The percentage of TVs sold worldwide with 3D capability will exceed ten per cent by 2011, market watcher Screen Digest has stated. But the firm stressed that this will only happen if a “unifying standard” emerges to ensure that 3D works across all display technologies. If such a standard emerges, Screen Digest said it is …
I still have an old, basic telly. Not found the need for HD yet as, quite frankly, I have yet to see any "Ronseal" HD system. *NONE* do what they claim. I can still see artefacts of compression, stepping, lines, flicker and other problems in HD shows - so why bother forking out £1,500+ for a TV that consumes more power and delivers nothing more than what I have now?
3D will be the same. Narrow angles, headaches etc.
Sound is the key. Get decent sound and you become totally immersed. Where are all the Dolby/THX 5.1 broadcasts; hmm?
Porn, not games, will be the technology driver for 3D TV. As usual.
It's not that impressive. I guess because the interesting bits are generally hidden, it's only really of use if you're into people pissing / spunking past you or just looking at various bits bouncing. The actual coupling is far less impressive than you'd hope.
Though I guess it could be good for POV porn. And watching a massive sex aid swing back and forth across the vision, penetrating deep out into your field of view, would be pretty impressive.
The market's yet to swell (fnarr) for 3D porn.
The comment about sound being the next thing to improve is pretty much correct.
A technology in search of a need...
Who, exactly, really *wants* 3D TV? If it was so great, why haven't 3D movies become the norm?
Frankly I'd prefer it if they put the money into making a few more decent TV shows!
Bollocks to Bollocks
Porn drives content expansion not hardware adoption - its never been cutting edge. Gamers and sports fans are the early gadget buyers.
"Sound is the key."
It is indeed.
And, for me, a half-decent pair of stereo speakers run through an amp makes my 14" TV infintely more watchable than TV at mates houses where there's a fancy flatscreen (of whatever quality) that's being totally undermined by the tatty built-in speakers or a cheapo surround system.
3D could make films less realistic
OK if you've got a huge TV and sit up close, otherwise you're likely to see little men walking around inside your TV. Even on computer games, where you tend to sit much closer, the viewing angles are such that the action looks miniature.
I'm guessing 3D TVs will be closer to 0%
Maybe it's just me, but I'm guess 3D TVs will be closer to, ohhh... 0% or so, standard or not. Not because of the crapped out economy, just because I don't see a big demand for it.
Also, think of the advertising.. I don't think it'll be too long before someone just decides to basically launch a product right at your face to gain attention. The local TV stations like doubling to tripling the volume on ads is annoying enough.
I could see this being used for gaming displays (as they say in the article). If costs come down though, the ~$10,000 or so prototypes I've read about already looked like they did the job pretty nicely, and having a 3D game actually appear 3D could be a nice enhancement.
@ The BigYin 10:52 GMT
Get with it man... Large (very large) HDTV's can be had for less than 500 quid. with none of the problems u mention. Shows broadcast with suround sound have been around for years.
- +Comment Trips to Mars may be OFF: The SUN has changed in a way we've NEVER SEEN
- Vid Google opens Inbox – email for people too stupid to use email
- Back to the ... drawing board: 'Hoverboard' will disappoint Marty McFly wannabes
- Pic Forget the $2499 5K iMac – today we reveal Apple's most expensive computer to date
- Google+ goes TITSUP. But WHO knew? How long? Anyone ... Hello ...