Consumer 3D TV system finally sorted

[blackwiggle]

I've just been trawling through the reports from CES 2010 about the various new technologies heading our way later in the year.

It seems there has finally been a 3D system that all the leading TV manufactures have agreed to use [Thanks Toshiba for sorting what could of been a useless format war]

Look like we will be getting the 3D system that uses the LCD glasses that flicker on and off.

Only SONY & Panasonic will be supplying ONE pair of glasses with there top of the line 3D sets,otherwise you will have to buy them separately.
[Which makes me think that nobody has solved the problem of viewing the TV from other than straight in front of the set without compromising the 3D effect,as only one person can occupy that viewing position,wait and see,or not see as the case may be].
No official prices have been released yet for either the TV's or the needed glasses,only a US release date of "Spring".
Some well educated guesstimated US prices from the tech savvy mavens at the AVS forum are at the link below,plus a general breakdown discussion on the relative merits and perceived short comings of the Sony flagship.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1214118

Of course this 3D software/discs is going to be different,so a new form of Blue Ray player will be needed to play it back.

That is unless you have a PS3!!!:nod
YES FOLKS,Sony have announced that the PS3 will be able to playback 3D Blue Ray discs with a firmware update.:clap:rock:clap:rock:hyper.

A list of 3D Blue Ray playback need to knows is at this link.
http://ces.cnet.com/8301-31045_1-10430918-269.html

I could fill you in with a heap of other info but this thread is long enough as it is.

[brainbeat]

well ill be skipping 1080p hdtv and saving up for a 3d instead

[blackwiggle]

Exactly ,same here.

I might wait until the new 3D capable projectors hit the market to replace the one I have now,not a fan of a huge rectangle of glassware taking up lounge room space ,I'll wait and see how good this technology is firsthand before I jump in,also when there are at least a good few 3D titles to playback.
And after the initial prices drop of course.;)

At least they have recognized the lag problem with HDMI switching due to the HDCP,the Sony's will be fitted with the new InstraPort HDMI which will reduce switching time to 1 sec.

I just came across this.

Sony will release FIFA 2010 World Cup on 3D Blu-ray Sony has announced it will be producing the 2010 FIFA World Cup in 3D for Blu-ray, after it covers the event using Sony 3D cameras.

The company will then release the "Official 3D Film" of the event on Blu-ray, so far without a timetable or price.

Finalized 3D Blu-ray specifications should be released by the Blu-ray Disc Association before the start of the new year.

The World Cup starts in June in South Africa and is expected to be watched by hundreds of millions.

“The transition to 3D is underway, and we at Sony intend to be leaders in every aspect. Our sponsorship of the FIFA World Cup allows us to leverage our cutting-edge 3D technology and premier products with dazzling content to produce a unique and totally compelling viewing experience,” adds Sony chairman/CEO Howard Stringer. “3D viewers around the world will feel as though they are inside the stadiums in South Africa, watching the games in person.”

[AG-wolf]

F*ck yeah, Virtual Boy!!

[mic-dk]

Bah, humbug!

While I look forward to real 3D capable projectors to light up my holodeck, I just don't see it happen in the coming years for the private consumer.

The viewing angle is critical - it's not that big of a deal in a movie theater, but it is in 99% of livingrooms. I can't imagine it'll succeede if only one or two people in the sofa is able to make out what is happening on screen.

Also, 3D in HD needs quite a lot of bandwith, and at least here in Denmark, the service providers do everything they can to use as little as possible. Horrible picture quality be damned!

Sure, my next TV/receiver/gismo may be able to show 3D, but I will still buy it for it's 2D picturequality. I just hope my 50" Kuro lasts forever.

I will not belive the hype.

[Aeroracer]

i hope the 3d in these 3d tellys is better than those lame red/green paper 3d glasses...i watched jorney to center of earth on blu-ray in 3d with thses crappy glasses and it looked rubish.

has anyone seen this lcd style 3d if so how good is it compared to old 3d.

[blackwiggle]

Well Both Toshiba & Samsung have bought out 3D capable sets that can turn standard DVD/Blueray into 3D on the fly.
It's pretty impressive from more than one report.

LG if the first to bring out a 3D capable projector,they are aiming at the high end videophile.

The biggest fly in the ointment with all these 3D capable set's atm is the need for the new 1.4 HDMI cables,which have a smaller plug very similar to a mini USB plug.

You can see all these individual video reports of all these various manufacturers at the AVForums TV.
Only the latest 4 videos are shown on the main page.
But just look at the bottom of the page where it says "older videos of this type" and choose the report you want to view from the last few days,it's the best coverage of the CES anywhere.

http://www.avforums.com/tv/

[mic-dk]

Ah yes... HDMI 1.4... I'm glad I've buried a HDMI 1.3 in my wall then :)

If HDMI 1.4 is a requisite for 3D how is the PS3 supposed to do it? In my case it would also mean replacing my receiver since I pass the HDMI signal through there on the way to the TV to pull the audio out.

Still, I'll maintain that 3D will only be a gimmick for a few people in a good number of years to come. I see an application in theaters and, maybe, games, but not in the T room at home.

(oh, and the HDMI cable in my wall is encased in a rubber tube so I can pull a new if I wanted. I'm not _that_ stupid :D )

Edit: Oh, now I bothered with some of your links:



A Sony representative emphatically told us that we'll get "full 1080p resolution to each eye", but we're under the impression that full 3D 1080p resolution requires HDMI 1.4--and the PS3 only has HDMI 1.3.

[abukii]

Im sure between an update and an adaptor, theyll be able to pull it off.

[blackwiggle]

I don't really believe the PS3 will be able to 1080p 3D,not with the HDMI socket it has, a over zealous Sony PR person more likely.
I also don't think a adapter would work either.
I think PS3 owners would be lucky if it did 720 3D,more likely 576.
There's bound to be a compromise of some sort,I'm guessing that to get 3D out of the PS3 you will have to use the HDMI for video output only, and use the optical out for audio.

But then again Blueray is Sony's baby,and the 3D aspect of Blueray has been on the drawing board since it's inception.
One of the reasons it won the format war with HDDVD.
If 3D playback as a future upgrade on the PS3 was on the drawing board since it's inception?,Guess we will find out soon enough.

Yeah,3D does seem gimmicky,there's a lot of hurdles in it's way for it gain acceptance from the general consumer anyway.
I'm well aware of those,always have been,I made a few posts about this here over a year ago.
There was 3 competing system then.

The need to wear glasses to view it [for most 3D systems] and the possibility of viewer nausea or eye strain causing headaches,plus the light loss that occurs due to the blackening of said shutter glasses.

The limited amount of people that can watch it at the same time and the limited seating arrangement to view 3D properly.

The need for a new 3D TV or PJ and the price involved.

The HDMI 1.4 miss match with current equipment [blame HDMI for that,they could have build HDMI to this spec from the beginning,but chose not to]
At least ALL manufacturers have to implement HDMI 1.4 the same way now,so equipment mismatches due to companies implementing HDMI differently "should" be a thing of the past.

And lastly,the lack of 3D media to watch.

I Personally think having to wear glasses to view 3D will be the biggest turn off for your average consumer.

[Dan Locke]

Viewing angle is only a problem with lenticular screens. They work by using a lenticular sheet to make certain areas of the screen viewable only at certain angles - each eye is at a different angle relative to the screen, and thus sees a different image, producing a 3D effect. Of course, the main drawback to this approach is a restricted viewing angle, as the 3D effect only works within very narrow windows.

By contrast, if these sets come with polarized glasses - which they do - they use the old polarized light trick, in which each eye's view is polarized at a different angle, which is blocked from the other eye's field of vision by the lenses' polarization. Such screens can be viewed effectively at any angle.


i hope the 3d in these 3d tellys is better than those lame red/green paper 3d glasses..~snip~
The red/green (red/blue where I come from) glasses are required to turn 2D, single-image content into a 3D image. The whole point of developing new TV designs is to eliminate that. The new system uses overlapping polarized images, like in a movie theater.


