Ask a question
Search in U-verse Forums

U-verse Forums

Reply
Posted Aug 15, 2011
6:36:54 PM
View profile
3D

WHEN IS ATT GOING TO START BROADCASTING ANY 3D CHANNELS? CANT WAIT. SUXX WITHOUT 3D Smiley Sad((

WHEN IS ATT GOING TO START BROADCASTING ANY 3D CHANNELS? CANT WAIT. SUXX WITHOUT 3D Smiley Sad((

3D

19,093 views
32 replies
(0) Me too
(0) Me too
Reply
View all replies
(32)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Aug 15, 2011 6:43:40 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Expert

You can make programming requests at the website below.

 

http://uversechannels.att.com/

You can make programming requests at the website below.

 

http://uversechannels.att.com/

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: 3D

2 of 33 (19,091 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Aug 15, 2011 6:50:32 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Professor

paulkucinskas wrote:

WHEN IS ATT GOING TO START BROADCASTING ANY 3D CHANNELS? CANT WAIT. SUXX WITHOUT 3D Smiley Sad((


In addition, AT&T U-Verse has dropped it's only 3D channel, ESPN 3D.

 

http://www.fierceiptv.com/story/espn-3d-picked-att-u-verse-bang-dropped-nary-whimper/2011-08-01


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.

Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.

paulkucinskas wrote:

WHEN IS ATT GOING TO START BROADCASTING ANY 3D CHANNELS? CANT WAIT. SUXX WITHOUT 3D Smiley Sad((


In addition, AT&T U-Verse has dropped it's only 3D channel, ESPN 3D.

 

http://www.fierceiptv.com/story/espn-3d-picked-att-u-verse-bang-dropped-nary-whimper/2011-08-01


Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.

Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: 3D

3 of 33 (19,085 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Aug 15, 2011 6:50:55 PM
0
(0)
Professor
They do have 3D on demand, right?
They do have 3D on demand, right?

Re: 3D

4 of 33 (19,084 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Aug 15, 2011 7:24:59 PM
0
(0)
Professor

paulkucinskas wrote:

WHEN IS ATT GOING TO START BROADCASTING ANY 3D CHANNELS? CANT WAIT. SUXX WITHOUT 3D Smiley Sad((


Really.  For your answer, when broadcasters decide that it is a good move, and probably will only be limited such as it is now.  Personally, I think that 3D will have to come a long way, before you see it mainstream, and probably never in our lifetime.

________________________________________________________________

"Ren: Now listen, Cadet. I've got a job for you. See this button? Don't touch it! It's the History Eraser button, you fool!

Stimpy: So what'll happen?

Ren: That's just it. We don't know. Maybe something bad, maybe something good. I guess we'll never know, 'cause you're going to guard it. You won't touch it, will you?"
________________________________________________________________

paulkucinskas wrote:

WHEN IS ATT GOING TO START BROADCASTING ANY 3D CHANNELS? CANT WAIT. SUXX WITHOUT 3D Smiley Sad((


Really.  For your answer, when broadcasters decide that it is a good move, and probably will only be limited such as it is now.  Personally, I think that 3D will have to come a long way, before you see it mainstream, and probably never in our lifetime.

________________________________________________________________

"Ren: Now listen, Cadet. I've got a job for you. See this button? Don't touch it! It's the History Eraser button, you fool!

Stimpy: So what'll happen?

Ren: That's just it. We don't know. Maybe something bad, maybe something good. I guess we'll never know, 'cause you're going to guard it. You won't touch it, will you?"
________________________________________________________________

Re: 3D

5 of 33 (19,068 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Aug 16, 2011 7:14:37 AM
0
(0)
Tutor

Agreed. It seems as though 3D is going the way it did the previous 3-4 times the entertainment industry has tried to cram it down the publics throat as the "next great thing." Meaning an initial success and an intense desire to have it, and then a gentle fade into obscurity. Its wont work until you don't need glasses and you don't get a massive headache from watching it for 3 minutes. Like you said. Probably not in our lifetime.

Agreed. It seems as though 3D is going the way it did the previous 3-4 times the entertainment industry has tried to cram it down the publics throat as the "next great thing." Meaning an initial success and an intense desire to have it, and then a gentle fade into obscurity. Its wont work until you don't need glasses and you don't get a massive headache from watching it for 3 minutes. Like you said. Probably not in our lifetime.

