3D Spin at CES

[Francesco Bonomo]

Simple facts...

It costs the manufacturers of TV from nothing to very little to change HD sets manufacture to 3D, in a year or so you will only be able to get 3D sets.

Studios make more money from 3D releases.

It's a business...

No doubt about any of that, Geoff.
But is the availability of 3D technology enough? In Europe most 3D Tv is still very expensive: in some countries it's available only through Sky or similar services, and you pay a premium of 20-30€ per month just to get a few channels and for not-so-great content. In theatres you end up paying 3-5€ more.

Quote from the article I posted the link to earlier, re-posted from another thread in the off topic section:

"Over the recent holiday season, 3-D TV just didn’t sell — anywhere. DisplaySearch, the market research firm, recently downsized projections that 5 percent of TVs sold this year would be 3-D models; that number is now 2 percent."

and:

"the latest data from Nielsen confirmed that a majority of North American consumers might have become disenchanted with 3-D TV technology. Only 3 percent of consumers surveyed said they would definitely buy a 3-D set in the next year.

On the international level, a survey of more than 27,000 potential buyers found that less than one-quarter are likely buyers of 3-D sets, and less than 10 percent of consumers worldwide said they would be buying a 3-D set over the next year.

Most interesting, however, are the large number of potential buyers who seem to be openly opposed to owning a 3-D system. Nearly 60 percent of those surveyed said they would not be purchasing 3-D TV set."

I guess the real question, in the end, is: given the choice, will people choose to see 3D instead of "traditional" 2D? Do people really want 3D?

 

[geoffboyle]

3D production can be very expensive but that's just because at the moment very few people have the kit and they are milking the market for all they can get.

Its really hard to get 3D kit at the moment, that will change as Atoms with Epics and Neutron with Scarlet's are delivered and as 3Ality gets the TS5 with Epics out there.

We're in a situation at the moment where a piece of 3D kit that costs £2,500 to but rents out at £250 per day!

That will change and the people who charged like that will be remembered!

As the cost drops to much closer to 2D, and there's no reason it should cost much more, we will see more and more 3D production.

It took time for colour to take off, it took time for HD to take off, it'll take time.

The main thing is that for any producer with half a brain the future resale will be clear.

The cost of the TV's will plummet, Satellite TV will do what they normally do and stop milking the early adopters after they've got what they can and they'll drop the price.

People don't know that they want 3D but after they see good 3D, not gimmicky shit, they will want more.

The Mercedes 3D piece I shot has converted quite a few people, the comments are always something like " it's so natural, like looking out a window"

This is why I seem to have a running battle with the "old school" 3D guys, they want the sound to be loud, the colours garish and the 3D in your face.

I like it all backed off a bit, most of the time but I will be "in ya face" if the scene needs it.

 

[Francesco Bonomo]

It took time for colour to take off, it took time for HD to take off, it'll take time.

there are things that took off relatively quickly, others that never took off, others that were about to and then were forgotten. Only time will tell, I guess.

Tonight I was approached by a gentleman working for SkyIreland, on my way to the theater, and he wanted to sell me the "new" SkyHD box. In some countries SD is still the norm, HD is the new thing, and 3DTv's presence is almost non-existent. But, as you rightly said, things change, and I think we'll see lots of 3D content coming to our homes in the next few years, I believe sports could play a big part in that process as a selling point.

People don't know that they want 3D but after they see good 3D, not gimmicky shit, they will want more.

I'm sure that's exactly the point, but as long as 3D is seen (and used) as something to "enhance" the box office gross more than the storytelling, it'd be harder for people (both in the audience and behind the camera) to accept it. I still have to see a good 3D movie, and by that I don't mean a movie where 3D was used in a good way, I mean a movie that was truly good (I liked Avatar, but I don't think it was a masterpiece, and frankly it was just as good in 2D as it was in 3D, but that's probably just me).

The Mercedes 3D piece I shot has converted quite a few people, the comments are always something like " it's so natural, like looking out a window"

Would love to see it in 3D, Geoff. I'm sure 3D will be great for some things and not so great for others. I think it's always good to have choices...

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

With all due respect...

Simple facts...

It costs the manufacturers of TV from nothing to very little to change HD sets manufacture to 3D,

Not a fact.

a) It takes a lot of different cost affecting factors to switch to 3D capability, some of which are components like panel controllers with increased bandwidth, panels, glasses and other costs like licenses for example.

b) The cost of instant switch to manufacturer means loss of sales for lower priced models without the new feature, models which production number and sales target has been pre-determined and which affected defining component and manufacturing cost. If the predetermined sales numbers or lower featured TV sets are not reached company has a loss. Switch to higher featured models is dependent on production planning, a roadmap, and is not a short term thing.

in a year or so you will only be able to get 3D sets.

Also not a fact.

a) There will have to be more generations of products gradually enhancing features up to the level of even cheapest models having 3D capability - due to production plan and market/sales factors. One or two years is not enough. Even LED backlight is still not in every LCD TV. Because of those factors.

b) There will have to be enough widespread content and content providers for the demand, which draws sales, which draws product adaptation, based on production planning which is based on estimated figures, which affect component sales...etc etc...

c) 3D technology in current state has not passed multiple long term testing stages regarding its effect on human vision and mind.

