3D TVs to start fading into history

http://www.twice.com/content/3d-tvs-disappear-history/60365

 

That's some pretty spotty news coverage. I can see why Samsung won't order any more oactive 3-D glasses from their supplier because nobody wants active 3-D they want the 3d passive glasses. I've heard LG say before they're only going to have three premium sets which is fine with me. It's nice to have a choice. But I would love to know how the hell virtual reality is going to have an effect on the 3-D movies as this article speculates. I think we're a long long way off from virtual reality movies and if people think a simple pair of polarized glasses gives them a headache wait until they strap VR headset on to go see a movie --I'm pretty certain they won't ever do that. I actually read as we go to 4K sets and I higher The quality of 3-D movies will look better and better. The author of that first news article confuses ultra high definition with high dynamic range The article he quoted doesn't say anything about high dynamic range I was wondering about that because there's no way in hell high dynamic range as a replacement for 3-D content I actually hate high dynamic range images they look so phony and stylized there's no way anyone is going to shoot film or television using that format Except for some specialized art films

 

Not surprised. I don't know anyone who's bothered with getting one. Don't see much software available for the format, another telling sign.

 

One of my co-workers bought a 3D TV and collects 3D anything, other than that one person, I don't know anyone who bought one of these 3D TVs.

 

Well deserved IMO.

 

I've had one for a couple years now. Used the 3D feature maybe twice. The glasses sit in my closet. I view it as another one of those silly short-lived attempts at pushing a "fad" on consumers... who don't want it. Get rid of it and replace it with something that's actually useful -- like the better color resolution on some of the new 4K TVs.

 

I got one and I have a new 3-D movie to view (Sin City 2) and another pre-ordered (Gog). I love 3-D movies. I would not (and do not) watch everything in 3-D. Look forward to buying more.

 

I got one of the early LG *passive* 3D TVs back in 2012. Still will use it on occasion and have maybe 20 3D movies.

Although not a huge fan, I actually am awaiting a decent priced 75"+ 4K TV with passive 3D to watch movies in full 1080P 3D resolution. (Any recommendations!?)

 

We enjoy watching 3d movies. Watched The Martian last week, have the Minions BD for next time we get a chance. Also have several other 3d BDs. If you haven't tried it with good active glasses, you are missing out. But yes, the tech will likely not last.

 

My TV's came with it. I seeked it out with one but not the other. I bought a handful of movies that i only used the 3D feature on once. It's not a bad idea, it's that the designers haven't figured out how to make it seamless for everyday use.

 

I have a 3D plasma Samsung about 3 years old. I watched one movie in 3D about a month into having it and never touched those glasses again. In fact until I just saw this thread I kind of forgot I even owned one. 3D technology RIP.

 

I have 98 3D Blu-rays. I admit, however, that so far I've watched only 72 of them. And for me "active" is the way to go.

 

I've had a 3D capable set for nearly 4 years now but I've never bought the glasses because the ones for my particular set never really went down in price at $75/pair. The tech for active glasses was all over the map with each brand incompatible with all other brands and even with different models and model years within that brand. It was pretty annoying and certainly didn't help with the longevity of the format. Passive is the exact opposite where you can grab a pair from the local theater and they'd work, but that was kept rather hush hush, too. Not many people know that.

 

I don't have a 3D TV yet, but I have stock piled 4 pairs of theater glasses I've liked.

 

I have a Samsung plasma with 3d. I have maybe a doz. titles. I really enjoy it. Just watched the Martian. I really helps in being immersed in the big space of the Martian landscape.

One application was a 3D concert. The shots on stage with the band literally put you right there with them. Very cool. I wish there was more discs available.

The current technogy is good, not great. There are times when the perspective gets wonky, but I believe it will get better and gain in adoption.

 

I have about a dozen 3D titles and, while I don't watch 3D on a regular basis, I do like to have the option. My Sony is a 4K model which means more pixels (whether upscaled or not), and that means it performs impressively with ordinary passive glasses - the type you get at the cinema. A lot of my friends are astonished at the quality and the improvement over the cumbersome active glasses which required batteries and synchronisation and whatever. The passive system eliminates flicker and the glasses themselves are very cheap - or free if you bring them home from the cinema (after paying a dollar or so extra).

Incidentally, there is quite a lot of 3D content (admittedly of varying quality) on YouTube and if your TV has the YouTube app it can be viewed in this mode.

 

What makes active 3D better than passive on TVs?

I have a Panny plasma that's active - it's the only 3D TV I've seen, so I don't know what differences would come with passive...

 

I can barely remember what 3D looks like. When I was very young, my dad showed me a Scientific American magazine that had stereoscopic pictures of the lunar surface. Blue/red 3D glasses were inside the magazine so that the pictures were visible in 3D. Those lunar mountains really popped!

A couple of weeks later I lost the sight in one eye in an accident. I'd sure like to see ANY 3D anything now.

 

From day 1 it already seemed dated to me.

Let me know when the glasses aren't required.

 

Nintendo does it with a handheld video game system, the 3DS. No glasses required, it's pretty neat.

 

I think some that haven't had the active glasses in the last few years think they are more complicated than they are. The ones for my Panasonic are rechargeable and the batteries last several movies or months in the dare. They charge with a normal USB micro and being active they are much less prone to skewing as you move your head. They are also bluetooth and connect instantly when turned on. They whole process is very transparent and they are not annoying at all to wear. There are also third party glasses available that are cheaper, but i haven't tried any.

My only regret with my set is that the 4K delivery standard for Netflix and others was not complete when I bought and as the Panasonic was the first to have HDMI 2.0 I thought it was more future proof, but as it turns out, I'm dead for the limited 4K content.

Funny that If i told the wife that I was selling the $10,000 Ref75 to get a more expensive Ref150 she would not bat an eye (though I hardly even listen in the den), or even going out and buying a car for a toy, she would not bat an eye, but upgrading a good TV is just not going to happen. Never quite figured out the stigma that a television carries among electronics.

 

We enjoy the odd 3D movie on our 4K Samsung but it is a shame the ps4 doesn't support 3D as we have to rely on what sky have in their lists. I can live without it though.

 

My Panny glasses don't have rechargeable batteries, but the batteries I buy for them last quite a long time.

When I watch a 3D movie, a display comes on screen to show how much battery power remains, but it seems to be useless - it's been on "empty" for at least 3 movies!

 

Only buy the odd selective 3D movie. The movies are shot for 3D so I want maximum result. Panny active glasses, my screen is a little dark. Don't ever see 3D ever going away( yippee )because of the demand for 3D movies in China.