Export thread

I'm so not crazy about having to wear glasses to watch TV...

You might not want to buy a 3D tv then.

Espy said:

You might not want to buy a 3D tv then.

Click to expand...

Well I guess what I'm saying is that I hope 3D Tv doesn't catch on as the new norm in like 8 years, kinda like LCD/Plasma/LED HDTV has.

WTB Holodeck.

Chazwozel said:

I'm so not crazy about having to wear glasses to watch TV...

Click to expand...

I'm more bothered by the glasses costing $100+ a pair.

figmentPez;366400][QUOTE=Chazwozel said:

I'm so not crazy about having to wear glasses to watch TV...

Click to expand...

I'm more bothered by the glasses costing $100+ a pair.[/QUOTE]

WTF?!?!? These are the same fucking throw-away glasses you get at any 3D show at a theme park!

As long as HDTV still works and is supported by everything, I'm cool.

Chazwozel said:

WTF?!?!? These are the same fucking throw-away glasses you get at any 3D show at a theme park!

Click to expand...

No, they're not. The 3D glasses paired with 3DTVs aimed at consumers use LCD shutter technology (as higher-end theater models do). They have batteries and sensors to sync with the TV, and have to be charged periodically. I still don't see how they cost $100+, though.

Chazwozel;366406][QUOTE=figmentPez;366400][QUOTE=Chazwozel said:

I'm so not crazy about having to wear glasses to watch TV...

Click to expand...

I'm more bothered by the glasses costing $100+ a pair.[/QUOTE]

WTF?!?!? These are the same fucking throw-away glasses you get at any 3D show at a theme park![/QUOTE]

Most of the 3d TV's require shutter glasses, not the cheap ones.

*Damn, got beat to it.

Supposedly they will be coming out with passive 3d sets this summer though.

It's a matter of time before they find a way to get glasses-free 3D and we'll all laugh at the goofy times we had to wear glasses.

Calleja said:

It's a matter of time before they find a way to get glasses-free 3D and we'll all laugh at the goofy times we had to wear glasses.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's physically possible with this technology unless you get into the realm of ocular implants. Realistic holographs however...

They're gonna be inspired by rainbows and create 3D "monitors" that work with large quantities of moisture in the air. You'll need a water nozzle on your TV.

Calleja said:

It's a matter of time before they find a way to get glasses-free 3D and we'll all laugh at the goofy times we had to wear glasses.

Click to expand...

They've already got them, and they had them on the show floor at the latest CES. They don't have as strong a 3D effect, they have a much smaller viewing angle, they're dimmer and I'm not sure what other drawbacks they have. I have no idea how they work, but they're out there.

The tech does work better on smaller screen, though. The Nintendo 3DS is set to be 3D without any need for glasses, and people who have seen such small-screen 3D say it can be impressive.

Chazwozel;366493][QUOTE=Calleja said:

It's a matter of time before they find a way to get glasses-free 3D and we'll all laugh at the goofy times we had to wear glasses.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's physically possible with this technology unless you get into the realm of ocular implants. Realistic holographs however...[/QUOTE]

Oh, they ARE working on it. I spent las summer working at a physics-optics research center and they were working on some ideas toward 3D without glasses. Baby steps, but still, if someone is doing that in Spain (VERY good center, but still), there should be people doing more advanced things in the US.

EDIT: Actually, now that I think of it, what they were working on was improved 3D without glasses: correct 3D from more than one position, wide angle if possible, etc.

tegid;366507][QUOTE=Chazwozel;366493][QUOTE=Calleja said:

It's a matter of time before they find a way to get glasses-free 3D and we'll all laugh at the goofy times we had to wear glasses.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's physically possible with this technology unless you get into the realm of ocular implants. Realistic holographs however...[/QUOTE]

Oh, they ARE working on it. I spent las summer working at a physics-optics research center and they were working on some ideas toward 3D without glasses. Baby steps, but still, if someone is doing that in Spain (VERY good center, but still), there should be people doing more advanced things in the US.[/QUOTE]

But it would be a holographic basic 3D right? There's no physical way you can make your eyes see 3D pop out on a 2D screen without augmentation. I guess I could see a holographic displayer mounted above and below the 2D screen and work in sync with the 2D image to generate a 3D effect....

I think the idea was to have a transparent liquid cristal layer on top of the regular screen that refracted the rays somehow giving the 3D effect. I think I saw a demonstration on a small screen with a simple image and it worked.

What do you mean by holographic displayer?

tegid said:

I think the idea was to have a transparent liquid cristal layer on top of the regular screen that refracted the rays somehow giving the 3D effect. I think I saw a demonstration on a small screen with a simple image and it worked.

What do you mean by holographic displayer?

Click to expand...

I guess holographic projector...

Having 2 small children means there is no way in fuck I would ever buy a TV that required $100 peripherals per person to watch, which could easily get broken and/or destroyed and/or magically lost in that little black hole where my car keys go .

Chazwozel;366510][QUOTE=tegid;366507][QUOTE=Chazwozel;366493][QUOTE=Calleja said:

It's a matter of time before they find a way to get glasses-free 3D and we'll all laugh at the goofy times we had to wear glasses.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's physically possible with this technology unless you get into the realm of ocular implants. Realistic holographs however...[/QUOTE]

Oh, they ARE working on it. I spent las summer working at a physics-optics research center and they were working on some ideas toward 3D without glasses. Baby steps, but still, if someone is doing that in Spain (VERY good center, but still), there should be people doing more advanced things in the US.[/QUOTE]

But it would be a holographic basic 3D right? There's no physical way you can make your eyes see 3D pop out on a 2D screen without augmentation. I guess I could see a holographic displayer mounted above and below the 2D screen and work in sync with the 2D image to generate a 3D effect....[/QUOTE]

Did anyone see Colbert's 3D trick? They interleaved two camera angles rapidly. you see a background shift occur, though I bet you could correct for that. It wasn't a really great effect but you could see the potential.

Chazwozel;366515][QUOTE=tegid said:

I think the idea was to have a transparent liquid cristal layer on top of the regular screen that refracted the rays somehow giving the 3D effect. I think I saw a demonstration on a small screen with a simple image and it worked.

What do you mean by holographic displayer?

Click to expand...

I guess holographic projector...[/QUOTE]

After some google and this post, I finally know what you were talking about

I was actually just reading a history and future on 3D tv/theater technologies, like, 10 minutes before I saw this.

It won't catch on, don't worry.

People hate wearing glasses.

Also, the ones with the sensors are horribly expensive and require you to sit in one place.

doomdragon6 said:

I was actually just reading a history and future on 3D tv/theater technologies, like, 10 minutes before I saw this.

It won't catch on, don't worry.

People hate wearing glasses.
.

Click to expand...

Yeah, one can only point to the abject financial failure of Alice in Wonderland and Avatar to see that 3D is just a fad.

The Lovely Boner;366526][QUOTE=doomdragon6 said:

I was actually just reading a history and future on 3D tv/theater technologies, like, 10 minutes before I saw this.

It won't catch on, don't worry.

People hate wearing glasses.
.

Click to expand...

Yeah, one can only point to the abject financial failure of Alice in Wonderland and Avatar to see that 3D is just a fad.[/QUOTE]

Well theater is one thing. It's a limited experience. And it could just be a fad (remember the 3d flicks of the 60s and 70s). If most people are like me, they like to turn on the tube late at night and lay down while watching a movie. Glasses would suck in that situation.

Chazwozel;366510][QUOTE=tegid;366507][QUOTE=Chazwozel;366493][QUOTE=Calleja said:

It's a matter of time before they find a way to get glasses-free 3D and we'll all laugh at the goofy times we had to wear glasses.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's physically possible with this technology unless you get into the realm of ocular implants. Realistic holographs however...[/QUOTE]

Oh, they ARE working on it. I spent las summer working at a physics-optics research center and they were working on some ideas toward 3D without glasses. Baby steps, but still, if someone is doing that in Spain (VERY good center, but still), there should be people doing more advanced things in the US.[/QUOTE]

But it would be a holographic basic 3D right? There's no physical way you can make your eyes see 3D pop out on a 2D screen without augmentation. I guess I could see a holographic displayer mounted above and below the 2D screen and work in sync with the 2D image to generate a 3D effect....[/QUOTE]

The ones they had at the CES show had polarizing screens over the TV, which allowed for up to 8 3D viewing angles. Basically, worked the same as the glasses, but on the TV instead of the end users. The main problem with them is you can only get the 3D effect from specific viewing angles.

Piotyr;366531][QUOTE=Chazwozel;366510][QUOTE=tegid;366507][QUOTE=Chazwozel;366493][QUOTE=Calleja said:

It's a matter of time before they find a way to get glasses-free 3D and we'll all laugh at the goofy times we had to wear glasses.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's physically possible with this technology unless you get into the realm of ocular implants. Realistic holographs however...[/QUOTE]

Oh, they ARE working on it. I spent las summer working at a physics-optics research center and they were working on some ideas toward 3D without glasses. Baby steps, but still, if someone is doing that in Spain (VERY good center, but still), there should be people doing more advanced things in the US.[/QUOTE]

But it would be a holographic basic 3D right? There's no physical way you can make your eyes see 3D pop out on a 2D screen without augmentation. I guess I could see a holographic displayer mounted above and below the 2D screen and work in sync with the 2D image to generate a 3D effect....[/QUOTE]

The ones they had at the CES show had polarizing screens over the TV, which allowed for up to 8 3D viewing angles. Basically, worked the same as the glasses, but on the TV instead of the end users. The main problem with them is you can only get the 3D effect from specific viewing angles.[/QUOTE]


I suppose eventually the tech will catch up to where its a million 3D viewing angles, at that point I would buy a 3D tv. I just want to maintain my hang upsidedown from the couch end, head half-cocked on the floor viewing position.

Chaz always be bragging about his "positions" :angry: damn flexible sack of cartilage.

3D is coming, like it or not.

You'll always be able to see whatever in 2D, though, so no need to hate 3D. Just shut off the right video output and only watch the left (or vice versa, if that how you roll. dawg.)

The glasses-less TVs aren't going to go very mainstream until some serious problems are resolved.

LCD shutter glasses are going to be the preferred tech for LCD TVs because polarizing them for polarized lenses (think imax and reald 3D at the theaters) is a pain.

DLP projection TVs and projectors, however, could go with polarized lenses.

I took the 3D lenses passed out for RealD 3D in theaters and put them in the clip on sunglass frames you can get for glasses, and love the result - no more head or earchache from the ill-fitting glasses they pass out at the theater. You'll be able to get comfortable, custom 3D glasses eventually.

Once these TVs come out, though, you'll find that even the LCD shutter glasses will drop radically in price so it shouldn't be an issue by the time 3D tv really catches on. They will be both cheap and comfortable. Ideally the manufacturers will agree to a common protocol and specification so you can have your pair and take them to your buddy's house to watch the game, rather than having to keep 15 on hand for whoever shows up at your house.

I have to wear glasses to watch TV in 2D.....

Bowielee said:

I have to wear glasses to watch TV in 2D.....

Click to expand...

That makes it even worse for us 4-eyes trying to watch it in 3D. The 3D glasses OVER my regular glasses are a pain in the ass, unless you can order either prescription 3D glasses or clip-ons to fit your frames.

David;366863][QUOTE=Bowielee said:

I have to wear glasses to watch TV in 2D.....

Click to expand...

That makes it even worse for us 4-eyes trying to watch it in 3D. The 3D glasses OVER my regular glasses are a pain in the ass, unless you can order either prescription 3D glasses or clip-ons to fit your frames.[/QUOTE]


Ever hear of contact lenses?

But seriously, I agree, wearing special glasses to watch TV at predisposed angles for some cheap effects is kinda stupid. I know Steiny's right though. 3D is being shoved down the market's throat and it's coming whether we like it or not.

I've heard of these "contact lenses". Are these the same things that don't really work in my dry eyes, unfortunately? Actually, I can use them, but not on a daily basis - I can wear them in about 5 hour stints.

Anyhoo, is there really a way to get the 3D signal watchable in 2D? I ask because my wife has only one functioning eye - meaning 3D is pretty much worthless. Can you watch something in 3D with one eye and one "lense" and have it look OK? Or do you lose a lot in translation?

It should look fine as long as you use one lens (as you said).

I actually tested that out with Alice in Wonderland. Without the glasses, the picture is blurry... with the glasses the blurryness turns into 3D... BUT if you close just one eye while wearing the glasses, you see everything non-blurry but no 3D, so pretty much how it'd be in normal 2D.

What? I do stuff!

tegid said:

It should look fine as long as you use one lens (as you said).

Click to expand...

Actually, I'm not sure about that with the LCD shutter tech. I'm not sure if it relies on both eyes to hide the fact that the lens is being blacked out 60 (er, 24?, 30?, 48?) times a second.

On most content there should be a 2D option, as long as everyone in the room is happy with losing 3D. Though, sadly, the standard for 3D Blu-ray allows for discs that contain a 3D version only, with no 2D option.

figmentPez;367294][QUOTE=tegid said:

It should look fine as long as you use one lens (as you said).

Click to expand...

Actually, I'm not sure about that with the LCD shutter tech. I'm not sure if it relies on both eyes to hide the fact that the lens is being blacked out 60 (er, 24?, 30?, 48?) times a second.

On most content there should be a 2D option, as long as everyone in the room is happy with losing 3D. Though, sadly, the standard for 3D Blu-ray allows for discs that contain a 3D version only, with no 2D option.[/QUOTE]

If it DOES have an effect on looking with one single eye, then it would darken the image significantly, wouldn't it? If it doesn't, I guess you wouldn't notice the blacking out that much. Isn't the frequency increased a lot?

While there are many monocular (one-eye) cues that we use to perceive depth, those are not very useful for producing a convincing 3-D image on a movie screen. you really need the binocular cues that the glasses give you to see the 3-D effects.

3D Burrito!

Hopefully there will be a way to buy a regular hdtv or turn the 3d "features" off. I had to go find the NON 3d Avatar movie to see.. you see, although I have two working eyes, one has a deformity in the rear which gives me 20/400 (20/800 according to one quack) vision, and making "3d vision" worthless to me. Trying to view the red and blue images in those types of provided glasses is simply annoying. Same with the other non (refracted?) red/blue glasses. My non-fully-working eye functions mainly as an extended "corner of the eye".

Matt² said:

Hopefully there will be a way to buy a regular hdtv or turn the 3d "features" off. I had to go find the NON 3d Avatar movie to see.. you see, although I have two working eyes, one has a deformity in the rear which gives me 20/400 (20/800 according to one quack) vision, and making "3d vision" worthless to me. Trying to view the red and blue images in those types of provided glasses is simply annoying. Same with the other non (refracted?) red/blue glasses. My non-fully-working eye functions mainly as an extended "corner of the eye".

Click to expand...

I'm guessing that they'll have three of each channel once this goes mainstream. One in digital, one in HD, and one in 3D.