Add Product

Search Results:

    By submitting an idea to IdeaX, you agree to our Terms & Conditions.    
0 Votes

A solution to 2D/3D coexistence

Status: Acknowledged
by tripletopper on ‎03-25-2019 09:12 PM

Please forward this to Insignia, Dynex, Rocketfish, or some other appropriate Best Buy Brand

Up until 2012 3D was being added to enough TVs where there was a bunch of reasonable choices. Then the 2013 Super Bowl 3D was cancelled, and 3D TVs were declining.

I think the market was misread.

3D TVs were moved to bigger, more expensive, and 4K TVs, and caused a twin problem.   Most people who wanted 3D didn’t want to be limited to the biggest, most expensive screen as their only option.  Likewise most big spenders on 4K TVs tended to be more 3D haters and went one step down, sometimes even paying more, just to avoid 3D. it gave the expensive 3D TV a simultaneous 3D Stink to 4K buyers and a big bucks stink that turned off 3D buyers.

What was the number one 3D TV model of all time?  Without looking at the numbers, I would say the Playstation 3D Display for many reasons.   First it was the cheapest 3D TV ever.  Starting at $500 and eventually went down to $180 while simultaneously selling out everywhere.  Second it was a 24 inch TV which appealed to gamers because it was 1080p for more detail, and considered the perfect size for gaming:  Big enough to focus on a specific detail, yet small enough to get the whole picture when you want to scan.  It also came in handy if you wanted to have a 3D, but your currently TV is perfectly fine, and you were not in the market for a new main TV, but wanted a separate 3D TV, just to get 3D.

My dad bought a Sony TV in 2009, before 3D was available in Sony.   It’s ten years later, and when it breaks down, there’s no opportunity to upgrade to a 3D TV.   Dad missed out because no reason to throw out a perfectly good TV just to add 3D.

For people like my dad, and plus the fact that 3D viewers can’t agree on one model of TV, plus making a single model is making that model really unpopular among 3D haters, if there was a way you can turn any 2D TV into a 3D would be the perfect solution.  Pick any 2D TV you want, any brand, 15 inches to 10 inchesl, 720p to 2160p, 24 bit color to 36 bit color, 60 Hz for 480 Hz, highly processed pictures for movies, or sub 1 ms ping time for games, any physical display technology, budget to luxury, and add 3D with an External 3D adapter.   The model of selling a 3D adapter would be similar to adding a Surround Sound system to any TV you have.  You can buy giant speakers, or you can buy surround sound encoded headphones, or you can settle for the default speakers.

Is there a way you can add 3D to an existing 2D TV?  Well there is, and the technology is no longer patented.  The Sega Master System SegaScope 3D take a Sega Master System and let you play 3D games.   And the funny thing is that every TV available at the time cable turned any TV into a 3D TV, any brand, any size, RF, Composite or RGB connection, albeit for those limited Sega games.  They just use either a 240p x 30fps x 2 eye or a 480i x 15 fps x 2 eye. They alternate frames and sync the classes with the video.  With ping time of under 1 mcs, the glasses don’t need a sync signal.  If the Sega Scope 3D TV technology can be used, then any TV can be a shutter-based 3D.  And I believe shutter 3D is superior to Polar 3D.  There are more instances of 3D sickness and confusion with polar 3D vs shutter 3D.

It’s a lot cheaper, easier, and less laborious to add Sutter 3D to a non-shutter TV vs adding polar 3D to a non poplar 3D TV. Just because it’s done in a theater doesn’t mean it’s the best way to do it at home.   Just like surround sound encoded headphone is a more effective if you’re a single viewer compared to communal surround sound , especially if your room is very asymmetric and otherwise acoustically bad, shutter 3D is a cheaper solutiion for everything except Super Bowl parties.  The way it’s done in a theater is different because it’s a professionally designed building and serve hundreds or more at a time.   Shutter Glasses and Headphones are very expensive when you go beyond a certain number , and grody to share.  Communal speakers and disposable glasses are cheap and sanitary for many.  But shutter 3D and headphone are perfect for 4 people or less.

That is step 1.  Make any TV be easily turned into a 3D TV.  If it can be kept to $200 or less, it’s a lot cheaper than buying 3D pre added.  Plus it opens the entire TV inventory for both 3D lovers AND 3D haters.  If you want 3D TV, either buy any TV or use an existing one, just buy a 3D processor.  if you don’t want 3D, just don't buy the 3D adapter.

Another suggestion.  For Blu Rays and 4K discs, they can have combination 2D/3D discs. Just read one of the 2 eyes.  And because the 3D technology uses alternate frames and is not dependent on resolution, this includes 4K2D / 4K3D combo discs.  The average person is not going to notice that 2D is just one of the 2 eyes.  A few people notice the left-eye version looks weird because they saw it in 2D-optimized version and they complain.

Then I noticed, certain people are left eyed and others are right eyed.  If you fire a gun, you know the importance of knowing and using your dominant eye.  Therefore the 2D version can be selected as "left eye only" or "right eye only" Therefore the 2D standard should allow a director-defined left or right eye as the canonical 2D version to be played on a 2D TV and Blu Ray.  I just don’t know whether the way to get the best picture to let it be director-defined-dependent, or individual-user-defined-dependent.

Finally, the reason why the Super Bowl was rejected was because the format they shown was technically ATSC compatible, but it wasn’t practically 2D compatible.   If you saw a 3D broadcast and didn’t know it about this way side-by-side-half 3D works, you’d swear there was something broken with either the TV or the Broadcast signal.   And if you did, and you didn’t have a 3D TV, then the show lost themselves a customer, and with 70% of the households not having the ability to watch a 3D broadcast, even at 3D’s peak, it’s a loser to do 3D, or a bandwidth waster to have a separate 2D and 3D Broadcast.

Using the alternate frame strategy, just like Dolby 5.1 is encoded into the signal but is 2.0 compatible, and Closed captions are there if you need it, and unnoticeable if you don’t, a truly 2D-compatible 3D would be a "there if you have it, over your head if it isn’t", just like Color TV was in the 60s, and Stereo was in the 80s.  Also you avoid the problems of the original UHF color of black and white incompatibility, 2D compatible 3D TV would be a boon to 3D TV.

The secret to having 3D TV on 60 HZ standard HDTVs is 3D broadcasts would use a 720p/1080i/1080p x 30 Hz x 2 eye mode in an ATSC 2 tuner, but it would read as a 30 Hz x 1 eye signal on TVs without 3D.   If they want 2D to be 60 Hz in 2D, then ATSC 2.1 can have 60 Hz x 2 eye, or 120 Hz broadcasts, that read as 60 Hz x1 eye broadcasts on backward compatible TVS.  if there is a mode which can "lock out" the alternate frames either with a 2D TV or with a 3D TV selected in 2D Mode, then you make more 3D TV without ruining 2D TV.

I believe, based on the introduction animation, that Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2012 was intended to be a 3D Broadcast, but Nickelodeon cancelled the 3D aspect because 70% of the kids would be rejected right at the front door, and that’s not a good business model.   But if it were a 2D-compatible 3D broadcast, then it probably would have been welcomed as the first regular series shown as a fully 3D show, yet would still be as popular as it was as a 2D Show, not shutting out customers.   3D customers may have watched it MORE religiously, just because it was 3D, and maybe even attract 3D viewer who normally wouldn’t watch it.

There’s one issue we have to fix: differing ping times.  I think the solution is already in place for another technology.  I assume an HDMI ARC send back a "display ticker signal" which indicates when the frames are begin displayed to synch up the audio on an external audio device like a Surround sound system or surround headphones.   If that’s the case, then a 3D processor can use that signal also.  Signaling when to switch between left and right eye.  So the 3D processor will work just as well with a 1 ms ping time as a 100 ms ping time.

There’s only one issue, pre-ARC TVs. My solution is an optical solution were the TV flashes Black and White for left and right to indicate a sync signal that a single pixel light-gun-like device with sub-microsecond ping can read "when" the signal is black and white and sync the signal until it becomes interrupted by a channel change, or a content change within the same signal.  And it only flashes Black and white on 3D content.  On 2D content it’s pure black. so there’s nothing to sync.

