3D without glasses
- Thread starter admin_exported
- Start date
We have seen some examples of glasses-free 3D in research facilities, but at the moment they seem very critical about where you stand, viewing angle and so on.
Will the glasses still cost a fortune down the road time wise, or will they get cheaper? As they are very pricey
Well the glasses for the polarised 3D systems - such as LG, JVC - are already very cheap: same sunglass-style specs as you get in the cinema. I bought 50 pairs for our Bristol Show demo for @£150....
The active-shutter 3D glasses - used by Sony, Samsung, Panasonic - will fall in price as third-party manufacturers jump on board, plus if/when the 3D set-ups themselves go more mainstream.
The active-shutter 3D glasses - used by Sony, Samsung, Panasonic - will fall in price as third-party manufacturers jump on board, plus if/when the 3D set-ups themselves go more mainstream.
The shutter glasses are going to be around £90 a pair from the reports I've seen.
One would hope that LG have solved the problems with sweet spots for their lenticular system as Sky have just bought 15,000 LG 3D tv's to install in pubs for 3D football broadcasting. If not I guess there are going to be a few fights to get into the sweet spot. However, I trust WhatHiFi's reviews over manufacturers claims so this footy season could get interesting!
One would hope that LG have solved the problems with sweet spots for their lenticular system as Sky have just bought 15,000 LG 3D tv's to install in pubs for 3D football broadcasting. If not I guess there are going to be a few fights to get into the sweet spot. However, I trust WhatHiFi's reviews over manufacturers claims so this footy season could get interesting!
I wasn't talking about the system LG is going to be supplying to Sky, which will a) still require polarised glasses and b) apparently isn't anything like 15,000 sets.
I was referring to true glasses-free systems.
I was referring to true glasses-free systems.
Tonestar1
Moderator
Do phillips not have a glasses free 3d tv, or have I been misinformed? Also is this going to be a multi-format war again? If so can anyone tell me who the main contenders are and which manufacturers are behind each format?
.....So (and pardon my cynicism) pubs have decided on the polarised system because the glasses are cheap? (imagine trying to collect back in a whole load of £100 active shutter glasses from a pub full of inebriated footy fans at the end of a match!)
...And presumably Sony, Samsung et al' are using active shutter technology because it is "better" despite there being a substantial price differential between their glasses and the polarised version?
....And if a sweet spot is needed to view Sky HD footy properly in a pub I can see nothing but chaos ensuing ....or is it just me??
NB: My local is installing Sky 3D so I'll guess I'll find out soon...
...And presumably Sony, Samsung et al' are using active shutter technology because it is "better" despite there being a substantial price differential between their glasses and the polarised version?
....And if a sweet spot is needed to view Sky HD footy properly in a pub I can see nothing but chaos ensuing ....or is it just me??
NB: My local is installing Sky 3D so I'll guess I'll find out soon...
@ Tonestar - No, not misinformed, but Philips halted development of that technology, and is now pursuing a glasses-based route.
@ georgejack - Exactly, couldn't have put it better myself
@ jetjohnson - No, Sky has presumably decided on the lower resolution version because it's actually possible for it to carry the service on its existing spectrum and using the current Sky+HD box.
And yes, the combination of the LG pro-use polarised monitors abd polarised glasses means the glasses cost is kept down for the pubs.
Finally no, my sweet-spot remarks were with reference to those 'no glasses' TV demonstrations I have seen.
@ georgejack - Exactly, couldn't have put it better myself
@ jetjohnson - No, Sky has presumably decided on the lower resolution version because it's actually possible for it to carry the service on its existing spectrum and using the current Sky+HD box.
And yes, the combination of the LG pro-use polarised monitors abd polarised glasses means the glasses cost is kept down for the pubs.
Finally no, my sweet-spot remarks were with reference to those 'no glasses' TV demonstrations I have seen.
3d without glases could be coming soon in the form of a nintendo ds.im not sure how its gonna work but theres a couple of things on the interweb about it.
3d dsi xl?
3d dsi xl?
Just a quick question:-
If i bought a Panasonic 3D TV (expensive glasses) could i use these better specs to watch the SKY 3D channel or will i need a cheap standard pair as SKY technology is the cheaper version?
If i bought a Panasonic 3D TV (expensive glasses) could i use these better specs to watch the SKY 3D channel or will i need a cheap standard pair as SKY technology is the cheaper version?
bigboss
Moderator
andytucker:
Just a quick question:-
If i bought a Panasonic 3D TV (expensive glasses) could i use these better specs to watch the SKY 3D channel or will i need a cheap standard pair as SKY technology is the cheaper version?
Regardless of the source of the 3D programme (Sky 3D, 3D blu-ray player etc.), you will need 3D glasses that's compatible with your TV. So, a Panasonic 3D TV will require Panasoinc 3D glasses as of now.
Just a quick question:-
If i bought a Panasonic 3D TV (expensive glasses) could i use these better specs to watch the SKY 3D channel or will i need a cheap standard pair as SKY technology is the cheaper version?
