Bits Life Without 3D

Don't know where you live, but in Germany and the Netherlands "Full-HD" (1080) has become the standard for TV's about 1 to 1-1/2 years ago.
Not that anybody utilises it, TV is in 720 max.

 

Well, I was never one to follow advertising. Apart from a minority of funny or cool ads, I detest most adverts. Yes I see ads for 3d TV's every day and I note the prices are falling. Although I spent a long time in 3d back when I was using CRT monitors, I don't feel any pressure to sell the 2 large TV's I bought last year and buy a 3d TV. Nor do I overreact and say 3d is a gimmick because it's being promoted by advertising companies. It's a technology that's now coming of age and will be improved upon in the same way computer tech is advanced and refined.

It seems laughable that so many people here throw a hissy-fit because they "feel pressured" into buying something or they dismiss 3d because it isn't perfect as they decide it should be. My experiences with 3d have been very positive, certainly with computer gaming and Nvidia 3d drivers. The only 3d movie I've seen at the cinema is Avatar and that didn't make me vomit or cause headaches or dizziness as some others might claim. I am aware there are many other 3d movies appearing now but those are movies I wouldn't rate highly anyway. Drive angry 3d? I like the new Tron movie but I haven't seen it in 3d.

Someone else here said he had a problem with depth focus being out of his control and down to the 3d movie or game. I haven't noticed that myself. The only issue with active shutter glasses when I used them some years ago was the ghosting and screen darkening. I was able to focus on various objects in the game without issue.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgx-Vw7zPe0&feature=relmfu

 

I don't think anyone's "thrown a hissy-fit" or stated that they've "felt pressured" into buying 3D or anything of the like. Quite a few people (myself included) have stated that we don't enjoy or like 3D technology simply because we either don't notice it or have troubles watching it.

And TBH aren't you doing exactly the same thing that you state the "other side" is doing?

You're saying that we're dismissing 3D because of our own personal experiences... but here you are defending 3D simply because "it works for you", it's rather stupid to dismiss another side's argument just because "you don't experience it".

And on a side note, whilst i do get headaches watching 3D movies, it doesn't mean i can't perceive 3D. There have been very few things that have impressed me in 3D and most of those were very short demos designed to highlight the best case scenarios in films. Otherwise i find that everything just appears like a collage with objects appearing at set depths and actually highlighting how 2D a film actually is.

 

I was referring to the other recent bit tech 3d articles (ATI and Nvidia) where people complained bitterly about 3d and called it a fad or gimmick. That's really all I'm reacting to since calling it either of those things doesn't make sense.

I'm not arguing that some people can't use it or don't like it (we should all have a choice). I'm just not going to be one of the people who dismiss it as a waste of time.

 

I think 3D is the future, however i'd still call it a gimmick... at the moment.

Like i said before, i've very rarely been impressed by 3D and it's my personal opinion that it doesn't offer anything special.

You previously said that you already see the world in 3D, so why not movies? (or something similar to that). I'd counter that i can already tell that the world in a movie is 3D, why do i need have it effectively "shoved" in my face? Like i (and others) said previously, it's almost like watching a kid's pop-up book rather than it actually being "true 3D".

When the technology moves along such that it seems real, i'll say that it was worth releasing. At the moment i see it as more proof of concept, aka "look this is what we can do/how far we are along now".

 

I think that's reasonable.

 

My TV set is 5 years old no i still dont get even 720 over most of the broadcasts. (and i dont watch that much TV broadcast TV on it to be honest football benafits from HD but i only pay for the odd match) Its my PC monitor and where i watch BluRay/DVDs.
Sorry to say i can only take care of what hardware i have in my house what the BBC, SKY and Virgin etc put out is not unfortuanly under my control.

 

In the UK the BBC have been broadcasting in 1080i since Freeview HD came out, and in the last month have started switching to 1080p. Sky/Virgin are also on 1080i, along with most other channels - but I'm expecting a further move to 1080p over the coming year or so.

Basically, 720p isn't used for broadcast.

 

I need to get a dish big enough to catch BBC-Freeview here in Germany then

Anyway, what I meant is, I'd prefer a decent "Full-HD" coverage over 3D...