The Death of 3D TV

[gene]

The last manufacturers of 3D TV, Sony and LG, are set to end production on 3D sets this year. But the demise of 3D TV has been a long time coming. As flat panel HDTV became more and more affordable, 3D may have been seen as a the killer feature that got customers buying a new round of premium priced TVs. But 3D, a side-show at best, was miscast as a premium feature, and studios did it no favors by launching a flood of mediocre 3D movies that did little to showcase the standard's strength. It's no wonder 3D has such a bad reputation with consumers. RIP 3D TV.

Read: The Death of 3D TV

 

[3db]

Phew!!! I'm glad I dodged that bullet by not investing in 3D BluRays.

 

[ncampbel]

Very glad to see 3d go myself. I have never felt it was a value add, even with the very best examples in the industry where they went all out (Avatar, Gravity, the Hobbit). I always saw it as a detractor, even in movies that were shot in 3d; and don't get me started on movies that added it by roto-scoping in post, looking at you Harry Potter franchise. I'll be happy to be able to watch future movies in the best atmos theaters without having to swallow the 3d detractions and cost. Same when I purchase it for home viewing. Hopefully now manufacturers can concentrate on providing the best 2d picture without having to maintain 3d compatibility.

I can see 3d having a comeback when movies move to a fully VR expereince, however I still see that as quite a ways off.

 

[Wayde Robson]

I've got a few 3D Blu-ray movies that may never get a to playback their 3D track.

Honestly, I always thought 3D would just be a latent feature in all TVs at a certain point. Nobody really thought of it, it just could do it if you wanted. Like having an RCA input or something. I guess there must have been a decent cost associated with the manufacture of 3D in TVs so as to be something that gets formally dismissed.

 

[Alain Singapore]

One additional factor is that even a large TV is not large enough to enjoy 3D. It is not immersive. 3D only works well with projectors on screen that fill most of our field of vision. The good news for 3D addicts is that projectors are still coming with 3D capability.

Other more convincing ways are coming with AR and VR equipment. Here again there is a risk of consumer deception.

Content is born to disappoint. VR movies do not bring anything else than allowing you to turn your head in every direction while the action is playing continuously. It does not help in story telling because cinematography is all about dragging the attention of the viewer using the camera motion expertly. By letting the viewer take control of the camera, all this magic is gone.

The only area where 3D shines is fully interactive media like computer games. Then you have immersion into another world where you become part of the story and it all start to make sense.

The coming generation of VR and AR hardware are likely to be disappointing too.

Despite very high resolution display, the pixel density is still relatively low to cover the full field of view allowed by VR head mounted displays. The picture appears pixilated. Some progress has been done regarding motion sickness but it is far from being perfect.

The problem with AR display is just the opposite. The pixel density is fine but it is done at the expense of the field of view. The AR image appears only in a small window that covers partially your vision. Virtual objects appear suddenly in that window when you move around. There is not any suspension of disbelief making you fill you are surrounded with virtual element. For example, the video presenting AR on MS Hololens are misleading and will lead to great disappointment. In those video, they show only the field of view covered by the AR, not the full field of view of the person. Testing the device in real situation is a completely different experience and it is not as sexy for consumer applications. However it can be a powerful tool for professional usage..

 

[jayleaf]

To the gentleman who is glad to see 3D go away. What difference does it make to you if some people enjoyed a 3D movie on occasion. You didn't have to see 3D movies at the theater, or buy 3D movies or a 3D tv. Clearly it never had any impact on your life, so why does it matter so much to you that it's gone. Why is it so important to you that others who enjoyed it won't be able to in the future.

 

[bikdav]

The demise of 3D wasn't surprising to me either. You pretty much gave the best reasons why. Personally, I hated the the "powered" glasses that were needed to make this all work. The passive glasses were not as good. For some reason, no matter which ones I used, I would start to get a headache after just a few minutes.
Unrelated to the 3D subject, but maybe related to the demise subject, I do not see Dolby Atmos and DTS:x catching on. It seems that there are very few movie discs with either one on them. And, I have seen absolutely no music discs or downloads with Dolby Atmos or DTS:x. Also, as an owner of an Atmos receiver, it seems very involved and troublesome trying to get it all to work. I am starting to wonder. Are these two surround formats in trouble already and perhaps headed to graveyard?

 

[bikdav]

The last manufacturers of 3D TV, Sony and LG, are set to end production on 3D sets this year. But the demise of 3D TV has been a long time coming. As flat panel HDTV became more and more affordable, 3D may have been seen as a the killer feature that got customers buying a new round of premium priced TVs. But 3D, a side-show at best, was miscast as a premium feature, and studios did it no favors by launching a flood of mediocre 3D movies that did little to showcase the standard's strength. It's no wonder 3D has such a bad reputation with consumers. RIP 3D TV.

Read: The Death of 3D TV

You said it truly.

 

[panteragstk]

The demise of 3D wasn't surprising to me either. You pretty much gave the best reasons why. Personally, I hated the the "powered" glasses that were needed to make this all work. The passive glasses were not as good. For some reason, no matter which ones I used, I would start to get a headache after just a few minutes.
Unrelated to the 3D subject, but maybe related to the demise subject, I do not see Dolby Atmos and DTS:x catching on. It seems that there are very few movie discs with either one on them. And, I have seen absolutely no music discs or downloads with Dolby Atmos or DTS:x. Also, as an owner of an Atmos receiver, it seems very involved and troublesome trying to get it all to work. I am starting to wonder. Are these two surround formats in trouble already and perhaps headed to graveyard?

Doesn't need to catch on. I'm pretty sure mixing for BD is done with Atmos or DTS:X. There are still standard DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD tracks on those discs, but I've got quite a few Atmos BDs.

 

[Alain Singapore]

Dolby Amos and other similar "so many" speakers setup are only operational in dedicated home theatres and most impact is with the latest action movies. Ceiling shooting speakers don't work and most movies don't need ceiling speakers. That is leaving just a small market. Forget about music mixed in 7.4.2, it doesn't make much sense, technically and business wise. 5.2 or 5.3 delivers a pretty stunning experience with the right equipment. Sometime I am even wondering if 2.2 or 2.0 is still not the best and most magical setup. Consumer electronics companies are simply running out of options to feed our already overwhelmed senses.

 

[hmarkstrom]

The killer of 3D spells Ultra-HD. I have two Ultra-HD video cameras and watching those videos on a Ultra-HD TV gives a 3D experience. Watching Ultra-HD films like Mad Max Fury Road does not give you the same 3D experience because films go to fast for our eyes. Yes, Ultra-HD are on the edge of what our eyes can manage.

 

[Ferd Smurf]

3d never had any appeal to me so I won't shed a tear for it. I think virtual reality will be a major flop too. Just no way you are going to get anyone but a few fan boys to wear those bulky headsets. Even surround sound, as good and pervasive a technology as it is still is only being used with a minority of TV sets.

The home entertainment industry is too fractured pushing too many different and only partially implemented technologies. Sure free enterprise is great at bringing us lots of choices but the majority of buyers sit on the sidelines waiting to see what shakes out and what has staying power. People have been burned too many times by Quadraphonics, Betavision, LaserDisks, etc. Now we can add 3D TV, can Atmos be far behind?

 

[barfle]

I'll love my 3D movies for as long as my set holds out. But then I've loved my laser discs and quad records, too.

I guess that makes me unusual, but that's no surprise.

 

[olc]

3D TV is/was awful. I have tried to fix my settings so it never pops up again. It's annoying that it ever appears. It's such an artificial look I can't imagine a videophile would want it.

 

[Gary Eickmeier]

I bought a 3D Sony 55 incher and a 3D video camera. It is great fun both watching professional movies and making my own. It still seems to be popular at the movies, and the next logical step is to include it in the Blu-rays. What I would like to know is what is so exotic about including 3D circuitry in these already complex flat screen sets? Mine is 4k and 3D. Who wouldn't consider that desirable? You don't have to watch 3D all the time, but you have your choice. I bought many 3D Blu-rays and I enjoy them very much. I hope there will be a specialty market for this equipment and software.

 

[marcuslaw]

Well, anti-3D Audioholics must be happy. Yes, it appears that we might be witnessing the demise of the format. Or are we? I wouldn't be tapping your champagne glasses together just yet. Sure, most TV manufacturers are not supporting 3-D in their 2017 lines, but it continues to be included in their UHD players (and will likely always continued to be by King OPPO). I regret that studios hastily released a few bad post-conversions and manufactures many poor displays and clunky glasses, but times have changed. Post-conversions, while not true 3-D, have improved tremendously since Clash of the Titans. 3-D Archive continues to churn out quality restorations like 3-D Rarities and, most recently, September Storm. For every one bad Blu-ray 3-D disk you point out, I can list several that are good. Technology has greatly improved over the past 5 years to deliver us a cleaner and more immersive home video experience particular now with object based audio surround formats ATMOS and DTS:X. I'm optimistic though. As history has shown, 3-D will be back and probably better than ever. Long live 3-D.

 

[ritechie]

So glad the experts informed me that I no longer want to watch 3D movies. I’ve been confused. Imagine how silly I felt reaching for those re-boot Star Trek movies every few months, or the disreputable (female) Ghostbusters, and those animated films, Minions and Inside Out. I hate myself every time I think about the perverse enjoyment I got out of watching the Martian, Gravity, Pacific Rim, Godzilla, Edge of Tomorrow, and Guardians of the Galaxy from behind my 3D glasses. Clearly I have no idea about what features contribute to my movie watching pleasure. I feel so dirty deriving pleasure from these distorted exhibitions of inferior technology. Look for my listing on CL of my LG OLED 65” 3D and my JVC x500r. I’ll be trashing these monstrosities ASAP. Thanks for the guidance. I'm anxiously awaiting instruction on the next investments I should make in AV technology. After all, past advisories have been helpful.

[Too much sarcasm? Irony challenged? Yes, I'm acquiring 4K, 'cause I can see the impact of HDR, if not the resolution improvement. No, I'm not reconfiguring my rooms for ATMOS. Good luck selling still more channels. My rear and side channels already deceive my perception adequately. I've run out of wall space for a bigger screen. And, my collection of 3D will grow until the supply dries up. Funny, though, how my local IMAX has a steady supply of 3D films. What don't they know?]

 

[Brian Horvath]

To be honest I am not surprised that 3D is quickly fading. In the past few years, I have opted to go see a handful of movies in 3D at the theater, expecting it to enhance to experience. I should have saved my money. In every case, I have told myself "that was a waste". Seems like the only thing it really enhanced was the preview for upcoming "kids animated movies". At no time did I ever think "wish I had 3D at home". Oh well. Hence another format leaving us. I won't miss it.

 

[bruin62]

I really enjoy 3D in fact I have a 60 inch 3D tv and also a 3D projector. But of course Hollywood gives it a bad name by filming in 2D than converting to 3D. But if the so called experts say it's dead why are there companies out there remastering all the great old 3D movies? I have bought a bunch of the old ones like it came from outer space,gog, APE comes out this month and September storm. Plus I heard there talking to the Dukes family to hopefully remaster Houndo in 3D. These older 3D movies are fantastic and fun to watch

 

[bobbybluz]

I have a 65" Panasonic VT-30 plasma 3D TV. My reasons for buying it new had nothing to do with the 3D feature. The annoying glasses, short range of pickup for the active glasses to switch to 3D mode and mind-numbingly stupid choices in titles available for 3D has resulted in using the 3D function very little for me.

I have used the 2D to 3D feature and find it to be a nice gimmick but it's far more hassle than it's worth. With three additional 4K TV's in my collection now I very rarely watch the big 1080p 65" Panasonic anymore for things other than live auto racing.