Quite possible. I kinda remember that, but not his screen name. However, that is just one angry singer vs a chorus of angry anti-3D posters.Personally I thought that the major pro-3D poster sounded the angriest of anybody.
ESPN 3D Shutting Down at Years End
- Thread starter Scherrman
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 74
- Views 10K
Or, on this forum, you are called a "hater" for no apparent (to me) reason, other than you are the bearer of bad news such as ESPN 3D shutting down.
All are very good points.
Requiring glasses was probably the biggest turnoff. This was especially true of the proprietary, active models prevalent at the beginning. The manufacturers really shot themselves in the foot by not starting out with inexpensive, passive, universal glasses. I think you would have seen higher acceptance from consumers. Some now have passive glasses. But, it's too little, too late.
The earlier high prices for 3D displays, source devices, and content, also turned people off. (The same thing almost killed blu-ray at the beginning.)
It's a shame, as it was a very promising technology.
The word "hater" is too easily thrown around on almost any topic. Just pointing out something's negative points in a logical and rational way, or delivering bad news about a thing, does not a hater make. But, there are a number of folks at SatGuys who deserve that moniker when it comes to this topic.
Hater is used quite a bit. I personally dont care if it makes it or doesnt, its built into most displays but that doesnt hurt me. I do get irritated when people make it out to be bigger than it actually is because they like it so much (no better than the "haters"), when it is really small in the grand scheme of things. Then dont get me started on the filmed in 2D and converted stuff. Reminds when folks actually thought HDDVD had a chance.
Dont pee on my head and tell me its raining.
I have a Toshiba 3-d tv and the only reason why we bought it over a year and a half ago was due to price. It was simply cheaper and had better video perks. We watched one movie in true 3-d and it was Captain America pay per view on DISH. We watched some shows in simulated 3-d in the past ,but quickly stopped. The glasses are a real pain in the EARS. Now if they had come out with passive 3-d withOUT the glasses , I think it would of been different. But you add the glasses to the higher cost of having a 3 -d tv when it first came out, so soon on the heels of the digital transition we all had in 2010 , and you can see why it didn't catch on. There is simply not enough difference in picture quality coming from HD to 3-d, as opposed to coming from SD to HD . People aren't going to spend extra for this feature ,and that is why 3-d tvs are so cheap now to buy. Mine was under $900.00 for a 46" 3-D hdtv. Besides now the industry has moved on to 4K! The newest thing to get people to unass some more money for the latest new fad. This too will fail, because the only difference in picture quality from HD to 4k is too subtle to see ,unless you have 60" or bigger screen. That and once again there is NO 4k content to be had right now and there is NO demand either. The whole" what comes first the chicken or the egg scenario" comes into play. The industry won't create new content unless their is a demand from the public and the public won't buy a 4k tv unless it is first value priced and their is content to watch on it.
How true -- there was a post here about ESPN-3D shutting down several days ago. It got moved to the 3D forum (a place I had never visited on this site), where some of us continued the discussion with our thoughts on the ESPN move and the merits of the technology in general. Then we got bawled out by a moderator who shut down the thread, calling us trolls for being critical of 3D. That was an interesting Catch-22 -- threads critical of 3D here get moved to the 3D forum by one moderator, where they are promptly shut down by another moderator who says we are trouble-making outsiders and are not welcome there.
Lots of really good points made here. In reading the review in the current issue of Home Theater Magazine of the stellar Panasonic ST60, which many consider the bang for the buck champ for 2013, the reviewer mentioned that the 3D was very good but a bit too dim and mentioned that the 3D glasses (active) sold for $49pr. I went out of my way to buy a passive 3D TV because from what I've seen in stores the passive was just as good with ($10 glasses). I wear the 3D glasses over my regular glasses and don't even think about them while watching a movie. I don't know what the future of 4K is but it will provide a much brighter picture and deliver 1080P to each eye in a passive 3D TV. With the studios pumping out an average of 40 new 3D movies each year and all being released on blu-ray 3D, they must think there is a market out there.
:
Well this sound's like Charlie may have been right about there just wasn't enough reason to have 3D. That Dish would wait and see sounds like smart thinking on his part. I really feel that 3D is more something that needs to be experienced in the large screen that immerses one in the picture.
There is definitely a market, just nothing near the level of the initial hype. I've never had anything against 3D, I just have never believed it was the "next big thing." I've also never believed it was going to go away. Too many folks line up on one side or the other of the argument as if there is no middle ground. It is a fairly sizable niche, and will be a permanent part of the environment.
I do wonder how many of the theatrical 3D sales are by folks that don't really care about it - either they are with someone who wants 3D, the 2D is sold out, or the show time they need is the 3D version, etc. Studios don't care as long as they get their share of the higher ticket price.
WOW, I just went to that thread. It's sad that it was closed down for "trolling". I do enjoy going to a theater and watching 3D movies on the big screen. It makes it more of an event since I only go to watch the big releases. But honestly 3D is a niche, and as long as someone has to wear glasses to enjoy it, it will never become big for home viewing. Yes, that's my opinion, but the lack of 3D broadcasts kind of confirms it.
I've even stopped watching 3-D at the movies since it adds too much to the price of each ticket. I have always felt it was a fad like it was in the 50s and then the 80s and now in the teens. It comes around every 30 years and goes again. Now if they can make it a passive experience you can watch without glasses , it may find a home. But till then it will simply be a fad.
Just like there are the 3D fanboys who refuse to accept news stories or studies about the continuing demise / decline of 3DTV.
Liking 3D is a matter of choice. You like it or you don't. If you like it, it does not make you wrong for liking it.
I like Coke and hate Pepsi.
The 3D forum is a place for those who like 3D to discuss it, not a place who hate 3D to go in and say how much they hate 3D.
If I would have saw this topic the other day I probably have closed it since its not really a DISH topic since DISH never carried ESPN 3D.
Also I said it before ESPN had a lot to do with the demise of ESPN 3D as most providers charge $9 to $12 a month for the one channel. Even if you are a 3D fan that was too much to pay for a channel which was showing basketball games from 2 years ago in 3D.
I like Coke and hate Pepsi.
The 3D forum is a place for those who like 3D to discuss it, not a place who hate 3D to go in and say how much they hate 3D.
If I would have saw this topic the other day I probably have closed it since its not really a DISH topic since DISH never carried ESPN 3D.
Also I said it before ESPN had a lot to do with the demise of ESPN 3D as most providers charge $9 to $12 a month for the one channel. Even if you are a 3D fan that was too much to pay for a channel which was showing basketball games from 2 years ago in 3D.
But Scott, it was said that the thread was moved to the 3D forum and not started there. It really limits debate when a thread like that is moved to a pro-format forum. There must be a better forum to have moved it to.
