Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 35
  1. #1
    Administrator Armageddon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    9,320
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 4,881
    Given: 4,868

    3D TV's the new thing to have?


    0 Not allowed!
    Hey Guys,
    i have a question are the new 3D TV worth the money ?
    Sometimes i think to myself, why don't you just shut up!

  2. #2
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    26
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 1

    0 Not allowed!
    Hi Armageddon,

    I'm not sure where you are located but if you are capable of watching reruns on UK Channel 5's The Gadget Show they recently reviewed a handful of 3D TVs. Some more detail here:
    hXXp://fwd.channel5.com/gadget-show/bestbuys/tv/3d-tvs

    The only "fun" material I've seen to date is on Dominic Ford's site - nice quality - but it is in pretty short supply. The hay day for 3D was the mid-1950s. You might have to wait another 40 or 50 years for it to reach its next peak!

    Yours anaglyphically,

    J
    xxx

  3. #3
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    3d tv


    0 Not allowed!
    be sure to check with your cable or satellite provider to see if they offer 3d programming. I work for the nation's largest cable provider and we only have 3, 3d channels. Most networks haven't gotten on the 3d wagon yet. And most tv providers will charge you a fee to use 3d service and require you to have special receiver or cable boxes. It usually is not worth it because the service is has just not caught on yet.

  4. #4
    Administrator Armageddon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    9,320
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 4,881
    Given: 4,868

    0 Not allowed!
    Thanks, is that usable at all ?
    I dont mind wearing glasses ( LOL ) to watch those but is that usable at all.
    I mean i can watch 3D blue ray at the shop and i am sure there specially set up
    that it looks good but what about having those in your own living room ?
    Would you go that close to the TV that you would get a headache ?
    Sometimes i think to myself, why don't you just shut up!

  5. #5
    Administrator Irrumator's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    21,238
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 10,281
    Given: 14,115

    0 Not allowed!
    Hmm. It doesn't interest me at all. I think it is a gimmick for people to spend more money on something they don't need. If I was that interested, I would want to watch 3D at the cinema. For porn, it sounds even more ridiculous! Now, I am interested in HDTV, and that is well worth the money, specially as the UK's main companies transmit several HD TV channels (and I even have the HDTV PVR now too).

  6. #6
    Jr. Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    75
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 12
    Given: 8

    0 Not allowed!
    my HDTV died last year so why not get the new 3D models. I specifically got one which has both good 2d and 3d pictures, and can do a fake 3d with 2d signals. sure enough there really isn't enough 3d material out there and the novelty of fake 3d wore off, we hardly use that feature anymore. do I regret getting it? no, it was just a bit more expensive than a 2d comparable model (I was set on getting a Panasonic Viera either way) and we can watch 3d movies every now and then. I'm in Canada and there is only a 3D preview TV channel which plays the same things over and over, with 3D specials once in a blue moon.

    other than the tv and glasses you need a 3d compatible blu-ray player, which the Playstation3 is. if you already have that, you're set. the distance from the tv is the same as that for regular HDTV.

  7. #7
    Administrator Armageddon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    9,320
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 4,881
    Given: 4,868

    0 Not allowed!
    What is the distance ?

    If i have a 27 inch display i don't want to be glued to the screen and it looks ridiculous if there were 2 persons LOL
    is it 2 meters or more depending of the size of the screen or what ?

    In the shops you sit around 2 meters away ??
    Would that be different if the screen is for example 60 inch ??
    Sometimes i think to myself, why don't you just shut up!

  8. #8
    Jr. Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    75
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 12
    Given: 8

    0 Not allowed!
    This is a site to calculate viewing distance http://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html
    However a display size of less than 40" may not look very good.

  9. #9
    Bobbing 4 Ballbags notanangel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    70
    Posts
    52,598
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 21,686
    Given: 32,655

    0 Not allowed!
    26" 3.3' – 6.5'
    30" 3.8' – 7.6'
    34" 4.3' – 8.5'
    42" 5.3' – 10.5'
    46" 5.8' – 11.5'
    50" 6.3' – 12.5'
    55" 6.8' – 12.8'
    60" 7.5' – 15.0'
    65" 8.1' – 16.3'

    According to Best Buy. Other sites are similar (close enough).


  10. #10
    Administrator Armageddon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    9,320
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 4,881
    Given: 4,868

    0 Not allowed!
    WOW i would need an 60' + TV......
    Sometimes i think to myself, why don't you just shut up!

  11. #11
    Administrator Irrumator's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    21,238
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 10,281
    Given: 14,115

    0 Not allowed!
    Armie - there is another solution: sit closer to a smaller televsion!

  12. #12
    Administrator Armageddon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    9,320
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 4,881
    Given: 4,868

    0 Not allowed!
    LOL
    but thats technically not possible.
    Sometimes i think to myself, why don't you just shut up!