Regardless of the source of the 3D programme (Sky 3D, 3D blu-ray player etc.), you will need 3D glasses that's compatible with your TV. So, a Panasonic 3D TV will require Panasoinc 3D glasses as of now.
chebby
Well-known member
How about us spectacles wearers? (With the systems that require 3D glasses.)
There are lots of us. Surely no company is going to want to cut us all out of being able to buy and enjoy the product.
(Sorry if this has already been answered somewhere.)
There are lots of us. Surely no company is going to want to cut us all out of being able to buy and enjoy the product.
(Sorry if this has already been answered somewhere.)
Andrew Everard:
I wasn't talking about the system LG is going to be supplying to Sky, which will a) still require polarised glasses and b) apparently isn't anything like 15,000 sets.
From searching I see the 15,000 story was retracted and replaced with Sky providing assistance to purchase tv's. Shows how quickly stories change in this industry. I also wonder how many pubs will actually take up 3D if they're buying the sets themselves in these times.
Andrew Everard: I was referring to true glasses-free systems.
I wasn't aware that the "Sky" tv's were polarised and not lenticular. On that basis I can't really see how this can work. The cost to a pub in providing polarised glasses to hundreds of customers is going to be huge and just how many pairs are going to walk out of the door straight afterwards? People steal glasses (drinking) so how exactly are pubs going to be expected to retain polarised specs?
I once did a marketing thing for the company I was working for that involved supplying a local pub quiz with our logo'ed pens, the idea being they like the cheaps pens before them, were lent out for the quiz. At the point at which we stopped, we were going through 200 a month and that was at quite a quiet pub!!! Someone at Sky hasn't really though this though it seems.
The only way I can see it working is if you make your customers buy their polarised glasses so that the pub doesn't lose any monies through stock losses and the customer has an incentive to look after them. Only problem here is how many customers ae going to want to buy glasses and can the pub always keep up with supply and demand. Imagine an England match with 500 drunken customers and only 25 spare pairs of glasses in stock, could get nasty!
I wasn't talking about the system LG is going to be supplying to Sky, which will a) still require polarised glasses and b) apparently isn't anything like 15,000 sets.
From searching I see the 15,000 story was retracted and replaced with Sky providing assistance to purchase tv's. Shows how quickly stories change in this industry. I also wonder how many pubs will actually take up 3D if they're buying the sets themselves in these times.
Andrew Everard: I was referring to true glasses-free systems.
I wasn't aware that the "Sky" tv's were polarised and not lenticular. On that basis I can't really see how this can work. The cost to a pub in providing polarised glasses to hundreds of customers is going to be huge and just how many pairs are going to walk out of the door straight afterwards? People steal glasses (drinking) so how exactly are pubs going to be expected to retain polarised specs?
I once did a marketing thing for the company I was working for that involved supplying a local pub quiz with our logo'ed pens, the idea being they like the cheaps pens before them, were lent out for the quiz. At the point at which we stopped, we were going through 200 a month and that was at quite a quiet pub!!! Someone at Sky hasn't really though this though it seems.
The only way I can see it working is if you make your customers buy their polarised glasses so that the pub doesn't lose any monies through stock losses and the customer has an incentive to look after them. Only problem here is how many customers ae going to want to buy glasses and can the pub always keep up with supply and demand. Imagine an England match with 500 drunken customers and only 25 spare pairs of glasses in stock, could get nasty!
chebby
Well-known member
it's also worth mentioning that the last Sky 3D demo I saw - last Wednesday - involved polarised versions of the freebie cardboard glasses that fold flat/come in a huge printed sheet. Picture looked fine via these ultra-cheap, basically disposable glasses: assume this is what pubs will be supplied big boxes of....
And the last I heard the plastic polarised glasses were available for well under 50p a pair when bought in bulk, so might well be viable as a promotional giveaway.
And to return to the earlier point about the pens, surely if the pens were pinched and used elsewhere, that's good in that it gets the logo out and about...?
And to return to the earlier point about the pens, surely if the pens were pinched and used elsewhere, that's good in that it gets the logo out and about...?
Clare Newsome:
Well the glasses for the polarised 3D systems - such as LG, JVC - are already very cheap: same sunglass-style specs as you get in the cinema. I bought 50 pairs for our Bristol Show demo for @£150....
The active-shutter 3D glasses - used by Sony, Samsung, Panasonic - will fall in price as third-party manufacturers jump on board, plus if/when the 3D set-ups themselves go more mainstream.
We brought ours home from watching Alice in Wonderland in 3D at the cinema. Seemed a fair exchange for having to sit through 30 MINUTES of commercials before the movie actually began
, not to mention the movie being a load of rubbish written around showing off 3D rather than using 3d to enhance the story
Well the glasses for the polarised 3D systems - such as LG, JVC - are already very cheap: same sunglass-style specs as you get in the cinema. I bought 50 pairs for our Bristol Show demo for @£150....
The active-shutter 3D glasses - used by Sony, Samsung, Panasonic - will fall in price as third-party manufacturers jump on board, plus if/when the 3D set-ups themselves go more mainstream.