If these 3 soultions are followed by the industry, then  3D will be as common and as much of a non-issue as Dolby and DTS sound.   There will be no segregated 3D version which is limited to a first run and that's all.  You only need one 2D//3D combo disc, instead of separate 2D and 3D copies, and would be a good 2D copy.  4K3D would be possible with this setup, without having to make a separate 4K3D verison.  TV can be made 3D wihtout alienating the populatoin that doesn't like 3D.  And sometimes, its a devoted watching, other times it's background noise. No TVs will not be rejected because it is or isn't 3D.  And most importantly, the 3D purchase is independent of the TV purchase.  It would be stupid to sell an attached suround sound package to a big TV.  If one likes picture but not the sound, or vice versa, you lost a sale or force a compromise.  Same thing with 3D.   Your sales crew doesn't mention 3D unless they ask what 3D TVs you have, and you can say "Pick any 2D TV you want, and make it a 3D TV with this..."  That way everyone gets the combination of feautres they want.

 

I belive if these changes were in place, then people who don't want 3D will say it's exactly like suround sound.  It's there, I just don't notice it.  But if you want it you notice it.

Status: Acknowledged

Thanks for your thoughts on this.

Comments
by Emerging Expert
on ‎03-26-2019 07:29 AM

The larger issue is 3D was a temporary fad and only a few people were excited about it.  

 

Also coupled with that is fewer and fewer movie titles are being made in 3D

 

 

Towards the end of life of 3D I was in a local store some years ago and the TV guy showed me this TV that had the technology that was either built into the player or the TV that converted a movie to 3D.  

 

Your battle to get 3D back into mainstream and make a $ for yourself is almost as fruitless as trying to get cassette tapes back. 

 

by tripletopper
on ‎03-26-2019 10:45 AM

At one point, before the 2013 Super Bowl was going to be 3D and then got canacelled,  30% of the households had a 3D display.

 

I don't know what percentage of people own something that can handle Dolby/DTS 5.1 or higher, but the reason no one has an ACTIVE hatred for Dolby/DTS 5.1 is becuase it's put on DVDs and TV broadcasts, and doesn't interefere witha basic 2 chanel enjoying of the movie/TV.

 

Has anyone complained that Dolby 5.1 was on the disc and said that the data used for surround sound would be better used for other languages, or more supplemetary footage, or deleted scenes, or anything like that?

 

If 3D can be as normalized as Dolby/DTS, the issues of Movie shelf space, and 3D shortages will sort themselves out.   If 2D users can see 3D as somehting that's there, but they choose not to particiapte in, then they'd less actively hate on 3D.

 

The reason why 3d is actively HATED can be traced back to Super Bowl 2013, which was cancelled (not the game, but the 3D presentation) when people found out 2D viewers can't watch the Super Bowl normally.

 

If the new can be added without alienating the old, then it's accepted.   That's why color failed in the 40s-50s with B/W incompatible RGB UHF, and color succeeded with YUV, B/W compatible color in the 60s.  Stereo succeeded in the 80s becuase it was mono-scompatible.  Closed captions was a feature that bothered no one and helped the deaf.

 

And the only way HD succeeded becuase the knuckle-draggers (of which I'm one when it comes to retro gaming and CRT TVs, so it's not an insult) had HD->SD conversion boxes that were subsidized by the federal government, until they were ready to buy a new TV.

 

If 3D were as unobtrusive as Dolby/DTS sound, then it would be more accepted.   That's why you don't include it in the TV and make a surround procesor and speakers a separate purchase. Dolby/DTS succeeds becuase it's a separate add on. 3D should be the same way.

by Emerging Expert
on ‎03-26-2019 11:59 AM

I don't personally know anyone who hates 3D. I know some that cannot handle it because it makes them feel ill in the stomach.  The only people who would have been upset over super bowl 2013 are those who purchased a 3D TV just for that event or already had a 3D TV.

 

A large reason why 3D also failed was the technology required to be able to stream 3D TV.  Bandwidth being a large part.  The cost to the broadcasters was probably the biggest factor though.

 

3D has been around a LOT longer than Dolby 5.1

 

Your the only person who I have ever had an inkling of who used Dobly 5.1 as an example of something bad.  I would be willing to bet there are a lot more people in the US who would rather have quality sound over French and Czech language tracks.  However, I have seen discs tracked in 5.1 or higher that have more than 8 languages on them along with bonus content. 

 

However, you are more than welcome to go ahead and develop and perfect the technology to make any TV a 3D TV. Then go out and market it and get people to jump on. 

 

I looked long and hard at a 3D TV when I purchased my first HD TV 10 years ago and decided it was a waste of money based on current technology. 

by tripletopper
on ‎03-26-2019 04:35 PM

@bobberuchi  FIrst the short question?   Would you refuse to buy a 2D + 3D combo Blu Ray, or a 4K2D/4K3D combo disc, just becuase it has 3D as a feature?

 

Actually I know a reason why someone would refuse to buy a 2D/3D combo disc, and I've got a solution it.

More deatils about the left eye vs right eye and why that matters:  

 

Spoiler

If you've ever fired a gun or a video game light gun, to line it up you close one one and aim down the baller.  Which eye do you use?   The current 2D/3D combo disc assumes you use the left eye.   Which would be good as long as the director who composed the shot has his left eye as his/her dominant eye and be the canonical 2D verison.

 

What if the director was right-eyed?   Then the default 2D eye, aka the left, which, if right eyed, rthe supplemental eye, then changes the composition more radically than the dominat eye. Forcing left-eye dominace is bad.   Giving either the director or the user a choice of domiant eye would be better.

 

Want a test?  Give your comuter screen the bird Smiley Tongue , (or if you're more polite, use the index finger)   and line it up vertically with something with both eyes open.  You'l probalby have a double vision scenerio wiht one finger loking ghosty and the other more solid.   Close one eye.   Did the finger, line up with what you were aiming at?  If yes, then the one that remains open is your dominant eye.   If the line up was messed up, then the open eye is the recessive eye.  Don't believe me, change eyes.

 

 

I'm using Dolby as a modern technology not all people take advantage of, but is everywhere.   They do make 2D + 3D discs.  What's wrong with 2D + 3D movie discs?  If the director said the 3D version is the definitive version of the movie, and 2D is a "second best" version, the bsinessmen would say it's stupid to release it in 3D ONLY and ignore 70% of the poulation, if the director is saying if you don't have 3D, you can't enjoy it. 

 

The differrence betwen broadcast 3D and Broadcast 5.1 is if the Super Bowl 2013 WERE in 3D, it would have been rendered unwatchable in 2D, thus angering to the point of riot 70% of the audience.  Plus a 3D-manditory evnironmrent would killed the idea of a Super Bowl party is becuase you have to have 10+ glasses to get everyone to watch in 3D. Plus a bigger percentage of Super Bowl watchers, compared to other NFL games, don't know the difference between a first down and a touchdown.  It's a cultual and social event  more than a sporitng event.  It's the only TV show I know where, beofre DVRs, people were going to the bathroom in the game to empty their tank in time for the commercials. And there's more talking and causal watching than intent game consuming at the Super Bowl, where glasses would ruin real life conversation..

 

No one complains about Dolby becuase it doesn't interfere with your media if you choose not to particiipate in the upgrade.  Broadcasting in 3D, based on current standards of side-by-side-half, renders the content unwatchable in 2D.

 

If there was a 2D compatible 3D, like (unfortunately not used more often) a 2D/3D combo Blu Ray disc, then there'd be less of a hatred of 3D.

 

More tangential talk about how offering different verison is usually poisionous to one side like a 2D and a 3D:

 

Spoiler

If people could save 5 bucks a movie by buying a 2-track stereo version of something in Dolby/DTS removed, if enough people would have taken it, and there wasn't a shortage of Dolby / DTS versions, then that would have been ideal.   But that requires different versions.   If you put too many one way, and too few the other, you sow bad will.   It'd be like the "pan and scan" vs "widescreen" versions of a DVD. There were shortages on widescreen DVDs more often than pan and scan.  You blame the company for making not enough Widescreen DVDs.  That's why both HD DVD and Blu Ray originally guaranteed original theatrical ratio as a format requirement.  Blu Ray relaxed that feature more recently.

 

That's basically what they did with 3D.   If the industry REALLY wanted to push 3D as a LASTING feature and not a fad, they would have made every Blu Ray a 2D/3D Combo Blu Ray, and silently made that a feature as part of the Blu Ray standard.  And 4k discs would be 4K2D/4K3D Combo discs on movies with a 3D verison.  3D would be a small-print feature, not a big print feature.

 

Very few Blu Rays and 4K discs advertise "Dolby Atmos version" in big print.  Putting it in big print puts a bullseye on "Atmos", especially for DTS 11.1 fans, and people feel they don't need it because they have 2.0, why get it.  That's exaclty what happened to 3D.  It put a bulleye on it.  People either dodge it or target it based on that feature.  70% don't have 3D at its peak, so it was dodged.  if it was a silent feature on every movie, everyone would have had every movie in 3D that wouild be, like Dolby and DTS in some households, present on the disc, but hidden.

 

 

So yes, the number one thing that would re-jumpstart the 3D movement is a 3D adpater where you add to any TV, so that every great 2D TV can be a great 3D, and every great 3D TV is automatically a great 2D TV.  Those who want it can buy ANY 3D TV and get 3D, and those who don't ignore the 3D seciton.  In that respect, exactly like the suround sound section.

 

And yes, that tehcnolgy is no longer patent-protected.  It's the Sega Scope 3D on Sega Master System technology.  So yes anyone can make it.   The biggest issues are ping, which are resolved with ARC reading, and with no ARC, a video game light gun from the CRT era, as a sub-microsecond timer.

 

And yes if Broadcasts and discs hide the second eye, like they do the 5.1 and higher sounds on a 2.0 speaker set, and closed captions, and even color on a Black and White TV, then we'd have no complaints from the 2D crowd.   The reason why there's 3D Hatred is becuae the 2013 Super Bowl would have been unwatchable in 2D if it were a 3D broadcast.   It was pulled before it was broadcast, which cemented 3D Hatred.

 

The most complained about football game before 3D that wassn't was that of watchers on black and white TVs when they first introduced color.  Where the 2 different teams were chromaticaly different but luminently identical uniforms. (Both teams look the same on a Black and White TV, but were diffferent in color.)  The obvious joke in this case is Vinnie Testaverde, a guy who mechanically threw great passes and rarely had missed passes or dropped bals, but had so many interceptions that he was jokingly accused of being colorblind.  SInce then, all leagues who either have a TV presence or aspire to have one have rules saying the uniforms must be luminatly different for B/W TVs.   Kind of archaic, but still a good rule to keep in force.  Hence why you have home white and road colors.

 

The funny thing about that one is they were oblivious to it until the aftermath.   Imagine if someone failed to bring this up and they WENT THROUGH twith the 3D Super Bowl broadcast?! The phone lines would have been clogged with the 70%.  It'd be a lot worse faiture for 3D.   Think there's hatred NOW? Imagine if your team was in the Super Bowl and you couldn't see it because it was 3D only! Better to never ever have a true full-color non-anaglyph non-Pulfrick 3D, then to have one and cuase a riot.  So 2D compatibility should be strived for.  Besides, just becuase I CAN watch it with 3D glasses any time doesn't mean I ALWAYS WANT TO watch it with 3D glasses EVERY TIME.  So 2D compatibility is a good goal anyway.

by tripletopper
on ‎03-27-2019 02:58 PM

@bobberuchi  would you refuse to buy a movie if it was only available in 2D/3D, just because it has a 3D mode, even though you're probably just using the 2D mode?  I predict, probably not.  Most people would probably not.

 

Even I, who has a specific issue with DTS movies not sounding right in my Dolby decoding surround headset if not coverted to Dolby, don't refuse to buy a piece of media watch a movie becuase it has DTS instead of Dolby.

