News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

3D TV: A Shambling Corpse

Started by SGOS, May 25, 2017, 08:32:07 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

SGOS

Quotehttps://www.cnet.com/news/shambling-corpse-of-3d-tv-finally-falls-down-dead/

It's been a walking corpse for the last couple of years, and now 3D TV finally looks dead.

LG and Sony, the last two major TV makers to support the 3D feature in their TVs, will stop doing so in 2017. None of their sets, not even high-end models such as their new OLED TVs, will be able to show 3D movies and TV shows.

Samsung dropped 3D support in 2016; Vizio hasn't offered it since 2013. Other smaller names, like Sharp, TCL and Hisense, also failed to announce any 3D-capable TVs at CES 2017.

3D projectors are still being made, but I would think their days would also be numbered.  If they can't sell enough TVs in 3D to make 3D a viable offering, why would projectors, which are in far less demand, be any different?

3D televisions were introduced in 2010 and the last ones manufactured were only 6 years later.  And I would guess the slow death must have set in after the first year.  From an industry point of view, this was a major bad call.  But people just didn't care about 3D, and most content producers did nothing to utilize the technology either.  They just shot ordinary films in 3D.  That would be like designing roller-coasters without the breathtaking first drops and subsequent dips, and then wondering why nobody was buying tickets.

The first 3D TV demonstration I saw was a TV tuned to ESPN's short lived 3D station, which didn't even broadcast everything in 3D.  I watched part of a football game.  It was in 3D but I had to sort of use my imagination to see the 3D effect.  It's like the big Mucky Mucks at the top floor of the ESPN building thought all they had to do was broadcast a game in 3D, and people would find it more interesting.

This failure could be avoided by building the content toward the technology as in Avatar, Dr. Strange, Guardians of the Galaxy, Hugo, and Gravity, but this takes a serious commitment on the part of the Director, and I'm guessing an intuitive feel for the 3D art form.

This presents a problem in that so few talented directors have ever studied the art form or even thought about it.  It would be like expecting highly talented musicians to produce great sculptures; And why not?  Musicians and sculptors are both  artists, right?  It's an extra talent that is required to produce something of value with an unfamiliar instrument.  You have to learn to play the instrument first, but if you don't that doesn't mean the instrument isn't any good.

I'm sorry to see it go.  I still think 3D has possibilities, but I think I can understand some of the reasons for it's failure.  Even as a fan of 3D, myself, I was quick to see that some films, just weren't going to be enhanced by the technology, and in worst case scenarios, the extra glasses served as nothing but an extra annoyance.

There is still research being done to produce 3D that doesn't require glasses, but that must be a ways off.  And even if that type of 3D sets a new standard, they still need to find the artists that know how to produce worthwhile results with it.

Baruch

Laser disk TV obsolete!  Old news from 2001-sh.  It was around for about 10 years, and I never bought one.  Never beat VHS or DVD.  Now it is all streaming ... so unless you can get 3D projection TV from a PC monitor ... you can forget 3D.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Munch

Never found the appeal of 3D. Always felt like a theme park gimmick, and really only was a mild benefit to movies designed around them, like the polar express or Jim carrys Christmas carol.
'Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners' - George Carlin

Hydra009

I think there's a place for 3D, when the implementation is good enough.  Unfortunately, like you say, it requires a serious commitment by the director to implement correctly (and that's assuming the technology is there to deliver a quality 3D experience).  That level of commitment is unlikely when audiences are either ambivalent about 3D technology or actively shun it.

There have been boom and bust cycles of 3D before.  Maybe someday it'll stick.

Sal1981

I don't want gimmicky 3rd, but holographic movies instead, but no such technology exists. I get headaches from 3d movies.

SGOS

Quote from: Baruch on May 25, 2017, 01:04:56 PM
Laser disk TV obsolete!  Old news from 2001-sh.  It was around for about 10 years, and I never bought one.  Never beat VHS or DVD.  Now it is all streaming ... so unless you can get 3D projection TV from a PC monitor ... you can forget 3D.
I understand most of the 3D streaming sources are phasing out 3D also.

SGOS

Quote from: Munch on May 25, 2017, 03:26:06 PM
Never found the appeal of 3D. Always felt like a theme park gimmick, and really only was a mild benefit to movies designed around them, like the polar express or Jim carrys Christmas carol.
In my lifetime, there was a surge of 3D movies in the early 1950s, but then as now, it didn't catch on.  That was followed by 50 years before the latest resurgence, which is fizzling also.  During that 50 years, there were 3D experiences in theme parks and museums, but the quality was the worst of the three periods.  It was sometimes so bad, I would feel mildly angry thinking they were doing nothing but conditioning people into believing 3D only meant poor image quality.

Mike Cl

I'm not particularly interested in 3D movies--or 3D anything.  The best 3D movie I've seen was Avatar.  That was the only one in which the 3D effects seemed to mesh perfectly with the scenery and action of the movie.  Other than that, very forgettable.  And it seems to me that  VR will mark the end to 3D.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

Hydra009

Quote from: SGOS on May 25, 2017, 08:23:36 PM
In my lifetime, there was a surge of 3D movies in the early 1950s, but then as now, it didn't catch on.  That was followed by 50 years before the latest resurgence, which is fizzling also.
There was a pretty decent boom in the 80s.



Once again, I'd love to see this graph updated to reflect current data.  According to the MPAA, 3D box office in US/Canada surged from ~1% in 2007 to 10% in 2009.  Then, it exploded to a high of 21% in 2010 which has slowly but steadily declined down to 14% in 2016.  3D is not dead, but it's definitely declining.

SGOS

Quote from: Hydra009 on May 25, 2017, 11:27:58 PM
There was a pretty decent boom in the 80s.


I can't remember a single 3D movie being shown in my area during the 80s, although I was living in a very small town in the empty corner of Montana, and I didn't leave the area much back then.  Missing out on a 3D resurgence would have been like a minor part of what I was unaware of back then.

Hydra009

Quote from: SGOS on May 26, 2017, 05:15:57 AM
I can't remember a single 3D movie being shown in my area during the 80s, although I was living in a very small town in the empty corner of Montana, and I didn't leave the area much back then.  Missing out on a 3D resurgence would have been like a minor part of what I was unaware of back then.
I saw Captain EO in 3D back then.

SGOS


Hydra009

Yes.  I saw it at Epcot Center.

SGOS

Yeah, I noticed when I googled that it was shown at one of the Disney parks for many years.