We brought ours home from watching Alice in Wonderland in 3D at the cinema. Seemed a fair exchange for having to sit through 30 MINUTES of commercials before the movie actually began
Darren Heal:not to mention the movie being a load of rubbish written around showing off 3D rather than using 3d to enhance the story
Actually it was originally written for and shot in 2D, only later being dimensioned up with some CGI...
Actually it was originally written for and shot in 2D, only later being dimensioned up with some CGI...
Andrew Everard:
Darren Heal:not to mention the movie being a load of rubbish written around showing off 3D rather than using 3d to enhance the story
Actually it was originally written for and shot in 2D, only later being dimensioned up with some CGI...
Could have been shot in the bottom of Wookey Hole with the lights out for all I care. It was still a pile of [expletive deleted] and the 3D effects were added for the beneift of pushing 3D rather than adding to the movie.
Darren Heal:not to mention the movie being a load of rubbish written around showing off 3D rather than using 3d to enhance the story
Actually it was originally written for and shot in 2D, only later being dimensioned up with some CGI...
Could have been shot in the bottom of Wookey Hole with the lights out for all I care. It was still a pile of [expletive deleted] and the 3D effects were added for the beneift of pushing 3D rather than adding to the movie.
Andrew Everard:
And the last I heard the plastic polarised glasses were available for well under 50p a pair when bought in bulk, so might well be viable as a promotional giveaway.
And to return to the earlier point about the pens, surely if the pens were pinched and used elsewhere, that's good in that it gets the logo out and about...?
Well on the 1st point I guess it depends on how many you lose and what the benefit is. I can't really see more people coming in regularly for 3D, just the same people who'd be in for footy anyway so so surely the amount of beer drunk and the profits would be similar anyway. (One would assume that most Sky pubs would be likely to adopt 3D and so the audience at each would remain more or less the same). In which case the loss of the glasses and the extra cost of the 3D subscription would actually result in a net profit loss.
I must admit I also don't think disposable glasses are very environmentally friendly.
On the 2nd point, I agree Andrew. But I think the problem was the price vs benefit point. Initial losses were expected but the losses were high and constant. I think the cost of advertising vs the potential audience size was simply too high for them to stomach as they weren't overly cheap pens. Maybe that was the problem, they neeed cheaper pens but then again if they were really cheap, people probably wouldn't have taken them and it also wouldn't have put across a good image either.
And the last I heard the plastic polarised glasses were available for well under 50p a pair when bought in bulk, so might well be viable as a promotional giveaway.
And to return to the earlier point about the pens, surely if the pens were pinched and used elsewhere, that's good in that it gets the logo out and about...?
Well on the 1st point I guess it depends on how many you lose and what the benefit is. I can't really see more people coming in regularly for 3D, just the same people who'd be in for footy anyway so so surely the amount of beer drunk and the profits would be similar anyway. (One would assume that most Sky pubs would be likely to adopt 3D and so the audience at each would remain more or less the same). In which case the loss of the glasses and the extra cost of the 3D subscription would actually result in a net profit loss.
I must admit I also don't think disposable glasses are very environmentally friendly.
On the 2nd point, I agree Andrew. But I think the problem was the price vs benefit point. Initial losses were expected but the losses were high and constant. I think the cost of advertising vs the potential audience size was simply too high for them to stomach as they weren't overly cheap pens. Maybe that was the problem, they neeed cheaper pens but then again if they were really cheap, people probably wouldn't have taken them and it also wouldn't have put across a good image either.
I think the cost of glasses is a bit of a red herring - if polarized content takes off (cinema/home/pub) a lot of people will have their own (my local cinema charges 50p and lets you take them away). I think pretty soon we'll see nicely made, comfortable, 'designer' sets on the market right up to Oakley level and 'clip on' lenses for glasses wearers (like the old clip on sunglasses). If you forget your own pair the pub will have a nice supply of advertising covered disposables (Beer brands, cigarette brands or Sky trying to sell you 3D for home).
However, that all depends on this actually being a success rather than a passing fad. I've been to see enough 3D films at the cinema to decide that the effect isn't that impressive, gives me a headache, and I'd rather watch in 2D. In a pub suddenly the screen becomes unwatchable/unpleasant to watch for any 'casual' viewers - ie anyone not glued to the screen the whole time. Anyone who arrives into the pub when it's packed can't really watch until they've got to the bar and back and picked up a disposable set.
I think 3D is a fail.
However, that all depends on this actually being a success rather than a passing fad. I've been to see enough 3D films at the cinema to decide that the effect isn't that impressive, gives me a headache, and I'd rather watch in 2D. In a pub suddenly the screen becomes unwatchable/unpleasant to watch for any 'casual' viewers - ie anyone not glued to the screen the whole time. Anyone who arrives into the pub when it's packed can't really watch until they've got to the bar and back and picked up a disposable set.
I think 3D is a fail.
Take away all the hype about 3D (and I reckon we haven't really started yet) and that proverbial elephant remains in the room i.e. whilst glasses (of whatever type) are required to watch it - it will never become a mass market product.
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
I'm a LiAV(!) and the future is Not Vinyl or CD, it's DAC / Streaming, what do yo think?- Started by Jasonovich
- Replies: 43
-
-
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram