davieG Posted 10 January 2010 Posted 10 January 2010 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8421157.stm I think this has come too soon for TV with most people either not even having HD or only having just taken that on. Even if you can afford the 3D technology if companies like Sky add additional charges on top of the HD most wont be able to afford it. They'll need to make HD the norm and just charge the extra for 3D.
coale39 Posted 10 January 2010 Posted 10 January 2010 Yeh, its gonna take a while for people to stump up the cash. 3D isnt as good an advance as HD imo so would probably just be a luxury upgrade.
Part Of The Crowd Posted 10 January 2010 Posted 10 January 2010 Not too big a fan of 3D, when you see a film or programme with it in it feels more a gimmick than anything else.
Bryn Posted 10 January 2010 Posted 10 January 2010 Don't see the point in it at all, if anything it gets in the way of the experience.
grth2004 Posted 10 January 2010 Posted 10 January 2010 as soon as they can find a way to get rid of those stupid glasses it will take off
Fox You Forest Posted 10 January 2010 Posted 10 January 2010 Not too big a fan of 3D, when you see a film or programme with it in it feels more a gimmick than anything else. I agree, I'm not a fan of 3D.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 The thing is, it's not real 3D is it? Sure, things in the foreground seem nearer than those in the background, but individual objects are still flat. It's like those old Victorian children's toy theatres with cardboard cut-outs.
Sir Fynwy Posted 13 January 2010 Posted 13 January 2010 I have seen some real high end experimental 3D TV's at electronics trade shows and generally think it's pretty naff. The ones that work without glasses (using hologramatic effects and multiple screen overlays) only seem to work properly if you are directly in front of them and there is no way I'd wear glasses to watch TV or even a film.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.