yep, that sums it up. how can this be a serious venture when you need a new tv and those uncomfortable specs to view something that IS NOT 3D - it's a 2 layered effect.
if it was 3D - like the star wars chess holograms, then it would be decent, but in reality, it's just a lenticular image.
WTF is the attraction with '3D' sports? If you are watching it live from the ground you are generally too far away for stereoscopic depth perception, you go only on the parallax (which you don't get with stereovision). So any '3D' outdoor sports will look wrong. Golf is worse than most, the ball travels so far that it gets lost visually.
I've avoided watching the Ryder cup for years due to the lack of that third dimension. I'd just been too confused as to where the ball was and how far it was to the hole.
I believe they are wanting £16 per month for the 3D channel which is no doubt on top of the £10 per month for HD and a subscription to Sky sports and sky movies. Sure it may be a gimmick for a month or two but i can see people easily getting bored with it and cancelling the subscription once the novelty had worn off. 3D is really only suitable for one off events and the odd movie which would be better as PPV events not a dedicate channel.
Very good indeed, but the specs alone cost £100 and I would need at least 4!! The American football and Toy Story 3D demo was certainly much better than a 'layered effect'. But nope, I shan't be getting one for several years if at all - reason... price and crap content!
The Sony version of 3D TV costs £100 per pair of glasses, because that is the active version. Check out the alternative passive version, as briefly mentioned in the article. This uses the same 3D specs that you get at the cinema, which cost a quid each. Same effect, no Sony-tax.
Looking at buying a new TV soon but not sure I want to pay a premium to get a 3D compatible one...
Sky turns 3D on Oct 1
off to dixons, gullible
All the early adopters have to dump their 1-year old super-duper HDTV sets and get a 3D one.
Glad we don't have a telly at all.
Ok, mine's the one with a pile of reminder letters from TV-Licensing in the pocket.
Logic Fail
If they're really early adopters they'll have had HDTV for years. You do realise HDTV didn't come out 1 year ago don't you?
Football in 3d
It's already widely available at your local ground. Give it a try, it's great!
fooled around with....
yep, that sums it up. how can this be a serious venture when you need a new tv and those uncomfortable specs to view something that IS NOT 3D - it's a 2 layered effect.
if it was 3D - like the star wars chess holograms, then it would be decent, but in reality, it's just a lenticular image.
golf in '3D' - fuck right off....
Why?
WTF is the attraction with '3D' sports? If you are watching it live from the ground you are generally too far away for stereoscopic depth perception, you go only on the parallax (which you don't get with stereovision). So any '3D' outdoor sports will look wrong. Golf is worse than most, the ball travels so far that it gets lost visually.
More chance to notch up profits I suspect...
Sign me up!
I've avoided watching the Ryder cup for years due to the lack of that third dimension. I'd just been too confused as to where the ball was and how far it was to the hole.
Wait, hang on...
£16 per month
I believe they are wanting £16 per month for the 3D channel which is no doubt on top of the £10 per month for HD and a subscription to Sky sports and sky movies. Sure it may be a gimmick for a month or two but i can see people easily getting bored with it and cancelling the subscription once the novelty had worn off. 3D is really only suitable for one off events and the odd movie which would be better as PPV events not a dedicate channel.
Just seen on in the Sony shop
Very good indeed, but the specs alone cost £100 and I would need at least 4!! The American football and Toy Story 3D demo was certainly much better than a 'layered effect'. But nope, I shan't be getting one for several years if at all - reason... price and crap content!
ah, but....
The Sony version of 3D TV costs £100 per pair of glasses, because that is the active version. Check out the alternative passive version, as briefly mentioned in the article. This uses the same 3D specs that you get at the cinema, which cost a quid each. Same effect, no Sony-tax.
Looking at buying a new TV soon but not sure I want to pay a premium to get a 3D compatible one...
Headaches are us
time to invest in paracetamol!
personally
apart maybe from women's beach volleyball it's not sport that would sell 3d tv to me, I wanna know what does porn look like in hd 3d?