Re: 3D

6 of 33 (19,044 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Nov 13, 2011 7:44:24 AM
0
(0)
Tutor
Edited by quisp65 on Nov 13, 2011 at 7:49:02 AM

Uverse needs 3d for image if for no other reason. That's what Directv is thinking when they offer 3d and allow it for everyone to see. Directv is saying we're on top when it comes to content being offered.
Sometimes it's not about how much is sold.  Hardees a while back started introducing a healthy selection of sandwiches because they know the one person that needs to eat health food often influences where all the other people go for lunch. Having the sandwich helped increase Hardee's sales even though they expected it wouldn't sell much. Uverse needs to think about this more.  But then, come to think about it, they do have 3d on demand.  

Uverse needs 3d for image if for no other reason. That's what Directv is thinking when they offer 3d and allow it for everyone to see. Directv is saying we're on top when it comes to content being offered.
Sometimes it's not about how much is sold.  Hardees a while back started introducing a healthy selection of sandwiches because they know the one person that needs to eat health food often influences where all the other people go for lunch. Having the sandwich helped increase Hardee's sales even though they expected it wouldn't sell much. Uverse needs to think about this more.  But then, come to think about it, they do have 3d on demand.  

Re: 3D

[ Edited ]
7 of 33 (18,769 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Nov 13, 2011 8:45:32 AM
0
(0)
Tutor

i like 3d as well. it sucks they dropped espn 3d but there is shows on demand for purchase and free.

i like 3d as well. it sucks they dropped espn 3d but there is shows on demand for purchase and free.

Re: 3D

8 of 33 (18,749 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Nov 13, 2011 8:55:54 AM
0
(0)
Guru

I think most Uverse customers, if asked this:

"Which next service improvement would you like us to embark upon: (A) Improving your HD experience through better picture quality, number of HD channels available, or number of HD channels you can record/view; or, (B) Add comparable numbers of 3D TV services as our competitors?"

The resounding majority would be selecting (A).

 

And let's face it. AT&T had the ESPN behemoth doing its 3D. If people weren't somehow swayed by ESPN ...

I think most Uverse customers, if asked this:

"Which next service improvement would you like us to embark upon: (A) Improving your HD experience through better picture quality, number of HD channels available, or number of HD channels you can record/view; or, (B) Add comparable numbers of 3D TV services as our competitors?"

The resounding majority would be selecting (A).

 

And let's face it. AT&T had the ESPN behemoth doing its 3D. If people weren't somehow swayed by ESPN ...

Re: 3D

9 of 33 (18,747 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Nov 13, 2011 9:39:33 AM
0
(0)
Tutor
They have on demand 3d for free?
They have on demand 3d for free?

Re: 3D

10 of 33 (18,743 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Nov 13, 2011 5:52:40 PM
0
(0)
Expert
Edited by SomeJoe7777 on Nov 13, 2011 at 5:53:16 PM

Sports is one of the higher-demand types of programming. If ESPN can't get people to watch in 3D at a profitable level, it would seem unlikely that other 3D channels could possibly be profitable.

3D is currently simply a gimmick that doesn't offer any compelling value in increasing the viewing experience. On any standard TV provider like U-Verse or DirecTV, a 3D broadcast robs the picture of 1/2 the spatial resolution, requires uncomfortable glasses, and diminishes the color rendition and contrast because of the glasses' polarized lenses. This is a step backward in picture quality, not forward.

Sports is one of the higher-demand types of programming. If ESPN can't get people to watch in 3D at a profitable level, it would seem unlikely that other 3D channels could possibly be profitable.

3D is currently simply a gimmick that doesn't offer any compelling value in increasing the viewing experience. On any standard TV provider like U-Verse or DirecTV, a 3D broadcast robs the picture of 1/2 the spatial resolution, requires uncomfortable glasses, and diminishes the color rendition and contrast because of the glasses' polarized lenses. This is a step backward in picture quality, not forward.

Re: 3D

[ Edited ]
11 of 33 (16,968 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Nov 13, 2011 5:55:52 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Expert
Edited by RCSMG on Nov 13, 2011 at 5:56:43 PM

I agree SJ.  I have been trying to wrap my mind around the prospect of buying a tv that would diminish or having lesser pic quality.  I love the way HD looks and I am not willing to give up that quality for 3D.  At least not right now.

I agree SJ.  I have been trying to wrap my mind around the prospect of buying a tv that would diminish or having lesser pic quality.  I love the way HD looks and I am not willing to give up that quality for 3D.  At least not right now.

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: 3D

[ Edited ]
12 of 33 (16,964 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 1, 2012 3:51:43 PM
0
(0)
Contributor

Do you guys still really believe that by aquiring 3D capabilities you will have to forfit HD???  It is time to start researching rather than running with what you hear!  And to those that CRY about the headaches from 3D, remember that it is a problem with you and your eyes, because the other hundreds of thousands of people that are out there enjoying it dont happen to be on here crying.  And for the rest of the people out there that dont have it, there are 2 different types: Those who dont care and those who cant afford it!  So put your energy towards making and saving money for a new 3Dtv instead of sitting at the computer moaning about something that doesnt even concern you!  No one wants to hear it anyways!!!

 

On a positive note, I am enjoying my 50" 3Dtv in full 1080 and it is awesome!  I highly suggest passive so you dont pay an arm and a leg for shutter glasses that weigh too much and are uncomfortable.  My father was just as skeptical about 3D and picture quality and now they are loving it every night!  If you have noticed, for the last few years 3D has been becoming bigger and bigger and now nearly every top name movie is coming out in 3D at the theaters.  I dont think they would do that if it wasnt desired or better yet "profitable".  And to those that havent tried it at home yet, the 3D at home is far superior to that at the theater!!  I would happily pay for some channels in 3D!

Do you guys still really believe that by aquiring 3D capabilities you will have to forfit HD???  It is time to start researching rather than running with what you hear!  And to those that CRY about the headaches from 3D, remember that it is a problem with you and your eyes, because the other hundreds of thousands of people that are out there enjoying it dont happen to be on here crying.  And for the rest of the people out there that dont have it, there are 2 different types: Those who dont care and those who cant afford it!  So put your energy towards making and saving money for a new 3Dtv instead of sitting at the computer moaning about something that doesnt even concern you!  No one wants to hear it anyways!!!

 

On a positive note, I am enjoying my 50" 3Dtv in full 1080 and it is awesome!  I highly suggest passive so you dont pay an arm and a leg for shutter glasses that weigh too much and are uncomfortable.  My father was just as skeptical about 3D and picture quality and now they are loving it every night!  If you have noticed, for the last few years 3D has been becoming bigger and bigger and now nearly every top name movie is coming out in 3D at the theaters.  I dont think they would do that if it wasnt desired or better yet "profitable".  And to those that havent tried it at home yet, the 3D at home is far superior to that at the theater!!  I would happily pay for some channels in 3D!

Re: 3D

13 of 33 (16,332 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 1, 2012 6:38:47 PM
0
(0)
Mentor

What channels are you hoping to see in 3D? You do realize right now there are no stations that are not 3D that even broadcast in 1080P let alone filming anything in 3D. If all you care about are movies then there are plenty of movies to buy or rent in 3D but it will be a long time before any broadcast network does more than a few events in 3D.

What channels are you hoping to see in 3D? You do realize right now there are no stations that are not 3D that even broadcast in 1080P let alone filming anything in 3D. If all you care about are movies then there are plenty of movies to buy or rent in 3D but it will be a long time before any broadcast network does more than a few events in 3D.

Re: 3D

14 of 33 (16,308 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 1, 2012 7:24:06 PM
0
(0)
Expert

Galiathsgirl wrote:

Do you guys still really believe that by aquiring 3D capabilities you will have to forfit HD???  It is time to start researching rather than running with what you hear!  And to those that CRY about the headaches from 3D, remember that it is a problem with you and your eyes, because the other hundreds of thousands of people that are out there enjoying it dont happen to be on here crying.  And for the rest of the people out there that dont have it, there are 2 different types: Those who dont care and those who cant afford it!  So put your energy towards making and saving money for a new 3Dtv instead of sitting at the computer moaning about something that doesnt even concern you!  No one wants to hear it anyways!!!

 

On a positive note, I am enjoying my 50" 3Dtv in full 1080 and it is awesome!  I highly suggest passive so you dont pay an arm and a leg for shutter glasses that weigh too much and are uncomfortable.  My father was just as skeptical about 3D and picture quality and now they are loving it every night!  If you have noticed, for the last few years 3D has been becoming bigger and bigger and now nearly every top name movie is coming out in 3D at the theaters.  I dont think they would do that if it wasnt desired or better yet "profitable".  And to those that havent tried it at home yet, the 3D at home is far superior to that at the theater!!  I would happily pay for some channels in 3D!


 

Hi one-post wonder.  Welcome to a forum where people are actually informed.  I'll be happy to teach you a few things.

 

1. Yes, 3D from a TV provider (like U-Verse or DirecTV) robs the picture of 1/2 of the spatial resolution.  That is a fact.  ESPN3D is broadcast at 1280x360 per eye, which is HALF the spatial resolution of the normal ESPN HD broadcast of 1280x720.

 

2. A total of about 1.1 million 3D TV sets have been sold, but the number of 3D Blu-Ray players and 3D provider subscriptions is a mere fraction of that.  That puts 3D viewing in the home in the few hundred thousand sets range.  Considering there are hundreds of millions of TV sets in the country, that puts the penetration rate down around 0.1%.  That's not even scratching the surface of the required sales to make the technology economically viable.

 

3. Your elitist attitude of "you either don't care or can't afford it" is presumptuous and offensive.  I and many others could easily afford how ever many 3D sets we think we would need, use, or want.  The number of them that I need, could use, or want is exactly zero.  Not because I don't care, but because my 2D LCoS TV produces an infinitely better picture.

 

4. Your 50" 3DTV can produce full 1080 3D only from Blu-Ray.  If you think you're getting full 1080 from any other source, you're sadly mistaken.  In addition, there are a grand total of less than 150 titles available in 3D on Blu-Ray.

 

5. I have personally viewed several different 3D TVs, with both the polarization technology (passive glasses) as well as alternate-shutter technology (active glasses).  I was impressed with neither.  In both cases, the loss of brightness and contrast is significant, and the color space is skewed as compared to 2D viewing.  The glasses make it impossible to properly calibrate the TV to ISF standards since the calibrated picture never reaches your eyes, but instead is altered by the glasses.  In addition, the 3D effect is minimal, adding significant depth to the objects in the frame only rarely, and when it does, it looks artificial and forced -- so far away from a natural scene as to be distracting.  And this is of course, expected.  Human eyes use two pieces of information to determine object distance: The parallax error from each eye, and the focal distance from lens accomodation.  It turns out that the latter is actually more significant to the brain, but all current 3D technologies only feed depth information to you via the former.  This is why it "doesn't look right".

 

6. The 3D wave of movies in the theater has slowed down significantly.  Hollywood has not seen significant draws to theaters solely because of 3D showings, and in fact on some films have lost sales because various people won't go see the film in 3D.

 

7. AT&T U-Verse carried ESPN3D for over a year, priced at $10.00 per month.  Sales were so low that AT&T pulled the channel.  If people won't pay to watch sports in 3D, what evidence is there that they will watch anything else in 3D?

 

Now that you have the facts, maybe you can think about those things whilst you also check your attitude at the door.

 


Galiathsgirl wrote:

Do you guys still really believe that by aquiring 3D capabilities you will have to forfit HD???  It is time to start researching rather than running with what you hear!  And to those that CRY about the headaches from 3D, remember that it is a problem with you and your eyes, because the other hundreds of thousands of people that are out there enjoying it dont happen to be on here crying.  And for the rest of the people out there that dont have it, there are 2 different types: Those who dont care and those who cant afford it!  So put your energy towards making and saving money for a new 3Dtv instead of sitting at the computer moaning about something that doesnt even concern you!  No one wants to hear it anyways!!!

 

On a positive note, I am enjoying my 50" 3Dtv in full 1080 and it is awesome!  I highly suggest passive so you dont pay an arm and a leg for shutter glasses that weigh too much and are uncomfortable.  My father was just as skeptical about 3D and picture quality and now they are loving it every night!  If you have noticed, for the last few years 3D has been becoming bigger and bigger and now nearly every top name movie is coming out in 3D at the theaters.  I dont think they would do that if it wasnt desired or better yet "profitable".  And to those that havent tried it at home yet, the 3D at home is far superior to that at the theater!!  I would happily pay for some channels in 3D!


 

Hi one-post wonder.  Welcome to a forum where people are actually informed.  I'll be happy to teach you a few things.

 

1. Yes, 3D from a TV provider (like U-Verse or DirecTV) robs the picture of 1/2 of the spatial resolution.  That is a fact.  ESPN3D is broadcast at 1280x360 per eye, which is HALF the spatial resolution of the normal ESPN HD broadcast of 1280x720.

 

2. A total of about 1.1 million 3D TV sets have been sold, but the number of 3D Blu-Ray players and 3D provider subscriptions is a mere fraction of that.  That puts 3D viewing in the home in the few hundred thousand sets range.  Considering there are hundreds of millions of TV sets in the country, that puts the penetration rate down around 0.1%.  That's not even scratching the surface of the required sales to make the technology economically viable.

 

3. Your elitist attitude of "you either don't care or can't afford it" is presumptuous and offensive.  I and many others could easily afford how ever many 3D sets we think we would need, use, or want.  The number of them that I need, could use, or want is exactly zero.  Not because I don't care, but because my 2D LCoS TV produces an infinitely better picture.

 

4. Your 50" 3DTV can produce full 1080 3D only from Blu-Ray.  If you think you're getting full 1080 from any other source, you're sadly mistaken.  In addition, there are a grand total of less than 150 titles available in 3D on Blu-Ray.

 

5. I have personally viewed several different 3D TVs, with both the polarization technology (passive glasses) as well as alternate-shutter technology (active glasses).  I was impressed with neither.  In both cases, the loss of brightness and contrast is significant, and the color space is skewed as compared to 2D viewing.  The glasses make it impossible to properly calibrate the TV to ISF standards since the calibrated picture never reaches your eyes, but instead is altered by the glasses.  In addition, the 3D effect is minimal, adding significant depth to the objects in the frame only rarely, and when it does, it looks artificial and forced -- so far away from a natural scene as to be distracting.  And this is of course, expected.  Human eyes use two pieces of information to determine object distance: The parallax error from each eye, and the focal distance from lens accomodation.  It turns out that the latter is actually more significant to the brain, but all current 3D technologies only feed depth information to you via the former.  This is why it "doesn't look right".

 

6. The 3D wave of movies in the theater has slowed down significantly.  Hollywood has not seen significant draws to theaters solely because of 3D showings, and in fact on some films have lost sales because various people won't go see the film in 3D.

 

7. AT&T U-Verse carried ESPN3D for over a year, priced at $10.00 per month.  Sales were so low that AT&T pulled the channel.  If people won't pay to watch sports in 3D, what evidence is there that they will watch anything else in 3D?

 

Now that you have the facts, maybe you can think about those things whilst you also check your attitude at the door.

 

Re: 3D

15 of 33 (16,297 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 1, 2012 8:26:22 PM
0
(0)
Scholar
Well said Joe. I love sports, love 3D movies, and had ESPN3D, but the technology just isn't there yet. I found watching it to be very uncomfortable and the picture was not better than its HD counterpart.
Well said Joe. I love sports, love 3D movies, and had ESPN3D, but the technology just isn't there yet. I found watching it to be very uncomfortable and the picture was not better than its HD counterpart.

Re: 3D

16 of 33 (16,285 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 2, 2012 4:22:58 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

Bravo SJ.  I agree 100% with your post and I personally can't wait for this 3D fad to go away.....again.  Very few movies are shot in 3D which is the only way to truly get the full experience.  Most are shot in 2D and converted.  Not worth it.  My wife gets head aches watching 3D so we don't go to the movies to see 3D and I haven't been impressed with them and IMO they aren't worth the extra money.  I have also posted enough links proving that 3D is a passing fad.

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway

Bravo SJ.  I agree 100% with your post and I personally can't wait for this 3D fad to go away.....again.  Very few movies are shot in 3D which is the only way to truly get the full experience.  Most are shot in 2D and converted.  Not worth it.  My wife gets head aches watching 3D so we don't go to the movies to see 3D and I haven't been impressed with them and IMO they aren't worth the extra money.  I have also posted enough links proving that 3D is a passing fad.

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: 3D

17 of 33 (16,268 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 2, 2012 2:36:44 PM
0
(0)
Scholar

I'm hoping 3D will not be a part of our life in the near future.  I don't want to have to purchase a 3D HDTV and a 3D Blu-ray DVD player if most of the channels start broadcasing in 3D.  I already put a lot of money down on an HDTV and a Blu-ray DVD player three years ago, I don't want to upgrade again soon if ever.

I'm hoping 3D will not be a part of our life in the near future.  I don't want to have to purchase a 3D HDTV and a 3D Blu-ray DVD player if most of the channels start broadcasing in 3D.  I already put a lot of money down on an HDTV and a Blu-ray DVD player three years ago, I don't want to upgrade again soon if ever.

iPhone 5S Verizon Wireless

Re: 3D

18 of 33 (16,232 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Apr 20, 2012 7:03:07 AM
0
(0)
Contributor

I probably am not as informed as some and more informed than some here when it comes to parts, but it is my understanding that the 2D viewing on a TV that is equipped with 3D is frequently better than a 2D only TV cause it has better processing, frequently has a faster refresh rate, contrast and the like.  We bought a 55" Samsung 7050 from costco, and I can tell you that next to all the other TV's there, the 2D picture was just better, clearer, and sharper.  I have yet to experiment much with 3D, other than turning on the 2D to 3D function for a minute or two, which I thought was cool cause it added a small amount of depth.  Honestly the glasses it came with are very comfortable and light, definitely more so than the ones they give you in the theaters.  As far as passive vs active, I would think active is better since the passive looses resolution from the TV regardless of the resolution of input.  I will definitely be checking out the 3D on demand soon, and will invest in a 3D blu-ray player when I find a good deal on one.  But I would love to see 3D programming improve.  With the rate resolution and quality has improved over the past 12 years from analog CRT to digital CRT and the levels of HD, and the broadcast world being about 1 step behind the whole time, I would love a good in home 3D experience as the broadcast market advances!

Oh and I chose A as well, can't wait for 6 feeds into the house rather than our current 4, and more HD feeds, we frequently run into conflicts with several family members watching shows and recording shows.

TJ

I probably am not as informed as some and more informed than some here when it comes to parts, but it is my understanding that the 2D viewing on a TV that is equipped with 3D is frequently better than a 2D only TV cause it has better processing, frequently has a faster refresh rate, contrast and the like.  We bought a 55" Samsung 7050 from costco, and I can tell you that next to all the other TV's there, the 2D picture was just better, clearer, and sharper.  I have yet to experiment much with 3D, other than turning on the 2D to 3D function for a minute or two, which I thought was cool cause it added a small amount of depth.  Honestly the glasses it came with are very comfortable and light, definitely more so than the ones they give you in the theaters.  As far as passive vs active, I would think active is better since the passive looses resolution from the TV regardless of the resolution of input.  I will definitely be checking out the 3D on demand soon, and will invest in a 3D blu-ray player when I find a good deal on one.  But I would love to see 3D programming improve.  With the rate resolution and quality has improved over the past 12 years from analog CRT to digital CRT and the levels of HD, and the broadcast world being about 1 step behind the whole time, I would love a good in home 3D experience as the broadcast market advances!

Oh and I chose A as well, can't wait for 6 feeds into the house rather than our current 4, and more HD feeds, we frequently run into conflicts with several family members watching shows and recording shows.

TJ

Re: 3D

19 of 33 (15,899 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Jun 14, 2013 12:07:09 AM
0
(0)
Scholar
Edited by CostaMesaCAGuy on Jun 14, 2013 at 12:07:41 AM

Here's an Associated Press article on the death of ESPN 3D.  The article mentions that ultrahigh definition TVs might have a better chance.

 

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/3-d-tv-falls-flat-espn-kill-3-d-broadcasts

Here's an Associated Press article on the death of ESPN 3D.  The article mentions that ultrahigh definition TVs might have a better chance.

 

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/3-d-tv-falls-flat-espn-kill-3-d-broadcasts

iPhone 5S Verizon Wireless

Re: 3D

[ Edited ]
20 of 33 (3,996 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 19, 2014 10:42:54 AM
0
(0)
Teacher
Edited by philline on Mar 19, 2014 at 10:45:32 AM

@SomeJoe7777 YOU call the person 'One Post Wonder' and uninformed. You come across as a self-proclaimed expert, well, the ones here that are actually educated on the subject know how much you lack in expertise. I would take it step by step, but you wouldn't believe me anyway since you have a vast amount of knowledge on the subject.

Just for kicks, go to YouTube on a good 3D TV, search for Extreme 3d, and ruin everything you know. Then, switch to 2D HD mode, and watch something in normal HD and tell me 2D on a 3D TV is an inferior picture. Of course, you really can't share with a very opinionated person.

@SomeJoe7777 YOU call the person 'One Post Wonder' and uninformed. You come across as a self-proclaimed expert, well, the ones here that are actually educated on the subject know how much you lack in expertise. I would take it step by step, but you wouldn't believe me anyway since you have a vast amount of knowledge on the subject.

Just for kicks, go to YouTube on a good 3D TV, search for Extreme 3d, and ruin everything you know. Then, switch to 2D HD mode, and watch something in normal HD and tell me 2D on a 3D TV is an inferior picture. Of course, you really can't share with a very opinionated person.

Re: 3D

[ Edited ]
21 of 33 (1,038 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 19, 2014 10:54:14 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

Uhhhhhh....you do realize the post you take issue with is a year old, right?  And as far as I can tell, a lot of what Somejoe said has come to fruition.

 

Did you buy a 3D TV and now you're bitter that programming has slowed to a trickle?

Uhhhhhh....you do realize the post you take issue with is a year old, right?  And as far as I can tell, a lot of what Somejoe said has come to fruition.

 

Did you buy a 3D TV and now you're bitter that programming has slowed to a trickle?

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: 3D

22 of 33 (1,028 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 19, 2014 12:06:10 PM
0
(0)
Scholar

Super High Def is is the next big thing 3D TV's bombed out i know movie theaters still do 3D that were it should be IMO . 

Super High Def is is the next big thing 3D TV's bombed out i know movie theaters still do 3D that were it should be IMO . 

Re: 3D

23 of 33 (1,017 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 19, 2014 1:43:15 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

@philline 

Considering SomeJoe's profession, he probably knows more about this than just about everyone on these forums, including the AT&T employees.  You readily admit your an opinionated person, so again, it's your opinion that 2D on a 3D tv is better. The masses disagree with you. 3D tvs are a dying fad. Even makers of TV agree.

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway

@philline 

Considering SomeJoe's profession, he probably knows more about this than just about everyone on these forums, including the AT&T employees.  You readily admit your an opinionated person, so again, it's your opinion that 2D on a 3D tv is better. The masses disagree with you. 3D tvs are a dying fad. Even makers of TV agree.

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: 3D

24 of 33 (1,005 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 19, 2014 2:46:11 PM
0
(0)
Teacher
Edited by philline on Mar 19, 2014 at 2:49:06 PM

The interesting part that you must remember that the 'masses' you speak of that disagree, have NEVER owned a 3D TV. And a good deal of 3D TV owners haven't purchased a 3D player yet. This is probably due to the high prices of 3D BLU RAY players, even though Sams Club has a Sony player that is very nice for only $78. So, it's easy to be an authority if you have never owned one. I own one, and I'm still not an authority, nor do I try to come across as one. Just though I'd clear that up. I just find it strange that all the people that bash things on forums usually have never owned the product they are bashing. I'm no opinionated except for what I actually own compared to the HDTV that I replaced. And yes, if you call me opinionated for making a statement to someone that starts out bashing someone by calling them 'One Post Wonder' in the first line...... well you stated your opion about me. So be it.

The interesting part that you must remember that the 'masses' you speak of that disagree, have NEVER owned a 3D TV. And a good deal of 3D TV owners haven't purchased a 3D player yet. This is probably due to the high prices of 3D BLU RAY players, even though Sams Club has a Sony player that is very nice for only $78. So, it's easy to be an authority if you have never owned one. I own one, and I'm still not an authority, nor do I try to come across as one. Just though I'd clear that up. I just find it strange that all the people that bash things on forums usually have never owned the product they are bashing. I'm no opinionated except for what I actually own compared to the HDTV that I replaced. And yes, if you call me opinionated for making a statement to someone that starts out bashing someone by calling them 'One Post Wonder' in the first line...... well you stated your opion about me. So be it.

Re: 3D

[ Edited ]
25 of 33 (988 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 19, 2014 4:02:25 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

I'd never watch 3D because I ain't wearing the glasses.   Smiley Frustrated

I'd never watch 3D because I ain't wearing the glasses.   Smiley Frustrated

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: 3D

26 of 33 (976 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 19, 2014 6:23:08 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

You know why they don't have a 3D tv because the don't WANT one.  I have had several chances to purchase one, but couldn't stand the picture quality on non-3D programming.  Sam's club, Costco, Target, it doesn't matter, I bought a 60" tv recently and made sure it was one WITHOUT 3D as have most people who were looking at the time.  Very few 3D movies are worth watching in 3D even in the theater and certainly not worth the extra money that they charge.  Avatar and Tron2 were filmed in 3D and they weren't bad, but still not worth the money.  You can tout 3D all you want, facts don't lie and 3D will be allowed to go away.

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway

You know why they don't have a 3D tv because the don't WANT one.  I have had several chances to purchase one, but couldn't stand the picture quality on non-3D programming.  Sam's club, Costco, Target, it doesn't matter, I bought a 60" tv recently and made sure it was one WITHOUT 3D as have most people who were looking at the time.  Very few 3D movies are worth watching in 3D even in the theater and certainly not worth the extra money that they charge.  Avatar and Tron2 were filmed in 3D and they weren't bad, but still not worth the money.  You can tout 3D all you want, facts don't lie and 3D will be allowed to go away.

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: 3D

27 of 33 (956 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 19, 2014 7:14:56 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

Someday, when 3D TV is mentioned, we will look back and put it in the same category as 8 track and VHS tapes.

 

"Hey, remember when they tried 3D TV but no one wanted to wear those dumb glasses?"

Someday, when 3D TV is mentioned, we will look back and put it in the same category as 8 track and VHS tapes.

 

"Hey, remember when they tried 3D TV but no one wanted to wear those dumb glasses?"

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: 3D

28 of 33 (925 Views)
Highlighted
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Mar 19, 2014 7:58:30 PM
0
(0)
ACE - Expert
Edited by JefferMC on Mar 19, 2014 at 8:01:44 PM

For many people, trying to view the 3D effects causes headaches and/or nausea.

 

This attempt at 3D technology is dead.  Until the technology vastly improves for another try, I think we're just going to see more and more 2D pixels.

 

And to the poster attacking SomeJoe7777: He posted factual information to support his assertions, detailing why he said 3D had less picture information, etc.  I challenge you to debunk his assertions with actual research of your own.

 

For many people, trying to view the 3D effects causes headaches and/or nausea.

 

This attempt at 3D technology is dead.  Until the technology vastly improves for another try, I think we're just going to see more and more 2D pixels.

 

And to the poster attacking SomeJoe7777: He posted factual information to support his assertions, detailing why he said 3D had less picture information, etc.  I challenge you to debunk his assertions with actual research of your own.

 

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: 3D

[ Edited ]
29 of 33 (915 Views)
0
(0)
  • Rate this reply
View profile
Apr 10, 2014 3:49:09 AM
0
(0)
ACE - Master

rt123 wrote:

Super High Def is is the next big thing 3D TV's bombed out i know movie theaters still do 3D that were it should be IMO . 


I wouldn't count on that.  Most networks have no plan to convert to UHD/4K due to it being way to expensive.  An article from back in March says that ABC has no plans to change and stated they just finished converting some of their channels to HD.

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway

rt123 wrote:

Super High Def is is the next big thing 3D TV's bombed out i know movie theaters still do 3D that were it should be IMO . 


I wouldn't count on that.  Most networks have no plan to convert to UHD/4K due to it being way to expensive.  An article from back in March says that ABC has no plans to change and stated they just finished converting some of their channels to HD.

” Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports … all others are games.”- Ernest Hemingway
*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.

Re: 3D

30 of 33 (736 Views)
Advanced
You must be signed in to add attachments
Share this post
Share this post