3D TV - Audience Led?

[Alec]

I've been discussing it elsewhere, and someone pointed out to me (when i said it is not consumer led), that nothing is consumer/audince led in that sense; that people were not saying "we want 3DTV" just like they were not saying that with BluRay, DVD etc...We just followed, he seemed to be saying, with a heavy guiding hand from the industry (I'm expanding slightly on what the chap said, in case he's reading).

What do people think? Are there any instances of something being consumer led in the true sense (A/V goods please, not pyramid teabags)...?

 

[Cofnchtr]

Hi,

I suppose the consumer led the way in the format wars - we chose VHS over Betamax (or did the adult film industry), we chose DVD over Laserdisc, we chose CD over tape. Appreciate we didn't ask for the formats to be invented but if we don't adopt them, they'll stop making them?

Could we now be leading the manufacturers to look at their product range and to adapt to our listening habits? Linn not making CDP because their customers prefer to download/stream could be seen as being consumer led?

Cheers,

Cofnchtr.

 

[Alec]

Good points, thanks.

 

[Andrew Everard]

Cofnchtr:we chose VHS over Betamax (or did the adult film industry)

No, I think the film rental and hardware rental industries chose VHS over Betamax, at a time people rented rather than bought consumer technology such as this.

Cofnchtr:we chose DVD over Laserdisc

Laserdisc was pretty much a spent force when DVD appeared.

Cofnchtr:we chose CD over tape

Again, tape - in the form of the humble compact cassette - had been going for ever when CD appeared. But agreed, digital audio tape never really took off as a consumer medium, but then it was never marketed as such.

 

[Cofnchtr]

Hi,

In all 3 examples I have shown, the manufacturers were not the ones making the decisions - the decision was taken for them by 3rd parties.

VHS was adopted and Betamax phased out

CD was adopted and tape phased out

Laserdisc wasn't fully adopted and phased out but DVD was adopted and has lasted the course.

HD has been adopted and should continue to improve. However 3D may be a different kettle of fish. If we don't adopt it (we being broadcasters, film producers and the general public) it'll be another gimmick.

I probably could have written it better but it did answer what al was asking.

Cheers,

Cofnchtr.

 

[ElectroMan]

Cofnchtr: If we don't adopt it (we being broadcasters, film producers and the general public) it'll be another gimmick.

Fortunately or otherwise, it seems to be the film industry that providing the main impetus for 3D - after the success of Avatar the studios will be falling over one another!

 

[Andrew Everard]

And I do think the hardware manufacturers are looking at it as a way of selling some premium-priced product in markets - TVs, Blu-ray Disc players - where the price-trend seems unstoppably downward.

 

[Tonestar1]

I think streaming has been pretty much consumer led. New products seem to be coming on the market daily to suit peoples needs as opposed to 3D tv which is being pushed by the manufacturers.

I completely agree with Andrew's comments on premium price products. The margins on tvs, dvd players, etc are so low now they are always pushing the next big thing so they can make a healthy profit on "early adopters". Problem as far as I see it is that there is such a short turnaround on new technology nowadays the next big thing seems to be every couple of years as opposed to 10-20 years in times past eg vhs, cassettes, cd. I mean Blu ray is still in it's infancy as far as I'm concerned yet we are now being pushed on 3D blu-ray. Same thing can be seen throughout the tech industry computers, phones, games consoles.

I worry that people will get fed up with constantly having to upgrade their equipment and just stick to established tech rather than take a chance on something that may become obsolete within 2-3 years.

 

[Cofnchtr]

Hi,

ElectroMan:
Cofnchtr: If we don't adopt it (we being broadcasters, film producers and the general public) it'll be another gimmick.

Fortunately or otherwise, it seems to be the film industry that providing the main impetus for 3D - after the success of Avatar the studios will be falling over one another!

Indeed they do - but at what cost for the extra technology? Is there an increased charge 'at the door'? The specs are a stumbling block for some. I'm not against advancing the cinema experience but it has to appeal to the mass market and not a handful of punters.

When it comes to the home environment, how much would you pay for this new TV? With very little content the increased cost may be hard to justify. Are you prepared to watch everything with a pair of specs on, possibly over and above a prescription set.

Cheers,

Cofnchtr.

