Skip to comments.Sony Fesses Up On 3D TV
Posted on 10/10/2012 2:21:56 AM PDT by Las Vegas Dave
Washington, D.C. (October 8, 2012) -- TV makers continue to push 3D TV despite a lack of evidence that consumers have any interest. But one top Sony executive has finally acknowledged that fact publicly.
Speaking to Eurogamer.net, Fergal Gara, Sony Computer Entertainment's UK chief, said "consumers decide how relevant (3D) is. It's fair to say consumers have decided it's not huge important at this time."
The Associated Press reported this month that the number of 3D viewers in the U.S. is so small that Nielsen is unable to effectively measure them. The ratings service says the number is likely around 115,000.
And IHS Screen Digest says only two percent of TVs in the United States are capable of displaying 3D programming, which represents roughly 7 million out of the 331 million in U.S. homes.
Gara notes that consumers are not interested in wearing 3D glasses while watching television.
"In the home people tune in and tune out a bit, and doing that with glasses on and glancing your tablet or pausing for a bit, compared to the cinema experience which is a solely focused experience, you there is a difference emerging there," he said.
He added that he does not have much hope that glasses-free 3D TV is coming soon.
Gara's comments suggests that one TV maker finally understands the difference between watching 3D at home and in the theaters, which helps explains why 3D TV has been such a flop. However, his comments makes this observer wonder why Sony continues to make 3D sets.
Interested in the HDTV ping list?
Please Freepmail me (freepmail works best) if you would like your name added to the HDTV ping list,
(approximately 375+ freepers are currently on the HDTV ping list).
The pinged subjects can be HDTV technology, satellite, cable, OTA HD reception (Over The Air with roof top or indoor antennas), Broadcast specials, Sports, Blu Ray/HDDVD, and any and all subjects relating to HDTV.
Note: if you search Freerepublic using the keyword "HDTV, you will find most of the past HDTV postings.
Comments please from 3DTV owners are appreciated.
In June, I purchased an LG6700 47” Smart TV and have been disappointed, thus far.
Besides having to replace the first set due to audio problems (there was a loud hum in the set) the 3D in replacement TV didn’t work. LG then replaced the entire screen and after two months, I finally had a working TV.
I’ve only used the 3D a few times, and it is nice. However, I’ve never watched a full movie or TV program in 3D. It’s a hassle to keep putting on and taking off the 3D glasses when doing something else.
Watching TV at home is much different than viewing a movie at a theater, where you’re confined to doing just one thing. Therefore, I wouldn’t consider purchasing another 3D TV.
I have a Sony Bravia 3-D tv and have been perfectly happy with it. I needed a new tv anyway, so I made sure that it would have that capability. The difference in cost between the 3D and non-3D was relatively small, so I didn’t see the point in not having it.
Not every show needs to be 3D for me to enjoy it, but it does add something when it’s an action sequence and the punch looks like it is thrown to me or having something thrown and it looks lke it’s being thrown at me.
I would say that having to watch an entire show in 3D is overkill, but it does add something at points in the movie.
I don’t have one, Dave, but that doesn’t stop me from being intrigued. The following little clip from Corning has an inviting image toward the end. I can’t see how 3-D wouldn’t be enjoyable. It’s the crappy programming that I would think would turn people away from such an investment.
LG7600 55” owner here. I like having the 3D option on there for the movies I have. The glasses are nothing since it is passive and I can check out my iPad with them on if I want with no issues. I can get up and let my digs out without removing them. Best of all with this TV is I have cut the dish, and get 90% of my content through my AppleTV now. Within a year the TV will pay for itself.
I only had to watch 3D TV once, and that just for 5 minutes, before deciding I would never own a set, even if it were free.
I got ill when I saw Avatar in the theatres. There was a scene in the movie, where the protagonist, had to control a bird and they were flying around all over the place and flying at all kinds of angles.
Frankly, the big push now is for bigger screen sizes in the 55” and bigger range. Why? Because TV set manufacturers can still make a profit on the bigger screen sizes. Why do you think the first AMOLED TV sets coming on the market are around 55” in size, even with the US$8,000 price tag?
Most people, if they can afford it and have the room for it, want the bigger sets. The more tv, the better.
Exactly. 3-D only works when it has reailstic scenes. The computer generated graphics which are impossible in real life simply make me sick, too.
