Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
DamnInteresting
532 Followers
Naveed Javaid
8062 Followers
Standing My Ground
4860 Followers
subatomicdoc
2537 Followers
Waheed Akhtar
2739 Followers
Jovan Maric
817 Followers
sciguyajJul 3, 2010
I think 3D will fade in time as it always has. I'm not even sure it's healthy to watch everything in 3D! We've never had it last long enough to know what it does to people's eyes in the long run!
And who wants to wear special glasses just to watch the news, or a tv show? I give it another 2 years, TOPS!
myotheraccountJul 4, 2010
you don't watch everything in 3D. They are called 3D capable TV's because they work like a normal TV but you can switch to 3D when you feel like putting on the glasses. Just like if your TV has picture in picture it doesn't mean you have to watch everything with picture in picture turned on.
ericccJul 4, 2010
Has anybody seen my fondue pot?
doctechnicalJul 4, 2010
I think it's in the closet, behind the Pokemon cards.
sciguyajJul 4, 2010
Yes, but if you're buying a 3d tv that means you plan on watching 3D a lot, and the whole idea behinde the 3D tv is that eventually cable providers will start to put out lots of 3D programing. This would mean people would be spending hours watching 3D daily when the normal exposure is a few hours in months time.
Closed AccountJul 4, 2010
Quit sticking up for TVs.
3nder99Jul 4, 2010
Back when Avatar came out and everyone went retarded for 3d, there was an interview with Carnegie Mellon Professor who explained that current 3d systems only worked on a portion of the cues we use for depth perception, thus possible throwing our depth perception out of whack for up to 45 minutes or so.
So don't tailgate people after watching 3d, or you might be buying a new bumper.
brotherfrancizJul 4, 2010
"...or you might be buying a new bumper."
Hmm, surprisingly, that can also apply to another product released by a fruit company...
freckleearsJul 4, 2010
3DTV is a moronic gimmick and the TVs are just normal f**king TV's with slightly higher refresh rates and an ability to osculate between 2 different images in sync with a pair of glasses. Companies could just as easily build a small device for a couple hundred that is like a blu-ray player specifically for 3d movies but noooo.... they have to make normal TV's that are $5000 f**king dollars for a 52 inch lcd.
It is NOT fancy technology and ANY tv with a refresh rate high enough can do it.
What is in a theater though, is not anything like a TV and would be expensive to mimic for home usage.
kestasjkJul 5, 2010
Yeah, nothing makes me angrier than companies bringing new stuff to the market increasing consumer choice. The emergence of a technology I don't see the need for just boils my blood.
Also I totally get what you mean about how they could just as easily release a better product for much cheaper. They've got all the $200 boxes that put cinematic 3D visuals into CRT TVs ready to ship, but they know they have nothing to gain from a product that renders all competitors obsolete so it's buried
"I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a comment" (apologies to Babbage)
4dfxJul 4, 2010
Who the f**k says you need glasses for 3D TV?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SyuEjBEMN4
freckleearsJul 4, 2010
You going to pay $100,000 for a prototype?
Without oscillating between different images between your eyes, you need to display many images at once. All of the TV's that are 3D and glasses free are all prototypes, have their own specific file format for display depending on how many simultaneous images are generated at once, and are very very expensive. There is some s**tty one in China for $20,000.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/10/intel-shows-off-glasses-free-3d-demo-now-this-is-more-like-it/
poxonyouJul 4, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
fentekreelJul 4, 2010
I think the wii idea is the best way to do it.
freckleearsJul 4, 2010
@Fentekreel
You are talking about Johnny Chungs Wii motion tracking system that he and his team developed. That is not endorsed by Nintendo, it just uses their hardware. That is my personal favorite system out there but it would not work with movies or TV's. That works with games because everything on screen is computer rendered. You cannot render a scene for a tv show.
morphiexJul 4, 2010
well although i agree its just a phase that will fade, i just want to correct you on one thing.
There isn't any special glasses needed for these tvs, they are built in a way to provide the 3d for the naked eye instead of through so called 3d glasses. Just like the new 3d nintendo ds.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
freckleearsJul 4, 2010
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Nintendo-3DS-3D-Glasses-DS,news-6237.html
You cannot view the 3DS from ANY other angle than perpendicular or the image will be distorted horribly. That is useless for a home TV. The TV's at CES have 8 or more simultaneous images displayed at once. The more displays, the higher the price, but the higher the variance for viewing angles. The 3DS has only 2 so you can only view the screen from one angle.
freckleearsJul 4, 2010
I don't like the idea behind the gimmick of 3DTV's. That is no secret. There is however, a MAJOR concern with the damages that viewing 3DTV's for a prolonged time can have on your vision and health. It is bad like starring at the sun bad.
http://blogs.howstuffworks.com/2010/06/28/public-service-announcement-3d-tv-may-damage-the-vision-of-children-and-maybe-even-adults/
http://pmanewsline.com/2010/06/07/technology-developer-warns-3d-tv-may-cause-permanent-vision-damage/
http://getbetterhealth.com/how-3d-tv-can-affect-your-health/2010.04.29
http://twitteling.com/2010/06/nintendo-game-3ds-can-damage-your-childs-eyes/
That is just the tip of the iceberg. 3DTV's are VERY dangerous for young children. It can permanently damage their depth perception causing a constant case of nausea. Their developing brains may permanently disconnect motion and visual depth causing them to feel like they are moving when they are not or visa-versa. That could ruin their ability to drive, run, or even walk.