 

[Anonymous]

if its an extra £2 at the cinema who will care ?? its still great value taken in the context of a night out ..

my view is the likes of panasonic , sony , etc etc,obviously want people buying new 3d tvs , amps , bluray players , cables ,etc..

the market is probably getting saturated already with regular hd gear ,which itself is now much cheaper , and probably not making them that much money , and until 4k2k comes along (will that even make a difference at 40-50i), many people wont upgrade ..

but the key for me , is , even if 3d isnt attractive enough in itself to get people to ditch their current hd gear , the potential improvement in 2d on the new 3dtvs , over whats now available , might get people biting ,it always has on this forum , so you find yourself with a new panasonic 50in kuro (liberties taken there , but were hoping) , but you cant watch 3d on it without a 3d bluray player , maybe 3d sky box (if that will be needed) ...

so you buy them too , before you know it , your a 3d convert , more blurays in 3d will be released , the world cup is being broadcast in 3d, what next ?? wimbledon , coronation st ??

thats how i see it taking off , i think it will be a slow burner , but it seems to me to be here to stay ..

p.s unless its rubbish

 

[Anonymous]

If any pubs embrace 3D in time for the World Cup, I think it'll be quite funny to see all the pub goers with their 3D specs on, pints in hand.

 

[Anonymous]

We see the world in 3D. Why should the box be in 2D even if 3D is technologically possible? It is not rocket science. 3D is seeing the world as intended for humans.

If you want to go back to 2D then have your eyes altered to see those around you in 2D. I am sure it can be done.

No institution either Hollywod or Japan INC is pushing anyone down the 3D route. It's what was to naturally come in 2010.See it as an TV evolution. We should learn to enjoy it and not wish it an early death or a threat?

The 3D glasses is needed for now for the 3D Shutter system but don't Philips have a none 3D glass system but they probably cannot create a viable business case for it now....if at all.

Sony wins! Maybe Panasonic and Samsung can share some of the glory

 

[Anonymous]

a threat ?? swine flu is a threat , 3d is an option

 

[Anonymous]

hmtb:
If any pubs embrace 3D in time for the World Cup, I think it'll be quite funny to see all the pub goers with their 3D specs on, pints in hand.

the local alehouse would look like a scene from pulp fiction

 

[Anonymous]

maxflinn:a threat ?? swine flu is a threat , 3d is an option

3D TV is a threat to some who feels their pride and joy investment now will be second rated when March 2010 comes. If you are in the US in March 2010, would you buy a Sony 3D Bravia a 2D one?? If you chose the latter then you must feel threatened by 3D.

We all want to feel proud of our TV ownership and that means something. But 3D TV overturns that proverbial convention.There is little no room for 2D sets to outflank 3D sets..... as the latter will do 2D just as good.

It's been obvious from day one there are people here who wants to see 3D fail.No names need be put forward.

 

[Anonymous]

Aldfort say:

3d will not be widely adopted until somebody gets rid of the specs. Holographic technology is the only way I know that this can be done. (In a home context. Clearly IMAX gives a near real experience already.) The current crop is surely just the next Laserdisc fad. The reason I say this is that cinemas have tried this before and it flopped. If it flopped before why won't it flop again? It's basically the same technology.

 

[Anonymous]

ukisbankrupt:
maxflinn:a threat ?? swine flu is a threat , 3d is an option

3D TV is a threat to some who feels their pride and joy investment now will be second rated when March 2010 comes. If you are in the US in March 2010, would you buy a Sony 3D Bravia a 2D one?? If you chose the latter then you must feel threatened by 3D.

We all want to feel proud of our TV ownership and that means something. But 3D TV overturns that proverbial convention.There is no room for 2D sets when 3D comes out as they will do 2D just as good. It's a threat to some people inner sacred assumptions.

It's been obvious from day one there are people here who wants to see 3D fail.No names need be put forward.
its still not a threat , unless someone is going to sieze their 2d equipment when 3d goes on sale , its just an option , like upgrading your tv is an option , if 3d is good enough it will succeed ,if it isnt it wont , not because people feel threatened by it ...

 

[professorhat]

ukisbankrupt:If you are in the US in March 2010, would you buy a Sony 3D Bravia a 2D one?? If you chose the latter then you must feel threatened by 3D.

Or maybe just that you don't want to pay extra for a feature you're not interested in?

ukisbankrupt:There is little no room for 2D sets to outflank 3D sets..... as the latter will do 2D just as good.

That's yet to be seen - I'd be surprised if a a 3DTV could outperform the best equivalently priced standard TV since a lot of the money you are paying is surely going on the 3D technology.

 

[Anonymous]

No prices have been quoted yet for the Sony 3D Bravias yet.It's certainly going to be less than a 2D Philips 9664.A 3D TV that is future proof is what buyers should look for with a shelf life of 3 years.

I got my Bravia 2D Tvs only recently.Thinking strategically,I never adopted any Bravia TV, till I felt the end of the 2D development was approaching.I didn't believe as MatthewPiano believed in another leading statement he made - that Sony would come out with any other new 2D bravia range in 2D for 2010/11. I don't think so, with the recent 3D TV US annoucement.

Sony needs to conquer the US market first the No.1 battle ground.Then Europe.

Sony is hellbent and convinced it can take the 3D market by storm.Such optimism is not misguided. I am totally behind them and predict the company will have the biggest % of 3D worldwide market share when the market becomes ripe.

It's their year.

 

[Anonymous]

professorhat:

ukisbankrupt:If you are in the US in March 2010, would you buy a Sony 3D Bravia a 2D one?? If you chose the latter then you must feel threatened by 3D.

Or maybe just that you don't want to pay extra for a feature you're not interested in?

ukisbankrupt:There is little no room for 2D sets to outflank 3D sets..... as the latter will do 2D just as good.

That's yet to be seen - I'd be surprised if a a 3DTV could outperform the best equivalently priced standard TV since a lot of the money you are paying is surely going on the 3D technology.

What Hi Fi did an interview with the Sony LCD boss a few issues back and clearly said that the Sony 2D sets can be upgraded with a small component.I believe no major changes are required to retool the production line analogous to the freesat additions on the 5810 models. As all the 3D compatible sets had to do was to output in 120hz and not 60hz.

So why would a 3D Sony TV be worse in producing a 2D image then a 2D compatible Bravia??

 

[professorhat]

ukisbankrupt:No prices have been quoted yet for the Sony 3D Bravias yet.It's certainly going to be less than a 2D Philips 9664.

How do you know this?

ukisbankrupt:It's their year.

Nah, Samsung and LG will continue to dominate I think.

 

[professorhat]

ukisbankrupt:So why would a 3D Sony be worse in producing a 2D image then a 2D compatible 3D Bravia??

That question just has me baffled!

 

[Anonymous]

I was interrupted with a phone call, hence the error in replying:-

My reply should say:- So why would a 3D Sony TV be worse at producing a 2D image than a 2D Bravia TV.

Referring to what was said below:-

What Hi Fi did an interview with the Sony LCD boss a few issues back and clearly said that the Sony 2D sets can be upgraded with a small component.I believe no major changes are required to retool the production line analogous to the freesat additions on the 5810 models. As all the 3D compatible sets had to do was to output in 120hz and not 60hz.

 

[Tonestar1]

Another important issue for me is will the studios be able to remaster 2D material into 3D? It's only really suited to big blockbusters and animation as far as I can see. I'm sure a large proportion of blu ray sales is back catalogue stuff the studios reissue. I can't see how this will be possible with 3D so it will only be new releases that will be available. Where will the high margin remaster market go?

If the studios can manage to remaster into 3D one of the main points of the latest technology was to give a closer representation of what the director intended us to see. Which certainly wasn't 3D so where does that leave true film buffs.

Do you really want to watch Citizen Kane in 3D?

 

[professorhat]

ukisbankrupt:My reply should say:- So why would a 3D Sony TV be worse at producing a 2D image than a 2D Bravia TV.

Makes more sense. However, note what I said - "I'd be surprised if a 3DTV could outperform the best equivalently priced standard TV". The key words there are "the best equivalently priced standard TV". It's fairly simple to see that money would need to be spent on components to make a 3DTV that would not need to be spent on a standard TV. It's therefore fairly simple to theorise that the best available standard TV which costs the same as the 3DTV would be better at producing a standard TV image since all the money is being spent on components purely to do that job.

Please note, I'm not saying all standard TVs will be better than all equivalently priced 3DTVs, just the best one of that range. My statement has nothing to do with Sony at all really (though it may of course be that Sony produce the best TVs this year - we shall see!).

ukisbankrupt:What Hi Fi did an interview with the Sony LCD boss a few issues back and clearly said that the Sony 2D sets can be upgraded with a small component

Which issue was that? I don't remember reading it...