3D tv.

[attgig]

So, it was supposedly the big thing at CES this year. I'm just wondering, how long before the prices on the sets come down to normal tv prices, and how long before we can watch in 3d without glasses. + when do broadcasters start showing their stuff in 3d?
Also, is regular non-3d stuff going to look good on 3d sets?

seems like something great is about to come into our livingrooms, but just wondering about cost and distribution.

[MrGreg]

I'm not convinced. Sure 3d has come a long way in recent movies (Avatar, Up, etc.) but I think a large part of that has been because they didn't over use it or get gimmicky, like in old school 3d where something would fly out of the screen towards the audience.

I'm not sure producers of tv shows would have the same restraint a movie director would in not abusing the 3d.

[attgig]

Well, I would love to be able to see the sporting events that ESPN3d is supposed to start doing this summer. With sporting events, I can't imagine it being gimmicky. just incredibly cool looking.

[cheapie]

can you imagine nascar, xgames, olympics, nba, etc. in 3d? that will be awesome!!!

[InfiniteNothing]

Yeah, I don't see my self watching TV with glasses on any time soon. Most of the glasses make you look like a tool. Reminds me of blue tooth ear peices for some reason. I don't think the technology parallaxes correctly so I'm unhappy with that too. I'll wait for hologram TV

[Apex]

http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/05/vizios-2010-xvt-lcds-go-up-to-72-inches-with-3d-led-wifi-and-wi/

72" Vizio local-dimming LED-backlit 1080p LCD, 3D, 480Hz, Wireless HD, 802.11n wireless, 10-bit color (1.7 billion colors), 10 million to 1 contrast (not that that spec ever means anything) for an MSRP of $3499!

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/01/new-xvtpro720sv-front_800.jpg

[cheapie]

yes please!

[attgig]

"55- and 47-inch versions available, with all the same features plus a new antireflective panel for those of you who like to keep the lights on during, they'll cost $2,499 and $1,999, respectively"

2k for a 47" out this august. sweet.

maybe next august, the 47" will drop down to ~1k? and I'll be able to afford it by then.. =)

[mojo]

i can see it now. limitations will be what is broadcast in 3d. as in, "i have a 3d tv, but can't use it." this will be limited by bandwidth (again). i'm not sure what 3d will take up, but it will have to be more than your average HD.

[ArkiStan]

So, the "3d" technology which was all over CES this year, does it require some type of eyewear?

Also, is the 3D-ness capured natively at the time of recording with special recording equipment or "simulated" somewhere further downstream such as the studios or within the TV? Considering these TVs are called "3D-ready" I would guess it's the latter, sort of like those "virtual 5.1 surround effects" you get from stereo speakers (shudder). In all honesty, how well could this possibly work? How is this being taken seriously and not as some fad or novelty feature?

[Chgoman]

It has to only work with glasses and who wants to sit in their living room putting on and taking off glasses from show to show. It's hard enough finding the remotes with kids, much less glasses.

It'll be like buying a printer. They'll give you the TV for almost free and then sell you the glasses in bulk as you lose and break them :)

[attgig]

Needs to use a 3d camera. they already have consumer grade point and shoot 3d cameras : http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10364461-1.html, but you can only see the 3d images on special screens. and the cool thing with those is that you can see the 3d images without glasses.

there were some screens in CES that were testing out glasses free 3d tvs:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/05/magnetic-unveils-a-clutch-of-glasses-free-3d-displays/
but this tech is still farther away than the real3d 3d stuff that's out in the market now.

and in terms of content, besides espn3d, there's a bunch of bluray and game applications that can make 3d pretty freakin cool. imagine playing a first person shooter in 3d. that would be pretty sweet.

[mojo]

currently the big names are using polarized glasses, but other vendors are going with other means (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7eNMCPJe_Q) such as lenticular lenses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenticular_lens)

[Butch]

When I was at the Autodesk Gallery (it's a company space displaying products designed using their software) in San Fran last month, they were showing a 3D TV that required no glasses. The content was digital animation rather than film-based, but it was pretty damn cool.

Edit: Hmmm, I was at the gallery the same day the Engadget post was written that att linked to. Wonder if they display was made by the same company.