[picard102]

Originally Posted by spooky

It's difficult to think of a profession that couldn't make good use of the technology.

Janitors.

[DWarrior]

Originally Posted by picard102

Janitors.

3d LCD pannels on vacuums for when you're vacuuming those hard-to-reach spots under surfaces.