For adults, it can cause a similar disconnection that may make you sick when trying to watch anything on a 3DTV because your brain will be confused as to why you are not moving when a scene is not moving. Short term exposure may not bring out the nausea, say when some douche at Futureshop is trying to get his commission and only lets you view it for 2 minutes; but after sitting down and watching it for a few hours, you can get very sick. You could get sick to the point that you won't be able to drive home right away as you will have to let your eyes adjust to the return to normality. Also keep in mind that there is a difference between the auto-stereoscopy and parallax viewing like with 3DTV's and seeing Avatar in theater.
Either way... there is NOT enough research done yet to fully determine if 3DTV's are safe for anyone for prolonged usage like is being designed and marketed.
This may end up having severe consequences when companies roll out full 3D channels.
kleon777Jul 3, 2010
"Despite the push by manufacturers, a new survey shows that the 70 percent of Japanese are not planning to purchase a 3D TV for their homes."
Which means 30% of Japanese home are planning on buying one. That's a lot of people.
Closed AccountJul 3, 2010
or planning on not buying one
csfflameJul 4, 2010
no, it means that 30% are not not planning to purchase one.
That doesn't mean they are going to buy one, they could be undecided.
clevercommenterJul 4, 2010
Double negative negates. so they ARE planning on purchasing them.
gcnaddictJul 4, 2010
Nope. It just means they're not actively saying that they won't. They range from undecided to yes.
eikaiJul 5, 2010
They're not PLANNING to buy one.. they're just not buying one.. or they're buying one but are not planning to.
Closed AccountJul 4, 2010
The 30% could be divided between people who are, and people who don't know what 3D is and/or are undecided.
chessjpJul 4, 2010
30% of about 9000 people surveyed by an 'online poll', probably located on a technology website of some sorts.
To say that is hardly representative of the whole country of 130Million people is a laughable understatement.
staticneuronJul 4, 2010
Negative article certainly is a negative article. It belabors about how many do not want one but left out the info about how many who do, which was located in the source article from reuters.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66115P20100702
"But 67.4 percent of respondents said they were not interested in buying a 3D TV while only 31.2 percent were considering or wanted to purchase one, the survey said."
So the article is basically saying nearly 40 million Japanese people are interested but I am sure because of some personal bias it is slanted in a negative light,
eikaiJul 5, 2010
Surveying a whole country and expecting feedback from 100% of the population..
sjbdallasJul 3, 2010
They'll get onboard as soon as there's 3D tentacle porn.
flyingsquirleJul 4, 2010
WHRE?!
freckleearsJul 4, 2010
Anime would be very difficult to do in 3D. That might be a large factor.
doctechnicalJul 4, 2010
Not if it's done with computer help. Same with CGI. Tell the computer that this object is at this depth, that object goes over there, etc, let the CPU crunch the numbers and render the result.
freckleearsJul 4, 2010
I was actually going to mention CG assistance but I really didn't think someone would take my joke seriously.
On the other hand, having a purely CG 'anime' is no longer anime but a CG show. Animes/cartoons are traditionally drawn by hand and doing them in a computer no longer makes them cartoons. Modern cartoons are done by 'hand' and are stitched together and blended with computer assistance. It is the same level of computer assistance as filming a video and using s**tty video editing software for effects.
I know that 'anime' does not definitively mean hand drawn Japanese cartoon, but if you pointed at FF7 advent children and then Bleach, most everyone would say Bleach was the anime, and the FF7AC the CG film. It would also ruin the effect of a cartoon by having to painstakingly render every single aspect of an image. When someone is running through a scene in cartoon, the 'depth' is perceived by having say 3 or 4 layers move at different rates, with layer moving the slowest appearing to be the farthest away. Making that actual 3d objects that move in the background would be stupid. Imagine the Naruto game or Simpsons game being the actual cartoon.
I can't believe I just defended my joke.
recidivusJul 4, 2010
Actually you can use a simple 3D Compositing program to do all that (afterfx, combustion, etc). Same frames/layers drawn as they normally would, and in the compositor you punch in the distance from camera. Instead of moving the layers at different speeds (which is pretty outdated even for classical animation) they just pan the virtual camera. Having something come from BG to FG you can just animate the Z axis, simple enough.
Even classical animation is heavily digital now, the only drawn parts are the original frames, after that they're scanned, painted and composited in a CG environment, and most programs designed for this (all that I know of actually) support 3D layering. It's a pretty simple process to do, especially since everything is already broken up into layers.
Personally I don't think cartoons would really shine in 3D, takes away from the style, but that's just personal taste.
usernr1337Jul 4, 2010
everyone mentions that but how exactly popular is it? btw what have you against it? lol
brygidawalczakJul 3, 2010
@kleon777 30% means a bit more than 38.000.000 Japaneses ! That is a lot !
gvoakesJul 3, 2010
There's a reply button dude
brygidawalczakJul 4, 2010
Okey, I got it, Thanks!
kibibytebrainJul 4, 2010
Households. So more like half that many units. Strong, but when compared to other product categories harsh, especially when you consider this technology will rely on media and content distribution to justify its existence for just that install base.
adamzedJul 9, 2010
Just because it is 30% doesn't mean 30% WILL buy. It could also be 15% want it and 15% are undecided. For 70% to say straight up NO is a big number.
tugospiegelJul 4, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
zenmojoJul 4, 2010
I think that's the most important question yet. Some smaller sites have asked this question:
http://www.t3.com/news/poll-will-you-buy-into-3d-tv?=45043
It almost seems as if 3D television is a foregone conclusion in the American market and now companies are focused on what makes other countries different from us. This is amusing since they just got us buying HD TVs two years ago...
poxonyouJul 4, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
sikedsykoJul 4, 2010
I think you'll find that no one really WANTS a 3D tv, that is financially able to
attleboroJul 4, 2010
3D TV is stupid yo. That s**t be all up in yo face
rudegarJul 4, 2010
I'm really happy for you; I'mma let you finish. But Beyonce produce one of the best 3d tv's by hand of all time!
raydeenJul 4, 2010
You're doing it wrong.
jevins0Jul 4, 2010
I'm not gonna buy a 3dtv. I just got my first 1080p HDTV. Is ANYONE really gonna buy a 3dtv?
Besides the really wealthy?
dfrossJul 4, 2010
People said that about 1080p 4 years ago, too :)
po43292Jul 4, 2010
This man makes a point. Once it's a big buzzword in the sales of TV (once Best Buy gets a hold of it, I mean) a lot of idiots are gonna buy it.
dfrossJul 4, 2010
To add to that, I went and played around with a 3dtv in a store earlier this week. I wasn't blown away - it looks a bit 3d, but the effect isn't as pronounced as it is in the cinema.
And the glasses you have to wear are less comfortable.
eikaiJul 5, 2010
I still don't see any big difference with 1080p..
fragmasterflashJul 4, 2010
How about the Chinese? Given the strength of their currency and vast size of their population the day they set the trends of consumer technology has arrived. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out, Japan.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
raydeenJul 4, 2010
It's not China or Japan or Europe or the USA that sets the trends...it's porn. Plain and simple porn. If the porn industry embraces 3D then we will embrace 3D.
hipmanJul 4, 2010
Well good luck with that.I guess it's less of a deciding factor for me though....
fragmasterflashJul 4, 2010
my one-eyed monster cares more about DDD than 3D.
poxonyouJul 4, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
myztryJul 4, 2010
It's content issue. Since new original worthwhile content is slowing to a near standstill, the studios are desperate to resell everything several times over. The hardware manufacturers likewise would love you to replace your new sets just the same.
Despite the pretence that value of content is in the title and not the medium, you will be expected to buy titles you already own on a medium costing cents to produce at the full value of the title - if not significantly more.
My children's grandfather religiously take my children to see every movie possibly worth watching. That's all fine but weeks get skipped because their simply is not enough new content to make the experience worthwhile.
The same is going to apply to 3D television. There simply is not going to be enough content to put these overpriced sets to use but perhaps once a week. For that kind of scenario, the theatre is a much grander and economical proposal.
solja45Jul 4, 2010
It really is just a hype/fad that will fade away.
phillyocJul 4, 2010
Or get better and better until it is the standard. Remember that most everything starts out painfully.
lynnehkJul 4, 2010
With Japanese eyes, exactly how many dimensions can they see anyway? They can't even do up and down without tilting their head.
brotherfrancizJul 4, 2010
What? I don't see Japanese people walking into things. I'm quite sure Japanese eyes have the same depth perception as everyone else.
Funny that your comment actually reminded me of this hilarious Japanese game show:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aj7f3B1VCYM
njbignellJul 4, 2010
People don't need to go out of their way to buy a 3DTV anyway, as time passes all new TVs will become 3D capable. It will really depend on whether or not people will actually rent the movies or not.