~snip~...plus the light loss that occurs due to the blackening of said shutter glasses.
Shutter glasses are not the same as polarized glasses. There is no light loss that results from the latter technique, which is the one that the new sets use.


And lastly,the lack of 3D media to watch.
A firmware update is the only thing necessary to turn the entire PS3 library into a 3D medium.

[blackwiggle]

I think there will be a perceived loss of overall screen brightness while a TV is in 3D mode, in comparison to normal,non 3D viewing, due the the LCD shutter glasses switching on and off from clear to dark 60 tps.

It would almost be the same as wearing glasses with photochromatic lenses and walking inside after being in bright sunlight, but obviously at a much faster rate.

As for turning the entire PS3 library into 3D medium.
I have yet to read anything from Sony regarding the specifics of it's upcoming PS3 3D update,only that it will be able to play back 3D Blueray discs.
Unless they are going to do with a PS3 firmware update what Toshiba & Samsung are doing with some of their sets,3D processing on the fly to turn 2D media into 3D.
I have seen no mention of this anywhere,let alone a confirmation.

Any links

[Dan Locke]

I think there will be a perceived loss of overall screen brightness while a TV is in 3D mode, in comparison to normal,non 3D viewing, due the the LCD shutter glasses switching on and off from clear to dark 60 tps.
THEY DON'T DO THAT. They're polarized.

LCD shutter glasses are completely different - actually, they're more like really clunky goggles. Here's a picture of one:

http://crsltd.com/images/fe1/fe1.gif

And there's no light loss as a result of using them - one eye always sees a fully-lit frame. Darkness would only result from both lenses being switched on and off at the same time, but that would kill the 3D effect anyway.



As for turning the entire PS3 library into 3D medium.
I have yet to read anything from Sony regarding the specifics of it's upcoming PS3 3D update,only that it will be able to play back 3D Blueray discs.
You know, now that I think about it, I'm not sure that it's really all that feasible. I was thinking that the PS3 would be able to simply render 3D graphics from one view for a single frame, then from a different view for the consecutive frame, etc, but the games themselves wouldn't allow for that constant "jiggling" of the camera.

Still, it's a feature that could easily be implemented further down the road.

@ Lance

Please stop screwing around with my posts.

[Lance]

Please stop making us read so much stuff twice.

-------

Re: the brightness issue of 3D 'shutter' glasses: Since the brain combines images from both eyes to create the final perceived single view, is it not possible that timed alternating shutoffs of the views from each eye in turn would result in each eye contributing to total brightness only half the time, thus reducing the brightness of the combined images by 50 percent?

[Dan Locke]

No, it is not. A 100%-brightness picture is routed to the brain through one eye, then through the other.

Besides, it isn't as if each eye "contributes" 50% to the "total" brightness anyway. Close one eye while reading this post and let me know how much darker your monitor appears.

[Lance]

A nice practical test. The only difference is the width of the total field of view due to only partial overlap of the FOVs of the individual eyes.

[Dan Locke]

That's only a problem if you're really, really close to the screen - which would ruin the 3D effect itself.

[Lance]

I usually sit from two to two and a half feet from a 19" HD screen. Very nearsighted, no corrective lenses.

[Aeroracer]

this 3d tv sounds good but i bet it will cost a fortune..:nod

[Dan Locke]

Indeed. It'll need two polarizers (and circular ones, at that), not to mention double the refresh rate of current sets.

Of course, with enough early adopters, the technology might get its big break and become much, much cheaper over time.

[ProblemSolver]

Best of all, I don't need any glasses to see in 3d. xD

[Koleax]

Have any of you actually seen these 3D TVs? Perhaps there was a problem with the demo system at Best Buy, but it did not look impressive at all. In fact it looked really cheap. Perhaps the problem was simply that it was a very large screen and if you didn't look at it exactly at the center point from a certain distance than it looked awkward or flickery. I don't expect it to be very popular.

[blackwiggle]

This technology is moving so fast.
I think anybody's previous encounters with 3D [even 1 year ago] should only be considered as a reference of a unsophisticated product, still with teething problems.

The manufactures think it's ready for prime time now,so I suppose you will have to get a good demonstration [good luck with that :lol] before you could make your own opinion,they should be hitting the shops around late May.

Here's a good "hands on" description of the Sony glasses and viewing experience

Glasses as they looked at CES 2009
http://www.sonyinsider.com/2009/09/11/hands-on-with-realds-crystaleyes-4-active-shutter-3d-glasses/

Glasses as they look CES 2010.
http://www.sonyinsider.com/2010/01/10/pictures-of-the-final-version-of-sonys-active-shutter-3d-glasses/

[Dan Locke]

So they are shutter glasses.

The technology's evidently progressed quite a bit.

[blackwiggle]

Watch that video as well in the glasses as they look CES 2010 link
It shows glimpses of what media will be coming in 3D.

Have a look at the right at 2m.38s and again on the left at 3m.03s .
What's that I see?
It must be Wipeout HD3D! :rock

[G'Kyl]

I Personally think having to wear glasses to view 3D will be the biggest turn off for your average consumer.

There's so many intriguing things about new technology and 3D in particular. I thought watching about 20 Minutes from Avatar in 3D was an impressive hint of what's possible. But there you have it: Like blackwiggle said, I think I will not - ever - wear glasses to watch a movie. I may do so once or twice out of curiosity, but after having seeing those scenes from Avatar I went do see the entire movie in a non-3D cinema. Glasses? No f...ing way! They are far too disturbing to enjoy a movie for what it is.

As long as 3D is little more than what Virtual Boy was for handhelds, it will never be a mainstream product.

Ben

[Dan Locke]

Considering that the Virtual Boy wasn't actually a handheld system, I'm not sure what you're getting at.

And what's so bad about wearing glasses? Anyway, the new lenticular screens eliminate the need for them entirely.

[Lance]

Have you ever tried wearing glasses over basic corrective glasses [in spectacle form]?

[Dan Locke]

G'Kyl's complaint appears to have been directed at the glasses themselves, rather than any inconvenience that would result from wearing two pairs at the same time.

[Lance]

But if 3D glasses were required, that would cause a problem for people who already wear glasses.

[SaturnReturn]

I think I will not - ever - wear glasses to watch a movie.

Some of us have little choice.:mad: Stupid broken eyes.

Anyway, I kind of agree. I can't imagine myself sitting down in front of the TV, only to have to get up again to find the bloody remote, and then again after that to find the bloody glasses...only to find someone has accidentally sat on them and broken an arm off. Then I'd have to go down the shops and buy another pair, which will probably cost a fortune in themselves.

That probably wouldn't happen to me, as I don't have kids in the family or anything, but I can imagine them getting lost and/or broken in many households. Add in the fact that you'd need a lot for a whole family, and the viewing angle issues, and I just don't think it's anything worthwhile for the average consumer.

I'd rather 3D technology stayed in cinemas. It would be a unique viewing experience and might stop so many of them closing down (many that only happens near me?).

[KGB]

Have to agree with the fact that the glasses won't take off (not in my house anyway) at home. Went to see Avatar 3D before xmas, while I thought it was a great film and stood up on it's own without the 3D aspect of it, the glasses are a pain in the arse, I have to wear glasses for distance these days so had to contend with both. Just as well it was dark as I probably looked like a right tool.

Also even though the new type are a massive improvement on what they were, they still make everything go dark around you so destroying any ambience or lighting in the room. This added to the fact that the viewers will look like the bastard children of Roy Orbison is a massive turn off.

I agree, keep it in the cinema.

[Lance]

Did Roy Orbison have any bastard children?

[KGB]

Yes and they are all watching 3D films.

