Looking Like a Dork Hinders 3D TV Interest

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The biggest hurdle for companies selling 3D TVs? No one wants to wear the goofy glasses. Nothing like having consumers less interested in your product after they try it. Feel free to post your favorite “you’re doing it wrong” picture in the comments section.

A study about consumer attitudes toward 3-D television found many who were less interested in the technology after they actually experienced it.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Probably just disappointed after all the 3D hype they've been hearing.
 
I refuse to wear glasses to watch TV. 3D won't be any good until they figure out how to do holographic projection anyway.
 
My daughter cannot stand to watch 3D movies at the theater. I don't know what her problem is, but she would rather watch a 3D film without the glasses on (blurry) than watch it with glasses on. She says it's because the glasses bother her and give her a headache. As for "active" glasses, I cannot stand them myself. I'm totally put off by the "flicker". Plus, I wear prescriptions, so they are generally uncomfortable over my existing. Furthermore, I can not stand movies that are "made for 3D".
 
glasses have always been the death of 3D TVs, oh that and the fact they add so little despite a huge price tag.
 
Once again, the hype doesn't match the product. Hollywood hype machine has been trying to push w/e since the beginning of time. When are they going to realize LESS HYPE more quality of product. Good movies will keep people in seats, bad movies (read most of the crap that has been released lately) has more to do with people not going to movies rather than piracy, or the fact that every D- movie is now "3D" without having anything of any quality for a movie except the special effects.
 
3D is gimmicky. It's cool for some things, but for a day-to-day thing, I don't like it a whole lot. It's kind of like haunted houses. Having a nutcase chase after you with a chainsaw in real life is a hell of a lot scarier than having some 15 year old kid behind bars screaming "boo."
 
Guys, do you need Steve Jobs to show you how to wear the glasses? Obliviously you all are wearing them wrong.
 
I wear glasses.. so wearing 3d glasses on top of that is worst than just wearing them normally, and that sucks too.
 
She's clearly doing it wrong:

TVHead3virtual.jpg
 
Apparently no one has seen the announcement about Toshiba and their glassesless 3D TVs coming out in Dec.?
 
for some reason the cheap glasses they give you at the movies i can see 3d fine, i tried out a samsung 3d tv with the glasses at compusa and all i saw was red and blue with a blurrryness. for some reason my eyes or brain would not process the image correctly. furthermore all those tv's are expensive and unless they sell the glasses for cheap, people wont buy them once they break or lose a set. the thought is cool, but the price and current hardware are limiting it a lot. maybe one day they will get it right and cost effective.
 
Riddle me this... Instead of giving you a lame 3D effect. How about keep pushing the clarity boundries with the resolution? I'm seeing this as a backwards step. We go from SDTV to HDTV and now hinder the 1080p with blur for a gimmicky 3D?

WOW! You just have to wonder who runs the entertainment industry.

Bring on the 4096 resolution instead. Leave the 3D gimmicky to movie theaters and theme parks please....
 
I own a 3d Samsung. But I dont own the glasses. I bought the Tv because it was a nice set and a good price. But i'm not paying 300 for a set of glasses that just crazy.. I only paid 1200 for the TV lol. If the family wants to come over and watch thats anoughter 2-4 sets I need. So now were up to the cost of the tv just so I can use 3d. Yea i'm good... I might grab a set just for me so I can mess around with it and my PS3. I can see 3d working in that market. But untill the glasses are in the $25 range I dont see this taking off. I mean at least give me one pair so I enjoy it when I buy the damn tv lol.
 
I clicked on this thread in hopes of seeing lots of your doing it wrong pics....I am disappointed.
 
has nothing to do with "goofy looking glasses" no one wants to put on special glasses just to watch tv.
 
1. I already wear glasses and don't needt o wear 2 pairs. 2. I am more concerned about the headaches rather than looking goofy.
 
It's not looking goofy that hinders me from adopting it but there are a number of factors that do.

1. video compression codecs (as far as i know left eye / right eye frames haven't been catered to in regards to 'keyframes' leaving the ability to compress lacking which is vital for mass storage of media. adopting HD presented no such issue.
2. glasses become uncomfortable for people like me who never wear glasses because they aren't comfortable.
3. frames of glasses unavoidably interfere with FOV requiring a set screen size : distance ratio to view the full picture without impediment.
4. surely such rapid flashing would cause eye strain.
5. restriction on what can be doing when watching something. laying in bed would be less than pleasant... especially when you fall asleep and break your expensive specs.
6. forced to upgrade recently upgraded tech. most lcd screens already in homes don't support 3D framerates of 120Hz.

come up with contact lenses and it may spark my interest. :)
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
 
Luddites! It's not like you wear the glasses all the time you are watching the TV, it is just for the special occasions. You smoke dope continually too, are you drunk 24/7? And of course there is going to be a bit of blurring because you are overlaying one image on top of another slightly offset from each other, duh.
 
Looking goofy doesn't bug me. I wear glasses. no matter how stylin' or expensive the pair of frames are on my face, I will always look dorky/nerdy/geeky to someone, so its futile for me.

Why I could care less about 3D TV?
1. Currently I would have to wear stupid glasses over my glasses and its uncomfortable.
2. Even if I didn't, most of the 3D being done is half assed. Avatar is a prime example. Seeing it at the theater, I took the glasses off halfway through and saw everything just fine. Nothing "blurry" about it. Saw the 2D for comparison and almost no noticable difference. The first 30-40 minutes were amazing, sure. After the amazing in flight scenery? Pointless. Keep that trend up and you'll kill interest off completely, again.
 
The glasses are just a symptom. Attempting to shorten a product cycle with inferior technology to feed greedy CE corporations needs to be punished and punished badly. I'm glad sales are slow, I wish people would smarten up and purchase stuff thinking about their best interests longer term than the "oh pretty" idiot purchase.

3D tech with glasses is an inferior technology and 3D should not have been released to consumers till glasses-less 3D was perfected. It was rushed to market to keep brain dead American consumers buying during an economic recession. Its good news that American consumers are not nearly as brain dead as these CE's thought. In Asia, where all these TVs come from and there is no recession, 3D TVs are not on the table. No one here wants them. Neither should you IMO. It will be replaced by glasses-less TVs in a matter of a couple of years.
 
Instead of 3D, the industry should be working on Larger size TVs- 65, 75 and 85 inches with ultra sharp images, deeper blacks without losing shadow detail at really affordable prices.. 85 inch LCD or plasma at $2999 or less.
This will entice me to upgrade from my current 52 inch 120hz TV.
 
I watched movies in 3d over 2 decades ago at Disneyland. I am not happy with the way things are run in this world. too many stupid old men having meetings.
 
I am pleasantly surprised that people are rejecting this over-hyped gimmick after giving it a try. Until we have a holodeck, I don't want 3D.

Now if we can only get people to stop opting for lame 3D movies, they can stop trying to 3D everything, and this fad can die just like it did in the 1950s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top