I can't say I like the whole 3D experience, you watch it once and you think wow but now I always grab the 2D versions. Not to mention most people do other thing while watching TV, so it's really only any good for theatres and the occasional rental.
kibibytebrainJul 4, 2010
This is the truth. How many people even now in 2010 really "want" an HDTV. I'd guess its now a majority but there is still a huge segment who could really care less, they just want to watch a few talking heads shows a week. But is it even possible to purchase a non-HDTV now?
po43292Jul 4, 2010
*could not care less
raydeenJul 4, 2010
Wake me when it's holodecks. Until then, as Bill the Cat would say, 'Ack! Thpppppppppt!'
debravity1Jul 4, 2010
all other posts are superfulous...this sums it up
:)
jareth86Jul 4, 2010
3D TVs! How the f**k do they work?!
wakeriderJul 4, 2010
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/3d-tv3.htm
lonewolf01Jul 4, 2010
They use magnets.
mhf03Jul 4, 2010
Neither am I
po43292Jul 4, 2010
yeah neither am you!
itcollJul 4, 2010
i am not going to want it even if somebody gives it to me for free
benroyJul 4, 2010
I always knew they were ahead of the curve.
Closed AccountJul 4, 2010
The 3DS on the other hand...they'll be all over that.
rapaxJul 4, 2010
I bought a 52" LCD three years ago, and now most of the broadcasters have dumped HD already and gone back to SD. Explain to me why the same thing won't happen with 3D?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
po43292Jul 4, 2010
who has dropped their HD for SD?
rapaxJul 4, 2010
Pro7, Sat1, RTL...basically all the big private broadcasters in Germany
I have 200+ digital channels right now, of which exactly 4 are in HD. There's BBC HD (which is awesome), then there are two artsy/culture channels (Arte, Anixe) and then there's HD Suisse, which shows some bits from swiss national TV in HD (but only 720p) and a lot of fillers.
Location: Switzerland.
davdevJul 4, 2010
Sux to be you.
In the States almost all stations are now HD.
jonathan102Jul 4, 2010
The 3D technology is still not quite there yet.
ptherouxJul 4, 2010
I'll consider buying a 3D TV when they can make it work without having to wear glasses.
konhachiJul 4, 2010
The day Japanese people stop buying the latest hot consumer product is the day the world ended.
lucidhawkJul 4, 2010
If 30% of Japanese plan to buy a 3d capable TV , I have reason to suspect that's much higher than in the United States and other areas of the world so the article is kind of ironic/stupid.
While I don't care much for shudder glasses.. Once there are some good video games in 3d , I think it will so be worth it personally.
It increases immersion greatly, also helps somewhat with platforms and first person shooters anything where depth matters.
If you want reduced eye strain and a clearer picture for 3d content, plasma is the way to go.
coffeeroxJul 4, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
deancJul 4, 2010
i've liked some of the 3D movies and you cansee the techniques are getting better (eg Alice had way better 3d effects than Avatar) but at the end of the day 'meh' is all i feel about 3D tv, i'm not motivated to buy one at all.
hadez2000Jul 4, 2010
I still think that 3D is just another gimmick to get you to re-buy another television set.. it started as a scam to get people back into theaters and now the home entertainment industry is trying to cash in on this premature and ultimately stupid technology...
kotatsuJul 4, 2010
The glasses are a total deal breaker for most people. That and the total lack of content,- and so called 3D 'conversions' are not a solution, they are an abomination and a crime against cinema, and taste.
yage2006Jul 4, 2010
As they should and hey if you are going to wear goggles to look at a screen why not just put the screens in the goggles this 3DTV thing seems like a total scam and unpractical.
The only place I see this being worthwhile are on front end projectors with passive polarization.
disastormJul 4, 2010
I dont think its only the Japanese. Is there any country where 30% or more of the population is going to buy a 3d tv?
thehyphenatorJul 4, 2010
Wow. If they can't sell Japan on this tech, I really don't think it's gonna take off.
Closed AccountJul 4, 2010
They know it's a gimmick/scam. To me it was pretty obvious when they first announced it.
antdudeJul 5, 2010
Good. No 3DTV for me since 3D effects doesn't work with my eyes. :(
jesusfreak216Jul 5, 2010
its a gimmick the way it works currently and it is unbelievable how no one realizes this all 3-d movies/TV switch between a 2-d plane and independent objects/people in 3-d if the only thing that LOOKED like it was on the actual tv was the background of the frame with trees, people, etc in front it looks like a holodeck instead of goofy bull trying to pass of as 3-d
priggernickJul 6, 2010
Headline should read: "Japanese See 3D TV for What It Really Is -- One Big Marketing Gimmick".
kokaratDec 23, 2010
Toshiba 55-Inch 1080p 240 Hz Cinema Series 3D LED TV
* List Price $3299.99
* Deal Price $1599.99
* You Save 52%
: http://bit.ly/hKTrt5