These "3D" TV's

[Danny S]

Can you lot tell me what's the big hype?

My mate was telling me you can watch TV in 3d without the need for those silly glasses? But i'm in a world of doubt about this :/

But if you do need glasses then why all the hype on adverts?

Anyone care to fill me in ?

Dan

[mr_fibuli]

Yeah you need glasses with all the current TVs - I've had a quick go on one and the 3D effect was better than I thought, but the glasses were heavy and uncomfortable.

There are small screens that don't need glasses - they basically work in the same way as those 3D dvd covers you see. The new Nintendo DS will be using one of these.

[zippy3x]

I've seen 3d tv's that don't require glasses up to about 50"

The effect is created (iirc) by some sort of prism in front of each pixel. I wasn't really listening, but i think thats what was said. The prism creates 7 (or possibly 11) zones across the viewable angle of the TV. So you need to align yourself with one of these for correct 3d. Unfortunately while you may be in the "zone" for the center of the TV, you'll be out of it at the edge. As a result, you spend most of the time moving your head slightly to remain in the zone.

I could also feel the faint effects of nausea after watching for about 10 minutes.

I've also seen big 3D tv's that require glasses - they're a much better experience (apart from the glasses).

I suppose like everything else they will improve - but I don't really see the point personaly

[TuxRacer]

Yeah, they've had working 3D TVs which use a prism type affair for some years now, with the problems mentioned that you have to stand in the right spot (early ones only allowed for a single 'sweet spot') and that you can't watch more than 20 minutes, so virtually any programme, without feeling sick/getting headaches.

[qwerty123]

I think its one of those technologies that still need time to develop.

At the moment I really don't see the appeal of having to wear uncomfortable glasses to watch a something at home. More a novelty for the cinema, but it didn't really make me think WOW, I need that, compared with when we first got proper Surround Sound at home back in the day.

Just my opinion

[Plotloss]

The Samsung that was shown that didn't need glasses is properly hilarious.

It's like those ribbed things you used to get in cereal packets years ago.

[Dunclane]

I was in Selfridge with a couple of mates and they said I had to have a go on one of the 3D TV's they had showing. Now I've always been dubious of it but I thought it was really good.

[DiscoColin]

By the time you factor in the glasses and ancillaries they are currently about 100% more than non-3D sets, there isn't much 3D content available, there isn't a cross brand standard for glasses yet (though they are supposedly working on one, currently the closest to compatibility you get is that for Samsung/Panasonic you turn them upside down) and the technology is still in its infancy.

Personally I decided to skip it for now when I bought my set before the World Cup. If it takes off enough and hits the mainstream then maybe I'll upgrade in a year or 2 (and due to the current premium, if that is the case I honestly don't see it ultimately costing me more).

[TuxRacer]

DiscoColin said:

By the time you factor in the glasses

For 3D TVs that don't use them?

[DiscoColin]

TuxRacer said:

DiscoColin said:

By the time you factor in the glasses

For 3D TVs that don't use them?

None of those shipping yet chap, so price and effectiveness is unknown.

They have been working on them for ages (I think that the first prototype I saw must have been about 15 years ago, though it only worked for one person sitting at exactly the right distance facing straight at the screen back then - which was underwhelming), yet even now you still cannot actually go out and buy one. Though 'soon' does now appear to be a lot sooner than it was back then...

Edited by DiscoColin on Sunday 4th July 17:15

[Beardy10]

I really am not sure about it....especially the logistics of how it works in a normal UK living roomm. According to the manufacturers you need to sit something like 5ft or at a maximum 6ft away from a 50" 3D screen to really get the imersive 3D effect....personally I don't want to sit that close to my TV. I can't really see someone inviting their mates round to watch the footie in 3D and four or five people huddling that close to the TV ? I find it hard even to imagine a family of four sitting that close to a TV watching a film....of course you really need to be viewing the TV straight on so that makes the logistics even more challenging. Tiered sofa's in your living room perhaps ?

[FarmyardPants]

Beardy10 said:

I really am not sure about it....especially the logistics of how it works in a normal UK living roomm. According to the manufacturers you need to sit something like 5ft or at a maximum 6ft away from a 50" 3D screen to really get the imersive 3D effect....personally I don't want to sit that close to my TV. I can't really see someone inviting their mates round to watch the footie in 3D and four or five people huddling that close to the TV ? I find it hard even to imagine a family of four sitting that close to a TV watching a film....of course you really need to be viewing the TV straight on so that makes the logistics even more challenging. Tiered sofa's in your living room perhaps ?

I agree with you, the 3D effect on a domestic TV (admittedly TVs are getting bigger - by an inch a year at a rough guess!) isn't very immersive, and watching TV is and always will be a social activity. Wearing 3D specs watching a 40" or 50" TV won't catch on in a big way. People use the TV as background entertainment while they use their phones, eat their dinners and surf the web.

On the other hand, watching 3D on a large projected display a la cinema (which although still a social activity, lends itself better to immersion - watching a film to the exclusion of your surroundings) is much more viable.

IMO.

Which is why I am starting to think about twin projectors, silver screen, filters in front of the projectors, a pc with suitable video card and cheap, passive polarised glasses....

[Beardy10]

FarmyardPants said:

On the other hand, watching 3D on a large projected display a la cinema (which although still a social activity, lends itself better to immersion - watching a film to the exclusion of your surroundings) is much more viable.

IMO.

Which is why I am starting to think about twin projectors, silver screen, filters in front of the projectors, a pc with suitable video card and cheap, passive polarised glasses....

Very true but how many people have really got the space for a PJ in their living room ? You deffo need a projector for 3D in my mind and that's why I think it struggles in the UK, your average living room just isn't big enough!