[Dan Locke]

Heh, good one.

Still, there are plenty of people who have no problem with glasses (including me); I'm sure that the technology will catch on eventually.

[blackwiggle]

I've been reading a lot of opinions from AV specialists/installers on the whole 3D explosion.

After having a week of thinking who will be the most likely early 3D adopters, roughly 50% of them agree that, although the TV's set are good,it still feels a bit of a gimmick seen on anything but the truly largest screens,and that it is most likely that most people would of already recently upgraded to a new none 3D TV,and would be hesitant to replace it just for 3D.

Where on the other hand,LCD and DLP projectors don't get the almost yearly model changes TV's do,so owners of these tend to have owned them for a good few years,and,rather than spend the price of a new lamp for their current projectors [which cost a small fortune],would rather see those funds used to upgrade to a 3D projector.

They also agree that to get the full 3D experience atm, projectors are the way to go,and that this type of consumer,already having set up for projection,would not be considering the need to wear 3D glasses to view 3D media as much as a problem as TV owners would.

The LG 3D projector shown at CES 2010 is supposed to cost around UK 10k.
[But is fitted with HDMI 1.3 , go figure]
This is the only one with a price atm,and the only one market ready,other manufacturers will follow,and like when 1080p projection first appeared is initially very exspensive.
But if the prices drop over 65% over 2 years,as 1080p did from it's first models,and 75% over 3 years,then this 3D stuff might take off.

Especially with the prospect of watching the likes of this newly release IMAX 3D movie at home, when it eventually gets transferred to 3D Blueray.
HUBBLE 3D
http://www.apple.com/trailers/imax/hubble3d/

[G'Kyl]

Considering that the Virtual Boy wasn't actually a handheld system, I'm not sure what you're getting at.

No, it wasn't. I agree, It's a bad comparison. What I was saying is: The Virtual Boy was as much a better handheld as today's 3D cinema is better cinema. :)


And what's so bad about wearing glasses?

Normal glasses? Nothing bad about that at all! Two glasses for people who already wear glasses? Quite bad.
However, my main concern is that I found the modern-day glasses I wore to be quite an annoyance - especially not at home where I want to feel comfortable. Also, I think it was mentioned before that picture quality suffers, and here's one more: Wearing those glasses I am much more aware of "Here's me, there's the room and over there is the screen.", which distracts me from the movie. Oh, and lastly, I don't think it's a good idea sharing the viruses and bacteria of the former costumer. :)

Ben

[DawnFireDragoon]

Ok 3D, from a gaming perspective: this is all well and good, but what about social gamers.

I like to play with friends, as well as alone, split screen or passing the control...or just a few people hanging out, some watching the games been played....i even played RPG's with people watching or playing some of it. not reallly gonna work too well when your buddies are sat watching a crappy blurred screen, while you sit their wearing your silly glasses.

Like the Wii, innovation is always good and great for a ever expanding and competetive field, but for some people it's just not their thing and wont grab them at all....again, like the Wii.

Personally, it'll take a lot for 3D in the home environment to get me excited, even with the biggest home TV, 3D really wont be that impressive, will suffer from bad viewing angles and have obvious 'edges' as oppose to watching it on a massive cinema screen.

i don't buy into it at all at this stage. Of course i'm open to been proven wrong by something amazing, but that's my take on it at the moment.

[DrMannevond]

Must say I'm still on the fence when it comes to 3D (I should probably try to actually see something in 3D first), but there is one gaming combination I think might be really cool if done right, and that is Natal with 3D. Imagine playing something like WOW in 3D where Natal reads your face and body language and overlays the movements on your avatar.

Edit : Not to mention hours of entertainment with people kicking the crap out of their TVs on youtube:P

[Dark-Twisted]

*looks into piggybank*
oooh I'm getting close to that HDTV!

What? I'm saving for a 3D Stereoscopic TV now? Oh...

Is it just me or do corporations take note that consumers want a new exciting experience, but not take note that they don't want to fork out their life savings for it?

