Cablevision (CVC) announced today that it will be making its 3D debut this evening with their broadcast of the Rangers-Islanders game. While CVC states that their current set-top boxes will be capable of delivering the feed, the consumer will still need to have a 3D-capable TV (same deal we have with HD); however, Samsung's the only manufacturer with a 3D-capable TV currently on the market (Sony plans to release a model in June). The 3D version of Samsung's models appear to only be a couple hundred USD more expensive than their non-3D counterparts, yet we just bought the latest Sony Bravia a few months back! This whole scene reminds me of the video game system wars we grew up with...grrrrrrr.
This SI article did a pretty good job explaining the two options for watching 3D TV that the market will determine a winner. Kind of like Blu-Ray vs. HD DVD and going way back to VHS vs. BetaMax.
ReplyDeleteWould you rather go out and buy a new, expensive 3D TV that can be used with relatively cheap 3D glasses (such as those you get in theaters now)...OR...would you rather spend $150 on a new set of 3D glasses (for each viewer) that can work with less expensive high refresh rate TVs?
I haven't read the article (will do when I find time this afternoon), but I'll go with option c: wait until the next gimmick comes out that will include both HD and 3D and 'x'. HD TV's are just now becoming cheap enough for the average consumer. Now, they're wanting us to go out and purchase an entirely new model a year or so later?
ReplyDeleteSeriously, though - this reminds me of being a kid and making the decision with my dad that we were going to pass on getting the SNES/Sega Genesis and wait for PS cause we didn't want to be purchasing a new system every year - only, to go out and get the Nintendo 64 a year or so later, and then the Xbox a year or so after that.
I went from Atari to Nintendo 64 and Super Mario 64. Damn I just got all nostalgic thinking about the Nintendo 64...
ReplyDeleteThen I upgraded to PS 2 and I've been there ever since. The last game I bought was Madden '08.
Back to 3D TV...Yahoo & Consumer Reports have a good quick article up about the economics and consumer experience of buying a new 3D TV and the $150 glasses.
ReplyDeleteGood find - I'll be interested to see how quickly the content providers toss out 3D content, and how much better the viewing experience will be. Will Glee in 3D really be worth watching compared to traditional 2D? Outside of sports and some movies, I can't imagine a 3D experience to be much different than the non-3D version - right?
ReplyDeleteScott, your last question is to me the most important. Exactly how good is this gonna look?
ReplyDeleteThat said, if the difference is notable for basketball, that alone would get me in.
Aaron don't even get me started on video games. I would bring the video game talk all day long if I didn't think that would lead to a lot of boredom for you guys and our audience.
What about basketball would you want to be 3D? How would that differentiate your normal viewing habits? I just can't see this...
ReplyDeleteI don't understand the question?
ReplyDeleteI would want it to be 3D because if it's anything like Avatar, it will just make the depth of field look that much more amazing. So I will be able to watching the guys on the side of the court closest to the camera and the guys on the far side of the court in different planes of vision, which I would imagine would make every play seem that much cooler to watch.
I say basketball because that's the one sport I watch super religiously and care the most about. Not because basketball has some special attributes that would make it particularly good in 3D.
The nuances would be really fun to pick up, too as you could see angles and plays developing in greater detail (definitely the case when you watch a game live with relatively close seats).
Royce, you could do a video game Post, as long as you don't reference a video game newer than 2005. Unless it's Halo, then it would be really hard for me to contribute (except comparing it to Golden Eye 007 on N64).
ReplyDeleteI swear everything in my inbox these days is about 3D-TV. We haven't even seen TV's become 3D capable, and now we're talking about adding the functionality to mobile devices - eye-wear not needed!
ReplyDeleteI mean - if 3D is all its cracked up to be, this will be awesome. But I need proof dammit, I need proof!
Wait, 3D without glasses? Is there some physiological process I'm not aware that would allows one eye to view incoming light differently than the other eye? I call bullshit!
ReplyDeleteThe glasses seem necessary to force one eye to view a slightly different picture than the other eye (and when the brain puts those together it appears as 3D).
Yup - 3D sans glasses; no clue how they plan to work that out...
ReplyDeleteContinuing the ever-expanding 3D theme, there's an IMAX 3D film surrounding the Hubble Telescope and our latest (and final) mission to repair the beleaguered satellite..
Apparently I can't get enough of this, and perhaps this review of ESPN's 3D Masters coverage answers one of my initial questions (Will 3D be that much better than 2D?). While the author does note that he's unsure if 3D technology is a novelty, or if it will be all that it's cracked up to be, this comment surely belies that sentiment:
ReplyDelete"But it took me only about 30 seconds to begin coveting a 3D television for my home."
Really? That one sentence is all it took?
ReplyDeleteI still want to see it in action before I'm convinced. Will it blow my mind like when I first saw HD?
I think the combination of the 2 statements is very powerful. On the one hand he's stating it could very well be a novelty item, which shows you how skeptical he is of the value and merits of the technology. With this in mind, he goes on to state that he already wants one his his home.
ReplyDeleteNow, I'm not gonna run out and buy one just cause the author says he wants on (esp. since I just purchased a new HD TV a few months back), but I am more intrigued to read up on user reviews than I was a few weeks ago.
I think golf really has a chance to succeed in 3D because I would hope that you can see the undulations in the green. Even in HD it is usually difficult to see how the ball is going to break on putts.
ReplyDeleteHehe, undulations...
ReplyDeleteWhat good is 3D TV if you can't get drunk while watching it?
ReplyDelete