View Poll Results: Poll: Will 3D at Home Make a Comeback?
3D at home will never come back 150 32.26%
3D is cyclical, it will return 276 59.35%
Who needs 3D when you've got VR 39 8.39%
Voters: 465. You may not vote on this poll

1 2 3 ... Last
OLED Technology and Flat Panels General > Poll: Will 3D at Home Make a Comeback?
imagic's Avatar imagic 07:42 AM 12-18-2017
Will 3D for the home make a comeback? Avatar 2, 3, 4 and 5 are on the way, will that be enough? Or are 3D TVs gone for good?

I posted this here because for a brief period in time, passive 3D 4K OLEDs were the arguably the best (i.e. brightest, sharpest, most comfortable) way to experience 3D Blu-ray movies.

Click here to read more: Will 3D at Home Make a Comeback?

Or just take the poll...

VidPro's Avatar VidPro 07:49 AM 12-18-2017
It keeps coming back like video herpes so yeah there will be another push and then it will die again.
satboy's Avatar satboy 07:51 AM 12-18-2017
Quote:
Originally Posted by VidPro View Post
It keeps coming back like video herpes so yeah there will be another push and then it will die again.
crude thought but I doubt there will be another push in it's current form. So if something new evolves that improves by 10 fold maybe
VidPro's Avatar VidPro 07:53 AM 12-18-2017
Quote:
Originally Posted by satboy View Post
crude thought but I doubt there will be another push in it's current form. So if something new evolves that improves by 10 fold maybe
Hmm...I was trying to be nice.
video_analysis 08:00 AM 12-18-2017
Quote:
Originally Posted by VidPro View Post
It keeps coming back like video herpes so yeah there will be another push and then it will die again.
Video herpes has such a negative connotation that I suspect you haven't witnessed well-rounded 3D (not simply whiz-bang popouts but also depth of field) on the aforementioned display tech. Hugo, Life of Pi, and Immortals are 3 examples off the top of my head that incorporate it succinctly in their storylines. It's probably the only way I'll ever care to rewatch those films in the future.

Studios and manufacturers blew it by pushing it too hard before the right display came along. That probably dooms any 3D requiring glasses at least in the near-term. Glasses-free 3D, if they can commercialize it, might bring a resurgence.
KidHorn's Avatar KidHorn 08:21 AM 12-18-2017
3D failed because it was too complicated. Everyone who viewed 3D at my home loved it, but they would never set it up at their home because you needed a 3D TV, a 3D blu-ray player, HDMI 1.4 cables, and 3D glasses that worked with your TV. Then you had to sync everything up and hope the TV detected your glasses and synced up. Something that was hit or miss. I had trouble getting it working at times and I'm 100x more into high tech than any of my friends or neighbors.

It's inevitable that 3D will dominate in the future in one form or another, but it may take 20+ years to happen
Class A's Avatar Class A 08:39 AM 12-18-2017
For most consumers the TV format is too small. People want good movies w/excellent PQ & SQ. This 3D dance has been going on since the 50's. It'll pop up again then fade away.













t
Ovation's Avatar Ovation 08:44 AM 12-18-2017
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post
3D failed because it was too complicated. Everyone who viewed 3D at my home loved it, but they would never set it up at their home because you needed a 3D TV, a 3D blu-ray player, HDMI 1.4 cables, and 3D glasses that worked with your TV. Then you had to sync everything up and hope the TV detected your glasses and synced up. Something that was hit or miss. I had trouble getting it working at times and I'm 100x more into high tech than any of my friends or neighbors.

It's inevitable that 3D will dominate in the future in one form or another, but it may take 20+ years to happen
Sums it up pretty much in my experience as well. I "accidentally" went 3D via a replacement for my projector last year. My previous one was nearly 10 years old and had no 3D. My new one has 3D and came with two free pairs of glasses (active glasses--I didn't pick the PJ for its 3D tech, so I did not weigh the pros and cons of each type). I bought two more, inexpensive, pairs for family viewing. I had a few 3D titles, tried them out, and found I enjoyed it more at home than at the cinema (with exception of IMAX 3D--that's much better than my setup). Mostly has to do with my ability to brighten the image more than at the cinema (I can't compete on size, though, in relative terms, my new screen should help once I put it up--going from 64" diagonal 16:9 to 84" diagonal 16:9).