[SaturnReturn]

They probably take note that most people who would want a HD TV will likely already have one (I made this up but doubt it's far from true) and therefore they need another reason to make people fork out for something else. Sony even say in their promo that they're going to convince people that they need 3D. I can't remember the exact words, but they do say it. That's just how it works unfortunately. Just "don't believe the hype" - you'll get along just fine in life without it.

[ACE-FLO]

You know, I like technology. And i don't mind it moving fast - if it is gonna be affordable enough. But when technology moves ridiculously fast, so fast that you feel cheated by your recent purchases - then it's time to wise up. Take a back seat, and get real on what your best options are...

I recently bought an HDTV, 1080p and all that jazz. Waitied around for the inevitable January sales. It's future proof enough to not make me feel like I need something higher spec for at least a couple years, and knowing me, more likely 5 years or more even :lol Point is, 5 years ago (2004/2005) I bought a Sony rear projection LCD 42" TV, and Plasmas were'nt even reliable at that time, not to mention ridiculously overpriced. I know coz I was considering buying one at the time. Oh, and HDTVs were'nt on the market then either. So I bought the SOny coz it was the best on offer at the time in my limited opinion. But a year after my purchase, Plasmas were all the rage, because the technology got better, screens got brighter... and RRPs got cheaper :bomb whilst my (then) year old Sony rear projection 42" LCD was already starting to look diminsihed in picture quality... Iw as gutted!

Not a wise purchase on my part, I should have waited... Do yer homework, and forget about 3D until it is accepted technology... and cheaper to buy :) that's what I think ;)

[blackwiggle]

Here's a small interview with James Cameron on the uptake of 3D that I lifted from a news report in Australia.
QUOTE:
Avatar director James Cameron says a seismic shift is about to occur in television in Australia with the advent of 3D programming.

Cameron, at Warner Roadshow Studios on the Gold Coast to check progress on his new 3D movie Sanctum, says 3D will be the norm before we know it.

"Oh, it's all happening at an accelerated rate," he said.

"For the last five or six years, there's been more content than there has been screens. People were making 3D films at a rate faster than the exhibitors were adopting the 3D technology in the theaters.

"That's now going through a fairly seismic adjustment, and over the next few months we're going to see a real change in that and the number of screens worldwide is probably going to double I would say, in the next year."

But he believes it will take time for consumers to take real advantage of owning a 3D TV or home computers because of a lack of content.

"I think they've jumped the gun," Cameron said.

"They're all now making 3D screens, and the quality is very good, but there's not going to be enough content to drive them."

Cameron said he's been asking the networks what their strategy is for the past five years.

"Their eyes have been glazing over, thinking this is something that might be coming in 25 years, and now it's banging on the door,' he said.

"But everything is going to change in the next couple of years very, very rapidly, and ... I think you'll have sports coming into the home in 3D within a year.

"The sets are available, they'll be expensive at first, but they'll come down just like high definition, everything will be with glasses initially but within three to five years we'll dispense with the glasses and we'll have auto stereoscopic screens.

"That will allow us to have laptops and small portable devices and i-phones and all that sort of thing all in 3D as well."

Cameron said we could eventually see things like American Idol, Dancing With The Stars and the Olympics leaping out of our screens in 3D.

"3D for everybody," he proclaimed.

[Koleax]

I've been saving up for a 52" TV for a while now (an upgrade from my 11") and I'd buy one right now if it weren't for the thought of playing Wipeout in 3D. I had heard that most of the TVs that had been released in the past year or so would be compatible, but no. I'm ready to buy a Samsung 950 series with a bazillion-to-1 contrast ratio with local dimming and 120hz, but can it do 3D? Nope. Argh, curse this waiting!

The latest to be reviewed on CNet is the Sony Bravia NX800, which doesn't do 3D either. It looks like they won't be released until the summer. They haven't even said how much they'll cost. Lastly, there's no guarantee that Wipeout will actually be updated for 3D, is there? They could just sit and forget about it. I just hope it's worth the wait.

[KIGO1987]

Just bought a KDL42W5500 for the main room in January. Damn knew i should of waited.... Did pick it up for a good price...... i think:|

No need to get a 3D tv anytime soon.:dizzy

[blackwiggle]

Well Sony aren't as dumb as I thought,they have just released some new budget receivers,at least one that has 3D pass through.
See link for details.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10455738-1.html

Pioneer have done the same.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10463850-1.html

[Rapier Racer]

HD and Blu Ray are hardly out the door and now they want to shove 3D down peoples throats as well? Wheres the bookie cos I'm putting my money on this being FAIL for a very long time.

[KGB]

Also even though the new type are a massive improvement on what they were, they still make everything go dark around you so destroying any ambience or lighting in the room. This added to the fact that the viewers will look like the bastard children of Roy Orbison is a massive turn off.

I agree, keep it in the cinema.

Someone else agrees! http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=152892155. Might stop a bit of fighting in pubs as you can't hit a man in glasses :).

[blackwiggle]

Well the first review of one of these 3D TV's has just come out.

It's of a Samsung model .
It seems the manufactures have been reading the negative comments about 3D TV's people have been posting at forums,even before the set's hit the stores.
So they have made some BIG alterations to the sets, well at least Samsung has,[ I expect the others will do the same] ,there is a lot more feature wise,to those that were shown just 3 months ago at CES 2010.
After reading the review it makes me think that the manufacturers have all along been able to make TV's that "Do it all", but hadn't shown them because their business plan was to stagger the introduction of the technology over a few years, there by maximizing profits.
We consumers have seen this coming, and have by our collective comments, basically told the manufacturers that 3D will be an epic failure if they released the set's as they were previously shown, hence the rapid change.
We still have the memory of the HDDVD V's Bluray debacle.
A small but important WIN for the consumer
Hell, Sony has even gone to the extent of waiting till later in the year to release their set's, a wait an see how the others go approach.

Anyway , read the review , if your in the market for a new TV you might actually consider one of these now.
http://www.avguide.com/review/samsung-8000-series-lcdled-3d-tv-tpv-88?src=Playback

I think all TV's will have these features as standard within the next 5 years anyway.

[AG-wolf]

I laid down a total of at least $1700 on two 1080p HDTVs (42" @ $1100, 32" @ $600) over the course of the last year and a couple months.

Neither will be replaced until they've died. I can't imagine people welcoming the 3D sets with open arms, even IF their prices ARE competitive. Aside from the requisite early adopters with ANY kind of technology, how many people do they really think are going to bust a gut to get their hands on this? Half the people who finally bought into HDTVs in general still don't know how to even operate their sets properly :/

Maybe this is something I'd have to see in action to actually appreciate it, I don't know. If that's the case, though, these companies had better put a display up in every Walmart, Sears, BJ's, and any other major suppliers LONG before it's set to hit the market.

edit: that soccer match that KGB linked to is prime example. If they really want this to take off, they need to build hype with tangible demonstrations like that really early.

[blackwiggle]

I'm of the opinion that people that might of been considering buying their first HD TV or maybe their second ,to replace 720p Plasma for example, might of been putting off buying a set till the 3D ones hit the market.
Apart from the obligatory early adoptees ,I think these people will be the major deciding factor if 3D really takes off.

I don't like the fact that they are intent on bring out HD 3D Plasma displays,basically only to make a cheaper entry point for the take up of 3D. That's just asking for problems.
Reason being is the screen burn-in that Plasma sets suffer.
Bluray disc playback will cut black bars into the set due to the movies aspect ratio differing from the screens, and the often stationary HUD/Menu/health bar/Targeting etc of video games do exactly the same thing.
Considering that these will be the main things that get played back on these 3D sets, you're going to have a lot of the less tech savvy consumers complaining about this about 10 months after purchase.
Not good when your trying to sell a new technology that's long term success is already touch & go.