Tessier Ashpool Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 Ok, so, with CES 2010 wrapping up it's another year of "omfg wtf bbq it's in 3d!" products. Seems like this year was no exception when it comes to 3d, with Sony pushing their upcoming "PS3 in 3d functionality", 3d Blu-Ray, not to mention a bevy of 3D TV's using either shutter-style glasses or polarized 3d tech. Supposedly the majority of TV owners will have 3d in the home by 2014, or so they say. I'm as hyped for 3d as anybody, but I do think that the main stumbling block to mainstream acceptance will be wearing the glasses. As someone (I think it was on Kotaku) was saying, wearing glassed to go see a IMAX movie is a lot more palatable for many people than having to don 3d glasses in the home. Die-hards and the curious/open minded will probably go for it, but casual users will likely be put off. I mean, shit, as much as I think 3d is tha future and all that, I'm not sure how long I'd be willing to go w/the specs on my head unless they were uber comfortable. Soooo - seems like the most realistic solution to this is auto-stereoscopic TV's/projection devices. Sounds like there continues to be movement on this front, but I have to wonder how effective auto-stereoscopic TV's are. Does anyone have any experience, knowledge about this? I just have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea that autostereoscopic could really work unless you are sitting/viewing from the perfect angle. I mean, is there really any way to make something autostereoscopic with a wide viewing angle? Or is it just a pipe dream? I throw myself on the mercy of the might WATMM massif knowledge base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
data Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ivan Lennovitz Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9mhSx7kMqU Nothing 3D, but nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patternoverlap Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 I had very noticeable eye strain after seeing Avatar so I imagine that will be an issue if people are watching TV in 3D all the time with the glasses and whatnot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JW Modestburns Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 The only good 3D TVs will be the absurdly huge ones. A 27" 3D TV seems kind of silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Super lurker ultra V12 Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 3D porn is going to be amazing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 this came out when i was a kid - so yeah i think in 2010 it's definitely possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Dylan Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 That was an optical illusion, it wasn't a true hologram dude. There was a telly inside and a mirror to refract so that it faked the 3d, nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hahathhat Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 i want the image beamed directly into my visual cortex, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Blanket Fort Collapse Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 I want da porn beamed directly inside my cerebrum dewd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ivan Lennovitz Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 I want to use my dick as a joystick. Lol joy stick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbpete Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 I have absolutely no idea what's going on there, but it makes me both happy and terrified in equal quantities... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 That was an optical illusion, it wasn't a true hologram dude. There was a telly inside and a mirror to refract so that it faked the 3d, nothing more. watmm very infrequently seems to get my humor i think it was a MIT they have a working ceiling viewable auto stereoscopic projector, one that does not require the use of 3d glasses or anything on the face. I saw a discovery channel program about new technology that featured this and this was a good 7+ years ago. Given that polarized light 3d technology has been around almost as long as anagylph, im pretty certain 3d televisions that create a 3d effect without glasses are possible right now. Unfortunately that type of technology is probably prohibitively expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tessier Ashpool Posted January 12, 2010 Author Share Posted January 12, 2010 That was an optical illusion, it wasn't a true hologram dude. There was a telly inside and a mirror to refract so that it faked the 3d, nothing more. watmm very infrequently seems to get my humor i think it was a MIT they have a working ceiling viewable auto stereoscopic projector, one that does not require the use of 3d glasses or anything on the face. I saw a discovery channel program about new technology that featured this and this was a good 7+ years ago. Given that polarized light 3d technology has been around almost as long as anagylph, im pretty certain 3d televisions that create a 3d effect without glasses are possible right now. Unfortunately that type of technology is probably prohibitively expensive. holy crap I remember that game!!! Remember seeing it in the arcades when I was kid too - thought it was the coolest thing ever. So, they have had some auto-stereoscopic TV's being produced, with several on display at CES this year. From what I hear, there is usually some sort of refractive, very thin lens over the screen of the television that allows the visual signal to be appropriately split/concocted so that the viewer sees it in 3d. The problem being that you have to view things from a specific angle (or, from what I was reading, there are several "sweet spots"), which seems like it could be a pain if you are watching with a bunch of people (or just want to not sit perfectly still when watching). And, yeah, cost is prohibitively expensive right now for sure - maybe by the time it becomes reasonable they'll have perfected the tech, but just not sure how you'd do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gary C Posted January 12, 2010 Share Posted January 12, 2010 3D glasses and spectacle wearers don't mix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patternoverlap Posted January 12, 2010 Share Posted January 12, 2010 I wear spectacles and I had no trouble with the 3D glasses over them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.