 

[Stuart English]

3D sets

3D sets

I'm with Geoff on this one...

 

[Rich Schaefer]

The Mercedes 3D piece I shot has converted quite a few people, the comments are always something like " it's so natural, like looking out a window"

I have seen the "Mercedes" piece, it is fantastic! Eye candy!

I totally agree with Geoff's assessments.

Prost,
Rich

 

[geoffboyle]

Actually, they are facts.

I don't want to get into an argument here but a major manufacturer of TV's when questioned by me in a public forum about this agreed, there were over 50 people present.

Active 3D TV's need very little doing to them, any current HD TV with a fast enough refresh rate can be changed in manufacture for almost no cost, yes the passive sets cost a little more.

OK, they won't be selling 3D TV's to grannies in a year but anyone wanting anything other than a very basic set will only have sets that are 3D capable to chose from.

It's simple business.

 

[Jeff Coatney]

When prices drop across the product spectrum like they have been-- more than you would expect given the seemingly stabilized economy-- you know that they're making room in the supply chain for a fundamental product shift. This won't be "rapid" per se, but it's clear that the market is trending towards 3D capable televisions. At this point in history, given JIT manufacturing processes, the manufacturing sector can change fundamentally within a very short window. Months, not years. This goes for the future 4K televisions that will come soon.

 

[Eren Ozkural]

I'm not nearly the most experienced person on these boards but even I'm shooting Stereo 3D TV shows this year.

The demand is slowly building up, it depends on your clientele right now but pretty soon we'll get to the right balance between demand for product and equipment retail/rental prices for making stereo shooting more common place.

As a director/cinematographer and VFX artist I have to say that shooting stereo isn't daunting but post production (motion graphics and CG) is quite a headache. Some old compositing tricks dont work, render times are much longer etc.

Still, this push for Stereo 3D seems to have enough momentum and corporations behind it to make it worth adding Stereo shoots under your belt right now.

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

Actually, they are facts.

I don't want to get into an argument here but a major manufacturer of TV's when questioned by me in a public forum about this agreed, there were over 50 people present.

Active 3D TV's need very little doing to them, any current HD TV with a fast enough refresh rate can be changed in manufacture for almost no cost, yes the passive sets cost a little more.

OK, they won't be selling 3D TV's to grannies in a year but anyone wanting anything other than a very basic set will only have sets that are 3D capable to chose from.

It's simple business.

No one wants to argue, just the definition of "facts" may be tricky sometimes.

I have been to a "couple" of events like these over the years, and through different industries. In most cases it goes like this: company rep throws news, sometimes adds a roadmap, followed with drawbacks of prior products which once were "best", and competition products which are no good, all accompanied with some puff and fluff (in consumer segment, hence "popular", high-sales especially), to enhance hype and with it customer perception and expectations. In this case, regardless of was it CFO, CTO, Head of PR or someone beneath, it is highly unlikely that any of them would be in a position to say "NO, it's not that easy".

I'd respectfully suggest not taking a company rep's public answer to a question from a well known DOP, the answer which is somewhere along the lines of: "Of course, our company can do it easily and tomorrow" and presenting it as a fact.

We disagree on this, which is fine. We'll see how easy, cheap and fast can this company switch to that level and use this competitive advantage, which they haven't harvested so far. I also suggest checking same manufacturer's current product line and feature differences through it.

We agree that it's business, and expanding one.

Generally speaking, I'd be slightly careful with jumping to wide adoption of visual stimuli which has temporal or spacial offset to human vision, along with convergence mismatch and "a few" other ones, and justify it just because "it's business".

 

[Joseph Ward]

The way I see it, TV manufacturers are going to make all their TVs 3D capable no matter what. Significant demand or not, the technology is here, it's cheap and already being incorporated into their top end models now. No option to buy without. I can order a 50" Panny VT25 plasma from Amazon with free shipping for under $1900.

3D is not going anywhere. And I think the higher resolution displays are going to play another role in 3D tech in the next year or two. There's also electronically switching polarizer films and masks that are hitting the market now, meaning that TV's will be able to mask each frame of video as needed for polarized glasses, rather than being stuck with interlaced polarization patterns. Now we can do full frame, interlaced, checkerboard, etc.. With full frame polarization switching -- probably mainstream within 2 years, the active shutter glasses will go extinct.

DLP systems have had a polarizer wheel as part of the design for years. No one, has ever offered one though. Kinda weird. Probably because DLP are all but extinct for consumer TVs now that 3D took off.

Maybe Mitsubishi will later come with a polarizer wheel on thier laser, http://www.mitsubishi-tv.com/laser.html ,tv?

What I really want to compare is half res conventional passive polarized tv, to Passive Full HD 3D with higher pixle displays and/or RealD RDZ, http://www.reald.com/content/consumer-electronics.aspx , tech.

I think RealDs RDZ is going to be the winner until MultiView-Auto-Stereocopic-Dispays advance even more? Interesting times ahead!