3D TV's

[smouty]

I'll be whacking some pics up of it gaming tonight on my new telly thread if your interested

Definately

TBH I'm not that impressed with HD overall.
I pretty sure 3D will involve reduced framerates for both video and gaming which is something I'd rather avoid. The G20 for example already multi frames internally to compensate for video deficiencies.
Sceptically this is just a marketing gimmick to get people to replace their current equipment.

[Lyris]

The G20 for example already multi frames internally to compensate for video deficiencies.

Do you mean Intelligent Frame Creation? That's actually there so the marketing department can play the numbers game and shout louder than the LCD manufacturers. "You've got 200hz? We've got 600hz!"

Of course a Plasma doesn't need that sort of processing to show clear video.

[anephric]

IFC is the devil. Even the best interpolation I've seen on LCD has lots of nasty side effects.

[Matt]

IFC makes your quality shot feature films look like camcorder recordings. Horrible.

[maxnod]

I am considering the Sony 3D right now, but the price is too high, Do the TV programm be 3D in NEEEEEEEAR future, or I just wanna buy a huge money-wasting monster and wait for years for this new technology come out?

[elaniel]

I was literally on the verge to go buy a 3DTV, but reading a few comments here definitely makes me feel apprehensive (YAY! Saves me money).

I think I'll wait until it becomes properly adopted, and we don't have to wear glasses to play games / watch Blu-Rays.

Blu-Ray I got straight away, but the 3D TV, I think I can wait a bit for. Especially considering I'd have to buy a new receiver.

[charlesr]

No point in buying a 3D TV yet. The technology hasn't been decided.

For example, perhaps you'd like to have a TV that doesn't involve wearing stupid glasses

[BeyondJumpFish]

No point in buying a 3D TV yet. The technology hasn't been decided.

For example, perhaps you'd like to have a TV that doesn't involve wearing stupid glasses

Now thats more like it Mr Wayne!

[EvilBoris]

The actual 3D standard has been decided already, but TVs can implement it in anyway that they wish.

[Lyris]

There are some standards, but 3D TV is still a work in progress.
Importantly, if you buy a 3D TV now, you will be able to watch future 3D content on it. That part is nailed down. Of course, they'll come out with better 3D TVs - maybe ones without glasses.

Of course, there are standards in place for 2D TV (and there have been for some time), but manufacturers ignore them, requiring calibration to get the TV working properly - so you might question what difference having standards makes anyway.

[QualityChimp]

I was in the newly-opened Best Buy at Merry Hill on Saturday and checked out some of the 3D TVs.

No Sony, but Samsung and Panasonic were represented, especially the former.
(I saw the Panasonic demo stall last year and was stunned).

There seems to be a difference in the way they're displaying them though. Am I right in thinking Samsung use the system where the glasses are powered and quickly alternate between each of the lenses and the Panasonic uses the same as the cinema and it's basically a more advanced version of the old red and blue specs?

The Panny was showing Cloudy... and it looked h'amaze! The Samsungs were showing demo reels, but some of the glasses weren't working and there seemed to be slight ghosting.

To me, the Panny seemed the better option, but is their basic technology inferior to the Samsung system? £70 a pop for a pair of glasses, plus a transmitter on top of the price of the currently crazy expensive telly doesn't look like the best option.

I'm not sure why I'm so fussed about it, I'm not going to be getting one anytime soon, but I just don't want to buy a Betamax/HD-DVD/Minidisc!

[Flockheart]

I was in the newly-opened Best Buy at Merry Hill on Saturday and checked out some of the 3D TVs.

No Sony, but Samsung and Panasonic were represented, especially the former.
(I saw the Panasonic demo stall last year and was stunned).

There seems to be a difference in the way they're displaying them though. Am I right in thinking Samsung use the system where the glasses are powered and quickly alternate between each of the lenses and the Panasonic uses the same as the cinema and it's basically a more advanced version of the old red and blue specs?

The Panny was showing Cloudy... and it looked h'amaze! The Samsungs were showing demo reels, but some of the glasses weren't working and there seemed to be slight ghosting.

To me, the Panny seemed the better option, but is their basic technology inferior to the Samsung system? ?70 a pop for a pair of glasses, plus a transmitter on top of the price of the currently crazy expensive telly doesn't look like the best option.

I'm not sure why I'm so fussed about it, I'm not going to be getting one anytime soon, but I just don't want to buy a Betamax/HD-DVD/Minidisc!

I think Samsung and Panasonic both use the powered shutter glasses, the Panasonic I had a demo of definitly used shutter glasses but I've not tried a Samsung.

[EvilBoris]

All the 3D tvs use the same system of powered LCD shutter glasses

[QualityChimp]

I promise you, the Panasonic showing Cloudy... just had a handful of standard cinema 3D glasses.

One of them had a lens pop out and another was a cinema pair with "REAL 3D" on the side!

['Press Start']

Our brains calibrate to the images received by the eyes. I will be interested to see the long term health effect of people who are heavy 3D users.