3D at home

[AzStevenCal]

It's been awhile since we've had a thread about 3d TV. How many people have bought into it? Are you happy with it? Any concerns, other than the lack of material? How about the TV's that convert 2D to 3D, does it improve the picture or experience at all?

I have a smaller Sony Bravia (46 inch) that I can watch 3D with but I've rarely used it. I'm going to be replacing my main TV soon and I can't decide whether to get one with 3D or just get a regular HDTV. I really would have thought that it would have either taken off or died by now but it still seems to fall in the alive but barely kicking category. Any thoughts/help would be appreciated.

Steve

 

[UncleChris]

My son has one. I've found that unless the room is completely dark, a lot of the 3D effect/feeling gets lost (for me, anyway).

 

[AzStevenCal]

My son has one. I've found that unless the room is completely dark, a lot of the 3D effect/feeling gets lost (for me, anyway).

Are you viewing from fairly straight on? I'm not sure if that's still an issue but I know I heard about that when it first came out. Also, do you know if his setup is active or passive? I don't know it that makes a difference as far as viewing angles go but it's one more thing I'll have to consider if/when I make my decisions.

I've watched a couple of 3D movies on my 46 inch TV and while I enjoyed the spectacle of it I couldn't really decide if it was gimmick or the next big thing. I guess I can mark you down for the gimmick side.

Steve

 

[BillsCarnage]

I haven't bought into it yet and probably won't for a while. At least not until the 90" 4K TVs come down to reasonable price. I'd reckon 3D would look mighty nice on that.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I haven't bought into it yet and probably won't for a while. At least not until the 90" 4K TVs come down to reasonable price. I'd reckon 3D would look mighty nice on that.

Well, with a 90 inch screen you'd at least have a chance to see some difference with your 4K TV. I'd have to knock out a wall or two to make room for a screen that size. I'm not sure what the WAF offset for that would be. I'd probably have to buy her a new car or something.

Steve

 

[BillsCarnage]

Booyah! A cool $25k for 4k.. some how that doesn't add up right.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-57507096-1/sony-puts-a-price-on-its-4k-tv-$25000/

 

[jf-08]

I have a 63" 3D tv. Our tv converts a 2D into a 3D. It looks fine, but it is just as nice to watch 2D. I used it once - just to show my neighbors we have it. I think the active 3D is a gimmick that will be short-lived.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I have a 63" 3D tv. Our tv converts a 2D into a 3D. It looks fine, but it is just as nice to watch 2D. I used it once - just to show my neighbors we have it. I think the active 3D is a gimmick that will be short-lived.

I haven't stayed on top of this but I thought active 3D was initially pretty much the standard but that more and more manufacturers have moved to passive? It's my understanding this trend is due to cost and the fact the glasses are a little easier on the eye even though typically the active version provides a better 3D experience.

Steve

 

[jf-08]

I haven't seen passive 3D yet. The glasses for active can be expensive.

Here is a recent article though on A vs P:

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57437344-221/active-3d-vs-passive-3d-whats-better/

 

[AzStevenCal]

I haven't seen passive 3D yet. The glasses for active can be expensive.

Here is a recent article though on A vs P:

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57437344-221/active-3d-vs-passive-3d-whats-better/

My Sony uses active 3D. I had assumed my next purchase, if 3D, would be of a passive set but after reading that article, I have my doubts. Maybe I should just move my little 46 inch Bravia into my living room and put up with a smaller screen for how ever many years it takes them to bring to market a decent 3D TV that doesn't use glasses. Unfortunately, when you're used to watching the NFL on a 65 inch screen, a 46 inch TV can make those guys look pretty small.

Steve

 

[MadCardDisease]

I refuse to watch 3D in the theaters. I hate having to wear glasses when I watch a movie. Therefore I would never buy a 3D TV for my home. It seems very gimicky to me. Just another way to grab some more cash from consumers IMO.

 

[UncleChris]

Are you viewing from fairly straight on? I'm not sure if that's still an issue but I know I heard about that when it first came out. Also, do you know if his setup is active or passive? I don't know it that makes a difference as far as viewing angles go but it's one more thing I'll have to consider if/when I make my decisions.

I've watched a couple of 3D movies on my 46 inch TV and while I enjoyed the spectacle of it I couldn't really decide if it was gimmick or the next big thing. I guess I can mark you down for the gimmick side.

Steve

The reasons for the poor effect isn't because of the 3-D technique, it's due to the distractions that surround the screen, i.e. the room itself. The best 3D EVER is any of them viewed on true IMAX. as the screen almost totally consumes your vision.

For me, the 3D effect requires "focus on your focus", i.e. the 3D effect is not a natural thing. Other things around the screen make me lose my visual "3D focus."

Did that make sense?

 

[AzStevenCal]

The reasons for the poor effect isn't because of the 3-D technique, it's due to the distractions that surround the screen, i.e. the room itself. The best 3D EVER is any of them viewed on true IMAX. as the screen almost totally consumes your vision.

For me, the 3D effect requires "focus on your focus", i.e. the 3D effect is not a natural thing. Other things around the screen make me lose my visual "3D focus."

Did that make sense?

Yeah, that makes sense. It is a lot more like work than it ought to be. So far, I remain slightly underwhelmed by in-home 3D. Maybe I just haven't seen the killer title yet.

Steve

 

[UncleChris]

Yeah, that makes sense. It is a lot more like work than it ought to be. So far, I remain slightly underwhelmed by in-home 3D. Maybe I just haven't seen the killer title yet.

Steve

In theater, Avatar is the king of great 3D. On the smaller screen at home, well, meh... imho