3-D At Home: Why It's Not Going to Work

[DavidBanner]

I need to post an update here, as I just spent a day evaluating a major company's new 3-D Blu-ray offerings. I will not say the name of the company or the titles, as it's not my place to do so, (although I will say it wasn't Samsung) but I will say that their products are solid, and the idea, while still forming, has potential.

Essentially, what I saw was a new generation of HDTVs which incorporate the ability to display the new iteration of 3D, using polarized shutter lenses rather than the old anaglyph idea. The Blu-rays we watched (including 2 full movies in 3D and several trailers for other films) were certainly more satisfying than the old-style anaglyph features I have seen. I noted that the depth was convincing to me, in terms of the menus standing out in front of the screen by about 6 inches, the subtitles standing out in front of the action by about 2 inches, and by the various layers within the picture standing out from each other. I also noted that when I moved my head to the right or the left, the foreground layers moved slightly and I could see more of the background layers on either side.

We were watching the materials on a 50" plasma screen, and we went back and forth between the 2D and 3D modes of the movie so we could check to see if the 3D versions were dimmer. What we saw was that when the HDTV went into 3D mode, the image became considerably brighter - almost washed out - when viewed without the glasses. When we put the glasses on, the dimming effect actually restored the image to the proper color timing. This is similar in my mind to the anamorphic encoding idea, only in terms of color brightness and intensity. In other words, the dimming is a compensation, not a detraction or even a distraction, since the end value is the same.

Now, none of this is to say that these films could only be viewed in 3D or that 3D was a be-all and end-all. The movies themselves work fine without it, and they should. I would say that, assuming the 3D trend lasts, you'll see the newer generation of HDTVs incorporating this technology as part of their general specs. So when you upgrade a set, or purchase a new one, you may well have a set that is 3D-capable. It still works great as a 2D HDTV, but it has that extra feature if you want to use it. If you don't, you still have the latest HDTV. If you do, you get an extra plus. And if the 3D idea goes away, the set still works in 10 years anyway, the same as any other set would. So I think my comment about 8 track players was premature. That would only be meaningful if the sets could only play 3D content.

I also have issues with the idea of making people pay high amounts of money for additional glasses, and I would support the idea now forming of independent companies making cheaper, rechargeable glasses that can work with any 3D HDTV. I also have issues with the various TV makers having exclusive deals with studios so that the only way you can see these discs for upwards of 6 months is to purchase the TV - ridiculous.

As for programming that can really make use of 3D, I noted that some footage of the Olympics had a depth to it I wouldn't normally have seen, and that some of the footage felt more interactive. (Downhill skiiing included snow being kicked up in a foreground layer as the skier passed the camera.) For the most part, I think it works best in animation, but I'll need to see more live action material to be sure.

One final thing. We sat through 2 full movies and more, probably over 3 1/2 hours of 3D material. No headaches. I will say that I think the glasses need to be made to better fit over people's existing glasses, but the "3D headache" issue wasn't there for us.

[Eric W.]

^^ Great write up!

[Paul MacLean]

Its still a silly gimmick.

And the idea of "retrofitting" older movies with 3-D is in principle no different from colorization.

[DavidBanner]

Agreed that it's a gimmick, although I think comparing it with colorization is a bit of a different issue.

I would agree with that comparison if the filmmaker is uninvolved with the process - a la It's A Wonderful Life.

On the other hand, when you have James Cameron playing with it because he wants to, I figure that's his business. I don't have to buy that version of the movie if I don't want to.

I see 3D as similar in many ways to surround sound in home theaters. It's a great effect when it works, but you don't truly need that to appreciate and enjoy the movie. Just as we don't truly need giant widescreen TVs to enjoy most films. But it does make it more fun if you're able to do it.

My point about the sets I saw is that the HDTVs being developed will be fully capable of broadcasting regular HD content without any 3D at all. So it's just an added capability that some viewers may choose. In another year or so, it won't be a big deal. I think it's just the latest attempt to get people interested in seeing movies on the big screen rather than watching them at home, and to get them to want another wrinkle for their home theater.

That said, it definitely works better than the old anaglyph system which used to give me eyestrain and headaches. This version didn't bother me, even after hours of exposure. And some of the effects were quite pleasing.

[AndyDursin]

My point about the sets I saw is that the HDTVs being developed will be fully capable of broadcasting regular HD content without any 3D at all. So it's just an added capability that some viewers may choose. In another year or so, it won't be a big deal.

I agree there as well. Seems to me they're incorporating it into their regular sets and it's not really going to be a premium eventually -- in a year or two, it'll just be a standard deal with the TV I'm guessing.

I still don't see any major push by consumers, who have only slowly gotten into HDTVs and Blu Ray discs, to adopt ANOTHER new form of TV -- another new Blu Ray player, another new disc, more peripherals...this is going to be a playground for techies who love 3-D and probably not anything close to mass adoption in the near future, if ever.

[Paul MacLean]

It used to be that you bought a TV and it was good for ten years or more. Today they're trying to cajole everyone into upgrading every TWO years, because your two-year-old $1000 1080p HDTV is "obsolete".

[AndyDursin]

It used to be that you bought a TV and it was good for ten years or more. Today they're trying to cajole everyone into upgrading every TWO years, because your two-year-old $1000 1080p HDTV is "obsolete".

I agree totally. Though, the reality is all the HDTV's out there -- nothing is obsolete. Some sets have 1080p, others don't, but if you have 1080i, honestly I still see no difference whatsoever on BD content played back at 1080p and 1080i. Perhaps for games and other applications there's an appreciable difference, but it might depend on the TV and type of content you are viewing.

They're just trying to make more $ however they can -- it's just a losing battle because consumers were so slow to adopt to HD in the first place, I can't see asking them AGAIN to indulge in another form of technical "upgrade" that really isn't.

[DavidBanner]

The way I see it, there are a LOT of people who have not bought HDTVs yet, and a smaller number who bought the first wave of HDTVs that were only up to 720p several years ago, and may want to upgrade.

And there's a lot of people who have held off on buying an HDTV because they were so expensive initially.

I think that would be the target consumer base for these sets. I agree that the 3D functionality will likely be unneeded after a while, but the sets will continue to be perfectly good HDTVs for both Blu-ray and broadcast content.

[AndyDursin]

Want to kill 3-D?

Here's how you do it...competing exclusives that will only work on a certain manufacturer's hardware.

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=4653

Game over if this actually happens.

[Eric W.]

Want to kill 3-D?

Here's how you do it...competing exclusives that will only work on a certain manufacturer's hardware.

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=4653

Game over if this actually happens.

Absolutely hideous concept.

[Paul MacLean]

Game over if this actually happens.

Then lets pray it does!

[John Johnson]

And in other quasi-release news today, there's unofficial word from our friend Scott Hettrick of Hollywood in Hi-Def that you Avatar fans WILL get your first chance to see the film on Blu-ray 3D format in November... but ONLY packaged with Panasonic Blu-ray/HDTV 3D systems. Panasonic has apparently signed a deal with Fox to make it an exclusive with their hardware for a limited time this year. This is nothing new - Samsung has had a detail with DreamWorks for Monsters vs. Aliens on Blu-ray 3D packaged exclusively with their 3D hardware (that deal expired this weekend, but no word on a wide retail release), and Sony is working on similar deals with Disney. One suspects we won't start really seeing regular Blu-ray 3D movie releases until this summer, when Sony launches their hardware, or even later in the fall. Either way, you can reasonably expect at least some titles on Blu-ray 3D to be available in time for the holidays.

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents