# It's Official: DIRECTV 3D coming in June



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

According to *this article* in Engadget, Panasonic confirmed that there will be DIRECTV 3D broadcasting in June. There will be three channels and they will be available via software upgrade.

Let's continue all previous discussion in this thread.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Press release courtesy of PRNewsWire:



> DIRECTV - First Television Provider to Launch 3D in the Home -Will Soon Deliver Three Dedicated 3D Channels Presented by Panasonic
> 
> LAS VEGAS, Jan. 6 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- DIRECTV, the world's most popular television service, and Panasonic, a world leader in HDTV and digital electronics, announced today a strategic relationship that, for the first time, will bring 3D TV, the next frontier of television entertainment, to the largest audience nationwide. Beginning in June 2010, millions of DIRECTV HD customers will receive a free software upgrade enabling them to have access to three dedicated 3D channels through their 3D television sets, such as Panasonic's VIERA Full HD 3D TVs.
> 
> ...


----------



## Skyboss (Jan 22, 2004)

Stuart Sweet said:


> According to *this article* in Engadget, Panasonic confirmed that there will be DIRECTV 3D broadcasting in June. There will be three channels and they will be available via software upgrade.
> 
> Let's continue all previous discussion in this thread.


Yeah!!! :nono2:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

This seems to be the most "interesting" part of the press release:

*"At launch, the new DIRECTV HD 3D programming platform, powered by Panasonic, will offer a 24/7 3D pay per view channel focused on movies, documentaries and other programming, a 24/7 3D DIRECTV on Demand channel and a free 3D sampler demo channel featuring event programming such as sports, music and other content."*

That could be interpreted a number of ways...looks like it was a good ideal to stop by the Panasonic booth at CES this weekend after all.


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

It's a shame that current HDTVs couldn't take advantage of some kind of plug in for the 3D experience. I would much rather do that then invest in a new LCD or whatever down the line.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

We're taking it for granted that they won't. I mean, it's a fair assumption, but on the other hand maybe there will be some sort of hinky add-on attachment that puts polarizing filters on in sync with the refresh rate. I'm not sure I'd want something like that, only saying it's possible.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Stuart Sweet said:


> We're taking it for granted that they won't. I mean, it's a fair assumption, but on the other hand maybe there will be some sort of hinky add-on attachment that puts polarizing filters on in sync with the refresh rate. I'm not sure I'd want something like that, only saying it's possible.


Agreed....leading to my earlier comment about "it could be interpreted several ways".

I think you are right on with your observation.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

In fact, I remember that there was a 3-D attachment for the Sega Master System that did something like that. It was pretty passable 3-D for 1988.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

I don't think I would want to watch tv wearing funny glasses.


----------



## ndole (Aug 26, 2009)

Nick said:


> I don't think I would want to watch tv wearing funny glasses.


Me either. But this is a very exciting new development!


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> In fact, I remember that there was a 3-D attachment for the Sega Master System that did something like that. It was pretty passable 3-D for 1988.


Yeah, there are several things out there that worked on interlaced displays. They don't work on progressive displays. That's not to say something couldn't be done.


----------



## Brent04 (Nov 23, 2004)

So is this going to only work with Panasonic 3D TV's or will it work with any 3D ready TV's made by other companies. IE is the software upgrade written only for a Panasonic 3D TV interface?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Brent04 said:


> So is this going to only work with Panasonic 3D TV's or will it work with any 3D ready TV's made by other companies. IE is the software upgrade written only for a Panasonic 3D TV interface?


I don't think so....but that's the problem I pointed out previously...the way the press release is phrased...it could indeed be interpretted several different ways.


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

Nick said:


> I don't think I would want to watch tv wearing funny glasses.


I wouldn't mind it from time to time. I've done it for several Blu-ray movies ("Coraline" off the top of my head).

I don't intend on buying a new TV anytime soon.... short of winning the lottery.

~Alan


----------



## slimoli (Jan 28, 2005)

About 5 years ago , Discovery Channel was showing some programs in 3D, with glasses supplied by the TV Guide Magazine . Any TV set could be used and the result was so so. If the Directv 3D implementation is anything like that, thanks but no thanks. Samsung and others are working on a 3D system that requires a new TV set and new BD player. Is this Directv 3D stuff supposed to work with our existing TV sets ?


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

First hands on info I have seen:



Gizmodo said:


> My verdict: After about 5 minutes of watching the feed on a 50-ish inch Panasonic plasma (using shutter glasses, of course), I think DirecTV's broadcast is about as good as any 3D I've seen for the home theater market....


Source


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

Grentz said:


> First hands on info I have seen:
> 
> Source


I'm curious as to why his HD channels are so bad? Mine look pretty darn good here...

~Alan


----------



## fireponcoal (Sep 26, 2009)

the wii seemed pretty gimmicky to me when i first saw it and people ate that up so perhaps people will feel compelled to try this out. like many of you i think this is incredibly lame but who truely knows what the public will buy into..


----------



## SParker (Apr 27, 2002)

I just bought a 46 inch Samsung LED and I bet it won't work for this. Not worth it.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

Hey Directv, how about just giving me BBCHD and ESPNUHD instead of something that requires me to buy a new tv.

Crap...


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Alan Gordon said:


> I'm curious as to why his HD channels are so bad? Mine look pretty darn good here...
> 
> ~Alan


I have no idea really. I don't know what he expects to be better. Probably is just speaking out of his rear end like most bloggers and media do a lot of the time.

I have seen a good selection of HD from different providers, and honestly DirecTV is one of the best. Very comparable to OTA here as well.

He might just be an ordinary joe talking about it, that is what bugs me about a lot of the bloggers and such that go to events like CES and report on products...anyone with knowledge in the subject can see they are speaking without true knowledge, but the masses eat it up as gospel. *cough* Vista *cough* Anyhow, back on topic!


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

elwaylite said:


> Hey Directv, how about just giving me BBCHD and ESPNUHD instead of something that requires me to buy a new tv.
> 
> Crap...


Lets not forget it is even more PPV!

I have yet to do PPV and hope to keep it that way, just too much money IMO.


----------



## ATARI (May 10, 2007)

Grentz said:


> Lets not forget it is even more PPV!
> 
> I have yet to do PPV and hope to keep it that way, just too much money IMO.


+1


----------



## loudo (Mar 24, 2005)

Does 3D require any additional brandwidth from a standard HD channel, with identical compression?


----------



## Movieman (May 9, 2009)

loudo said:


> Does 3D require any additional brandwidth from a standard HD channel, with identical compression?


Im pretty sure it will. I know Directv likes to stay ahead of game which is great but I think if its not cheap enough with the current economy I dont see it going any where at least this year. Plus we dont even have a great range of HD (overall in the industry) programming where they are already jumping to something newer. I can see Directv taking advantage of ESPN because of their dominance in the sports market but for those of us that are not sports junkies really is just another toy.

Its exciting though that in a time where major companies are laying off people left and right there is money and time for new technology.  I dont plan on changing my tv's any time soon so there better be a very cheap plug and play option.


----------



## cforrest (Jan 20, 2007)

loudo said:


> Does 3D require any additional brandwidth from a standard HD channel, with identical compression?


http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=186394&site=cdn&


----------



## armophob (Nov 13, 2006)

Nick said:


> I don't think I would want to watch tv wearing funny glasses.


From some of your previous posts of your age, I suspect you currently watch tv with unfunny glasses already. You are opposed to the lens shape or color at this point in life?


----------



## william8004 (Oct 6, 2006)

I can predict the commerical wars now. "We have the most 3D channels". "But we have the most HD3D channels with added content"...

You get the idea.


----------



## Smthkd (Sep 1, 2004)

3D Tv @ home = FAILED!!!


----------



## Dcm210 (Jan 17, 2009)

if for some reason you have to wear glasses after buying a 3D tv,forget it. I'm happy with my Sharp Aquas 37" 1080p LCD.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Dcm210 said:


> if for some reason you have to wear glasses after buying a 3D tv,forget it. I'm happy with my Sharp Aquas 37" 1080p LCD.


To watch 3D content you do. A 3D TV will be just a normal TV with normal content


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

From a STB technical standpoint, I'm a little curious. From their press release, all that is needed is a firmware update (plus a 3D-Ready display). Yeah, no big deal. But, for 3D, it has to be 1080p at 60Hz, which currently, these STBs don't do. They do 1080p24 just fine, but I was led to believe due to the hardware, 1080p60 couldn't be done.

Obviously, they can.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

Nick said:


> I don't think I would want to watch tv wearing funny glasses.


No worse than looking at life through funny looking glasses.......


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

armophob said:


> From some of your previous posts of your age, I suspect you currently watch tv with unfunny glasses already. You are opposed to the lens shape or color at this point in life?


At age 71, I don't need glasses. My eyesight is probably better than yours.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

The most troubling thing to me is that they are devoting THREE channels to this when one would make more sense. One is just a DEMO channel? Ever hear of time multiplexing?

This is a waste to the vast majority of people at least for quite some time.


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

tonyd79 said:


> This is a waste to the vast majority of people at least for quite some time.


So was HD once upon a time, but DirecTV offered it nonetheless for those who wanted it.

~Alan


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

Movieman said:


> Its exciting though that in a time where major companies are laying off people left and right there is money and time for new technology.


It is exciting!

Innovation should never remain stagnant... that's often one of the things that leads to people getting laid off.



Movieman said:


> I dont plan on changing my tv's any time soon so there better be a very cheap plug and play option.


While I'd prefer DirecTV to only spare bandwidth on ESPN-3D, and the new Discovery channel coming next year, I don't mind a few channels set aside for 3D for those who will have these sets. I don't intend on spending my money on a new TV either though anytime soon. The next time I do buy a large TV, it will definately be a 3D one though...

~Alan


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

A little more: http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/07/eyes-on-with-directv-3d/​1080p24

Same bandwidth as 2D.

Live demo.


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

Sixto said:


> A little more: http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/07/eyes-on-with-directv-3d/​1080p24
> 
> Same bandwidth as 2D.
> 
> Live demo.


Yep. I was just reading the article and came here to post it. Ya beat me. 

Here's the exact quote:



> We also had the chance to speak with the DirecTV technical staff which told us that the 1080p24 3D signal doesn't take any more bandwidth than 2D content at the same resolution and frame rate.


----------



## abooch (Oct 25, 2008)

really sucks that we have to buy a "3D capable" TV.. I have a panasonic plasma thats like a year and a half old..i hope they come out with some sort of add on


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

abooch said:


> really sucks that we have to buy a "3D capable" TV.. I have a panasonic plasma thats like a year and a half old..i hope they come out with some sort of add on


I'm not too familiar with how it works, but some TVs are what's called "3D ready".. meaning they can do 3D if a PC is connected to it (running some software I assume). The Samsung DLP my mom bought about a year ago had this in the description.


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

Greg Alsobrook said:


> I'm not too familiar with how it works, but some TVs are what's called "3D ready".. meaning they can do 3D if a PC is connected to it (running some software I assume). The Samsung DLP my mom bought about a year ago had this in the description.


There was a list I was looking at the other day of 3D capable displays. Basically, if you don't have a Mitsubishi or Samsung DLP, you're out of luck.

However, it will be a nice feature for those of us without one sometime in the future.

~Alan


----------



## Cyclone99 (Sep 22, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> The most troubling thing to me is that they are devoting THREE channels to this when one would make more sense. One is just a DEMO channel? Ever hear of time multiplexing?


It's really only TWO actual channels, the PPV one and the 'free' one. The third one is Directv On Demand, which would be downloads and not taking up channel bandwidth.

I don't see how they could time multiplex the PPV and free channel. They are going to want the free channel running all the time for store demos and such.


----------



## bjdraw (Jan 25, 2007)

The other thing I learned but didn't make it in my post was that the STB treats the 3D stream like any other, so the DVR has full trick play, record ability. 

And to the skeptics, let me tell you. I was the exact same way. I thought it was a gimmick, things thrown at you in cartoons etc. Well seeing a College Football game in 3D changed all that for me, and no they didn't once throw the football at the camera. So before you knock it, try the latest technology watching your favorite content and then tell me what you think.


----------



## bjdraw (Jan 25, 2007)

taz291819 said:


> From a STB technical standpoint, I'm a little curious. From their press release, all that is needed is a firmware update (plus a 3D-Ready display). Yeah, no big deal. But, for 3D, it has to be 1080p at 60Hz, which currently, these STBs don't do. They do 1080p24 just fine, but I was led to believe due to the hardware, 1080p60 couldn't be done.
> 
> Obviously, they can.


The 3D content is 1080p24, but other resolutions could be supported, but I doubt 1080p60 will be one of them. DirecTV isn't increasing the frame rate like 3D Blu-ray, they are just storing both eyes in one frame and letting the glasses split it out.


----------



## bjamin82 (Sep 4, 2007)

I don't know how accurate this is but I figured I would share....

http://www.3dmovielist.com/3dhdtvs.html


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

Alan Gordon said:


> There was a list I was looking at the other day of 3D capable displays. Basically, if you don't have a Mitsubishi or Samsung DLP, you're out of luck.
> 
> However, it will be a nice feature for those of us without one sometime in the future.
> 
> ~Alan


Kinda what I figured after a quick google. Please post that list if you have a chance.


----------



## Stanley Kritzik (Aug 4, 2005)

In the "good old days", products like TV's and radios were pretty static -- like sofas and dining room tables. These days, they are technology products, and as features advance, circuits become more sophisticated, inventions occur, obsolescence sets in. Thus, pre-Blu-Ray DVDs are obsolete. They work, but only to a degree. Old cell phones aren't i-phones or Droids. Older flat screen sets (like mine) are good only to 1080i. And, in the 3D instance under discussion, pre-3D screens won't do it.

Back in 1992, my company bought a disk drive for our office computer from IBM. The drive cost $18,000 for 600 GB of storage. Today, we get a terabyte of faster storage for a lot less money. Look at 10 megapixel camera costs and their storage card costs today, vs. five years ago.

In short, the video home entertainment world is part of technology, and that means that every time one buys a product, one is buying, to some degree or other, into functional obsolescence. Stick with your existing stuff (if it still works) and miss the new features. Buy it for $2,000, and two years later, it is worth $200 used. Those who are early adopters, at the top of the price curve, will lose the most value -- the price of pioneering.

That's the reality we're living with. Keep what you've got, and "pass" on stereo sound, HD, 3D, or Blu-Ray. Or, at some time when you feel the need, and can afford it, take your loss and upgrade.

Stan


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

Greg Alsobrook said:


> Kinda what I figured after a quick google. Please post that list if you have a chance.


I tried looking for where I thought I saw the link prior to me posting about it, and couldn't find it. However, it appears another poster found what I was looking for:



bjamin82 said:


> I don't know how accurate this is but I figured I would share....
> 
> http://www.3dmovielist.com/3dhdtvs.html


Thanks!

~Alan


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

Ah. Nice. Missed that. Thanks!


----------



## hdprice (Jan 30, 2007)

The specs for the required TV are of the biggest interest to me. I bought a new Mitsubishi last year that is "3D Ready". This peaked my interest. I bought an Nvidia 3D system. You have to run this from a PC. The system has the required shutter glasses and an IR emitter that plugs into the PC via USB and the TV via a 3 pin VESA socket.

To get 3D out of this the PC must support 1080i60 and you have to put the Mitsu into "3D mode". The results are amazing. Not at all like the cardboard colored lenses some mentioned above. It's really very convincing 3D, full frame, full color, flicker free.

I can't believe that DTV would launch a service that only worked with TVs from one vendor. I'm hoping/expecting that the solution will have a similar config, just replacing the PC in my description above with the DTV STB. I think the HR20 has USB ports that could be used to drive an IR emitter..


----------



## aramus8 (Nov 21, 2006)

Both Mitsubishi and Phillips are developing televisions that are 3d but don't require glasses. Trouble is they are $25,000 and probably not compatible with Panasonic's system. I'll be waiting for the price to come down.
http://gizmodo.com/5057832/philips-3d-autostereoscopic-tv-requires-no-glasses-is-gentle-on-the-eyes


----------



## Cyclone99 (Sep 22, 2007)

hdprice said:


> The specs for the required TV are of the biggest interest to me. I bought a new Mitsubishi last year that is "3D Ready". This peaked my interest. I bought an Nvidia 3D system. You have to run this from a PC. The system has the required shutter glasses and an IR emitter that plugs into the PC via USB and the TV via a 3 pin VESA socket.
> 
> To get 3D out of this the PC must support 1080i60 and you have to put the Mitsu into "3D mode". The results are amazing. Not at all like the cardboard colored lenses some mentioned above. It's really very convincing 3D, full frame, full color, flicker free.
> 
> I can't believe that DTV would launch a service that only worked with TVs from one vendor. I'm hoping/expecting that the solution will have a similar config, just replacing the PC in my description above with the DTV STB. I think the HR20 has USB ports that could be used to drive an IR emitter..


In the HDGuru article late last month about DTV's 3D plans, they indicated that a "forthcoming 3d converter box" would be needed to view the DTV 3D programming with current DLP 3D ready sets.

Mits has since announced the 3DC-1000 3D adapter which is supposed to be an "easy and affordable" way to convert video from upcoming 3D blu-ray players to the checkerboard format that the DLP sets need. It seems likely that the same adapter would be used for DTV 3D.


----------



## ptuck874 (Aug 12, 2007)

Ok here is a dumb question for anybody out there that has used the new type of 3d glasses. I wear regular glasses (and kinda have a big head lol  ), how does those new types feel on ya? I personally will not be upgrading cause' I just got a new tv last year, but in any case, do they feel ok? Opinions?


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

slimoli said:


> About 5 years ago , Discovery Channel was showing some programs in 3D, with glasses supplied by the TV Guide Magazine . Any TV set could be used and the result was so so. If the Directv 3D implementation is anything like that, thanks but no thanks. Samsung and others are working on a 3D system that requires a new TV set and new BD player. Is this Directv 3D stuff supposed to work with our existing TV sets ?


I would suspect it won't be like that. The way I understand the new technology on 3D is that there are two polarized (one left hand circular and the other right hand circular) signals on the screen at one time. The screen itself, or a filter attachment, has to be there, in addition you need polarized glasses to be able to watch the show. This is the current technology that is being used in IMAX 3D theaters.


----------



## Mrmiami (Oct 3, 2006)

The thing I noticed about the TV's that are 3D ready is that they would all be a step backwards IMO, back to the bigger box-lamp type (with a dimmer picture and terrible off center viewing) or Laser view with color blooming picture. Neither one of these types would tear me away from thinner,crisper, HD picture with above adverage off center viewing of HD content on the newer LED LCD's, Plasma or LCD TV's we have now. The technology is a step forward but in order to view it you have to use a TV that's about 3 steps backwards, that is not what I would refer to as an upgrade of my tv in order to adopt the 3D viewing experience IMO.

So what exactly are some of the specs for the newer 3D capable TV's? If anyone has knowledge please post.


----------



## dhines (Aug 16, 2006)

i attended a 3-D showing of the USC/OSU game (this past college football season). i have to say that i was not impressed at all. i am trying to think what bothered me the most, but it would have to be the lack of good camera angles.

as i recall, (i watched the game at the on campus basketball arena) that my opinion was pretty common among the other viewers.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

ptuck874 said:


> Ok here is a dumb question for anybody out there that has used the new type of 3d glasses. I wear regular glasses (and kinda have a big head lol  ), how does those new types feel on ya? I personally will not be upgrading cause' I just got a new tv last year, but in any case, do they feel ok? Opinions?


I've seen 3 different "form factors" on those glasses....but the new generation 3D glasses are totally different than those cardboard red & green lens thingys of the past.

Generally, the ones I've seen are light weight, using grey-black polarizing lens.

I'll be at the CES this weekend, and will surely be at several 3D demos there...and will perhaps finds even more sample versions there.


----------



## Hdhead (Jul 30, 2007)

So will D* count the 3 new 3D channels as 9 new HD channels:grin:


----------



## jford951 (Oct 6, 2008)

Sorry but I am really new to the whole 3d thing but I have one of the TV's listed at the link below. So can anyone tell me if that means I will be able to use directv 3d stations? I am sure I will need some kinda of glasses when the time comes and firmware updates but is all the hardware manufactures going to use a standard setup or will different signals and tv's need different glasses? http://www.3dmovielist.com/3dhdtvs.html

thanks 
Jeff


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Hdhead said:


> So will D* count the 3 new 3D channels as 9 new HD channels:grin:


Probably.


----------



## DC_SnDvl (Aug 17, 2006)

+1



Nick said:


> I don't think I would want to watch tv wearing funny glasses.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

3D TV is Great for watching occasionally but I wouldn't want to watch it all the time and it is expensive so I don't think it will catch on like HDTV has.

It is a Niche Product for those who want COOL but I don't want eye fatigue, headaches, etc. but it was enjoyable to watch last year at CES and we will be viewing 3 or 4 3D Demo Booths this year as well.

Watching 3D Football was Cool for 5 minutes but would I want to watch it like that for 4 hours? I don't think so.


----------



## leww37334 (Sep 19, 2005)

elwaylite said:


> Hey Directv, how about just giving me BBCHD and ESPNUHD instead of something that requires me to buy a new tv.
> 
> Crap...


+1 (this is my first +1 and only because this post truly deserves it)


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Hey Directv, how about just giving me THE TRAVEL CHANNEL in HD, HLN in HD, HISTORY INTERNATIONAL CHANNEL in HD and ESPNUHD instead of something that requires me to buy a new tv.

I Amended your statement.


----------



## dvrblogger (Jan 11, 2005)

The side by side system announced by DIRECTV (with RealD) uses a standard 1080i channel and sends two side by side videos (basically using half the horizontal resolution and then the TV stretches it back to full size. Bluray uses 1080P60 to each eye requiring 50% more bandwidth due to the way the signal is encoded. No current boxes from any satellite, telco or mSO support the Bluray format but probably will in 18-24 months.


----------



## dvrblogger (Jan 11, 2005)

richierich said:


> Probably.


as david letterman said if I watch 3D with my 2D glasses do I get 5D.


----------



## xmguy (Mar 27, 2008)

Oh my 3DTV. Um no! lol


----------



## loudo (Mar 24, 2005)

Sixto said:


> A little more:http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/07/eyes-on-with-directv-3d/​1080p24
> 
> Same bandwidth as 2D.
> 
> Live demo.


That is good news. The only thing I see that might not be to good, is the fact that the glasses are connected to something, probably the receiver or TV. It may be for the demo only, and maybe it will be wireless on the final product. I was just thinking of when I first got my XBox 360 and had the wired control running between the XBox and the recliner, and how many times someone would tangle up or pull the cable. It didn't take me long to change to wireless control units. I would hate to have the glasses on my head watching something and someone trip over the cable and pull the glasses off my head. Ouch!!


----------



## dmurphy (Sep 28, 2006)

Not to be a downer, but I've got some reservations about this ...

Not that there is 3D content - I'm all for that.

What bothers me would be "EXCLUSIVE" 3D content.

There's a segment of the population (myself included) who are amblyopic - long story short, I look out of either one eye, or the other. Not both at the same time - the eyes work independently of each other, so 3D doesn't work as planned for us ....

Then there are others who have completely monocular vision - such as my dad - who lost vision in one eye in an accident as a child.

For us, 3D is a useless technology.... it just looks blurry. I was at the IMAX theater at Kennedy Space Center this year, and it was such a shame - they had a great movie that was blurry for me.

So long as there's a way for us to see all these fancy-dancy 3D movies in a 2D format, I'm all for it!

Anyone with a better understanding of the underlying technology know if there's anything that can be done for us?


----------



## Button Pusher (Jan 19, 2007)

richierich said:


> Hey Directv, how about just giving me THE TRAVEL CHANNEL in HD, HLN in HD, HISTORY INTERNATIONAL CHANNEL in HD and ESPNUHD instead of something that requires me to buy a new tv.
> 
> I Amended your statement.


I agree! I hope DirecTv doesn't waste the space that D12 has on 3D channels, especially PPV ones! 
I like new technology as much as the next person but not before current technology has been improved!


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

A couple of things. If Directv sends this as either 1080i60 or 1080p24, a converter will be needed for both current Mits and Samsungs. Both of these displays require 1080p60 for 3D. Also, they use the checkerboard method, not the SbS method. I know that Mits say they'll have a converter out soon, but RealD already has one on the market (at $500). Quite possibly, Directv will offer a converter.

And the emitter doesn't connect to the STB, it ALWAYS connects to the display. I know the nvidia emitter connects via USB to a PC and 3-pin VESA to the display, but the USB is just for proprietary reasons, so you're forced to use a nvidia card. They are the only one on the market that requires this, which could be their downfall.

In the pictures, that cable coming from the glasses has to be a security cable, so people don't walk off with the glasses. There are wired shutter glasses, but 3D displays only have a single 3-pin VESA connector, so there is no way to connect multiple pairs of wired glasses to a single display.

EDIT:

There are also DLP-Link glasses, which don't need an emitter to sync. Cheapest ones on the market are $150/pair, made by Xpand. RealD also has a pair (which are supposedly the best on the market), but they go for $450/pair. Bit Cauldron is releasing theirs soon, via OEM (which quite possibly could be the ones Directv was using in the demo).


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

On CNBC, they were at the CES2010 and they showed a new 42" Samsung 3D prototype that doesn't require the glasses. They said it will be out later this year. He was very impressed and said it reminded them of the first time he saw HD. Comparable or better then what you see in a theater. It has special filters and glass to produce the 3D. He mentioned that it will work with the new 3D programming that will provided by D*. Now were talking!


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

I am glad that this is not taking extra bandwidth. WHile I think 3D is a gimmick that will not go past that for a long time, I guess they can expirement all they want as long as they follow through and show all the other HD channels out there that they are not showing now, once they get D12 up and running and do not mess up regular broadcasts with blurry 3D as mentioned above. Keep the 3d stuff on its own channel and don;t run things in 3d only.

As far as cracking on the demo channel, when they first started HD, that was all there was to watch sometimes, so it is needed if only for in store demo purposes. Again, I think that 3D is not wanted by many people compared to HD and will take several times longer for acceptance.


----------



## Joe C (Mar 3, 2005)

dmurphy said:


> There's a segment of the population (myself included) who are amblyopic - long story short, I look out of either one eye, or the other. Not both at the same time - the eyes work independently of each other, so 3D doesn't work as planned for us ....


That's exactly me, been that way since birth. Also, my other concern besides yet another fee is the marginal HR2X. Will it be able to handle the stream without getting slower than it already is ?


----------



## dmurphy (Sep 28, 2006)

Joe C said:


> That's exactly me, been that way since birth. Also, my other concern besides yet another fee is the marginal HR2X. Will it be able to handle the stream without getting slower than it already is ?


... as have I. I had LASIK done last year so everything is crystal-clear, but still amblyopic. I'm considering surgery to straighten the eyes, but that's not a definite fix, and may actually induce double-vision (which I don't have now). LASIK was a much easier (and less risky) choice.


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

Mrmiami said:


> The technology is a step forward but in order to view it you have to use a TV that's about 3 steps backwards, that is not what I would refer to as an upgrade of my tv in order to adopt the 3D viewing experience IMO.
> 
> So what exactly are some of the specs for the newer 3D capable TV's? If anyone has knowledge please post.


Multiple 3D LCD & Plasma models will be hitting the stores this year. DLPs are the only TVs CURRENTLY released capable of 3D.

~Alan


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

richierich said:


> 3D TV is Great for watching occasionally but I wouldn't want to watch it all the time and it is expensive so I don't think it will catch on like HDTV has.


Expensive?! Where are you getting that?

~Alan


----------



## je4755 (Dec 11, 2006)

An above-the-fold headline on page one of today’s Wall Street Journal reads “Sony Pins Future on a 3-D Revival;” the article in part presents Sony’s optimistic judgments about downstream consumer demand. 

In addition to inconvenient glasses and absence of a single transmission standard, I wonder about the “WOW!” factor of 3-D. I am old enough to remember the transition from black and white to color, an extremely-exciting advance. The shift from SD to HD also was dramatic, although less so than introduction of color.

I recently attended a showing of Avatar. Given the hype surrounding this movie, I may have been over-expectant about the viewing experience. The 3-D was enjoyable, but not as inspiring (to me, at any rate) as development of color/HD. 

Nevertheless, if in the market for a new TV, I likely would purchase a 3-D variant absent a material increase in cost over an HD-only set. However, owing a two-year old 52” Sony XBR5, I will wait to see if 3-D is a commercial success or forms a contemporary version of quadraphonic sound.


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

In another thread, now closed, taz291819 said:


4. You can get shutter glasses for as low as $45.

which is about $44.75 more than I'm willing to pay...

That sort of tells you what I think of 3D TV at the moment.


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

RACJ2 said:


> On CNBC, they were at the CES2010 and they showed a new 42" Samsung 3D prototype that doesn't require the glasses. They said it will be out later this year. He was very impressed and said it reminded them of the first time he saw HD. Comparable or better then what you see in a theater. It has special filters and glass to produce the 3D. He mentioned that it will work with the new 3D programming that will provided by D*. Now were talking!


OK, they posted the video on their website, so you can hear it for yourself. I hope this guy knows what he is taking about [Link].


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Well, that's all very possible. However, DIRECTV seems to be indicating that their partnership is with Panasonic, at least for the first year. If I had to look into the crystal ball, I'd be more likely to believe that the Samsung guy means "there is no technical limitation to DIRECTV building in support for this TV."

At any rate, looking at the time it took for HD adoption to catch on, and that's with a serious mandate from the government, I would expect 3D to take years before it became pervasive, and that's if it's even successful.


----------



## DaveP (Dec 8, 2003)

For what it's worth, I was at CES *last* year when most of the TV manufacturers were also demo'ing their 3D TVs... it didn't get a lot of press because there wasn't much content, but here's my 2 cents on the TVs themselves:
- The ones that used shutter glasses I couldn't picture myself enjoying at home. It's just too cumbersome and uncomfortable.
- The ones that used the thin and light polarized glasses: some were OK, one was fantastic (I forget which it was, but it was a year ago, so that's somewhat irrelevant now). I could definitely see myself watching TV this way and being happy with it. I could even envision when this becomes mainstream enough that I could get another set of glasses from my eye doctor with the polarized filters built-in, similar to how I get a 2nd set of prescription sun glasses. (I do wear glasses and don't mind the thin and light polarized glasses over top of my normal ones)
- The ones that don't require any glasses at all: These were really cool, but do some really wacky things to make it work without glasses that make them work really well for something like a spinning 3D graphical model of a widget in ACME's lobby, but I'd never want to watch TV on it.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Alan Gordon said:


> Multiple 3D LCD & Plasma models will be hitting the stores this year. DLPs are the only TVs CURRENTLY released capable of 3D.
> 
> ~Alan


Actually, I installed a Samsung plasma for my mom last year and it said it was 3D capable on teh box. It had a port on the back for hooking to some processor I guess (or maybe to the IR sync device that some use for the glasses), so who knows if it will work with what is being proposed now, but it definitely advertised as 3D capable.


----------



## RCY (Nov 17, 2005)

Since I just replaced my 15 and 20 year old CRT TVs in the last couple of years, it'll probably be a loooong time before I'm looking at new TVs. And maxing out at 1080i and 720p on the "new" TVs, I'm out of the pool for 3-D.

So, in addition to the high cost for a new TV (for me, anyway) I see a serious upcharge for this kind of programming. Not to mention constantly asking myself, "where did my 3-D glasses go?" 

But if you've got the coin, I'd think digital 3-D TV would be great. (Avatar in digital 3-D was amazing, IMO.)


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

Lee L said:


> Actually, I installed a Samsung plasma for my mom last year and it said it was 3D capable on teh box. It had a port on the back for hooking to some processor I guess (or maybe to the IR sync device that some use for the glasses), so who knows if it will work with what is being proposed now, but it definitely advertised as 3D capable.


It was designed to be used with a PC connected, so its unlikely that it will work with the broadcast 3D. Here is the kit she can buy [Link].


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

RCY said:


> Since I just replaced my 15 and 20 year old CRT TVs in the last couple of years, it'll probably be a loooong time before I'm looking at new TVs. And maxing out at 1080i and 720p on the "new" TVs, I'm out of the pool for 3-D.


Are you saying that the new TVs you recently bought are 1080i and 720p, because the new 3D sets are 1080p?

~Alan


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Alan Gordon said:


> Multiple 3D LCD & Plasma models will be hitting the stores this year. DLPs are the only TVs CURRENTLY released capable of 3D.
> 
> ~Alan


Not entirely accurate, as the approach they take for content presentation actually governs that. If, for example, some HDTV manufacturer offered a "3D screen overlay kit", it could work with other displays. That's just one alternative.

Until we know more about the options, its a bit premature to assume it will be limited to just one display technology.

I saw 3 different formats alone LAST year at CES, and there will likely be 10 times that many when I set foot in CES later this week.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

RACJ2 said:


> It was designed to be used with a PC connected, so its unlikely that it will work with the broadcast 3D. Here is the kit she can buy [Link].


Not necessarily, it still can accept the 3D signals, whether from a PC or set top box or whatever. So it might indeed work.

The whole 3D technology is confusing right now since there are different players with unique ways of doing it.

I posted this before, but here is a 3D ready list:
http://www.3dmovielist.com/3dhdtvs.html


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Until we know more about the options, its a bit premature to assume it will be limited to just one display technology.


I'm not sure why you quoted me?!?! 

I said that the technology will not be limited to just one display technology. Just that at this time, DLPs are (basically) the only sets currently released that should be able to take advantage of this format.

Later this year, other types of displays will hit the stores...

Everything I have read has said the same thing...

~Alan<~~~~~~~~Who would be suspicious of any screen-overlay...


----------



## oldcrooner (Feb 23, 2004)

Directv doing a little experimenting on the side with 3-D TV is fine and dandy. However, IMHO, they should be primarily be spending their time, effort and money on making their present service the best possible visually. This is currently not the case with their horribly over-compressed SD channels and HD channels that are not being delivered at the highest quality they could be. Most OTA stations have betrayed HD quality with their overabundance of sub-channels and poor technical management; Directv should be striving for excellence. In many instances, I saw better HD 10-15 years ago than I'm seeing now. And yes, Directv is probably better than many/most other HD programming suppliers but that is still no excuse for mediocrity.


----------



## sarhaynes (Dec 10, 2006)

I found this press release today:

From the way I read this, it sounds like you don't need new set top box or use extra bandwidth.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...-deliver-3d-content-to-the-home-80866512.html



> DIRECTV and RealD Work Together to Deliver 3D Content to the Home
> DIRECTV to Support the RealD Format for Delivery of High-Definition 3D Content
> EL SEGUNDO, Calif. and LAS VEGAS, Jan. 6 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- CES -- DIRECTV, Inc., the world's most popular television service, and 3D technology leader RealD are currently working together to deliver high-definition 3D movies and TV programming via satellite to DIRECTV subscribers. DIRECTV's content providers will be able use RealD tools to format their 3D content and deliver it to millions of homes with the crisp, clear 3D images that RealD has become known for. DIRECTV will be launching three 3D channels sponsored by Panasonic. The delivery of RealD Format content is compatible with DIRECTV's current HD satellite broadcast and on-demand systems and works with existing HD set-top boxes. As part of the agreement, RealD has delivered to DIRECTV a license to use the RealD Format and associated 3D technology patents.
> 
> ...


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

Grentz said:


> Not necessarily, it still can accept the 3D signals, whether from a PC or set top box or whatever. So it might indeed work.
> 
> The whole 3D technology is confusing right now since there are different players with unique ways of doing it.
> 
> ...


This is correct. At the time these displays were produced, the only option for feeding them 3D content was a PC, that's why it says that in the instruction manual.

On the flip side, Directv is going to use the RealD SbS method (side-by-side). This is not compatible with current Mits and Samsungs. You will need a converter, unless somehow Directv can put the ability to convert into the STBs (PC software players currently do this with no problem).


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

Alan Gordon said:


> Multiple 3D LCD & Plasma models will be hitting the stores this year. DLPs are the only TVs CURRENTLY released capable of 3D.
> 
> ~Alan


Not exactly true. Samsung has sold several Plasmas (720p) over the past two years that are 3D-Ready. There aren't any 1080p Plasmas currently on the market that are 3D-Ready though.

Also, I know you didn't say this Alan, but I'll put DLP up against any plasma (minus maybe the Kuro) or LCD.

I've never quite understood why people are infatuated with super-thin displays. Unless you hang it on a wall, you still have to put it on a stand, which adds depth. My 61" DLP is only 6" deep at the bottom, and tapers to about 1" at the top. And it only weighs ~65lbs.

And even if you hang a LCD or Plasma on the wall, it still looks out of place with speakers (unless you use in-wall speakers). Then you have to fish all the wires inside the drywall, if you want it to look nice and neat. Never quite grasped why people want the display to be so thin.


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

billsharpe said:


> In another thread, now closed, taz291819 said:
> 
> 4. You can get shutter glasses for as low as $45.
> 
> ...


That's the beauty of it. If you don't want to buy/watch it, you don't have to.


----------



## vegasnv (Jul 5, 2008)

I was going to check out CES this weekend hoping to see a new HD DVR, Tivo or not, from Directv. I'm disappointed the only news from Directv is that 3D is coming. 

I'm getting very tired of my slow HR21-100.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

vegasnv said:


> I was going to check out CES this weekend hoping to see a new HD DVR, Tivo or not, from Directv. I'm disappointed the only news from Directv is that 3D is coming.
> 
> I'm getting very tired of my slow HR21-100.


DirecTV did not exhibit there last year either, so it comes as no surprise.

When the new Tivobox is ready for some form of "official unveiling", odds are DBSTalk will be the first or one of the first places to learn about it.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Here's some more clarification from a piece on Mediabiz's site today in the Sky Report section:

*"The Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) says 3D could sizzle for BSkyB....*

*...Could that mean good news for DIRECTV which also plans a 3D launch? Yep. With Panasonic by June of this year .... 2 linear channels plus a VOD version. The channels will work with new Panasonic 3D sets and current DIRECTV boxes."*

Seems clear now what this will be...


----------



## mountainDBS (Jul 31, 2009)

Oh boy Oh boy Oh boy! 3-D TV. what's that gonna cost 59.99 a month by itself, alone, one channel?


----------



## Dave (Jan 29, 2003)

On the other side of the equation. TV makers and other inividual companies are not expecting this technoligy to be fully accepted until (2018) when there will be 198 million HD sets capable of 3D performance. So as we can see this will be a very long range project.


----------



## David Ortiz (Aug 21, 2006)

I was at CES today and got a good taste of 3D TV. A Christmas Carol looked absolutely amazing on an LG Plasma. Panasonic had a very impressive show, complete with live 3D. Got to the Sony booth early and things were still being tweaked. JVC is demoing their D-ILA front projector and showed some 1080p, some 4K source material, and then used two projectors to play some 4K 3D source material with polarized glasses.

I was skeptical going in, but I was pretty amazed by what I saw. A number of the booths were showing DIRECTV 3D source material.


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

taz291819 said:


> Not exactly true. Samsung has sold several Plasmas (720p) over the past two years that are 3D-Ready. There aren't any 1080p Plasmas currently on the market that are 3D-Ready though.


Yeah, when I first started typing that post, I had inserted something that left room for possible exceptions, but I didn't like how I put it, so I started over from scratch and forgot to add that part in. My intention was to say that:

DLPs are *(basically)* the only TVs *CURRENTLY* released capable of 3D.



taz291819 said:


> Also, I know you didn't say this Alan, but I'll put DLP up against any plasma (minus maybe the Kuro) or LCD.


I'll take my LCD over a DLP or plasma any day, BUT different strokes for different folks.

As for your other comments, I could comment on them some more, but I don't really have the time too at the moment.

Personally, I can't wait until I can get a 46-inch one of these at a price comparable to what I got my LCD for: Sony OLED 3D TV eyes-on

I'll be waiting a while... 

~Alan


----------



## RCY (Nov 17, 2005)

Alan Gordon said:


> Are you saying that the new TVs you recently bought are 1080i and 720p, because the new 3D sets are 1080p?
> 
> ~Alan


I just assumed since my TVs are 3 and 4 years old that they can't handle the 3-D specs. I have a JVC LCD (LT-46FN97 only capable of 1080i) and a Panasonic Plasma (TH-42PX75U, 720p).


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

Cyclone99 said:


> I don't see how they could time multiplex the PPV and free channel. They are going to want the free channel running all the time for store demos and such.


Yeah, cause a store demo has to be live from the satellite, not a recording on the DVR.


----------



## Gocanes (Jul 15, 2007)

Honestly, 3D is a gimmick and I'd much rather they used bandwidth to provide all possible channels in HD. I have yet to watch any 3D movie that was actually more enjoyable because it was in 3D. The 3D novelty wears off in about 5 minutes which is why it works well in theme park rides. 

Honestly, until somebody invents 3D that looks as good as HD and you don't have to wear glasses it's just going to be a passing fad. I wouldn't pay a dime more to watch a sporting event in 3D vs. HD. 

3D TV (or movies) doesn't look natural like you are looking at the real world. It looks "3D". If you put a 3D camera in the best 50 yard line seat at a football game the resulting 3D broadcast that you watch will not make you feel like you are really there.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

This article pretty well sums it up:
http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/158745/its-official-no-one-really-wants-3d-tv/

Who's going to sell their recently purchased $1500-2000 HD-TV to get a new one to watch 3D? The special glasses are going to be expensive, how are they going to handle football parties? I think it's going to be a very short lived fad.


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

Gocanes said:


> Honestly, 3D is a gimmick and I'd much rather they used bandwidth to provide all possible channels in HD. I have yet to watch any 3D movie that was actually more enjoyable because it was in 3D. The 3D novelty wears off in about 5 minutes which is why it works well in theme park rides.
> 
> Honestly, until somebody invents 3D that looks as good as HD and you don't have to wear glasses it's just going to be a passing fad. I wouldn't pay a dime more to watch a sporting event in 3D vs. HD.





TBlazer07 said:


> This article pretty well sums it up:
> http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/158745/its-official-no-one-really-wants-3d-tv/
> 
> Who's going to sell their recently purchased $1500-2000 HD-TV to get a new one to watch 3D? The special glasses are going to be expensive, how are they going to handle football parties? I think it's going to be a very short lived fad.


When HDTVs started coming out in 1080p, did people sell their recently purchased 720p sets?

*This is a FEATURE.*​
When you get a new TV, you'll have the option of this feature.... a feature I may rarely use, but one I'm excited to one day have.

~Alan


----------



## seemenewd (Dec 19, 2007)

Gocanes said:


> Honestly, 3D is a gimmick and I'd much rather they used bandwidth to provide all possible channels in HD. I have yet to watch any 3D movie that was actually more enjoyable because it was in 3D. The 3D novelty wears off in about 5 minutes which is why it works well in theme park rides.


Boy do I disagree with this statement wholeheartedly. I'll admit that 3D has been used as a gimmick by many and I hate that they have done so, but that isn't inherent in the technology. I think it's as natural as using color as an enhancement "gimmick" rather than just using black and white.

All I can say is to go and watch the movie "Avatar" in 3D (at least in the USA, 75% of it's already substantial revenue has been for the 3D version despite having relatively very few 3D screens). Fantastic and not used as a gimmick, just increases the perceived reality quite substantially. And that's reality even seen in a CGI world!


----------



## hdprice (Jan 30, 2007)

seemenewd said:


> All I can say is to go and watch the movie "Avatar" in 3D (at least in the USA, 75% of it's already substantial revenue has been for the 3D version despite having relatively very few 3D screens). Fantastic and not used as a gimmick, just increases the perceived reality quite substantially. And that's reality even seen in a CGI world!


I can't agree with this enough. I saw it in IMAX 3D and it was amazing! 3D isn't used in this movie as it has been in the past, with objects gratuitously flying out of the screen just to get a reaction. Avatar uses 3D to really sell the movie. You completely forget you're watching CGI. I've seen the 2D trailers and each time I thought that the creatures looked fake. They don't in the 3D version. The technology really adds to the movie watching experience.

For all of you who are skeptical about what this technology can do (and given what it's been used for till now that's not surprising) go watch Avatar in 3D. You'll see a side of 3D that will amaze you.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

I think there are more then 10,000 geeks and/or gadget's lovers with enough money to start manufacturing and selling 3D TV/glasses/BR players. Perhaps the number close to 100,000 to procure all the 3D manufacturer's buzz.


----------



## Stanley Kritzik (Aug 4, 2005)

P Smith said:


> I think there are more then 10,000 geeks and/or gadget's lovers with enough money to start manufacturing and selling 3D TV/glasses/BR players. Perhaps the number close to 100,000 to procure all the 3D manufacturer's buzz.


When you think of 3D ads for, say, cars, home furnishings, clothes, etc., plus what the gamers will do, plus what we'll see on PC displays, there are going to be a heck of a lot of people (especially young ones) wearing glasses. Those who want to wait for holograms or something else will have a long dry spell, but I think lots of 3D hardware and software will be sold in the next five years.

Stan


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

Grentz said:


> Not necessarily, it still can accept the 3D signals, whether from a PC or set top box or whatever. So it might indeed work.
> 
> The whole 3D technology is confusing right now since there are different players with unique ways of doing it.
> 
> ...


I agree it's possible it could work, that's why I didn't use won't. As you said, it "might" work and the word "unlikely" leaves room for that. I guess we will find out over the next year.


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

taz291819 said:


> Also, I know you didn't say this Alan, but I'll put DLP up against any plasma (minus maybe the Kuro) or LCD.
> 
> I've never quite understood why people are infatuated with super-thin displays. Unless you hang it on a wall, you still have to put it on a stand, which adds depth. My 61" DLP is only 6" deep at the bottom, and tapers to about 1" at the top. And it only weighs ~65lbs.


Its all personal preference, but I would take you up on your challenge.

I looked at DLP's when I purchased my Panny Plasma. I felt it blew away the DLP's, especially in 180 degree viewing. Projection TV's always get dimmer as you move right or left of center. And I didn't like the fact that after a couple years, you had the possibility of buying a new bulb, which at the time were about $100.

On the super-thin comment, I think the slimmer TV's just have a more up to date look to them. The DLP's have come a long way in that area. I don't own a DLP, but do have a Panny Plasma and a Samsung LCD. I do think Samsung has one of the best LCD's, but personally prefer my plasma for it's richer blacks and a more realistic picture. As I said upfront, its all personal preference.


----------



## lovswr (Jan 13, 2004)

David Ortiz said:


> I was at CES today and got a good taste of 3D TV. A Christmas Carol looked absolutely amazing on an LG Plasma. Panasonic had a very impressive show, complete with live 3D. Got to the Sony booth early and things were still being tweaked. JVC is demoing their D-ILA front projector and showed some 1080p, some 4K source material, and then used two projectors to play some 4K 3D source material with polarized glasses.
> 
> I was skeptical going in, but I was pretty amazed by what I saw. A number of the booths were showing DIRECTV 3D source material.


David, could you describe how the (I think active shutter) glasses worked? In particular, how do they interface with the set (or not)?


----------



## Mind Voyager (Sep 22, 2007)

lovswr said:


> David, could you describe how the (I think active shutter) glasses worked? In particular, how do they interface with the set (or not)?


Most shutter glasses currently use IR for syncing - so you need line of site to the ir transmitter, which typically isn't an issue since you're looking at the TV  There isn't typically anything you need to do except turn on the glasses (and some have solutions so you don't even do that). There are some "old school" systems that use a wire but I can't imagine any of these new sets would use that. XpanD has announced the "first" bluetooth shutter glasses which will be bundled with the VIZIO XVT Pro. I'm not sure bluetooth is necessary for a standard TV, but it might be useful for front projection systems.

Jason T


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

TBlazer07 said:


> This article pretty well sums it up:
> http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/158745/its-official-no-one-really-wants-3d-tv/
> 
> Who's going to sell their recently purchased $1500-2000 HD-TV to get a new one to watch 3D? The special glasses are going to be expensive, how are they going to handle football parties? I think it's going to be a very short lived fad.


Shutter glasses currently sell for ~$50. Polarized glasses currently sell for $15. Right now, it isn't that expensive. And the price is only going to drop.


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

lovswr said:


> David, could you describe how the (I think active shutter) glasses worked? In particular, how do they interface with the set (or not)?


The IR emitter connects to the display, and the display basically tells the emitter the "ON/OFF" sequence. The emitter sends the "ON/OFF" sequence via IR to the the glasses. The shutter glasses close the left lens and open the right lens on "ON" and vice versa on "OFF". This happens 120 times a second for 120Hz displays. So each eye gets 60 frames a second.

Nothing too complex about how it works.


----------



## twistedT (Jan 11, 2007)

Some good reading here: http://www.reald.com/Content/Announcements.aspx

It looks like RealD will be making glasses for all brands (Mits not mentioned  ), It sounds like the older models too..... not sure though?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

The three main obstacles to 3D adoption will be:

1) New HDTVs/Blu Ray players to support it - this is a hard cost that someone will have to pay to get it....simple as that. According to my clarification information posted earlier....the only TV's supporting this new service are the NEW Panasonics (at this time).

2) New content - apparently the 3D hardware manufacturers are going to pony up some $$$ towards the content providers' efforts on new 3D content. HAve to see how that works out.

3) Glass, or the need for glasses - cost wise and availability wise...that is not a real issue. Its whether or not people want to use them, or if technology is provided to no longer require them (ie polarizing filters on the screen). 

3D with DrecTV is a bold move, and one we need to learn more about before passing judgement, but so far....it looks like there's some added costs coming for it one way or another.


----------



## HarryD (Mar 24, 2002)

I'm sure the 3D of today is way better than the old 3D movies I watched years ago (w/ the red and blue plastic lenses)... but until we can do this without the need of some sort of device that you have to wear on your face (glasses)...I'm out. Not to mention I would have to buy a new TV .... again. It's just like when HD started (w/o the glasses)...


----------



## dhines (Aug 16, 2006)

my hope is this fails with flying colors. i have no desire to see programming cluttered with wasted 3D channels. now if they want to create a 3D pack, then god bless and i hope there are tons of channels out there for people to get.

but, considering the limited number of people that will have compatible TV's . . . compounded with the number of people that actually want to see them, i find it hard to justify this as any base package inclusion.


----------



## loudo (Mar 24, 2005)

Great idea, but I can't see it going very far for a while. It will be years before there are enough 3D HDTVs in circulation to make it even worth while producing programing in 3D. As we have within the past year gone digital with OTA and many people have just gotten new HDTVs, it will be years before they are ready to replace them by purchasing new 3D ready TVs. I know there will be a few people, who need all the latest bells and whistles, running out and buying one, but I don't see many doing that. 

The people still using analog sets are the ones that are not concerned with PQ, and if 3D HDTV sets cost more than regular HDTVs, most of them will opt out to purchase the less expensive one. The majority of 3D HDTVs will go into circulation, by new purchases, as current sets are replaced.

I know the next one I purchase will be a 3D HDTV, but as I have bought 3 HDTV this past two years, it will be a while before I have to need to purchase another one.


----------



## Bill Broderick (Aug 25, 2006)

As an owner of the Mitsubishi WD82837, which is HD-ready, but uses the checkerboard format, I really hope that the "adapter", that Mitsubishi is touting, has multiple input & output HDMI jacks. I'd hate to think that I'd need multiple adapters to accomdate both a Blu-ray player and a DirecTV receiver.

If not, at least I'd have the option of buying a Samsung Blu-ray player, which, they claim, is supposed to output the checkerboard format as well as the Blu-ray standard.


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

I predict this 3D thing will bomb.

Reasons:

1) 3D is an eyestrain

2) Wearing the glasses sucks

3) Content is limited and for the most part Dull.

4) Its a novelty thing that will fade away again when Avatar fades.

5) Extra money for a 3D TV, not going to happen for 95% of the masses.

6) The economy sucks, even the people who spend money on HDTV's are not trading out now.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

There are 5% who willing to buy 3D components and they could cover initial investment before we all will be satisfied and will follow.


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

I'm not interested in jumping into 3D right away but I for one am happy to see this happening. It's much better than the early days of Hi-Def in my opinion.

When I bought my first HDTV there was no way for me to get a hi-def picture on it. I had to wait a few years before my cable company finally started offering HD service and then I think I had 5 or 6 channels. Then I had to wait even longer before I was finally able to buy a Blu-Ray and HD-DVD player so I could buy and own hi-def movies.

I would much rather have them come out with a few 3D channels now and start the ball rolling with content available from the start.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

The the companies would not make constant money flow from your packet.


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

twistedT said:


> Some good reading here: http://www.reald.com/Content/Announcements.aspx
> 
> It looks like RealD will be making glasses for all brands (Mits not mentioned  ), It sounds like the older models too..... not sure though?


RealD already makes glasses for current 3D-Ready displays. All of their Crystal Eyes glasses are compatible, even the CE5s with DLP-Link (no emitter needed). Though they aren't cheap. They're considered the best on the market (used by NASA), but at $450/pair, they better be.

EDIT:
Not to mention, the current shutter glasses they make will be the same ones for upcoming 3D displays that use shutter technology. Shutter glasses running at 120Hz are all the same, just different designs, tints, etc.


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> The three main obstacles to 3D adoption will be:
> 
> 1) New HDTVs/Blu Ray players to support it - this is a hard cost that someone will have to pay to get it....simple as that. According to my clarification information posted earlier....the only TV's supporting this new service are the NEW Panasonics (at this time).


There has been some talk about the mandatory output in the 3D BD specs. "Frame Packing" is mandatory, all players will at least have to output this method. And as explained by folks that know stereoscopic 3D very well, Frame Packing includes the checkerboard method, which is what all the 3D-Ready displays made since 2007 use (not including LCD gaming monitors).

This has not been clarified by anyone from HDMI or the BD Forum, but the folks that explained this have been in the 3D arena for quite some time.

Basically, if this is true, all 3D BD players will have to be able to display the 5 methods included in Frame Packing. Frame Packing is the method used to put the data of 2 frames into a single frame, ala half-resolution. Basically it's 960x1080 per eye, 60 times a second.

Will there be an apparent drop in quality? I don't think so, as it's basically the same thing as 1080i compared to 1080p. And we all know, if your display has a good enough deinterlacer, 1080i is practically comparable to 1080p. (I'm not talking about 1080p at 24Hz).


----------



## mhking (Oct 28, 2002)

elwaylite said:


> Hey Directv, how about just giving me BBCHD and ESPNUHD instead of something that requires me to buy a new tv.
> 
> Crap...


+1


----------



## twistedT (Jan 11, 2007)

taz291819 said:


> RealD already makes glasses for current 3D-Ready displays. All of their Crystal Eyes glasses are compatible, even the CE5s with DLP-Link (no emitter needed). Though they aren't cheap. They're considered the best on the market (used by NASA), but at $450/pair, they better be.
> 
> EDIT:
> Not to mention, the current shutter glasses they make will be the same ones for upcoming 3D displays that use shutter technology. Shutter glasses running at 120Hz are all the same, just different designs, tints, etc.


Sweet, sounds like you know 3-D... I don't know much. :lol: I put this up because others were wondering if thier older sets would work (myself included) and to let others know that realD is one of the main players.


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

P Smith said:


> There are 5% who willing to buy 3D components and they could cover initial investment before we all will be satisfied and will follow.


Even if 5% are willing, you are still going to need some Wow 3D shows to make this work. What I figure Directv will do is make the channel follow the design format of Smithsonian HD and just keep repeating a few good shows hundreds of times. Will people shell out thousands of dollars for that??? Look how long it took for HD to get going, if thats any indication, it will take 6-8 years before 3D will get off the ground.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

There is no controversy - HD came a few years ago and still cover less then 40% households. Same would happen with 3D market.


----------



## Gocanes (Jul 15, 2007)

P Smith said:


> There is no controversy - HD came a few years ago and still cover less then 40% households. Same would happen with 3D market.


A few years ago is an understatement. I think it's been 8 or 9 years since OTA HD started broadcasting in South Florida. After all that time still nowhere near all programming is available in HD.


----------



## somguy (Oct 2, 2006)

DCSholtis said:


> It's a shame that current HDTVs couldn't take advantage of some kind of plug in for the 3D experience. I would much rather do that then invest in a new LCD or whatever down the line.


We've been able to watch 3d on our tv's since the early 80's. Who wants to go out and spend money on a "special" tv when you'll still have to wear special 3d glasses anyways?! Especially when lots of people just spent money on new lcd's, led lcd's, dlp, plasma, etc.?! It's really ashame that a "special" tv is needed for this. I don't think it will catch on for many years to come since this is mandatory. Make 3dtv w/o the need for special glasses and then we'll talk!! besides, who wants to wear these glasses anyways. They're uncomfortable and bothersome. How about people who wear eyeglasses all of the time, will they fit over them?! Lots of issues with this I think but hey that's just my two cents!!


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

This is what gets me with technology. There is always something new coming out to try to get people to spend out even more money! We had one TV that had to be replaced. And I remember when I got our HDTV I thought I got top of the line with 1080i and I hadn't had the TV any time when along comes 1080p! Obviously I didn't rush back out to get another HDTV. Plus we still have a perfectly good SD TV so we weren't going to rush out and get another HDTV to replace it. All we did with it was add a D* HD DVR
receiver to it and it really has an excellent picture. No not an actual HD picture, but it does come closer to one than you might think it would.


----------



## gary900 (Feb 16, 2009)

Last year, I spent three grand upgrading my old CRT TV's to LCD HDTV models. I am not going to be upgrading again anytime soon. Probably will wait for a 96" OLED 3D HDTV that weighs 10 pounds and costs under a few hundred bucks. Might be here sooner than you think at the currect rate of technology price and performance gains.


----------



## joed32 (Jul 27, 2006)

gary900 said:


> Last year, I spent three grand upgrading my old CRT TV's to LCD HDTV models. I am not going to be upgrading again anytime soon. Probably will wait for a 96" OLED 3D HDTV that weighs 10 pounds and costs under a few hundred bucks. Might be here sooner than you think at the currect rate of technology price and performance gains.


Put me down for one of those too.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

somguy said:


> We've been able to watch 3d on our tv's since the early 80's. Who wants to go out and spend money on a "special" tv when you'll still have to wear special 3d glasses anyways?! Especially when lots of people just spent money on new lcd's, led lcd's, dlp, plasma, etc.?! It's really ashame that a "special" tv is needed for this. I don't think it will catch on for many years to come since this is mandatory. Make 3dtv w/o the need for special glasses and then we'll talk!! besides, who wants to wear these glasses anyways. They're uncomfortable and bothersome. How about people who wear eyeglasses all of the time, will they fit over them?! Lots of issues with this I think but hey that's just my two cents!!


I also think 3D is something that most people do not want, are not willing to spend money on and will flop, but I have to admit the new setups do deliver a much better picture than what we could see in the 80s.


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

This is going to be a lot of hipe over nothing,it be will more of an enhancement than true 3d witch will take a lot more to do than what is planed.


----------



## Stanley Kritzik (Aug 4, 2005)

Short of an IMAX venue or holographic images at home, a 3D image on a 2D screen will require a device -- something like glasses, or both eyes will see the same thing. But, we manage to fool our eyes with mixtures of only three primary colors, and, I predict, for those who will want it, 3D with glasses will be very nice. For those who don't want it -- they can pass. 

There are people in our nation and world who make do without cars, cell phones, stereo sound, color TV, PCs, DVDs, power lawn mowers, etc., and most of them don't instruct the rest of us to do without. The same, I suggest, ought to apply to 3D channels, especially if it doesn't obsolete everyone's present situations.

And, if the dogs don't like it, they won't eat the dog food. Freedom of choice is wonderful.

Stan


----------



## Gocanes (Jul 15, 2007)

If DirecTV had all available HD channels and still had bandwidth that they could use to offer 3D channels then I'd have no problem. My problem is that by giving a very small percentage of people (who actually want it and will pay extra for it) 3D channels they are going to use bandwidth that could be used to give lots and lots of paying customers more HD content.

As I said in an earlier post and others have echoed, as long as you need to wear glasses to view 3D it isn't going to be something that people watch all the time as "normal" programming. A movie once in a while, sure. A sporting event once to see what it is like maybe but nobody will be spending a whole sunday watching NFL Sunday Ticket 3D for 7 hours straight.

3D is just a gimmicky trick and does not create anything that resembles virtual reality. Far away objects look VERY small and as you get closer to the edge of the screen you lose the ability to create the effect. For example if a football game is shown and the shot has the safeties right at the edge of the screen and the QB in shotgun at the opposite edge, the lineman and linebackers will be in 3D but the QB and the safeties won't be. To solve this they'd have to zoom out further and you have even smaller looking players. Notice that anything you normally see in 3D the 3D effects are concentrated on objects in the middle of the frame.



Stanley Kritzik said:


> Short of an IMAX venue or holographic images at home, a 3D image on a 2D screen will require a device -- something like glasses, or both eyes will see the same thing. But, we manage to fool our eyes with mixtures of only three primary colors, and, I predict, for those who will want it, 3D with glasses will be very nice. For those who don't want it -- they can pass.
> 
> There are people in our nation and world who make do without cars, cell phones, stereo sound, color TV, PCs, DVDs, power lawn mowers, etc., and most of them don't instruct the rest of us to do without. The same, I suggest, ought to apply to 3D channels, especially if it doesn't obsolete everyone's present situations.
> 
> ...


----------



## jamieh1 (May 1, 2003)

Can a non 3d HDTV display the 3d picture and use the cheap 3d glasse you use at a movie theather to view it?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Nope.


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

Stanley Kritzik said:


> Short of an IMAX venue or holographic images at home, a 3D image on a 2D screen will require a device -- something like glasses, or both eyes will see the same thing. ....


This isn't exactly true here. They have been messing around with 3D TV in a form of no needed glasses for awhile now. The last I looked into it was called "Autostereoscopy" as that form of 3D viewing technology lets you watch 3D images without the use of special glasses and the likes. There deff should be some sets at the CES too.

Of course the first step in 3D is going to be with glasses just like the first step in big streen TV's were the big old tubes that were heavy as all can be. I myself will wait untill the sets themselves can show it without the use of glasses.

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/3DTV-autostereoscopic-CES,review-1490.html

http://www.gizmag.com/go/4603/
http://www.geek.com/articles/gadgets/philips-unveils-3840x2160-3d-hdtv-not-ready-2008103/

Also, If you bought a new "high end" tv recently(1-2yr), its likely that it is already 3d ready and all you would need to buy is the glass's equipment.
http://www.3dmovielist.com/3dhdtvs.html


----------



## Draconis (Mar 16, 2007)

Well, nobody's posted it, but here is the brochure they were handing out at the booth. 

My personal take, as a (former) glasses wearer I'm not pleased that the glasses are required. They can get lost, damaged, and may not fit over the viewers prescription glasses. On the other hand, I did see other 3D TV's there that did not require glasses for 3D. So I'm going to sit on the fence for this one and see what happens.


----------



## johnezee (Dec 23, 2009)

Ok, I have a Samsung 56" DLP 3D capable, HR22/100. Does anyone know what I will need? There is a 3D sync jack on the back of the TV that I believe was intended to be linked to a pc to sync the glasses shutters with the display. Will that be used? Or will the shutter glasses be synced soley by the reciever? Will the HR 22 be 3D capable?


----------



## Cyclone99 (Sep 22, 2007)

johnezee said:


> Ok, I have a Samsung 56" DLP 3D capable, HR22/100. Does anyone know what I will need? There is a 3D sync jack on the back of the TV that I believe was intended to be linked to a pc to sync the glasses shutters with the display. Will that be used? Or will the shutter glasses be synced soley by the reciever? Will the HR 22 be 3D capable?


The 3D sync jack is solely to sync the shutter glasses to the TV. An IR or RF emitter is connected to the sync jack which transmits a signal to the glasses. Neither the glasses or the sync jack are connected to a PC or satellite receiver.

The connection from the satellite receiver to your TV would an HDMI cable like it is now. What is not clear yet is whether the satellite box will output the checkerboard format 3D signal that your Samsung TV can understand. Otherwise, an adapter would have to be made available that converts the 3D video signal. Mitsubishi has just announced a similar adapter that converts the 3D video signal from 3D Blu-ray players into the checkerboard format that the DLP TVs need.


----------



## kstefanec (May 13, 2007)

somguy said:


> We've been able to watch 3d on our tv's since the early 80's. Who wants to go out and spend money on a "special" tv when you'll still have to wear special 3d glasses anyways?! Especially when lots of people just spent money on new lcd's, led lcd's, dlp, plasma, etc.?! It's really ashame that a "special" tv is needed for this. I don't think it will catch on for many years to come since this is mandatory. Make 3dtv w/o the need for special glasses and then we'll talk!! besides, who wants to wear these glasses anyways. They're uncomfortable and bothersome. How about people who wear eyeglasses all of the time, will they fit over them?! Lots of issues with this I think but hey that's just my two cents!!


Totally agree! I looked at every booth with 3D and everyone of them gave me a headache. There is no way I could watch for an extended period of time. And every person I saw with glasses, had a heck of a time trying to get the 3D glasses to fit over their prescription glasses. I think this whole thing is a waste of time, money, and resources. The only thing that looked good was a first person shooter video game. But then again, it's the fanboy gamers who are going to want 3D. Movies like AVATAR are just one big video game.

Another product that got me scratching my head, was the ultra high def screen, 4K lines of resolution. What source are we going to use for that?! We're lucky if we can get HD TV stations to put out a 720 signal.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Movie industry using the format in theaters, so they could start selling those to you if you have 4K projector.


----------



## MadManNBama (Jan 31, 2008)

somguy said:


> We've been able to watch 3d on our tv's since the early 80's. Who wants to go out and spend money on a "special" tv when you'll still have to wear special 3d glasses anyways?! Especially when lots of people just spent money on new lcd's, led lcd's, dlp, plasma, etc.?! It's really ashame that a "special" tv is needed for this. I don't think it will catch on for many years to come since this is mandatory. Make 3dtv w/o the need for special glasses and then we'll talk!! besides, who wants to wear these glasses anyways. They're uncomfortable and bothersome. How about people who wear eyeglasses all of the time, will they fit over them?! Lots of issues with this I think but hey that's just my two cents!!


I can tell you who'll spend, early adopters like me, who have a 5 year old HDTV and will upgrade this year. Since I'll be getting a 52' or 55' LCD with at least 240Hz, why not make it 3D?

Now, my Blu Ray player is another story altogether. I've only had it for 1 year and it works great.

My only issue is price. I don't plan on spending over $2500 for my next set and I noticed that none of the vendors except Visio discussed the price of the fancy new 3D capable sets. That tells me that none of the m wants to be first to name a price. I am sure Sony will blow it out the water, but I don't want a Sony anyway.

3D will catch on, and I feel it will be a faster process than HD. 6 years ago, paying $2000 for a TV was unheard of, yet we all did it eventually. We all know that we'll have to upgrade a TV within 5 year cycles nowadays, that's just the new era of tech we live in.

If everyone in this forum weren't tech geeks and early adopters with the money, you wouldn't even be discussing 3D right now. Just the fact that we all keep up with CES tells me that we are the target audience for grabbing these sets once we see them in person. I for one am remaining optimistic and open minded, albeit skeptical.


----------



## dvdguyjt (Apr 22, 2002)

I checked out almost every 3D demo at CES, and I have to say, the only one I thought looked REALLY spectacular was the Mitsubishi LASER TV with 3D. That one looked more realistic. Maybe it was because it had a 1000x faster refresh rate than LCD and was just screaming for this type of technology.

The DLP 3D demos were not impressive at all. They seemed to blur off and on...I even saw a rainbow effect or two......

I did, however, like the Panasonic demo (on the 152 inch screen no less) that showed a live shot of us sitting in the audience in 3D. That one wasn't bad.

JT


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

dvdguyjt said:


> I checked out almost every 3D demo at CES, and I have to say, the only one I thought looked REALLY spectacular was the Mitsubishi LASER TV with 3D. That one looked more realistic. Maybe it was because it had a 1000x faster refresh rate than LCD and was just screaming for this type of technology.
> 
> The DLP 3D demos were not impressive at all. They seemed to blur off and on...I even saw a rainbow effect or two......
> 
> ...


Yeah thats somewhat understandable there seeing as how the new Mitsu Laser TV is supposed to be the bomb in its own.


----------



## Brent04 (Nov 23, 2004)

Technicolor 3D TV with no glasses

http://www.neowin.net/news/live/10/01/10/hands-on-technicolor-3d-tv-with-no-glasses-2

The article says that it is not as good as compared to the version that requires glasses because there are certain ways you have to watch it to get the 3D effect.


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

Brent04 said:


> Technicolor 3D TV with no glasses
> 
> http://www.neowin.net/news/live/10/01/10/hands-on-technicolor-3d-tv-with-no-glasses-2
> 
> The article says that it is not as good as compared to the version that requires glasses because there are certain ways you have to watch it to get the 3D effect.


I was hoping that the 3D w/o glasses would be better. When I saw the review of the Samsung version of 3D w/o glasses on CNBC, they raved about it. So that's disappointing about only looking good in the sweet spot, because thats not practical. And if you have to wear glasses, I'm out.


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

RACJ2 said:


> I was hoping that the 3D w/o glasses would be better. When I saw the review of the Samsung version of 3D w/o glasses on CNBC, they raved about it. So that's disappointing about only looking good in the sweet spot, because thats not practical. And if you have to wear glasses, I'm out.


Do not diss the no glasses 3d yet. Its early in the process. I know we all can remember how the first big tv's were and how their viewing angle was narrow. Now they can be seen clear from almost anywhere.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Went to the Panasonic booth today (again), and lucked out again with another DirecTV respresentative there to show things and answer some questions. Photos will appear in my CES thread/report...but in the mean time:

1) Panasonic is the lead partner vendor to launch 3D with DirecTV, and theya re also going to actively encourage and "assist" content providers to introduce more 3D content.

2) Samsung and others will follow with their 3D offerings.

3) You will need a 3D-enabled TV, as well as special 3D glasses that will likely vary by vendor.

4) Panasonic is introducing a new Blu Ray Player (BDT350) some time in late 1Q 2010 that will function with the same 3D glasses.

5) DirecTV will launch with 2 3D channels, along with 1 3D DOD channel.

Clearly, based on what we say at CES, they are serious, Panasonic is serious, and the 3D bandwagon has left the station.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

3D is still a gimmick as long as you have to wear glasses to see it. When there is TRUE method of holographic projection get back to me. 

Considering the dire economy I'd say that this particular version will go the way for quadrophonic sound, and the like.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> 3) You will need a 3D-enabled TV, as well as special 3D glasses that will likely vary by vendor.


I spent $1200 on a new Panasonic plasma this past year, I am not buying another new TV just to get 3DTV.



dubber deux said:


> Considering the dire economy I'd say that this particular version will go the way for quadrophonic sound, and the like.


I hope so.


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

TheRatPatrol said:


> I spent $1200 on a new Panasonic plasma this past year, I am not buying another new TV just to get 3DTV.
> 
> I hope so.


Its a possibility that you wouldn't have to buy a whole new tv. Long as your tv has the minimum specs for 3D you'd be able to get the glasses and equipment to add onto it.

In the end this 3d will take off. It may not at first with the glasses but as soon as they fine tune(and make available) the sets that can do it without glasses that they are working on more and more now, then at that point 3dtv will become something for the masses.


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

dvdguyjt said:


> I checked out almost every 3D demo at CES, and I have to say, the only one I thought looked REALLY spectacular was the Mitsubishi LASER TV with 3D. That one looked more realistic. Maybe it was because it had a 1000x faster refresh rate than LCD and was just screaming for this type of technology.
> 
> The DLP 3D demos were not impressive at all. They seemed to blur off and on...I even saw a rainbow effect or two......
> 
> ...


That's odd what you saw with the DLPs, as every hardcore 3D reviewer has said they're the best. I'll let everyone know how a DLP looks on Thursday, as my shutter glasses will come in on Wednesday.

I'm going to compare it with what I saw in the theaters (XpanD Theater, "Fly Me to the Moon", polarized glasses). I have the 5 minute trailer in stereoscopic 3D ready to go.


----------



## IcedOmega13 (Mar 3, 2008)

I'm just crossing my fingers that us early adopters don't have to purchase newer sets. I have an HL61A750 Sammy that does great stereo 3D. Works with the one Ps3 stereo game that's out invincible tiger, and numerous Direct X games for the pc and is the same tech Panasonic uses.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

IcedOmega13 said:


> I'm just crossing my fingers that us early adopters don't have to purchase newer sets. I have an HL61A750 Sammy that does great stereo 3D. Works with the one Ps3 stereo game that's out invincible tiger, and numerous Direct X games for the pc and is the same tech Panasonic uses.


As one of those who got a chance to look at the DirecTV 3D offering these past few days at the 2010 CES (Consumer Electronic Show)....

I can tell you that the launch of 3D HDTV into the marketplace will likely be as much *evolutionary* as it is *revolutionary*.

For DirecTV, Panasonic is clearly the lead partner to get things launched. We saw and learned a great deal about the partnership, including the demo 1080p 3D sat feed with content samples.

What we do know for sure is:

1) The actual service is becoming known as 3D HDTV.

1) The launch of DirecTV's 3D HDTV service is still set for June 2010 with 2 content channels and 1 DOD (on demand) channel.

2) Panasonic will be a strong partner to promote content, facilitate marketing, and provide some ancillary items such as 3D glasses.

3) You *will* need to have a Viera Plasma 3D TV to view the new content - eventually Samsung and others will have comparable hardware for 3D HDTV viewing.

4) There are tentative plans for some form of "conversion technology" that will allow some legacy HDTV equipment to work with all this...but what, when, and costs are all unknown.

5) Panasonic is releasing a series of 3D HD Blu Ray players in the next few months which will be compatible with the Viera and same 3D glasses.

6) If what we saw onsite at CES respresents what the final offering looks like (and we saw live sat content using the Viera 3D HDTV's and Panasonic glasses)....its very impressive.

Hope that answered most of the repeated questions here for now.


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> As one of those who got a chance to look at the DirecTV 3D offering these past few days at the 2010 CES (Consumer Electronic Show)....
> 
> I can tell you that the launch of 3D HDTV into the marketplace will likely be as much *evolutionary* as it is *revolutionary*.


Did you happen to see the Samsung 3D LCD prototype that doesn't require glasses?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

RACJ2 said:


> Did you happen to see the Samsung 3D LCD prototype that doesn't require glasses?


Yes... the Samsung 3D LCD HDTV DirecTV demo as well - and the demo DID require glasses...and despite multiple/separate visits, they consistently told us the same thing.

They are working on non-glasses-required technology also....but don't look for that for some time to come later on....


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

IcedOmega13 said:


> I'm just crossing my fingers that us early adopters don't have to purchase newer sets. I have an HL61A750 Sammy that does great stereo 3D. Works with the one Ps3 stereo game that's out invincible tiger, and numerous Direct X games for the pc and is the same tech Panasonic uses.


Panasonic doesn't use the same tech as the Sammy HL61A750 (I have the same display). The Sammy (and Mits' DLPs) use the TI checkerboard method. Either the STB is going to do the conversion, or you'll need an external converter.

Directv is using the RealD SbS method. As I've noted before, RealD currently offers a converter for Sammys and Mits, but right now, it costs $500.


----------



## BubblePuppy (Nov 3, 2006)

I can imagine inviting friends over to see my new 3D HDTV: "Sorry, I don't have enough of the $100 a pair glasses for everyone. Just unfocus your eyes, like with the Magic Eye pictures and I'm sure something will pop out".


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

It's going to be a wile before i jump on the 3D HDTV bandwagon,probably start whit the glasses so i can look like i been 3D HDTVorized. But at 100 bucks apiece i will wait to see how everybody likes the picture and price's come down.I am still skeptical.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

BubblePuppy said:


> I can imagine inviting friends over to see my new 3D HDTV: "Sorry, I don't have enough of the $100 a pair glasses for everyone. Just unfocus your eyes, like with the Magic Eye pictures and I'm sure something will pop out".


Make a provisional note in your invitation: *3D glasses will be require, so please bring your own*.


----------



## BubblePuppy (Nov 3, 2006)

P Smith said:


> Make a provisional note in your invitation: *3D glasses will be require, so please bring your own*.


Yea..so I can borrow one, since I can't afford one of my own because I bought this ridiculously expensive 3DHDTV that didn't come with the friggin glasses in the first place.


----------



## barryb (Aug 27, 2007)

I will be in the market to replace a Sony this year, so I will wait it out and see what comes down the pipe.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

This is just to keep you all 3D warm and 3D fuzzy for a while...at least until June...


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

BubblePuppy said:


> Yea..so I can borrow one, since I can't afford one of my own because I bought this ridiculously expensive 3DHDTV that didn't come with the friggin glasses in the first place.


Most of the displays will come with at least 1 pair of glasses, according to some CEs. And as I've said, you can currently get them for $59, not $100.


----------



## ATARI (May 10, 2007)

taz291819 said:


> Most of the displays will come with at least 1 pair of glasses, according to some CEs. And as I've said, you can currently get them for $59, not $100.


Can I use my pre-tax flexben plan money to buy them?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

taz291819 said:


> Most of the displays will come with at least 1 pair of glasses, according to some CEs. And as I've said, you can currently get them for $59, not $100.


Actually - we saw 3D glasses from various manufacturers ranging from $50 - $250 at the CES this past weekend...so there will be various flavors.

More important, Panasonic will be the first DirecTV partner to market shortly, with multiple different size 3D HDTV plasma devices, as well as the 3D HD Blu Ray player in 1Q.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Will Panasonic include 3D glasses with those models ? How many if yes ?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

P Smith said:


> Will Panasonic include 3D glasses with those models ? How many if yes ?


We were told 1 pair of 3D glasses came with each 3D HDTV, and 1 pair with each 3D HD Blu Ray player in the Panasonic line of products...I guess we won't know for sure until they come out soon....but that's what was said at the CES show.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Well, if you are going to have a Super Bowl Party or whatever you had better have lots of money for 20 pair of glasses or how ever many you will need. :lol:


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

richierich said:


> Well, if you are going to have a Super Bowl Party or whatever you had better have lots of money for 20 pair of glasses or how ever many you will need. :lol:


NP. See post#169.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Well, that ain't gonna happen and if they did would they all be the same brand using the same technology???

All 3-D Glasses are not the same as far as technology goes so they all will not work for a given 3-D Display.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

That would be bizzare if it will be no standard [IR/RF] interface settled. TV/glasses already here.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

richierich said:


> Well, that ain't gonna happen and if they did would they all be the same brand using the same technology???
> 
> All 3-D Glasses are not the same as far as technology goes so they all will not work for a given 3-D Display.


True - not for a while anyway.

It has taken years for the Blu Ray folks to establish firm standards, and likely, the 3D HDTV specs becoming stable with an industry standard is also years off.

It's unfortunate, but probable.


----------



## JayB (Mar 19, 2007)

I suppose it's possible that 3D TV will catch on, but I just don't see folks being excited, on a continuing basis, to sit down on their couch and slap on a pair of dark glasses to watch TV. In a theater, it's a novelty, part of the experience, but at home, I'm willing to bet folks just won't buy into this the way the CE manufacturers and content producers seem to think that they will. Personally, I think this is going to end up a huge waste of money for everyone.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

JayB said:


> I suppose it's possible that 3D TV will catch on, but I just don't see folks being excited, on a continuing basis, to sit down on their couch and slap on a pair of dark glasses to watch TV. In a theater, it's a novelty, part of the experience, but at home, I'm willing to bet folks just won't buy into this the way the CE manufacturers and content producers seem to think that they will. Personally, I think this is going to end up a huge waste of money for everyone.


I agree that this is a Gimmick, a Niche Product with lots of COOL Factor and a Novelty that will not make it to the Masses. You will have to get rid of the glasses, get lots of programming out there and bring down the price so the Wally World crowd can afford it.

Can you imagine having a Super Bowl Party and inviting 20 or so people over for the party. You will have to buy 20 pairs of 3-D Glasses at $75 a pop and then take them off when you go to the bathroom or to get a drink or eat some snacks or engage in a conversation. Just not very practical but it does have it's COOL FACTOR and that will sell to the younger generation and also for GAMING as that will be a BIG DRAW bad will be one thing that will drive it to more success.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

To paint the picture a bit more...

For 3D HDTV (as its becoming known) - it will likely have limited early adoption, as there are new costs (like a new 3D HDTV!) involved.

That is nothing new for any new technology - just think back about HDTV in general....many folks STILL don't have them.

I suspect we're looking at this all rolling out over YEARS, and becoming mainstream some time 3-5 years down the road.

It's also content-dependent, and that's all at its infant stage as well.

All that said - its real, its here, and its really neat. The demos we saw at CES were impressive.

Some will join early, some late, but it is indeed coming down the highway.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I don't even think you can compare it to HDTV adoption, because that got a significant boost from ATSC adoption requirements. You have to look at the slow pace of color TV adoption. When the color standard was adopted around 1955, a lot of folks had just bought their first TV 5-7 years before. Network programming didn't even really go full color until about 1966. If 3D does eventually get widespread adoption, it will be a long time from now, and there will have to be a lot more interoperability between manufacturers.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

I'd agree that widespread adoption of 3D HDTV won't be anytime soon.


----------



## gary900 (Feb 16, 2009)

Im gonna wait for 4D!!!!!!


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Actually - we saw 3D glasses from various manufacturers ranging from $50 - $250 at the CES this past weekend...so there will be various flavors.
> 
> More important, Panasonic will be the first DirecTV partner to market shortly, with multiple different size 3D HDTV plasma devices, as well as the 3D HD Blu Ray player in 1Q.


Yeah, I was only mentioning the cheapest. And RealD sells their top of the line CE5s for $450/pair.

Also, regarding emitters, there are a couple of companies that already sell "universal" emitters, which work with most major brands. They go for around ~$99.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

gary900 said:


> Im gonna wait for 4D!!!!!!


Current 3D is actually 4D if you will count time axis.


----------



## BubblePuppy (Nov 3, 2006)

I'll pay $500 for 3D glasses that turn 2D into real 3D. It will save on buying another tv.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Actually "Current 3D" would imply a fixed point in time, making it truly 3D. In order for your supposition to be correct, then you would have to be speaking of the once and future 3D


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

I was very skeptical of 3D until I went to CES last weekend. I was extremely impressed with all of the 3D that I saw. It added an element to everything I watched that I didn't expect. It's not just about something coming at you, it's about depth. City scenes looked unbelievable with the different depths of each building.

That being said, there were some cool "coming at you" moments too. At the Sharp (?) booth they had a row of TV's all displaying HD content. Obviously, the TV you were right in front of looked great as an alligator came out of the screen and you couldn't help but look away. The coolest part though was looking down the line of TV's and watching one further down the row. Even at a pretty steep angle, you could see things coming right out of the bezel of the TV and toward the person watching it. Very cool to see.

I'm looking forward to as much 3D as I can get. Will I want to wear glasses all the time and watch everything in 3D? Nope. Much the same way that I don't watch everything in my theater either. I save the theater for movies, some sports and some TV shows (like Lost), everything else is viewed in the living room. 3D will be that way for me. Certain things will be watched in 3D, but most will not.

As for the expense, well I already have a 60" and a 65" 3D ready display, so I'm fairly covered there, I just need to get a 3D capable projector.



dreadlk said:


> Even if 5% are willing, you are still going to need some Wow 3D shows to make this work.


It doesn't need to be "wow". One of the coolest things I watched was a simple underwater scene. Breathtaking.



BubblePuppy said:


> I can imagine inviting friends over to see my new 3D HDTV: "Sorry, I don't have enough of the $100 a pair glasses for everyone. Just unfocus your eyes, like with the Magic Eye pictures and I'm sure something will pop out".


In one of the viewings that I had, the 3D glasses were basically the same cardboard glasses that come free with some current Blu Ray movies. I would imagine there'll be some pretty basic and inexpensive glasses for a few dollars for guests.

3D will take time, but it will build. Just like someone else mentioned, when color TV happened, everyone didn't run out and buy a new TV. Some people did, but most just waited to replace their current set and eventually everyone had a Color TV. The same thing has been happening with HD. Eventually everyone will have an HD set. And as people replace thier HD sets, they'll get 3D capable ones.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

spartanstew said:


> I was very skeptical of 3D until I went to CES last weekend. I was extremely impressed with all of the 3D that I saw. It added an element to everything I watched that I didn't expect. It's not just about something coming at you, it's about depth. City scenes looked unbelievable with the different depths of each building.
> 
> That being said, there were some cool "coming at you" moments too. At the Sharp (?) booth they had a row of TV's all displaying HD content. Obviously, the TV you were right in front of looked great as an alligator came out of the screen and you couldn't help but look away. The coolest part though was looking down the line of TV's and watching one further down the row. Even at a pretty steep angle, you could see things coming right out of the bezel of the TV and toward the person watching it. Very cool to see.
> 
> ...


All great observations at the CES.

I suspect that the 3D HDTV space will have to evolve like the Blu Ray group did, to establish at least some kinds of standards. Twenty or more flavors of 3D HDTV hardware - all with different types of technologies - won't survive long term. My guess is that this will begin throughout 2010 and continue into 2011, with a smaller number of "survivors", mostly dirven by "who can deliver content" and of course, price.

Those of us who saw demos at teh CES clearly got the chance to experience some very impressive 3d HDTV technology.

We'll have to see how it all pans out.


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

I was always skeptical of 3d not that it cant be displayed on tv but that it needs a special display and glasses.I feel if the source is done right it defiantly be done on what we have now.


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> All great observations at the CES.
> 
> I suspect that the 3D HDTV space will have to evolve like the Blu Ray group did, to establish at least some kinds of standards. Twenty or more flavors of 3D HDTV hardware - all with different types of technologies - won't survive long term. My guess is that this will begin throughout 2010 and continue into 2011, with a smaller number of "survivors", mostly dirven by "who can deliver content" and of course, price.
> 
> ...


While there are quite a few display methods, there are really only 3 types of glasses. LCD Shutters, Linear Polarized (not very popular), and Circular Polarized.

imo, Shutter glasses will come out the king, as displays that use this method are cheaper to produce. Also, shutter glasses are basically universal. (Yes, they can run at either 120Hz or 240Hz, but that isn't a big deal) The biggest issue is syncing them. Each company uses their own IR emitter, so since it's on a different frequency, the glasses aren't compatible.

A standard, sort of like DLP-Link, is needed in this regard. This way, the universal syncing signal is built into the display, and all shutters are compatible. This will go a long way in paving the road for 3D in the home.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

taz291819 said:


> While there are quite a few display methods, there are really only 3 types of glasses. LCD Shutters, Linear Polarized (not very popular), and Circular Polarized.
> 
> imo, Shutter glasses will come out the king, as displays that use this method are cheaper to produce. Also, shutter glasses are basically universal. (Yes, they can run at either 120Hz or 240Hz, but that isn't a big deal) *The biggest issue is syncing them. Each company uses their own IR emitter, so since it's on a different frequency, the glasses aren't compatible.* A standard, sort of like DLP-Link, is needed in this regard. This way, the universal syncing signal is built into the display, and all shutters are compatible. This will go a long way in paving the road for 3D in the home.


Well said sir.

Agree, the glasses are not the main issue, and standards will be needed on the other side of the fence.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Agree, the glasses are not the main issue, and standards will be needed on the other side of the fence.


I think the Glasses are the Main Issue as most people will not want to wear glasses except for a Special Event and then what happens when you get up to walk around in a Super Bowl Party, do you take off your glasses?

Or you go to the bathroom or to get snacks. And if you have a large party do you want to buy 20 pairs of glasses for everyone to wear.

Then you need Standards such as the BluRay/HD DVD Debacle.

Then you have to buy some more 3-D Displays. With 3-D it has to be shot with 3-D Cameras as conversion is very expensive and not as good visually to watch.

Then what about people who get headaches/nausea from watching 3-D.

It is just not practical but alot of fun to watch in a Special Environmental Situation such as a Dedicated Home Theater Room but then again that is for the 2% of the Masses economically who can afford it.

And then how long before you have enough 3-D Content?

At least with HD you could convert 35 MM Content/Movies easily over to HD Content.

We'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

richierich said:


> I think the Glasses are the Main Issue as most people will not want to wear glasses except for a Special Event and then what happens when you get up to walk around in a Super Bowl Party, do you take off your glasses?


In the end...the main issue is COST.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

richierich said:


> Or you go to the bathroom


Just don't look down.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

spartanstew said:


> Just don't look down.


Not good advise for us, but works for other gender. :nono2:


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

richierich said:


> I think the Glasses are the Main Issue as most people will not want to wear glasses except for a Special Event and then what happens when you get up to walk around in a Super Bowl Party, do you take off your glasses?
> 
> Or you go to the bathroom or to get snacks. And if you have a large party do you want to buy 20 pairs of glasses for everyone to wear.


My shutter glasses and emitter came in yesterday, so I tested various things with my HTPC. When the glasses are turned off (by losing sync), the LCDs are wide open. Other than looking like an idiot, you can walk around with them on, and everything looks normal. Now, this may be an issue with upcoming glasses which will use Bluetooth to sync the glasses, but honestly, even when they're on, you can still see just fine. I did notice the blue power light on the HR20-700 flickered when I looked at it, no biggie though.

The glasses are quick to turn off and on when they lose or receive the IR signal. Sitting in front of my display, if I looked straight down, the glasses would turn off. Looking back up at the display, they turned back on. Took about 1/2 second for to turn off or on.

Glasses designs will be an important factor. Ideally, you want to block all light that could seep in from the sides of the lens, as they can cause reflections on the insides of the lens, and become a distraction. The major shutter glasses' manufacturers have better designs that discourage this, compared to the cheaper pair I bought.

Though, turning off all the lights helped a LOT.

With my DLP, the effects were different (and imo, better) than in a movie theater. Instead of things "coming at you", the display was like a window, with quite a bit of depth. It was sorta like my display went from being 6" deep to 20 feet deep. Very cool. With this technology, screen size will make all the difference, the bigger, the better. I sit 6' from my 61" display, but I could see the effect would be better with a larger display. If you sit 10 feet back or so, you're going to want a very large screen, or move the couch closer.


----------



## Christopher Gould (Jan 14, 2007)

taz291819 said:


> My shutter glasses and emitter came in yesterday, so I tested various things with my HTPC. When the glasses are turned off (by losing sync), the LCDs are wide open. Other than looking like an idiot, you can walk around with them on, and everything looks normal. Now, this may be an issue with upcoming glasses which will use Bluetooth to sync the glasses, but honestly, even when they're on, you can still see just fine. I did notice the blue power light on the HR20-700 flickered when I looked at it, no biggie though.
> 
> The glasses are quick to turn off and on when they lose or receive the IR signal. Sitting in front of my display, if I looked straight down, the glasses would turn off. Looking back up at the display, they turned back on. Took about 1/2 second for to turn off or on.
> 
> ...


so hows the blocking the extra light going to work for someone wearing prescription glasses


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Christopher Gould said:


> so hows the blocking the extra light going to work for someone wearing prescription glasses


Two of the 3D HDTV glasses I tried at the CES fit nicely over my prescription glasses without a problem. One other one did not.

That said, some versions there were not production versions, rather, for demo purposes...my guess is final versions will work fine for those of us who wear glasses.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Christopher Gould said:


> so hows the blocking the extra light going to work for someone wearing prescription glasses


They will probably come out with Prescription 3-D Contacts for the Visually Impaired.


----------



## JayB (Mar 19, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> In the end...the main issue is COST.


I dunno - you're certainly right at the price points we'll see at first, but I really think that the main thing this technology has going against it is the simple hassle of the glasses. For the most part, folks just want to plop down, hit the on button and watch TV. I really think folks aren't going to put up with wearing glasses on a daily basis.

I will say that if this technology becomes a "special events" only technology then that's when price becomes a big deal - the question then becomes "am I willing to pay extra for occasional content".


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

JayB said:


> I dunno - you're certainly right at the price points we'll see at first, but I really think that the main thing this technology has going against it is the simple hassle of the glasses. For the most part, folks just want to plop down, hit the on button and watch TV. I really think folks aren't going to put up with wearing glasses on a daily basis.
> 
> I will say that if this technology becomes a "special events" only technology then that's when price becomes a big deal - the question then becomes "am I willing to pay extra for occasional content".


Perhaps to clarify my earlier statement a bit more...when I referenced COSTS, I was primarily speaking of new 3D HDTV's themselves and and 3D channel service fees. The glasses, while not necessarily inexpensive, are the smallest cost factor in the whole "what does 3D really cost to have in your home" equation.

Those costs will be substantial to start with, and go down, as has been the case with the introduction of any new technology. But for the next year or two at minimum....3D will likely be "pricey" for many (not all) mainstream HDTV viewers.


----------



## JayB (Mar 19, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Perhaps to clarify my earlier statement a bit more...
> 
> Those costs will be substantial to start with, and go down, as has been the case with the introduction of any new technology. But for the next year or two at minimum....3D will likely be "pricey" for many (not all) mainstream HDTV viewers.


Yeah, prices will go down, but I suspect that there'll always be something a premium you'll pay for 3D vs. non-3D TVs, Blu-Rays, etc. That's what I meant about price becoming a big deal for occasional content. Unless it takes off to a much greater degree than I think it will. Personally, I really think that 3D TV is the new DVD Audio - there's a market, but it's a small one and it won't ever be "mainstream" until someone figures out how to overcome the glasses issue *without* the current non-glasses 3D issues of being at the right distance and angle.

But, then again, I could be wrong - there's probably a reason I write code for a living and don't build consumer electronics...


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

JayB said:


> Yeah, prices will go down, but I suspect that there'll always be something a premium you'll pay for 3D vs. non-3D TVs, Blu-Rays, etc.
> 
> But, then again, I could be wrong - there's probably a reason I write code for a living and don't build consumer electronics...


Sorry to disappoint you....but you are likely right. :lol:


----------



## kevinwmsn (Aug 19, 2006)

I want to see the Jetsons 3D TV. They didn't wear glasses.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

I want to see The Playboy Channel In HD!!! :lol:

WOW!!!


----------



## Gocanes (Jul 15, 2007)

The biggest reason why I think that 3D will be a fad is that for the vast majority of 3D content it isn't worth paying more for it to be in 3D. Take the movie "Up" for instance. I saw it in 3D and the depth to the image was cool to see but it didn't make the movie any better. I would have enjoyed it just as much in 2D.

Same for sports. If I have to pay let's say $10 a month for ESPN 3D, it's not going to be worth it. Although there will be a few cool shots, it won't make the game any more enjoyable to see it in 3D and not worth the extra charge.

If it was free (which it won't be), I'd watch some stuff in 3D.

The bottom line is that 3D is a "special effect". It doesn't look like natural 3D, it looks like you are watching a 3D effect. Any special effect gets boring if you see it too much. For instance, Jurassic Park had really cool special effects but if you watched Jurassic Park every day for a week the effect wouldn't seem cool anymore.

3D will be something that the early adopters will have fun showing off to their friends and then it will die out just like 3D movies did in the 1950's. Before you say that 1950's 3D was bad quality, it's not true. They were using polarized 3D back then, not the Red/Blue anaglyph 1980's crap. 3D movies died off then for the same reason that 3D movies and everything else will die off in the next few years. After seeing a few, the "wow" factor wears off and all the negatives of the 3D technology start to take over (starting with having to wear glasses). 

Maybe it would have staying power if there was a "no glasses required" technology that was done for a very small price premium and allowed viewing from anywhere in the room at high quality.

My opinion is let's get everything at least produced and delivered in HD before we worry about 3D. HD is a HUGE improvement in viewing experience over NTSC TV.


----------



## texasmoose (May 25, 2007)

I work with D* folks(my company administers to their 401k plan) and I spoke with one of their engineers today and he told me that the upcoming 3D platform is going to be a bandwidth hog. I would prefer that they scrap this & just reserve the bandwidth for the addition of more HD channels.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

texasmoose said:


> I work with D* folks(my company administers to their 401k plan) and I spoke with one of their engineers today and he told me that the upcoming 3D platform is going to be a bandwidth hog. I would prefer that they scrap this & just reserve the bandwidth for the addition of more HD channels.


Don't worry - before multiple new HD channels will come, the new D12 sat would cover the 3D transmission.


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

Gocanes said:


> The bottom line is that 3D is a "special effect". It doesn't look like natural 3D, it looks like you are watching a 3D effect. Any special effect gets boring if you see it too much. For instance, Jurassic Park had really cool special effects but if you watched Jurassic Park every day for a week the effect wouldn't seem cool anymore.


This isn't true, the way 3D is now, it looks very natural. It has a "looking through a window" effect.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Gocanes said:


> The bottom line is that 3D is a "special effect". It doesn't look like natural 3D, it looks like you are watching a 3D effect.


Having seen 4 different version of true 3D this past weekend at the Consumer Electronics Show...the actual definition from Panasonic and Samsung was that its actually 3D HDTV, and contains a "3-dimensional present ion of content recorded with new 3D film media and cameras.

This is not the same as the old red & green glasses 3D of yesteryear.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Having seen 4 different version of true 3D this past weekend at the Consumer Electronics Show...the actual definition from Panasonic and Samsung was that its actually 3D HDTV, and contains a "3-dimensional present ion of content recorded with new 3D film media and cameras.
> 
> This is not the same as the old red & green glasses 3D of yesteryear.


With the addition of this novelity service I'm sure the rank and file subscribers (SD) will have to pay to support this as well....oh well the more D* raises rates the more subs will leave....eventually,.


----------



## hilmar2k (Mar 18, 2007)

texasmoose said:


> I work with D* folks(my company administers to their 401k plan) and I spoke with one of their engineers today and he told me that the upcoming 3D platform is going to be a bandwidth hog. I would prefer that they scrap this & just reserve the bandwidth for the addition of more HD channels.


It is just 1080p24 so it should not be any more bandwidth than their 1080p PPV and VOD content.


----------



## seern (Jan 13, 2007)

I am watching the Sony Hawaii Open on Golf Channel and a while ago the showed a test that Sony was doing with 3D at the match. They did a close up of a camera that was broadcasting a 3D image of the 18 green to their tent on the course.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

dubber deux said:


> With the addition of this novelty service I'm sure the rank and file subscribers (SD) will have to pay to support this as well....oh well the more D* raises rates the more subs will leave....eventually,.


That's certainly one (pessimistic) way of looking at it.

On the other hand....since the roll out will be in June but adoption gradual, and only limited content at the start...the corresponding costs can't be substantial in comparison either.....mainstream will likely take *years*.

Without special displays and glasses, you simply won't be able to view it.

Also, since manufacturers like Panasonic, Samsung, and others are subsidizing marketing, product launches, and even content provider startups....DirecTv is not alone in funding the 3D HDTV endeavor.


----------



## loudo (Mar 24, 2005)

dubber deux said:


> With the addition of this novelity service I'm sure the rank and file subscribers (SD) will have to pay to support this as well....oh well the more D* raises rates the more subs will leave....eventually,.


Where will they go? To DISH or the cable company that raises their rates also. Rate increases are an annual event for satellite and cable customers. We all hate to see it, but know it is coming around the beginning of every year.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

loudo said:


> Where will they go? To DISH or the cable company that raises their rates also. Rate increases are an annual event for satellite and cable customers. We all hate to see it, but know it is coming around the beginning of every year.


:sure::roundandr

Sorry but that "talking point" blather splashed about by the media congromerates just ain't gunna work anymore. The economy is in the crapper and more amd more subs are either leaving subscriber based services all together or drastically paring down what services they get...

The annual increases CANNOT continue to go on unless the providers only want a small fraction of their current sub base.


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

I dont get why you would need one of the "viera" tv sets to enjoy the directv 3d coming in June. I would think that the 3d feed's would be a standard and then you could see it in 3d as long as you had one of the forms of seeing 3d, ie the glasses, mitsu's adapter's, etc...


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Sgt. Slaughter said:


> I dont get why you would need one of the "viera" tv sets to enjoy the directv 3d coming in June. I would think that the 3d feed's would be a standard and then you could see it in 3d as long as you had one of the forms of seeing 3d, ie the glasses, mitsu's adapter's, etc...


A new 3D HDTV set will be required - the image on the set, as well as corresponding signal used by each of the lens in the 3D glasses are all part of the equation. Samsung's setup is very similar. While everyone will have firmware update(s) to support it in various HD DVR and HD receiver units.

All of those elements are needed to make it work.

We saw a live DirecTV 3D HDTV feed demo, using the Viera set and glasses, and it all came together impressivly.


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> A new 3D HDTV set will be required - the image on the set, as well as corresponding signal used by each of the lens in the 3D glasses are all part of the equation. Samsung's setup is very similar. While everyone will have firmware update(s) to support it in various HD DVR and HD receiver units.
> 
> All of those elements are needed to make it work.
> 
> We saw a live DirecTV 3D HDTV feed demo, using the Viera set and glasses, and it all came together impressivly.


Thats what I would think. All you would need is a 3D HDTV that is set up to see the 3D feed via whatever method available ie glasses.

I questioned it b/c the report stated "...you will need to use one of their new Viera series 3D HDTV plasma units to see the content..." Reading that it comes across as only those with a Viera series Panasonic will be able to see it while those with perfectly capable 3D HDTV's by other manufacturers could not.


----------



## hokie93 (Aug 21, 2007)

Has anyone come out with glasses that don't need to be hooked up to a computer? All I've seen so far are glasses that run through a computer for gaming.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Sgt. Slaughter said:


> Thats what I would think. All you would need is a 3D HDTV that is set up to see the 3D feed via whatever method available ie glasses.
> 
> I questioned it b/c the report stated "...you will need to use one of their new Viera series 3D HDTV plasma units to see the content..." Reading that it comes across as only those with a Viera series Panasonic will be able to see it while those with perfectly capable 3D HDTV's by other manufacturers could not.


The Panasonic sets seem to be the only ones that will be in production and out there for sale in time for the June DirecTV 3D launch, however, the Samsung folks indicated they were trying to be ready by that time as well, but could not guarantee it.

The Panasonic partner/promotion efforts for 3D were by far much more significant at CES than all the others coming down the pike.


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> The Panasonic sets seem to be the only ones that will be in production and out there for sale in time for the June DirecTV 3D launch, however, the Samsung folks indicated they were trying to be ready by that time as well, but could not guarantee it.
> 
> The Panasonic partner/promotion efforts for 3D were by far much more significant at CES than all the others coming down the pike.


But there are already sets on the market that are 3D ready and only require the glasses kit or something of the likes of what RealD offers.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Sgt. Slaughter said:


> But there are already sets on the market that are 3D ready and only require the glasses kit or something of the likes of what RealD offers.


Correct...the question is do they use the same 3D technology used in the version we saw, that works with the DirecTV setup and new glasses....don't know the answer to that.

We were able to view several different versions of 3D technology at CES, and they all were slightly different....you can't mix and match. For example, the Samsung 3D glasses will not work with the Panasonic TV's.

In addition, there still are multiple players (Texas Instruments is just one) that continue to work on "glasses-free" HD projection, which may simply require some form of polarizing lens (very thin) on top of an HDTV screen.

Fact is, all the 3D technology is still very much new, and there are various "flavors" of it out there right now. I suspect 2010 will "filter" down the number of approaches.


----------



## loudo (Mar 24, 2005)

hokie93 said:


> Has anyone come out with glasses that don't need to be hooked up to a computer? All I've seen so far are glasses that run through a computer for gaming.


I have seen a few advertised, but don't have any experience with any of them. Here are a few sites that sell them, not sure if these will work on any of the new sets coming out. 
For the computer:http://www.edimensional.com/product_info.php?cPath=21&products_id=28

For Home Theater: http://i-glassesonline.stores.yahoo.net/wirh3dglason1.html


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

loudo said:


> I have seen a few advertised, but don't have any experience with any of them. Here are a few sites that sell them, not sure if these will work on any of the new sets coming out.
> For the computer:http://www.edimensional.com/product_info.php?cPath=21&products_id=28
> 
> For Home Theater: http://i-glassesonline.stores.yahoo.net/wirh3dglason1.html


Thanks for sharing.

This brings up one other point we didn't mention earlier....gaming will also be a driving force in the launch of 3D. There were a number of booths at the CES pertaining to gaming, and 3D was part of their future planning as well.


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Correct...the question is do they use the same 3D technology used in the version we saw, that works with the DirecTV setup and new glasses....don't know the answer to that.
> 
> We were able to view several different versions of 3D technology at CES, and they all were slightly different....you can't mix and match. For example, the Samsung 3D glasses will not work with the Panasonic TV's.
> 
> ...


Yes my main point is i think the report should be changed in wording to say that you need a capable 3D HDTV and viewing hardware to see the feed they are going to stream later on in June. Currently it comes across as the Viera is the only one when it is not. Just think it might clear up some possible confusion. 
Great report though!! CES is always a treat to go to!

I myself will hold off on the 3D buzz till they seem to get it down and if the ones doing the non-glasses format can get it together for mainstream then I'll jump on that boat.

Saying this now and actually holding off on buying a new set once it comes out and getting the glasses is a completely different story for myself. I know once I see it demoed live and DirecTV is offering it itll be hard to hold off. lol


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Sgt. Slaughter said:


> Yes my main point is i think the report should be changed in wording to say that you need a capable 3D HDTV and viewing hardware to see the feed they are going to stream later on in June. Currently it comes across as the Viera is the only one when it is not.


Actually, the Panasonic Viera plasma units are the only announced 3D HDTVs that were confirmed to be available in time for the DirecTV 3D HDTV service in June. Samsung could not confirm their units would be ready. For that reason, we reported things as they were confirmed.

It may be possible that more 3D HDTV's will be available and compatible by June, but no official word of that at CES.


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Actually, the Panasonic Viera plasma units are the only announced 3D HDTVs that were confirmed to be available in time for the DirecTV 3D HDTV service in June. Samsung could not confirm their units would be ready. For that reason, we reported things as they were confirmed.
> 
> It may be possible that more 3D HDTV's will be available and compatible by June, but no official word of that at CES.


If I recal correctly Mitsubishi has 3D ready sets now and announced they were going to offer an adapter to work with the glasses too. Sony also has 3D coming out that were announced at the CES.

I know the Mitsubishi WD65736 DLP already supports 3D.
I posted this before but heres a list of monitors and HDTV's that are already out now and also 3D ready only to require glasses. http://www.3dmovielist.com/3dhdtvs.html

Point being there are many sets out that are 3D ready and will be able to accept the direcTV 3D feed as long as they have the glasses compatible for the set. http://www.reald.com/Content/Crystal-Eyes-5.aspx sells glasses for the Mitsu and samsung 3D DLP tv's already.

http://www.dlp.com/hdtv/dlp-features/3d-hdtv.aspx

A little 3D info here..http://www.3dflightsim.com/articles/HDTVisHERE.htm

Also fyi Mitsubishi has been working with Nvidia for awhile on the 3D movement and currently you can buy the nvidia 3d kit to add to your mitsubishi 3d ready tv to get a taste of it.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Sgt. Slaughter said:


> If I recal correctly Mitsubishi has 3D ready sets now and announced they were going to offer an adapter to work with the glasses too. Sony also has 3D coming out that were announced at the CES.
> 
> I know the Mitsubishi WD65736 DLP already supports 3D.


There have been issues with their version of 3D (called boxed or screen), including compatibility and some things that they are going to fix via a firmware update.

Not all 3D HDTV is created equal.


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> There have been issues with their version of 3D (called boxed or screen), including compatibility and some things that they are going to fix via a firmware update.
> 
> Not all 3D HDTV is created equal.


Not the point of what i was saying at all. Fact is there is 3D sets from many companies out now and have been out for some time. Just need the glasses and immiter to get the viewing part. This is different from the report statement. I'm not trying to crap all over the report b/c you guys do an amazing job and greatly appreciate it, but the thing is its incorrect in the statement about the only tv to see the directv 3d being the viera. And also incorrect in what you said about them being the only confirmed ones available by the time directv3D is launched.

Were not debating if mitsu's 3D is perfect but are the mere fact that there are MANY sets out now that are able to be used for the 3D channel when launched with just the ability of glasses added, like I mentioned before.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Sgt. Slaughter said:


> Not the point of what i was saying at all. Fact is there is 3D sets from many companies out now and have been out for some time. Just need the glasses and emitter to get the viewing part. This is different from the report statement. I'm not trying to crap all over the report b/c you guys do an amazing job and greatly appreciate it, but the thing is its incorrect in the statement about the only tv to see the DIRECTV 3D being the Viera. And also incorrect in what you said about them being the only confirmed ones available by the time DIRECTV is launched.


The main point (which was confirmed onsite at CES) is that simply having a 3D HDTV (with glasses) does not assure it will work with the DirecTV setup/receivers/DVRs.

There is more than one 3D image technology out there - they are not all alike nor compatible.

We were told that the first "compatible" sets are those 4 models released by Panasonic, and then others by Samsung. Having any model 3D HDTV alone will not assure it works with every delivery of 3D HDTV. I suspect the Dish version, whatever year they eventually have something, may require other things as well.

The Mitz units may or may not work - but at this time, they are not confirmed as "compatible" with the new June settop box firmware that presents the 3D images via DirecTV.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

So yesterday we were at Best Buy. Of course we would like a new TV, who wouldn't. They had some very appealing models, 1080p/120, 55", for under $2,000. I mean, that's a great deal. 

Nonetheless I didn't buy a new TV because that TV is not 3d-compatible. I have no intention of using 3d but I want to make sure I'm not totally unable to receive 3d broadcasts so long as I see them in 2d. 

I have to wonder if the whole 3D thing is going to backfire and cause a huge "Osborne Effect" (younger guys, look it up) on HDTVs in general.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Stuart Sweet said:


> So yesterday we were at Best Buy. Of course we would like a new TV, who wouldn't. They had some very appealing models, 1080p/120, 55", for under $2,000. I mean, that's a great deal.
> 
> Nonetheless I didn't buy a new TV because that TV is not 3D-compatible. I have no intention of using 3D but I want to make sure I'm not totally unable to receive 3D broadcasts so long as I see them in 2d.
> 
> I have to wonder if the whole 3D thing is going to backfire and cause a huge "Osborne Effect" (younger guys, look it up) on HDTVs in general.


Very good points.

What is happening on the 3D front is much like where Blu Ray was about 1-2 years ago.....alot of enthusiasm, many manufacturers launching new products, and lots of marketing behind it. Only one thing was missing.

Standards.

Now Blu Ray has them, and equipment in the latest generation can co-exist in the home with less technical conflict with HDTV's than ever before. By the way - there are also new 3D Blu Ray players as well, but they all follow the new standards. Audio standards, hardware standards, etc.

That's where I suspect there is still some disconnect in 3D HDTV. DirecTV's approach has been to partner with some leading manufacturers (Panasonic and Samsung to name just two), and "craft" a "standard" of sorts using their market push for adoption.

That would seem to have a higher chance of long-term success than other technology that will go to market with "their version" of 3D HD.

Fact is its too soon to tell on all fronts. I'd be doing the same thing as you, not rushing to get any 3D set quite yet....until the standards are set and stable in place....right now, there are numerous flavors to choose from, and everyone might not like vanilla or chocolate.


----------



## hilmar2k (Mar 18, 2007)

I have plans to replace my 52" LCoS projection TV in my basement with a 55" LCD. Those plans are on hold until 3D has sorted itself out. I don't have any major interest in 3D, but I am not going to drop $2k on a TV than can't display everything that will be broadcast within the next year.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Seriously... have any of you said to yourselves, "Daing, I really want that 3DTV, with the glasses and everything?"

Seriously, seriously... I haven't heard anyone say that.


----------



## hilmar2k (Mar 18, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Seriously... have any of you said to yourselves, "Daing, I really want that 3DTV, with the glasses and everything?"
> 
> Seriously, seriously... I haven't heard anyone say that.


Nope. But I am still not going to buy a new TV that can't display it.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

And that's the point. Most people are slowing or stopping their current purchases and waiting for some sort of standard. In the meantime, there's no excitement for 3D, and if people stop buying until there's a standard the industry will suffer. 

The more I think about this the more I think it was a huge misstep to promote this so heavily at CES. Not DIRECTV specifically, but the whole industry.


----------



## hilmar2k (Mar 18, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> And that's the point. Most people are slowing or stopping their current purchases and waiting for some sort of standard. In the meantime, there's no excitement for 3D, and if people stop buying until there's a standard the industry will suffer.
> 
> The more I think about this the more I think it was a huge misstep to promote this so heavily at CES. Not DIRECTV specifically, but the whole industry.


Most? I doubt it. Most people have no idea that 3D is coming to home TV's. Most people buy there TV's at Walmart and hook them up to their cable box with composite connections and wonder why the picture doesn't look as good as it did in the store.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Well without data I don't know about most, you're right. But I think it's fair to say that HDTV purchases spiked because of the digital switchover. Folks that bought a TV in the last 2 years are not likely to buy another one right now. The people who would normally change out TVs quickly are the early adopters, and I suspect that they may be waiting on the sidelines until there's a 3D standard.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

hilmar2k said:


> Most? I doubt it. Most people have no idea that 3D is coming to home TV's. Most people buy there TV's at Walmart and hook them up to their cable box with composite connections and wonder why the picture doesn't look as good as it did in the store.


I suspect that is true...however....based on all the large manufacturers promoting it throughout 2010...that will be much less likely by year end.

3D will be something you will hear about more and more this year. Avatar on 3D Blu Ray....Disney coming out with some 3D Blu Rays....all sorts of promotional efforts going on.

When the whole Blu Ray evolution from BD profile 1.0, then 1.1., then 2.0, etc. took place...very limited information was pushed out that this was changing, or even what the differences between 1.1 and 2.0, for example, were all about - except to those of us who asked alot more questions.

I see 3D HDTV kinda rolling out the same way - buyers will need to be as informed as possible.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

But going back to my initial question... who is sitting at home waiting to put the glasses on? The manufacturers can promote it all they want. Hopefully they even get a standard so glasses will work with different model TVs. 

I remember it clearly, in November 1998 when I saw my first commercially-available plasma TV. 42", and $18,000 -- it wasn't even HD. My thought was to gasp, smile, and eventually say, "OK, someday I will have that." 

It was the same when I saw HD for the first time in 2004. 

I wasn't alone, I'd bet. Flat TVs and HD were really drool-worthy things. People wanted them, even if they couldn't afford them. 

What I'm trying to get at is, I talk to a lot of geeks, you guys included. I'm just not getting that same response with 3D. At best it's like, "I'll get it when it comes out, but I'm not that excited. I just don't want to miss out." At worst it's "I'm not wearin' no fricken' glasses." 

These are not the sorts of responses you want from a high-end consumer electronics product. It's more like the kind of response you get when you hear Microsoft is updating Office again.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Stuart Sweet said:


> But going back to my initial question... who is sitting at home waiting to put the glasses on? The manufacturers can promote it all they want.


The whole "glasses" thing will likely be an obstacle to rapid adoption. Its not an accident that folks like Texas Instruments are looking for a 3D version that doesn't require the glasses.

One other thing I forgot to mention from the CES in speaking with a number of folks who had viewed some 3D for more than just a few minutes - some began to get headaches....I know that will likely not be a mainstream problem - but some reading I've done on the topic seems to infer it happens from time to time with some people.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I've heard that the headache factor is the worst with people who have one eye that isn't correctable to 20/20. So once again you have this technology that isn't really senior-friendly. I know seniors aren't traditionally thought of as the money demographic but let's not forget there are going to be a lot of members of the very first TV generation retiring soon, some of whom have no desire to leave anything to their kids.


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

I'm usually an early adopter (I bought both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray when they first came out, had one of the first DTS AV Receivers, etc) but I'll be sitting on the sidelines for this one for quite a while.

I have 3 HDTVs that I don't plan on replacing anytime soon (65" and 57" Hitachi CRTs and a 42" Samsung Plasma) and none of those will work with 3d. Also, I tend to get headaches from wearing any kind of glasses (between the pressure on my ears and nose, and my eyes trying to focus on the nose piece, I don't know which really causes them). I went and saw Avatar in 3d and while it was teriffic I still got a headache. There's no way I would want to do that very often at home.

I'll be waiting for a display that will work with both the Blu-Ray and D* 3d standards, and not require me to wear glasses. I don't care as much about viewing angle because most likely 3d is going to be used mostly for movies and occasional sporting events which I'll be watching in my theater room with good line of sight anyway.


----------



## hilmar2k (Mar 18, 2007)

Only one person I know is really clamoring for 3D. He is a cable customer currently, as when I told him DIRECTV was launching 3D channels in June, he said that might be enough for him finally to switch. He has seens every movie in 3D that has been out (he has kids), and says he thinks 3D is amazing. He has no problems wearing the glasses.

Other than him, everyone else I know is waiting for 3D not to require the glassses.


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> The main point (which was confirmed onsite at CES) is that simply having a 3D HDTV (with glasses) does not assure it will work with the DirecTV setup/receivers/DVRs.
> 
> There is more than one 3D image technology out there - they are not all alike nor compatible.
> 
> ...


One would think the 3D feed would be the same across the board though. What your saying is like saying that when 1080p/24 came out that it would only work on certain TV's that were 1080p/24 TV's. It just seems a lil washy to me, but maybe I'm missing something. I am assuming the feed to the tv will be the same standard feed no matter what 3D TV your watching and then you'd use the emitter setup for the glasses to get them sync'd to the TV correctly. 
I have not herd that there are different format's of the actual video feed's, but there are different ways to view them.


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> There have been issues with their version of 3D (called boxed or screen), including compatibility and some things that they are going to fix via a firmware update.
> 
> Not all 3D HDTV is created equal.


The method current Mits and Samsung displays use is TI's checkerboard method. This is a very common method for 3D, and is supported wholeheartedly in the gaming and software player (video) industry.

For gaming, nvidia's 3D Vision, iz3d, TriDef, and games with built-in 3D capabilities all support the checkerboard method.

For software video players (all based on Stereoscopic Player), once again, they all support the checkerboard method, sometimes called the "DLP output".

As far as shutter glasses are concerned, they only vary on build quality, their refresh rate, and how they sync to the display. Basically, any 120Hz shutter glasses will work with any 120Hz 3D-Ready display, as long as the sync emitter works with the glasses. All external emitters use the standard 3-pin VESA connector. They differ by their IR frequencies and/or other means (Bluetooth, etc.). Also, DLPs can sync with glasses via the DLP-Link standard, whereas no external emitter is necessary.

Directv will use the RealD method of 3D. This is a proprietary Side-by-Side method, so if your display doesn't have the capabilities of using this method, it will have to be converted. We do know the upcoming Panasonic displays will handle this method internally, what we don't know is if the Directv STB will do any conversions or not for other displays.

As was mentioned in previous posts, RealD already has a converter on the market, which converts their proprietary SbS method to checkerboard.

A Mits rep at CES, off the record, said that their converter will take any 3D method (including via HDMI 1.4), convert it to checkerboard, and output it via HDMI 1.3. He hinted that the converter will cost ~$100. When asked if it'll work with Samsung DLPs (since they've stated they aren't making a converter), he stated that it's based on TI's spec, which is identical to what Samsung uses, but obviously Mits won't guarantee compatibility with a competitor's displays. So basically, it'll work, it just won't be marketed or technically supported by Mits.

Hokie93, yes, there are already quite a few companies selling glasses that don't need to be hooked up to a computer. In fact, for big screen displays, none of them do. The emitter connects to the display, not the PC. (Mind you, nvidia's 3D Vision glasses do require their emitter to be plugged into both the PC and the display, this is to enforce you are using a nvidia graphics card). The pair of glasses I have don't require a PC at all, but as of right now, the only source of 3D content is a PC (or PS3/XBox360).


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

Not that it means much, but after my parents saw 3D on my display, they plan on upgrading to a 3D display this summer.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Sgt. Slaughter said:


> One would think the 3D feed would be the same across the board though. What your saying is like saying that when 1080p/24 came out that it would only work on certain TV's that were 1080p/24 TV's. It just seems a lil washy to me, but maybe I'm missing something. I am assuming the feed to the tv will be the same standard feed no matter what 3D TV your watching and then you'd use the emitter setup for the glasses to get them sync'd to the TV correctly.
> I have not herd that there are different format's of the actual video feed's, but there are different ways to view them.


...and then there is 1080p/60 on the table too....

The feed is the feed...the display is the display....the are not mutually exclusive.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

taz291819 said:


> The method current Mits and Samsung displays use is TI's checkerboard method. This is a very common method for 3D, and is supported wholeheartedly in the gaming and software player (video) industry.


...and yet...there are many other delivery technologies for 3D, and those are not consistent with the one Panasonic or DirecTV will be using. ALso, when you say Samsung...which one?....because the version at CES WAS NOT using that 3D technology either.

The Panasonics at CES were plasma displays, the Samsung were LCD - both 3D - both different technologies, but both compatible to the DirecTV delivery.


----------



## loudo (Mar 24, 2005)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Seriously... have any of you said to yourselves, "Daing, I really want that 3DTV, with the glasses and everything?"
> 
> Seriously, seriously... I haven't heard anyone say that.


Only if they come up with a non glasses, direct view 3D-TV.


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> ...and yet...there are many other delivery technologies for 3D, and those are not consistent with the one Panasonic or DirecTV will be using. ALso, when you say Samsung...which one?....because the version at CES WAS NOT using that 3D technology either.
> 
> The Panasonics at CES were plasma displays, the Samsung were LCD - both 3D - both different technologies, but both compatible to the DirecTV delivery.


Checkerboard is a display method, not a delivery method, as you are aware. RealD's SbS is for delivery. If the Panasonic and Samsung displays used different display methods, it begs the question, what did the conversion, Directv's STB, or the displays themselves?

The reason this is important is because of different delivery systems. Let's say the both the Panny and Sammy did the conversion from RealD's SbS to whatever the display needed. And then let's theorize Comcast decides to go with Sensio instead of RealD on their delivery method. If these displays don't have the ability to convert Sensio's method, then an external converter will be needed (or done via the STB). That's why it's important for the STB to be able to do the conversion, to make it compatible with as many displays as possible.

Basically, there are only about 5 major 3D display methods, but there are pretty much infinite 3D delivery methods (any company can come up with their own algorithm). It just makes a lot more sense for the STB to be able to do the conversion.

EDIT:
And when I said current Mits and Sammys, I meant what you can currently purchase right now. Mits' DLPs and LaserVue use checkerboard. Sammy's DLPs (now discontinued) and certain plasmas use checkerboard also.


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> ...and then there is 1080p/60 on the table too....
> 
> The feed is the feed...the display is the display....the are not mutually exclusive.


Still any 3d ready TV like I listed before, will be able to view the directv3d broadcast with the help of the emitter and glasses and if needed the RealD converter.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

taz291819 said:


> Checkerboard is a display method, not a delivery method, as you are aware. RealD's SbS is for delivery. If the Panasonic and Samsung displays used different display methods, *it begs the question*, what did the conversion, Directv's STB, or the displays themselves?


A good question indeed


> The reason this is important is because of different delivery systems. Let's say the both the Panny and Sammy did the conversion from RealD's SbS to whatever the display needed. And then let's theorize Comcast decides to go with Sensio instead of RealD on their delivery method. If these displays don't have the ability to convert Sensio's method, then an external converter will be needed (or done via the STB). That's why *it's important for the STB to be able to do the conversion*, to make it compatible with as many displays as possible.





> Basically, there are only about 5 major 3D display methods, but there are pretty much infinite 3D delivery methods (any company can come up with their own algorithm). It just makes a lot more sense for the *STB to be able to do the conversion*.


Yes, hopefully that is the case, but it was not confirmed.


 Sgt. Slaughter said:


> Still any 3d ready TV like I listed before, will be able to view the directv3d broadcast with the help of the emitter and glasses and if needed the RealD converter.


Fact is.....per the explanation above and what was told to us onsite at CES, that is neither confirmed nor for sure.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Sgt. Slaughter said:


> Still any 3d ready TV like I listed before, will be able to view the directv3d broadcast with the help of the emitter and glasses and if needed the RealD converter.


Fact is.....that is neither confirmed nor for sure.

The post above explains why this is the case.


----------



## Sgt. Slaughter (Feb 20, 2009)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Fact is.....that is neither confirmed nor for sure.
> 
> The post above explains why this is the case.


Well im going to go out on a limb and say that by the launch date there will be wayyyy more sets confirmed to work with the method DirecTV uses. Very pointless to start it and only a select few can use it....


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Sgt. Slaughter said:


> Well im going to go out on a limb and say that by the launch date there will be wayyyy more sets confirmed to work with the method DirecTV uses. Very pointless to start it and only a select few can use it....


Agreed.

We'll have to see what happens in June.

By the way...the Panny plasma 3D HDTV imagery at CES was very, very impressive. The Samsung was not at all far behind.

To me, watching some sports in 3D is what convinced me this will have some kind of future.


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Fact is.....that is neither confirmed nor for sure.
> 
> The post above explains why this is the case.


Actually, he has a point. If a converter is needed, RealD already offers a solution, although this looks like a professional version, it'll never fly at that price with consumers:

http://www.reald.com/Content/POD-Side-By-Side-Interlace.aspx

But I agree with you, still too early to tell if this will be required. Consumers will not like having to buy a bunch of external converters.


----------



## GregLee (Dec 28, 2005)

Has the automatic conversion of 2D to 3D been demonstrated? If so, how does it look?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

GregLee said:


> Has the automatic conversion of 2D to 3D been demonstrated? If so, how does it look?


Good question....at the CES, we were told that the process is "no where near as good as using 3D source material", but did not witness any examples ourselves.

The Panasonic and Samsung demos at the conference itself was original 3D HDTV source material that was being streamed by DirecTV.


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

GregLee said:


> Has the automatic conversion of 2D to 3D been demonstrated? If so, how does it look?


I've seen some samples, it's nowhere near true 3D.


----------



## GregLee (Dec 28, 2005)

taz291819 said:


> I've seen some samples, it's nowhere near true 3D.


I wouldn't expect it to be. But if it can produce any sort of improvement at all in a standard 2D picture, even a marginal slight sense of depth, this would make a crucial difference, to me at any rate. I'm looking forward to watching 2D progam material almost entirely for years to come; I wouldn't buy into 3D just for the sake of a few sporting events and pay movies.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

GregLee said:


> I wouldn't expect it to be. But if it can produce any sort of improvement at all in a standard 2D picture, even a marginal slight sense of depth, this would make a crucial difference, to me at any rate. I'm looking forward to watching 2D progam material almost entirely for years to come; I wouldn't buy into 3D just for the sake of a few sporting events and pay movies.


I suspect that approach might be seen more in the gaming world, in order to contain costs near the lower end of the spectrum. As for 3D HDTV, the impression I got were that several of the larger manufacturers were not impressed by nor supporting the upconverting approach.


----------



## jdspencer (Nov 8, 2003)

Personally, I'll wait for the holographic system.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

jdspencer said:


> Personally, I'll wait for the holographic system.


Ironically....we saw 2 of those demoed at CES too...also a "work in progress", but they were pretty cool too.

The 3D demos at the Panasonic and Samsung locations both featured live 3D HDTV feeds from DirecTV, and included a wide range of content to show off that technology - my favorite was the sports - especially from the ground view - you felt like you were actually there.


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

jdspencer said:


> Personally, I'll wait for the holographic system.


The Avatar game looks holographic, quite impressive.


----------



## GregLee (Dec 28, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I suspect that approach might be seen more in the gaming world, in order to contain costs near the lower end of the spectrum.


Computer games are inherently 3D, aren't they (except for some old-style platformers)? Rendering 3D game objects stereoscopically rather than in monovision doesn't really count as converting 2D to 3D.


----------



## RBTO (Apr 11, 2009)

Probably one of the most advanced forms of home 3D will come from Panasonic. They are touting what they call Full HD 3D which is 1080p60 for each eye. This requires 120 full 1080x1920 frames per second (60 right and 60 left), and is a sequential system in that the right and left eye presentations rapidly alternate (in this case at a 120 Hz rate). Shutter glasses get the right image to each eye. Checkerboard and alternate line systems cut the resolution in half to achieve their effect (as explained elsewhere) but save on bandwidth. It appears there could be a 3D war similar to betamax vs VHS, and BD vs HDDVD, but the full HD system offered by Panasonic stands a good chance of winning. Data bandwidth will almost double but this is partly being addressed in the MPEG4 compression ability and D* has the bandwidth to handle the small number of 3D channels we are currently talking about. For those of you waiting for glassless 3D, it presently exists in several forms, but is vastly inferior to that offered with glasses. True high quality glassless 3D is right out there with fusion power (or maybe further), so you'll probably be old and gray when it happens if you wait. Don't buy into the "holographic" fiction of "Star Wars" or "Back to the Future". That will be in my flying car when I get one. Right now, and in the foreseeable future, glasses provide the only way to truly get left and right eye information where it needs to go (short of a true hologram which is not at all practical for the video displays we are talking about).
Visit the Panasonic 3D site for more information on their system. The site was a little sketchy, but is filling in with new info all the time. They have a pretty good pdf Q&A at one of their links, and are showing their 3D BluRay and display products.
Shutter glasses are becoming much more stylish and advanced. Panasonic is offering some that aren't much different than designer sunglasses. The wires are gone and the glasses are fairly light weight compared to older styles.
It appears that the D* 3D stream will be delivered only over an HDMI interconnect (1.4) but the 3D stream may be backwardly compatible with most 2D displays (just no 3D effect). I only hope someone comes up with a box that will allow breaking the stream into two HDMI feeds for those of us with existing 3D settups (dual projector systems and the like), and Panasonic won't make those already equipped, buy a new display system. In any case, until such a box exists, the only way to watch the new D* channels in 3D will be to use your receiver with a compatible display device (i.e., a Panasonic plasma 3D display) which does require glasses.


----------



## GregLee (Dec 28, 2005)

RBTO said:


> Data bandwidth will almost double ...


Why do you think so?


----------



## taz291819 (Oct 19, 2006)

RBTO said:


> Probably one of the most advanced forms of home 3D will come from Panasonic. They are touting what they call Full HD 3D which is 1080p60 for each eye. This requires 120 full 1080x1920 frames per second (60 right and 60 left), and is a sequential system in that the right and left eye presentations rapidly alternate (in this case at a 120 Hz rate). Shutter glasses get the right image to each eye. Checkerboard and alternate line systems cut the resolution in half to achieve their effect (as explained elsewhere) but save on bandwidth. It appears there could be a 3D war similar to betamax vs VHS, and BD vs HDDVD, but the full HD system offered by Panasonic stands a good chance of winning. Data bandwidth will almost double but this is partly being addressed in the MPEG4 compression ability and D* has the bandwidth to handle the small number of 3D channels we are currently talking about. For those of you waiting for glassless 3D, it presently exists in several forms, but is vastly inferior to that offered with glasses. True high quality glassless 3D is right out there with fusion power (or maybe further), so you'll probably be old and gray when it happens if you wait. Don't buy into the "holographic" fiction of "Star Wars" or "Back to the Future". That will be in my flying car when I get one. Right now, and in the foreseeable future, glasses provide the only way to truly get left and right eye information where it needs to go (short of a true hologram which is not at all practical for the video displays we are talking about).
> Visit the Panasonic 3D site for more information on their system. The site was a little sketchy, but is filling in with new info all the time. They have a pretty good pdf Q&A at one of their links, and are showing their 3D BluRay and display products.
> Shutter glasses are becoming much more stylish and advanced. Panasonic is offering some that aren't much different than designer sunglasses. The wires are gone and the glasses are fairly light weight compared to older styles.
> It appears that the D* 3D stream will be delivered only over an HDMI interconnect (1.4) but the 3D stream may be backwardly compatible with most 2D displays (just no 3D effect). I only hope someone comes up with a box that will allow breaking the stream into two HDMI feeds for those of us with existing 3D settups (dual projector systems and the like), and Panasonic won't make those already equipped, buy a new display system. In any case, until such a box exists, the only way to watch the new D* channels in 3D will be to use your receiver with a compatible display device (i.e., a Panasonic plasma 3D display) which does require glasses.


You're talking about two different things. You won't get Full 1080p 3D from cable or satellite, their infrastructure just doesn't allow it. They would have to send two separate channels, and keep them in sync. So they have to rely on a "frame packing" method.

3D BD on the other hand will offer full 1080p 3D, but it's not outputting two 60p frames. It's going to output 2 24p frames, and your display will repeat them to whatever native refresh rate.

There will be no 3D format war, this isn't like BD vs. HD-DVD. Displays will use different methods for processing and displaying the 3D content, but there are only a handful of ways to do this anyway. And these methods cross-convert quite easily, it's not a big issue.

EDIT:
Also, Directv receivers will not be HDMI 1.4, I believe they are HDMI 1.2. Directv is going to use the RealD Side by Side method, which doesn't require HDMI 1.4. This has been stated several times already.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Stuart Sweet said:


> So yesterday we were at Best Buy. Of course we would like a new TV, who wouldn't. They had some very appealing models, 1080p/120, 55", for under $2,000. I mean, that's a great deal.
> 
> Nonetheless I didn't buy a new TV because that TV is not 3d-compatible. I have no intention of using 3d but I want to make sure I'm not totally unable to receive 3d broadcasts so long as I see them in 2d.
> 
> I have to wonder if the whole 3D thing is going to backfire and cause a huge "Osborne Effect" (younger guys, look it up) on HDTVs in general.


I don't think "Osborne Effect" as much as just very poor timing .... I think the biggest reason it will "flop" is because we just went through the digital conversion and zillions of people just went out en masse and bought new sets. I don't see them buying another new set so soon.

The media pundits in general (other then for the cool-factor) don't seem to see it succeeding either but just being a VERY tiny niche market (especially in this economy).

I'll put it's success somewhere just above the vibrating "immersion TV chairs" and "smell-a-vision" and way below Bluray which in it's first few YEARS hasn't been that successful and BD is way more practical then 3DTV.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Latest news from Samsung http://www.samsunghub.com/2010/01/26/samsung-starts-mass-producing-3d-tv-panels-supporting-240hz/


> Samsung today announced to mass produce 3D TV panels for both LED and LCD TVs. The HD panels varying in sizes from 40-, 46- and 55-inches boast support of True 240Hz technology and 3D Active Glasses.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

RBTO said:


> Probably one of the most advanced forms of home 3D will come from Panasonic. They are touting what they call Full HD 3D which is 1080p60 for each eye. This requires 120 full 1080x1920 frames per second (60 right and 60 left), and is a sequential system in that the right and left eye presentations rapidly alternate (in this case at a 120 Hz rate).


Yes...that is what several of us viewed ourselves at the CES - and it is indeed impressive. It does require new 3D HDTV displays, as well as the corresponding 3D Panasonic glasses and HD content (which DirecTV intends to deliver, at least on a limited 3 channels to start, in June).


P Smith said:


> Latest news from Samsung http://www.samsunghub.com/2010/01/26/samsung-starts-mass-producing-3d-tv-panels-supporting-240hz/


We saw 2 of those at CES as well - also very nice.

Panasonic appears to be some months ahead in the production of their units, but both should start appearing later in 2010.


----------



## texasmoose (May 25, 2007)

I'm fortunate to work with D* employees & every once in awhile i get an in-the-know(or so he said) techie of the forthcoming rollouts for D*. He works out of the El Segundo Corp. Office & he said that they had an in house demo of the forthcoming 3D platform and that this would *NOT* be made available in HD, but *DVD* quality resolution only. So, why do i see references to 3D-HD? or as i've seen 1080/24p? He's been with D* over 10 years so I would think he knows what he's talking about.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Well, DVD Quality could be like BluRay Resolution which is better than 720P/1080I HD!!!


----------



## texasmoose (May 25, 2007)

richierich said:


> Well, DVD Quality could be like BluRay Resolution which is better than 720P/1080I HD!!!


I am aware that Blu-ray Rez is better than 720p/1080i, but explain the first part of your comment please.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

He was referring to it as BluRay DVD Quality not just Regular DVD Quality Resolution, I'm betting!!!


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

texasmoose said:


> I'm fortunate to work with D* employees & every once in awhile i get an in-the-know(or so he said) techie of the forthcoming rollouts for D*. He works out of the El Segundo Corp. Office & he said that they had an in house demo of the forthcoming 3D platform and that this would *NOT* be made available in HD, but *DVD* quality resolution only. So, why do i see references to 3D-HD? or as I've seen 1080/24p? He's been with D* over 10 years so I would think he knows what he's talking about.


Respectfully, your source appears to be incorrect.

Please note that several DBSTalkers saw HD 3D firsthand at the Consumer Electronics show in person, as being broadcast from DirecTV in multiple locations....not SD/DVD resolution. The DirecTV staff there stated it was HD repeatedly, we saw it and can verify that, and the signage in the Panasonic and Samsung booths also repeatedly stated "Full HD 3D".

"Full HD" is the industry term for 1080p, and is also used by the Blu Ray folks.

The in-house demo your contact referenced may be just that, an interim internal demo, but not the final product going to market.

If you read the onsite report that is on DBSTalk from the CES - you'll even see a photo of a DirecTV sign that specifically states "Full HD 3D".

But to save you the time...here's some photos again for your reference - note the "HD" on 3 signs in 2 booths, and even on one of the screens.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Sony joining the ride http://discover.sonystyle.com/bravia/sony3d/

but it's totally misleading by telling "the glasses receive separate left and right _images_"


----------



## jimbo56 (Nov 13, 2007)

Saw the Sony 3-D demo at the Sony store in Toronto last week. The demo consisted of a nature scene, video game and a soccer game. Before checking it out I was skeptical, but after viewing it there is definitely a "Wow" factor. I wonder if the 3-D technology that Sony uses is compatible with the 3-D that DirecTV will be using.


----------