  13. #13
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    26
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 3
    Given: 0

    0 Not allowed!
    I would give that a wait, rumors are glasses free 3D TVs will be out as soon as next year. Sure they will cost an arm and a leg, so give yourself a time frame and see what you are actually after. Besides they still need to standardise the 3D format for home use so it'll take a little bit of time. Having said that, if there are glasses free TVs available, then the current ones that needs glasses will be on sale big time. Also, it seems like the real winner isn't going to be 3D, but it's 4K. 4K resolution for home use. It'll be an interesting time when the dust is settled.

  14. #14
    Hero Member PBnJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,159
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,092
    Given: 859

    0 Not allowed!
    If I were to purchase a new, larger flatscreen within the next year or two, I expect that current 3D tech would already be integrated into it, so I would probably use it to watch Blu-Ray movies in 3D. I believe that 3D television will be the next big thing, however we haven't gotten there yet.

    It is not such a big deal to me to have the 3D features until I can view 3D programming without glasses. When a sans-glasses 3D TV is available AND 3D/3D-enhanced programming is available on Netflix, Amazon, and Xbox LIVE I will happily upgrade. I expect that the transition will probably be about as difficult as the transition from NTSC/SD to ATSC/HD was in 2008/2009. I look forward to the tech, but I'm not looking forward to having my Cable provider (Comcast) nearly double my cable bill just to get the "3D Ultra-HD Package" Programming.
    Last edited by PBnJ; 5th December 2011 at 07:07.

  15. #15
    Superhero Member mark0159's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Age
    47
    Posts
    7,276
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 4,468
    Given: 3,043

    0 Not allowed!
    I don't think that 3d is the next big thing, or perhaps the best thing to say is that it's the next big thing to waste your money on! it's all about marketing, they have to find some reason to buy a new TV ever few years.

    3d isn't for everyone it's going to be a small percentage that will ever really use 3D. it's cool to watch but not for long period of time. Avatar gave me a headache. I haven't seen another 3d movie. And anyway who want to sit at home and put on a pair of glasses just to watch TV? I still haven't read a good answer to that.

    I did read on a tech blog tho that it's better to buy a 3D tv because it's got the processing power to handle fast moving pictures, since it has to encode it twice. so when it comes down watching sport it may look better. who knows.

    my theory is this, set a budget and then buy the best you can for that amount.

    but I would def look at getting wireless built in


  16. #16
    Hero Member ck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Age
    56
    Posts
    2,411
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 5
    Given: 0

    0 Not allowed!
    3D TV does not really seem to be catching on. Even in movies I find it mostly distracting. The only exception to this was Avatar. Cameron seems to understand how to use 3D as more than just a gimmick.
    Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction. - Blaise Pascal

  17. #17
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    0 Not allowed!
    I own a 23" LG passive LCD monitor.Amazon finally restocked after selling out the first batch within a week.Costs 300$ and uses the cheap theater polarized glasses.My brother bought a 72"active shutter glasses 3D sony last year.Few titles were available at the time.Now 3D titles are more common with Harry Potter and Fright Night being recent 3d releases.Not to forget the 3d gay cheesy goodness of "Whorrey Potter". 3D games are another plus. Rumor of a 3d Ipad in the near future. Once the football games are broadcasted in 3d,3d will be as common as stereophonic sound.Cheers to more 3d horny goodness.

  18. #18
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Age
    43
    Posts
    1
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    0 Not allowed!
    I just got a 47" LG Passive 3D. It's amazing. With 3D it's like you've got twice the resolution or something. Everything is crisper and more real than 2D 1080p... and you can upgrade 2D to 3D and again it makes your average content seem better than 1080p. Make any porn 3D. Ok I know it's simulated 3D but the enhancement to the quality is truly visible. My partner has Active 3D and it gives me a headache. No headache at all with Passive. So happy with it. If you're needing to buy a new TV, get a 3D one. My vote goes for Passive. The Active having more resolution is nonsense. When you've got the glasses on you are seeing the complete 1080p picture. Just because it's only sending half to one eye and half to the other doesn't stop it from adding up to a complete 1080p picture.
    --<br />Andrew

  19. #19
    Administrator Armageddon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    9,320
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 4,881
    Given: 4,868

    0 Not allowed!
    Active / Passive 3D ?
    Sometimes i think to myself, why don't you just shut up!

  20. #20

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •