# 3D TVs are on the Verge of Extinction



## Todd Anderson (Jul 24, 2009)

Just five short years ago Sony and Panasonic brought 3D televisions to market with a gaggle of other manufacturers in hot pursuit of a similar multi-dimensional aspiration. It may be hard to remember, but the technology was billed as the next great leap in television. In fact, some suggested that the revolutionary realism delivered by 3D would be comparable to the jump from black-and-white to color screens. 

Yup, 3D was billed to be bigger than big. 

In retrospect, the technology was only slightly more than geeked-up sales fodder. This isn’t to say that 3D hasn’t had its moments and doesn’t have its fans; it has and does. But its overall success has fallen well short of self-promoting industry predictions. 

3D’s primary Achilles heel is the necessity for viewers to wear glasses, which (depending on the type of glasses) can be expensive for manufactures to implement. There are also side issues such as diminished display light output, ghosting, viewing annoyances (e.g., headaches), and a complete lack of live television content (which largely disappeared in 2013). Of course 3D Blu-ray content is still readily available and commercial cinemas are still showing movies in the format. However, don’t be fooled by the continued existence of commercial and disc-bound 3D media. According the Motion Picture Association of America, 3D ticket sales only accounted for 14-percent of box office sales in the United States and Canada during 2014; 3D Blu-ray sales aren’t too much different (they vary by title, but certainly reflect a general preference for non-3D discs).

This brings us to recent exclusive news from a Korean IT news organization called etnews. According to this source, both Samsung and LG Electronics are actively “greatly reducing the number of TVs that will have 3D function.” In other words, 3D televisions appear to be entering their final cycle. Samsung is said to be completely abandoning 3D on new products (for the time being) and LG is reporting plans to cut 3D television production in half. Etnews supports its Samsung claim with industry insider information from a parts supplier, confirming that Samsung has not requested a further supply of 3D glasses this year. The news site says LG may reserve 3D functionality for only its most expensive models.

The arrival of 4K UHD paired with High Dynamic Range and Wide Color Gamut has hurt the viability of 3D in the consumer setting, crushing what little momentum the technology had reserved for future sales. Let’s face it, both UHD and HDR offer significantly more intriguing levels of visual impact without the need for wearable equipment. There has also been fast growth in consumer Virtual Reality technology that may further reduce the demand for 3D content on a television.

Perhaps 3D televisions will re-emerge under different circumstances, which is certainly foreseeable if manufacturers find a way to create a three dimensional feel without the need for glasses. If this happens, we’ll likely see it marketed once the sales allure of 4K and HDR has run its course.



_Image Credit: Amazon/Samsung
Source Credit: etnews, MPAA, Home Media Magazine_


----------



## ambientcafe (Sep 10, 2014)

Great news, Todd -- let's hope *curved* flatscreens are the next to get_ The Gong_ :wave:!


----------



## willis7469 (Jan 31, 2014)

ambientcafe said:


> Great news, Todd -- let's hope *curved* flatscreens are the next to get_ The Gong_ :wave:!



Hahahahaha!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Todd Anderson (Jul 24, 2009)

ambientcafe said:


> Great news, Todd -- let's hope *curved* flatscreens are the next to get_ The Gong_ :wave:!



Don't worry - curves are not far behind!


----------



## robbo266317 (Sep 22, 2008)

3D has been tried by the movie outlets since I was, well lets not go there, Anyway, Gimmicks with glasses will not sell.
Maybe holographics will break through when they get to an affordable price. Maybe not. :dontknow:

Who knows what will happen in the next ten years to 2026.
The transistor wasn't around until I was born. 

What the future holds is anyone's guess... 


Please feel free to ask for your wishes!


----------



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

3D I've always hated.... from the first time I saw it at best buy w/ the demo setup they had. I'm a purist at heat... this includes 24fps movies. They have been testing 60fps in theaters recently and I absolutely hate this....

...I hope this doesn't come to play because my projector and bluray player all output 24fps and I love the natural movie look. I love watching older movies that have grain from the film transfer. It looks great!

New movies look great too but they just have a digital feel to them. And curved screens need to vanish although very large anamorphic screens I can see their benefit.... but it's a fad imho.


----------



## Todd Anderson (Jul 24, 2009)

You can't blame the industry for searching for technologies that will boost sales...I think immersive sound and HDR are going to end up being legit impact players, which is exciting to have...lots of these other techs (curves, 3D, front height, etc) are afterthoughts.


----------



## ambientcafe (Sep 10, 2014)

Being a hipster, I wouldn't mind seeing tele's with wood cabinets again, like on this retro (non-3D  ) 24" Crosley that I own ... the front-mounted speakers offer significantly better sound quality than on similar-sized slim fashion models due to the depth of the cabinet, as well as benefitting from the resonant qualities of the wood construction. And hey, with the deeper cabinets, they could integrate immersive-enabled speakers into the top and sides (!) ... obviously, I've got too much idle time on my hands, and sorry for going off-topic.


----------



## videobruce (Jul 11, 2010)

> You can't blame the industry for searching for technologies that will boost sales


Yes I surely can. If they need "gimmicks" to sell their wares, then that tells me there 'wares' are suspect! 

The overblown "LED TV" scam is the best example.


----------



## videobruce (Jul 11, 2010)

They need to try to grossly improve customer support and especially *detailed* documentation with advanced products which has almost always went lacking.


----------



## tripplej (Oct 23, 2011)

While I do have a 3D TV as well as 3D Blu ray, I must admit that I only own a handful of 3D movies and that is mostly due to the fact that there are only so many good movies that are worth seeing in 3D.
I will not miss 3D but I do hope they perfect it at some point where we don't need to wear the 3D glasses in the near future.


----------



## Todd Anderson (Jul 24, 2009)

I've never taken 3D seriously simply because the drawbacks outweigh the positives - it certainly has its proponents though. It's good to see manufacturers pushing in another direction... I'll be curious to see if this has a trickle down (or, depending on how you see it... trickle up) effect on 3D movies in commercial theaters. I don't follow the commercial side of the equation all that closely, but it doesn't appear to be anything close to a cash-cow for the industry.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I would be curious about the success of 3D in movie theaters. Our family is unanimous in avoiding them. But there must be a market for them as they do seem to fill seats.


----------



## tripplej (Oct 23, 2011)

Studio's can justify having them for block buster films since they charge an arm and a leg for the ticket price. People will see it for the special effects. We saw Star Wars in 3D and tickets were pricey but the special effects were incredible. Now, I can't compare to non 3D to say if it was any better or not since I didn't see 2D but the seats were full for the 3D picture.


----------



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

tripplej said:


> Studio's can justify having them for block buster films since they charge an arm and a leg for the ticket price. People will see it for the special effects. We saw Star Wars in 3D and tickets were pricey but the special effects were incredible. Now, I can't compare to non 3D to say if it was any better or not since I didn't see 2D but the seats were full for the 3D picture.


the 3D was full because the 2D was sold out :rofl2:


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Here 3D movies in the theaters get the premium times and they tend to get put in the best/biggest theaters. Atmos with UltraAVX tend to all be 3D. Its a scam because I know many of my friends would rather see the 2D version because of the same reasons I dislike 3D (darker picture and those silly glasses) but because we all like the largest screen possible we are stuck getting the 3D.


----------



## ambientcafe (Sep 10, 2014)

tonyvdb said:


> Here 3D movies in the theaters get the *premium times* and they tend to get put in the* best/biggest *theaters. Atmos with UltraAVX tend to all be 3D. Its a scam because I know many of my friends would rather see the 2D version because of the same reasons I dislike 3D (*darker picture* and those silly glasses) but because we all like the largest screen possible we are stuck getting the 3D.


Bingo! -- exactly the same tactics the theaters are using here in Canada -- oops, I just realized that 'tonyvdb' is a fellow Albertan as well, lol. Anyhoo, I remember being 'forced' to watch 'Fury Road' in 3D and absolutely hating the experience because of the darker picture (sound was subpar as well); sentiments that were shared by all four members of our viewing group.


----------



## Todd Anderson (Jul 24, 2009)

It would be interesting to get the scoop from the commercial cinema side, but I'm guessing that forcing movie goers in that direction pushes ticket revenue up. The 3D ticket costs more - perhaps a tad more profit is built-in?


----------