Can’t remember when the first 3D rush began, maybe the late fifties? It was a bust then in theaters. Not much changed in the intervening years. How many arrows headed straight for you is one person good for?
The movie industry tried to resurrect 3-D movies in the early 80’s (IIRC).
The attempt flopped.
When 3-D TVs started hitting the market a couple of years ago, many predicted the effort would be another flop.
I’m good for an arrow, or whatever, in every movie. As long as it is well done and not just there for the sake of being there.
Same argument used to be made for flashing T&A in a movie.
If that’s what you want, it’s a free country.
Nah, in that galaxy between the jedi order stifling any independent and critical thought and the senate taxing anything that did work until it was unprofitable, it’s no wonder that the best holovid they could manage is as good as we could do now.
Seriously, why, 1000 years after they defeated the Sith, were the Jedi still running around on urgent missions and knocking on doors to find people? Thanks to them the galaxy hadn’t even managed to develop cell phones and freedom is hard to extinguish.
Too bad the programming doesn't grow along with the screen size.
However, I use my tv for more than watching tv. I also use it to connect to my computer.
So far, I'm not blown away by it. For one thing, our mind "sees" 3D in a properly composed 2d image; otherwise there would be no sense of depth is a movie or TV show. The new Blu-ray of Lawrence of Arabia looks so sharp, and its visuals are so well composed that it practically looks 3D to me. Most of the 3D Blu-rays I've watched simply look like different flat images interspersed throughout the picture. The objects themselves do not have depth; bu their layer has depth from other layers. I find this distracting, as it seems to detract from the 3D realism I would have gotten with a normal 2D image.
Many, if not most of today'sD films are conversions which are not actually shot with stereoscopic equipment. From what I hear, these are the ones that have the "View master effect" I alluded to above. I would like to see more 3D with "in your face" effects like the 3D movies from the 50's. Otherwise, what's the point? It is wearying to wear the 3D glasses over my regular glasses (which hurts the bridge of my nose after awhile), and the effect grows less noticeable as a film progresses. I just received the Universal Monster film box set, which includes the 3D version of Creature From the Black Lagoon. I have not had time to watch it, but reviews say it is full of in-your-face 3D stuff. For a B-grade horror movie, I suppose 3D has its place. Otherwise, I'm not real excited about it. However, I love the 2D picture on my 1080P set. Films like Ben-Hur are simply amazing in HD.
Nah, in that galaxy between the jedi order stifling any independent and critical thought and the senate taxing anything that did work until it was unprofitable, its no wonder that the best holovid they could manage is as good as we could do now.
Seriously, why, 1000 years after they defeated the Sith, were the Jedi still running around on urgent missions and knocking on doors to find people? Thanks to them the galaxy hadnt even managed to develop cell phones and freedom is hard to extinguish.
Too true. I saw an article a couple of years ago that was a look at the star wars universe, especially the political situation from the other side. It was pretty interesting.
Bingo. NetFlix will now play through a whole season of shows on the computer other boxes will not. NetFlix deserves kudos for their closed caption support. Charter, the provider I use requires you to set captions in the firmware of their Moto boxes, aarrgh.
We bought one, not for the 3D feature, but because all the other upgrades that came with it, didn’t come with the standard versions. We wanted those upgrades. Love ours, got a killer deal just before SuperBowl Sunday. Great time to buy an HDTV. We’d been monitoring prices for a number of months to see when to jump in and buy. Hubby occassionally watches the 3D. The glasses give me a headache if I wear them too long, so I prefer not. You can turn the 3D off and just use the HDTV, which is fantastic.
My only complaint is that watching my Broncos suck in wide screen, full color, HDTV glory is a little depressing.
I’m absolutely satisfied,thrilled in fact,with my Sony 46XBR8 and PS3.The 3D demo I saw at the Sony Store recently left me utterly underwhelmed.
I have a Samsung, and I have found the 3-D to be very nice to watch. No strain...they are the powered glasses.
I have a friend who was very skeptical and didn’t even like the concept, but after he watched, he was impressed, thought it would cause eyestrain, but it didn’t.
There doesn’t seem to be a huge amount of material in 3-D out there, though.
Agree...I have the Ben Hur boxset in bluray. The Ten Commandments is similar with the colors amazing.
“As long as it is well done and not just there for the sake of being there”.
Back in the day, “for the sake of being there”, seemed the only reason.