 

One probelm with having separate 2D and 3D verisions is predictng how many of each would sell.  When you subtract 5 dollars from the price of a 2D copy or offer a 4K2D for the same price as 3D it's going to be less popular.

 

It's like the "Letterbox" vs "Pan and Scan" issue on DVD.  I remember Blockbuster would have 30 copies of a new release on Pan and Scan and like 3 in widescreen.  I remeber used movie stores having 10 copies of a Pan and Scan, but none of widescreeen.

 

If making a 2D copy of a 3D movie is just as easy as showing one eye of a two eye presentation, then woldn't that be the better route? Make 3D hidden feature on 2D TV, just like Dobly/DTS is on a 2.0 speaker set?  Wouldn't that also allow a 4K3D/4K2D combo disc. Most 4K +3D disc sets are 4K2D + a separate 3D Disc, not 4K3D?

 

Also would you avoid a TV that has 3D, even pay $100 more for a TV that has the exact same features but is a 2D TV, or would you save the $100 and just not use the 3D?

 

Also isn't forcing 3D as a luxury item on ONLY the top-of-the-line model, instead of an everyday item like on the Playstaiton 3D Display more harmful to 3D than helpful?

 

And you said the only people that were angry that the 3D Super Bowl was dropped was people who bought 3D TVs.  Most people understood and said you can't shut out 70% of your audience in a big to appease 30% in a small way.   The Super Bowl to me is not unwatchable in 2D, but to the others IS UNWATCHABLE in 3D.

 

What if the reverse was true and the Super Bowl was broadcast in a 2D-incompatible 3D only?  People would have been rioting! And you think 3D harted is bad now!

 

Would my 3 step process make 3D a viable option for people to carry it in stores?  Maybe not at fad levels like just before the 2013 Super Bowl was cancelled, but forever be part of the media landscape like Dolby/DTS is currently?

1) making a separate device to add on to a TV to make it 3D, so anyone can add 3D, instead of just for the ultra rich by focring 3D purchasers to be 80 inch OLED/QLED purchasers, and, conversely, not putting a 3D Stink on those high end TVs that are aoided becuase it's 3D.
2) Releasing every 3D-made movie in a 2D/3D Combo disc, and 4K discs in 4K2D/4K3D combo discs, in which the director picks which eye is the intended 2D version to use as the 2D shot.   (which is important, because almost no one is ambioculous.  You're either left eyed to right eye.  If the director is right eyed, should he/she decide to pick the right eye as the deafult 2D compostion.  The current Combo Disc format mandates the left eye.) 

3) making a 3D broadcast standard of alternate frames with the tag of "x 2 eye" on an ATSC 2 tuner, but default as 1 eye on an ATSC 1 tuner and therefore, be 2D compatible.  30 Frames interlaced was acceptable for SD TV, and a lot of things are still filmed in 30 Hz to give it a film feel compared to 60.  There's no sacrifice in 30 Hz shows, and a 60 HZ show needs a 120 Hz broadcastto do 60 Hz x 2 Eyes.

 

Am I assessing the fall of the 3D market right.   Would my suggesitons save 3D from extinction?

by tripletopper
on ‎04-01-2019 12:07 PM

@bobberuchi  Is it true that if these 3condtoins are met in the marketplace, then there'd be less active 3D hatred, and people will either take to or leave it, and make 3D rore successful, although not at fad levels, and imporve the media and TV marketplace in general?

 

1) 3D/2D combo discs and 4K3D/4K2D combo discs, with the director defining either eye of his/her choice as his/her primary eye, therefore the 2D version.

 

2) A 3D external adapter which can turn any existing 2D TV into a 3D TV using alternate frames technology like the Sega Scope 3D from the Sega Master System, which is no longer patent protected, and simultaneously not "taint" an expensive TV wth 3D Stench. Any TV can become a 3D TV, and any TV can remain a 2D TV by doing nothing.

 

3) A true 2D-compatible 3D broadcast/cablecast/satcast/webcast standard, with a director definable eye as the 2D version, with no adapter needed to watch it in 2D using a decoder-unlocked alternate frames standard?

 

@bobberuchi I'm keping it short.  Please respond.



 

by Emerging Expert
on ‎04-01-2019 12:25 PM

I don't see 3D hatred. I see people who are not as interested in it as some. I do see people that the 3D experience makes them feel vertigo or nauseous.

 

Demand and supply.  The demand for 3D was very high 10 years ago.  Avatar was  the pinnacle of the 3D experience.  3D TV's were all the rage.  

 

But I think most people saw the quality of 3D TV's was not nearly as good as the movie experience. 

 

Studios slowed way down on the production of 3D movies.   Interest just simply died away. 

 

You are not going to inflame an new interest in 3D until after you can convince the producers of content to invest in the production of content in 3D.  

 

People and tech companies are more focused now on better picture quality and better sound.

 

Your issues with Dolby are from trying to hang onto old technology.  Dolby is a sound experience that has become mainstream since George Lucas included it in his movies.  And its a winner.  I would much rather have superior sound over 3D.  And I am not alone

 

 

by tripletopper
on ‎04-01-2019 06:48 PM

Personally I think Home 3D is beter than Theatrical 3D.  Theartrical 3D uses Polar technology, whihc if your head is not level will cause partial filtering, whihc cuases double images which caouses 3D headaches in theater.

 

The 3D I'm used to at home is shutter 3D.  That uses frame alternating tints.  One bad thing it dos is darkens lights, but it darkens darks at a higher ration, so you'll get lcloser to an Inky CRT TV black with this.   PLus there's no head tilt orientiotn problem.

 

But I noticed 3D was well hyped until 2012.  The "turnaround event" ws the cancellation of the 3D uper Bowl.   It ws cancelled becuase it was 2D incompatible.  If it were nroadcast in 3D, instead of 30% complaining about the lack of new tech being used and  kill future interest in 3D, 70% would complain that he Super Bowl was physically unwatchable, and would demand their shows not be in 3D.

 

Do yuou believe that if 2D and 3D can get along better, then people would add 3D.   Today it's an obstacle to good 2D viewing. I don't beleive tere was EVER a 3D broadcast, except for Pulfrick, Red and Cyan, and Chromadepth.  No true streoreosocpic 3D show was ever broadcast.  And the reason they never show it is becuase it's 2D unfriednly

 

Dolby/DTS is stereo/mono friendly, Color is BW firendly, Closed caption is hearing firendly.  If 3D/2D coexistance was a goal, then 3D would be like Dobly/DTS surround.  There if you want it, not there if you don't.

 

And would my 3 steps promote 3D/2D Harmony?

by Emerging Expert
on ‎04-02-2019 07:00 AM

No

But feel free to invest the money to develop the technology and then convince the parts of the industry that can make your dream a reality to take it on.  Best Buy is not a technology developer.  They resell.

by tripletopper
on ‎04-02-2019 12:14 PM

I was considering talking Sony becuase they ae the only company in both the Physical TV market and the media produciton department.  Samsung doesn't make media, and Disney doesn't make TVs.

 

Unfortunately, most tech companies don't take outside ideas.

 

I know Best buy has some divisions of "store brand stuff"  For example Rocketfish is Best Buy's Gaming home label, Dynex is Best Buy's computer equipment home lablel and Insignia is Best Buy's TV home label.

 

I though this would be a unique oppoetunity because everyone else has given up on 3D.  And I think I analysed the problem right.

 

Which of these points do you dispute?

 

1) 3D technology started its dive when the 2013 Super Bowl was anounced to NO LONGER be broadcast in 3D, becuase if it were broadcast in 3D, it would render the show unwatchable in 2D.  That's when 3D hatred started.  People didn't want to lose their shows.  It the shows could be 3D in 3D households and 2D in 2D househulds, then everyone would be satisifed

 

2) The most popular model of 3D TV for those who sought out the format (meaning the customer comes out and says, "I want a 3D TV.  What do you got?"  a opposed to debating between different TVs and 3D being a swaying factor.)  was the Playstation 3D Display. It was the cheapest 3D TV at release date, $500,  and became the cheapest 3D TV as a non-blowout retail price of $180.

 

3) Late 1960s color, 1980's Stereo and Closed Captions, and Dolby/DTS in Laser Discs and beyond, as well as Cable/Satellite/Broadcast HDTV were all succeeded becuase they were backwardly compatible with the older technology, and someone who didn't partake couldn't notice the diffrence.  3D is NOT like that and that's why it failed.

 

4) The Sega MAster System let you turn an TV into a 3D TV.   That technology is no longer patent protected, so anyone can make an external shutter 3D Device.

 

5) After the 2013 Super Bowl, 3D TV bcame harder to sell for 2 reasons.   The first is that 3D TVs were put on more and more expensive models, with bigger sizes, higher resoluitons, and other flashier features. The Johnny Luncpail model of 3D TV was removed. At the same time, People were downgrading one step form the premium TV just becuase the premium had 3D and it wasn't wanted.   There is a perception that a good 3D TV is an awful 2D TV, and people were dodging 3D even if they saved money over the same TV except no 3D..  If these 2 facts are true, then wouldn't an external add-on 3D porcessor take away both problems simultaneously?  You can use your existing TV and make it 3D, or buy whatever 2D you want and turn it into a 3D.

 

6)  It's stupid to sell surround sound system and a TV in one composite unit.  Selling components is smarter.  You pick what you want, and don't have to worry about compromises.  They tried sellng combo TV/VHS, combo TV/Betamax, combo TV/DVD, and Combo VHS/DVD-R.  Those tend to be made for convenience sake and were either cheap models for conveience, or the expensive models didn't move much like the combo TV/Betamax..  Snce surround sound is expensive, selling a combo TV/Surround Sound is suicide.

 

At first 3D was seen as a cheap feature that would sell TVs, so why sell it separately?   Now that enough people have a HATRED for 3D due to the Super Bowl 2013, it's suicide to pack in 3D, becuase too many diferent peopole have too many diferent ideas what a good 3D TV is, and don't want to spend the big bucks as TV companies premiumized the 3D feature, while simltaneously booby traping the expensive TVs with unwanted 3D.  The market adjusted the wrong way.   They should have componentized the 3D instead of premiumizing it.  The 3D processor would have a spearate section in the TV Section, just like TV Audio has a spearate section.  Everyone who wants a 3D TV would get it, and not interfere with those who don't.

 

7) The more verisons of media you have, the tougher it is.   If you had a separate Dobly and DTS veriosn, like some Laser Discs, or a separate Widescreen and Pan and Scan version like in the DVD days, you run the risk of a surplus in one format and a shortage in the other.  A 3D/2D Combo disc, or a 4K3D/4K2D combo disc would be perfect.  You don't have to predict how many people will refuse to buy either the 3D or 2D veriosn becuase the other one isn't available.  Just like Dolby/DTS is a hidden feature that people can bring out if they want and have the equipment, or not, 3D cn be exacltly the same.

 

8) the number one complaint of 3D/2D combo discs is that it always default to the left eye, which is bad if the director intended the right eye to be the default frame.  Cameras are not left-eyed or right-eyed, but directors are.  A 3D/2D combo disc format that recognizes that would go a long way in make 3D more common than segregated 2D and 3D veriosns. Colorized movies are given the optio t "turn off the chroma

 

And just becuase Insingia is a "store brand" of Best Buy, doesn't mean it can only HAS TO carry bargain versions of stuff that's everywhere.  MAybe the 3D procesor ca be an INsignia Exclusive.  That willet 3D lover packed in stores.   Use a mysterious trade name for 3D/2D combo discs, so it can be sold in all stores without referring to Best Buy, being a sneaky way to advertise Best Buy in other rstores when people realize they can go to Best Buy and see 3D in movies they already have.,

Join the Community
Join the community and enjoy all the benefits! You may be our next expert!
Join Sign In
Announcements
Welcome to our Best Buy Community Forums. The Insignia and Rocketfish communities have been merged into this forum, please click on the links directly below in our Community Browser area to access our Insignia and Rocketfish boards! Rocketfish and Insignia can be found under our Best Buy Brands boards.
Labels