I would not have gone out of my way to get 3D capability, but now that I have it, and enjoy it more than anticipated, I will remain parked in PJ territory for the main HT in order to maintain 3D there.

As with many things, I think 3D will be cyclical in home use. Given my unexpected appreciation, I think I'll be quicker to adopt any significant advancement in the future, rather than go the "accidental" route again.
TuteTibiImperes 08:49 AM 12-18-2017
I’ve seen one 3D movie in the theaters (Gravity) and one at home (Avatar) and while the effect is neat, viewing in 4K HDR. adds more to the experience IMO, plus the glasses suck.

If they can do glasses free 3D in 4K HDR I’m in, otherwise I don’t have much interest.
video_analysis 08:57 AM 12-18-2017
Never want to see the superficial, preachy Avatar again for as long as I live. I also generally prefer competently done 3D to HDR (of which I have found few exemplary examples). Then again, I don't have a light cannon (wish I had a projector to enhance the immersion).

Passive 3D doesn't require syncing fortunately, so that's one complication out the window. HDR is practically as complicated in terms of requirements (minus glasses).
Pitbull0669's Avatar Pitbull0669 09:00 AM 12-18-2017
I wont buy a 4K tv Id rather get a 4K projector that still uses 3D. I have a 80 in Passive 3D and at 15 ft away with my Darbee you CANT tell the diff AND IM NOT SPENDING $8 Grand on a 8 4K set they can bite my ass.If they bring back 3D on that size then sure Id try it. with my 3D library why bother until it does thats why Ill save my shekels for the 4K projector that does 3D
kleenex's Avatar kleenex 09:01 AM 12-18-2017
No way do we need 3D... Can we move to say 5D insetad
snpanago's Avatar snpanago 09:23 AM 12-18-2017
I love 3D movies in theaters and I have a collection of 3D blu rays for home viewing. However, the typical smallish tv screen size and ghosting experiences with some titles, made the home 3D less amazing and immersive.

Recently, when looking for a large screen UHD tv, I excluded those manufacturers that left 3D off their feature set. The embattled and nearly defunct LeEco produced an 85 inch 3D, UHD set and the 3D is the best home viewing I’ve ever seen. I love rediscovering my collection of home movies with this format. The large size screen and proper employment of 3D by the set, is the only way to give home 3D a fair shake and a limited comeback.

I have VR; may work for gaming, but I never find it satisfying for home theater to replace 3D.
brazen1's Avatar brazen1 10:02 AM 12-18-2017
The title of this poll says "Will 3D at Home Make a Comeback?" I think the poll should be Would You Like 3D at Home to Make a Comeback? Unless you're in the industry with 1st hand knowledge and have the early inside scoop on the future, who knows? We're just consumers, consuming or not consuming.

I think there are many who bought cheap 3D displays and got what they paid for - Cheap 3D. Add neglect to set it up properly and the end result was further diminished. Add to that the passive 3D at half resolution vs Active 3D at full resolution smear campaigns based on worthless facts revolving around battery hassles in glasses and the stage was set to adopt a lower resolution 3D technology as 'Standard'. And of course Passive was also less expensive than Active at the time. Consumers gravitated toward cheaper prices and low resolution and deemed 3D an eye straining gimmick that gave them a headache (which was also noted in user manuals warnings).


Had the masses purchased wisely and took the time to set it up properly, they would have embraced 3D instead of passing quick irrational judgement on the entire format. These are the same haters filling every thread with their bitterness to this day. No amount of viewings at perfectly working 3D setups at home and/or testimonials can cure their disgust.


UHD with the added benefit of HDR is the replacement for SDR. 3D is SDR. There is no room for SDR anymore for those that want to be state of the art. Streaming services and replacement titles are pushing this avenue and would like to eliminate SDR, including 3D. 3D is the 1st and easiest to head for the chopping block. When it comes to us and our money, it's always out with the old and in with the new paving the way for new upgrade (necessities) backed by more worthless gum flap and clever advertising.


I think display manufactures removed the optional 3D format so we have to replace and repurchase UHD titles now that our new displays are not 3D capable. We're told how much better UHD HDR looks than 3D ever did so we're in for a treat and the repurchase (upgrade) is well worth it - Titles and hardware. Well, not in my opinion.


My display is UHD HDR and 3D, active in particular. Imo, I have the best of both worlds as long as my display doesn't fail since it's irreplaceable given both techs are no longer offered together. I have many UHD HDR titles, SDR titles, and 3D titles. I prefer to watch titles in 3D vs UHD HDR because it entertains me better and I'm very happy with my 3D setup and results as is everyone who has enjoyed it with me, also preferring 3D vs UHD HDR given the choice. The industry hates me and others like me. They'd prefer myself and my equipment keel over since I'm not adopting the push the rest of consumers are embracing. They have no choice to embrace it now that 3D isn't offered on displays anymore. The 3D queen appears to be in checkmate, or is it?


Seems 3D titles are still being released often and new releases are slated for years to come. It isn't like they need to make a comeback because they're still releasing. They are hidden from consumers but they are out there and they are being purchased and used. They sell out quickly too, many on prerelease purchases, as if in limited quantities only. Anyway, I don't know if 3D at home will make a comeback since no reasonable 3D displays are offered anymore, especially with UHD HDR as a (side benefit). I like both formats but given the choice I will always immerse myself in 3D. Glad I have that choice and not forced to use only one and can keep my old 3D titles in play without having to purchase the same title in a newer format that is arguably newer but not necessarily better.


I would like to see manufactures add back the 3D format as an option just as it was on the display I currently own. I don't need the 3D format to upgrade such as glassless or UHD HDR 3D although it would be welcomed and worth of an upgrade if the specs ever became possible. I'm perfectly happy with what USED to be offered, taken away out of 'greed', disguised as 'in our best interests'.
AnalogHD's Avatar AnalogHD 10:12 AM 12-18-2017
3D has been coming on and off since 1851. It was always some new tech that created a new 3D boom, they everyone got bored with the worthlessness of available 3D content, then it went away.

This cycle has seemed to be 20-30 years long for the past 160 years. But right now, it seems like 3DTVs' death is being followed almost immediately by a second 3D goggles cycle, after the mid 1990s one. It's most likely to go the same way: a boom in a few years, then everyone gets bored with the worthlessness of available content ("wow, I'm moving stuff with my hand!" is only exciting for so long), then it dies.

The cycle after that, whatever it is, probably won't involve TVs, at least not what we call a TV now.
tezster's Avatar tezster 10:18 AM 12-18-2017
It will come back to stay once glasses-free 3D is common-place and can be properly implemented at minimum cost.
VidPro's Avatar VidPro 10:26 AM 12-18-2017
Quote:
Originally Posted by tezster View Post
It will come back to stay once glasses-free 3D is common-place and can be properly implemented at minimum cost.
And not make a portion of the audience dizzy and grabbing for a barf bag.
mightyhuhn's Avatar mightyhuhn 10:40 AM 12-18-2017
i guess they will try it again so people have to rebuy everything again.
my guess is avatar 2 with HDMI 2.2 or 2.3
8mile13's Avatar 8mile13 10:46 AM 12-18-2017
Once we have forgotten all about it and in that time period manufacturers are in need for a new ''trick'' there might be another 3D launch. OTAH the HDR stuff replaced the 3D stuff and because of that the 3D TV might be something of the past. Whatever it is what will replace HDR it is not 3D.
javanpohl's Avatar javanpohl 10:52 AM 12-18-2017
Of course it will come back. The only reason it's "gone" right now is so that they can push us to buy 4K HDR TVs right now and then have to buy another one that works with 4K 3D in a few years.
javanpohl's Avatar javanpohl 10:57 AM 12-18-2017
"Who needs 3D when you've got VR"--isn't 3D an inherent part of VR?
Dr. Niles Crane's Avatar Dr. Niles Crane 11:11 AM 12-18-2017
I prefer 3D presentations when I have the option on my 1080 projector. I downscale 4K movies when 3D isn't an option on disc. Immersion is better to me than just more pixels.
snpanago's Avatar snpanago 11:13 AM 12-18-2017
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazen1 View Post
The title of this poll says "Will 3D at Home Make a Comeback?" I think the poll should be Would You Like 3D at Home to Make a Comeback? Unless you're in the industry with 1st hand knowledge and have the early inside scoop on the future, who knows? We're just consumers, consuming or not consuming.

I think there are many who bought cheap 3D displays and got what they paid for - Cheap 3D. Add neglect to set it up properly and the end result was further diminished. Add to that the passive 3D at half resolution vs Active 3D at full resolution smear campaigns based on worthless facts revolving around battery hassles in glasses and the stage was set to adopt a lower resolution 3D technology as 'Standard'. And of course Passive was also less expensive than Active at the time. Consumers gravitated toward cheaper prices and low resolution and deemed 3D an eye straining gimmick that gave them a headache (which was also noted in user manuals warnings).


Had the masses purchased wisely and took the time to set it up properly, they would have embraced 3D instead of passing quick irrational judgement on the entire format. These are the same haters filling every thread with their bitterness to this day. No amount of viewings at perfectly working 3D setups at home and/or testimonials can cure their disgust.


UHD with the added benefit of HDR is the replacement for SDR. 3D is SDR. There is no room for SDR anymore for those that want to be state of the art. Streaming services and replacement titles are pushing this avenue and would like to eliminate SDR, including 3D. 3D is the 1st and easiest to head for the chopping block. When it comes to us and our money, it's always out with the old and in with the new paving the way for new upgrade (necessities) backed by more worthless gum flap and clever advertising.


I think display manufactures removed the optional 3D format so we have to replace and repurchase UHD titles now that our new displays are not 3D capable. We're told how much better UHD HDR looks than 3D ever did so we're in for a treat and the repurchase (upgrade) is well worth it - Titles and hardware. Well, not in my opinion.


My display is UHD HDR and 3D, active in particular. Imo, I have the best of both worlds as long as my display doesn't fail since it's irreplaceable given both techs are no longer offered together. I have many UHD HDR titles, SDR titles, and 3D titles. I prefer to watch titles in 3D vs UHD HDR because it entertains me better and I'm very happy with my 3D setup and results as is everyone who has enjoyed it with me, also preferring 3D vs UHD HDR given the choice. The industry hates me and others like me. They'd prefer myself and my equipment keel over since I'm not adopting the push the rest of consumers are embracing. They have no choice to embrace it now that 3D isn't offered on displays anymore. The 3D queen appears to be in checkmate, or is it?


Seems 3D titles are still being released often and new releases are slated for years to come. It isn't like they need to make a comeback because they're still releasing. They are hidden from consumers but they are out there and they are being purchased and used. They sell out quickly too, many on prerelease purchases, as if in limited quantities only. Anyway, I don't know if 3D at home will make a comeback since no reasonable 3D displays are offered anymore, especially with UHD HDR as a (side benefit). I like both formats but given the choice I will always immerse myself in 3D. Glad I have that choice and not forced to use only one and can keep my old 3D titles in play without having to purchase the same title in a newer format that is arguably newer but not necessarily better.


I would like to see manufactures add back the 3D format as an option just as it was on the display I currently own. I don't need the 3D format to upgrade such as glassless or UHD HDR 3D although it would be welcomed and worth of an upgrade if the specs ever became possible. I'm perfectly happy with what USED to be offered, taken away out of 'greed', disguised as 'in our best interests'.
IMO, a better post on the state of consumer 3D has not been written.
AlanAbby 11:16 AM 12-18-2017
Fantastic was to start a hate thread, we who love 3D get to be called morons, idiots and losers. Interesting those who don't like 3D always want to deny it to those of us you love it.
VidPro's Avatar VidPro 11:22 AM 12-18-2017
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlanAbby View Post
Fantastic was to start a hate thread, we who love 3D get to be called morons, idiots and losers. Interesting those who don't like 3D always want to deny it to those of us you love it.
Wow! Who calls you guys that like 3D morons, idiots, or losers? I'm not a fan and probably never will be unless it turns into something other than a gimmick to me, but I don't really care if TV manufacturers want to add it to their TV's.
RoadLizard's Avatar RoadLizard 11:25 AM 12-18-2017
I agree with most of whats been said here. The 3D performance on my OLED is literally perfect. If this had been everyones first try at it - with perfect image quality, super-light passive glasses and excellent OLED PQ... we might not be having this discussion.

As for a comeback? I say no. People have moved on and even if a few of us love 3D at home, the rest of the " Joe Six Packs" have checked out. Sucks but thats the reality of it.
tomhorsley's Avatar tomhorsley 11:34 AM 12-18-2017
You left off "God, I hope not!" in your poll choices.
JCP1740's Avatar JCP1740 12:02 PM 12-18-2017
I like it and have owned TVs with it, but I went to a Projector and like it even more. The glasses are no big deal as I have to wear them normally anyway. Some people don't like it and that is ok, but they shouldn't put it down for the rest of us that do like it. I noticed that the price has gone up and some stores like Walmart is hardly ever carrying them, unless it is in a package with 4K at about $40. For me that is way to high a price to pay for any movie. Sure some movies were crappy in 3D with little effect, such as Last Airbender, but some were excellent also. I know some magazines put it down, as some of the article writers didn't like it and posted that feeling much too often. They recently quit grading 3D movies on the main magazine. If companys like Visio read that stuff, it possibly is what swayed them from adding 3D to their TVs. I have two 4K TVs, not all programs are in 4K with HDR, when it is, it looks better, but I have 2 eyes and when I look around, everything I see is in 3D, except my TV's picture. Nope, I sure hope it isn't dead and makes a bigger comeback. Like the man above said, probably when they can put it in 4K 3D. They will then offer us new TVs and Projectors with it, for more bucks spent. Then several years later the will come out with 8K. That's capitalism folks.
klimo 12:04 PM 12-18-2017
One problem I've noticed was that you can't really rent/stream 3d movies. My Sony 900b I got a couple of years ago had 3d. So I thought I would check it out. Only way to do that was to purchase from VUDU for like $35. I bought one movie and that was that. The mass market requires easy access. Not allowing new releases to be rented/streamed is bad.

Purely anecdotal, but it seems lots of people have a serious motion sickness/headache issue with 3d.
fatuglyguy's Avatar fatuglyguy 12:05 PM 12-18-2017
I would love to have 3D back in my next TV...If my room was large enough and the wiring situation more practical, I'd just get a 4K/3D projector and call it a day (my buddy just got a Sony 285ES with a 100" Stewart Firehawk and it looks GREAT). I remember back in the early days of 3D, there wasn't a really "great" option for 3D -- active had issues with sync, brightness, weight, and flicker, while passive looked like a VHS-resolution dog turd. Then the Sony 84" X900A came out, and I saw the real potential of 3D. Passive 3D with a 4K panel. Watching scenes from Hugo on that TV was magical, and I figured that this would finally be the thing that turned the 3D stigma around.

Now I have quite a few titles that I can't watch on my main TV since it no longer supports 3D, which is a bummer. Luckily I still have a "vintage" 2014 Sony with 4K and passive 3D. The problem is that I'm not really buying new 3D titles any more since I'd have to buy each movie twice, which isn't something I see myself doing. Would be nice if studios didn't make you choose between the UHD and 3D editions and rolled them all into one combo pack, but I'm sure the market for that is very small.
1 2 3 ... Last

Up
View Full Version