As many movies are starting to be made in 3D, do you think 3D TVs will become mainstream within the next 5 years?
Niche Website Success will show you how to take your knowledge and build a themed, content website that can generate money through affiliate marketing, Google ads and more. Get it now!
WIll they become more available: Yes. The industry will surely push the 3D developments, as this is their 'next new thing' now that everyone has an LCD flat-screen. The manufacturers are really struggling to find something new to make people want to replace their televisions now.So, as far as the availability is concerned: Yes, expect these 3D capable TVs to emerge quickly this year, and become more and more available in the next few years.
Will they become mainstream in five years? No There are several reasons for this. One is, that even though 3D is a nice gimmick, its technique is not fully developed yet.
You still need glasses to see the 3D effect (even though there are experiments in Japan and China of 3D tvs that don't need any glasses), and many people find watching 3D is very tiresome. Many even get head-aches from watching 3D.So, the developments are still not far enough to validate a wide-spread popularization of 3D content. Another reason is customer acceptance.
It takes time for new technology to really penetrate the homes. And as TVs can normally last 10-15 years without problem, it will take at least that time for the majority to get 3D TVs, even IF they would all decide to start buying them tomorrow. Remember HD TV?
It's been around for well over a decade (first shown in 1981!), and it took until recently before that format became popular enough to enter the households. A third one is content. 3D footage requires special equipment.TV companies are still slowly switching over to the HDTV format, and will not be too eager to switch over again to new 3D cameras.
Plus, post-production time gets much more lengthy, as 3D footage takes more after-care to make it look good. As long as the content-providers consider 3D a nice gadget to experiment with, but won't fully adopt it, it won't fly. I know some companies are going to experiment with the FIFA World Cup 2010, but for now it will be no more than an experiment.
What's next? Well, I really do believe that in due time, 3D TVs will indeed become more popular, but initially only for the happy few. One niche market that may drive the 3D tv market is gaming.
Sony is already preparing to make its Playstation 3 3D enabled, which would instantly create a potential audience of millions of gamers for its 3D TVs. I think the future of 3D depends on whether the manufacturers manage to get TVs to do both 2D AND 3D, and manage to get rid of those glasses. People will not gather around the TV, or watch casually at 3D images if they continuously need glasses.
IF they can solve that, 3D may have a great future in about 10 years. But I can wait for that... :).
From what I gather from industry reports, it does not seem likely. {1} Content is one issue. Apparently they currently cannot broadcast live events in 3D and that rules out sporting events which seems like a major pull for the format.
Toshiba has unveiled some technology that is supposed to convert 2D into 3D in real time so that's promising but not available yet. Since the technology is in its infancy, there also appears to be no technological leader between the major players Samsung, Sony, LG, and Panasonic, as if no one has figured out the best way, i.e. Cheapest way to do it.
{1} Which leads to the other problem, cost. Why pay $1000 to $2000 dollars on a 3D TV when you can get a really good HDTV for much less. But, at the rate of technological advancement, 5 years seems like more than enough time to work out all the bugs.So, what about the human element?
Do people want it? Who knows without doing extensive polling and market research. Will the industry force it upon us?
Probably eventually, if history is any indication. My record player still works just fine.My tape cassette player still works just fine. My CD player still works just fine.
And my iPod works just fine as well. Color TV made a big difference in my visual entertainment experience. VCR's and DVD players and TIVO made a difference.
Gh Definition TV did not really improve my experience too much, and if your priority in entertainment is storyline, then I think you will agree. The only reason I will buy an HD flat screen TV is for its space saving attributes. 3D added very little to my Avatar experience.
So, here's my personal opinion on the matter. The problem with 3D is that only the really standout, visual "eye-candy" benefits from it being in 3D. Most landscape shots don't look any more 3D than reality.
Most conversations between two people on screen are just as "boring" as they are in real life. Only the massive space shuttle flying toward you or the first person aspect of flying over a cliff on a dragon-like creature benefits from watching in 3D. How many scenes from Law and Order or The Office are really going to benefit from this technology.
It's merely an over-hyped gimmick in my opinion. Not until true holographic, virtual reality, becomes a reality for entertainment, like in the fictional Star Trek's Holodeck, will there be a real desire for a new form of visual entertainment. In my opinion.
1. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6054AB20100106.
I think if the technology can bring 3D to the home without having to wear special glasses it will be a great feature. As long as glasses are required it will not become mainstream. I do feel that the 3D "glassless" technology will be in the home in 5 years so my answer is YES!
Yea the article on How do 3d tvs work is great. I think 3d tvs movies and games are definately gonna go mainstream I really enjoy some of the 3d movies that are out. Cant wait to see whats in store for the future.
James Cameron's hotly anticipated 3D movie, "Avatar," hits theaters across the U.S. and elsewhere recently. Besides stunning computer generated imagery and a predictable-but-appealing storyline, the movie will become well known for high-quality 3D. Although an early review of "Avatar" famously said the 3D effects were "literally vomit inducing," most will be impressed.
It's likely that actual nausea will be experienced by only a small minority of viewers. "Avatar" is prompting armchair prognosticators to predict that the film will mainstream the use of 3D in the movies. In fact, multiple industries -- TVs, software, PCs, videogames and even cell phone handsets -- are ramping up a new generation of 3D products that will be released in 2010.
Despite the hype -- and billions in risky investment -- most of these efforts will fall flat. I predict that people will largely reject 3D consumer electronics products next year. When I was a kid in the 1970s, I saw the 1953 horror film "House of Wax" in 3D at the Chinese Theater in Hollywood.
It was an old movie even then, but the film set the standard for pandering to 3D technology with scenes showing random objects flying at the audience. Judging from the trailer, you can see that 3D was hyped 56 years ago. One of the problems with 3D technology is that it tempts directors to change the action, and sometimes even the story, to get a rise out of the audience with cheap 3D tricks.
They did it in "A Christmas Carol" with Jim Carrey. The trouble with 3D in movies is that Hollywood is confusing novelty with sustainable appeal. Audiences will quickly tire of 3D pandering -- and of wearing goofy cardboard glasses.
And that's one of the problems with 3D as it's currently set to be offered in consumer electronics. Executives smell money. But they just don't get 3D.
"We went from standard definition to high definition, and 3D is the natural next step." HDlogix president Jim Spinella said recently, perfectly encapsulating the conventional wisdom among 3D advocates. That statement sounds reasonable.
But it all hinges on what "3D" means. If "3D" means goofy glasses, then, no, going from not wearing goofy glasses to wearing them is not a "natural next step." And HDlogix's own technology helped demonstrate that.
A Dallas Cowboys football game last Sunday featured the "first live 3D broadcast ever to be shown on giant video screens at a major sporting event." The idea was to showcase HDlogix 3D technology. At halftime, the giant screen switched to 3D mode, and the fans were invited to put on the 3D glasses that were handed out at the entrance.
The intent was to show the second half of the game in 3D. But many fans refused to wear the glasses, and saw a blurry picture. Some of those who did wear them felt nauseous.
I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.
Related Questions
How many Conservatives out there still read the mainstream newspapers or watch the mainstream news?
Mainstreaming Education. Special Needs in Mainstream Classrooms. Mainstream Teachers and ED/LD students only?
Movies, movies, movies, movies, movies, movies, movies......?
Which starting 5 do you like better Phil Jacksons Starting 5 or my starting 5?
Will the Champions League become the mickey mouse cup next season with the huge tv deal starting in the Premier League next season?
Do you think Toys R Us will go out of business entirely within the next ten years?