@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;68637 wrote:Not at all.
The fact that a TV requires special equipment for it to work is going to make is less preferable to a TV that requires no special equipment. People don't like having to wear glasses just to watch the TV in their living rooms, especially when they are doing other things.
We've had 3d technology for decades and yet it's never really taken off.
We definitely have had 3D technology for decades. The trick is that TV technology has finally caught up to such a level that 3D won't give the viewer headaches after a half hour of watching. NTSC is 29.97Hz interlaced, so there's a flicker to begin with. When you split that again to do stereoscopic images, the flicker is unbearable. In movie theaters, they can use special equipment to overcome this (some use two projectors, others use high framerate projectors). We in TV land have had to deal with either watching 3D in red and blue or popping Advil like M&Ms. Now with 120Hz and 240Hz screens, you can shove two overlapping images onscreen fast enough to retain a crisp display.
As for the glasses, there really isn't a way around this. Something has to handle the stereoscopy or polarization on the user's end... something has to translate two 2D images into a proper 3D one. Anaglyphic, polarized and shuttered glasses are the best (and currently the only) way to do proper 3D. Its been that way for ages because that's how the illusion works... one eye is shown a slightly different image than the other, simulating a feel of depth in what you are seeing. The only other 3D is holographic, which has actual depth to its imagery.
Either make it or fake it, those are your only real choices.
If they make another 1, they better jive Jaws something other then paper teeth that can't bite a O2 can.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace