Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Although I've read plenty of reviews of various 3D HDTVs, and I've seen demos of several models in stores, I've yet to read anything by anyone who has owned one for several months and gotten past the novelty phase. If you've lived with one for a while, what do you think? How much 3D content is available? How much of it is good and convincing? Have the glasses become a hassle, or have you gotten used to them? If you had it to do over, would you have gotten a 3D TV or saved some money and gotten a 2D TV?
Of the store demos I've seen, Avatar and the 3D animated movies look great. The real-life content I've seen has been less impressive, often looking like three or four vertical layers of 2D images staggered at several distances, as in a museum diorama or the set of a stage play. Also, when I shifted my head slightly, the relative distance between the objects shifted unnaturally. It was interesting, but it didn't convince me I was looking into a real 3D scene. Some of these demo videos, I think, were 3D conversions of 2D content. I'd been assuming that my next TV purchase would be 3D, but now I'm not so sure -- especially since I've been reading that glasses-free 3D TV should be available and affordable in three to five years.
Four hours and not one response yet...that gives you an idea of how many people actually have one. lol
3D tv isn't catching on like the manufacturers had hoped. I personally do not know of anyone that has one and furthermore, do not know anyone that intends on buying one. The topic came up a couple months ago with some friends and nobody really cares for having it. Several of us are techies too and aren't interested at all. There isn't much content in true 3D and probably won't be much other than a few DVD's every now and then. As far as television content I doubt there will be much at all in 3D.
I expect them to try promoting them for a couple more years and then they will just fade away. I wouldn't waste the money on them. Who wants to have to wear those stupid looking glasses to watch tv anyway? lol I personally have never cared for 3D in general, even in the movie theaters.
I have a friend who bought one. Watched a movie and it was kind of a noviety ;so I passed on it whe buying new flat screen .I guess some would like it but I decided against it.Hated wearing the glass by the way just has i did when I was a kid and they came out with it in movie houses.It is not like being there is all I can say which is why it seeemd just a novalety to me.
Yeah, for me the key is how convincing the 3D effect is. If a lot of 3D content gets produced, and most of it is of the quality of Avatar, then I'll buy a 3D, but I'm not yet convinced it's going to happen. What's funny is that my wife bought the 2D Blu-Ray version of Avatar when it came out, and the CGI life forms, while excellent, looked like CGI to me, whereas they looked believably realistic to me in 3D IMAX in the theater. In that instance, 3D is better than 2D. But I'm not going to buy a 3D TV just so I can watch Avatar and the various animated Pixar movies. I also think screen size matters, when it comes to believing you're looking through a window into a 3D world. My plan has been to buy a projector and big screen the next time I upgrade (probably at least a couple years away), so I've been keeping my eye on 3D projector technology. Apparently the issue is that 3D looks better on a gray screen, and 2D looks better on a white screen (or vice versa), and they're still trying to perfect a projector that looks equally good in 2D and 3D with the same screen. By the time I'm ready to buy, we should know whether 3D is here to stay or not. (Is anyone here old enough to remember the quadraphonic audio fad of the late 1970s?) As someone who has worn glasses for 35 years, wearing an extra pair for 3D TV isn't that big a deal, although I'd prefer not to have to wear them.
No matter how much 3D TV content is produced, or how "cool" it is, people do not want to deal with donning bulky 3D glasses in their own house, just to enjoy the show. The glasses can get lost, they make it harder to multitask (i.e. talk to your family/friends during the show), and you have to buy extra pairs for anyone you invite over. Plus you have more batteries to deal with. In short, they are a pain in the a$$.
The glasses-free 3D technology (aka parallax barrier) being used in some smaller displays (e.g. Nintendo 3DS) is far superior. Now if they could just improve the viewing angle and screen size, I'd be all over that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
