Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
on June 9th
seems yet another total failure for 3D , which has been predicted to be the future of TV/Cinema 4 or 5 different times since the early 1950s .
Recall when this channel launched , 2010 i think , they really had high hopes . The trailer for it was overwhelmingly about live sport , and was really thought this would become the essential way to watch football etc
Suppose the writing was on the wall when they virtually stopped covering sport in 3D a year or so back .
seems yet another total failure for 3D , which has been predicted to be the future of TV/Cinema 4 or 5 different times since the early 1950s .
Recall when this channel launched , 2010 i think , they really had high hopes . The trailer for it was overwhelmingly about live sport , and was really thought this would become the essential way to watch football etc
Suppose the writing was on the wall when they virtually stopped covering sport in 3D a year or so back .
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 22
|
By:
Like someone said to me a long time ago, 3d is individual experience, total opposite to what the sharing youth of today want to do.
|
|
By:
it was sh!te experience aswell. Never saw one demo in a shop that was any good.
|
|
By:
brendan's point is far more valid.
the only 3d tv/film that works is the top end animation where they carefully manage which part of the image is in 3d and which is not. on top of that, they don't do anything in the foreground or background over where we're supposed to be focusing. which is just how our vision works: the centre of our view is in 3d, the periphery is not. We also have to refocus when we introduce images into the foreground of what we're looking it, otherwise we filter it out. so stare at these words, notice what's around you to the sides, and then wave your hand equidistant between the screen and your nose. you should get the idea of what i mean live images are **** because everything is in 3d appears unnatural and distracting because it can't compensate for these sorts of thing. and that's before we worry about the loss in fidelity and brightness caused by the glasses |
|
By:
Plus the specs made you look stupid
|
|
By:
The darts matches they used to show in 3D were hardly a stunning success.
|
|
By:
People diving for cover
|
|
By:
how close do broadcasters and tv manufacturers work? there must be some 'collusion' for want of better word. Maybe they paid for 3d channel? seems ridiculously expensive use of money for sky otherwise
|
|
By:
As I seem to be a font of all ignorance, I've not seen anything in 3D since those silly plastic glasses were free with the TV Times 30 odd years ago!
Where can I see an example of 3D sport with the benefit of 3 decades of technology since I last tuned in? I wouldn't mind seeing what it looked like and I'm wondering whether some sort of goggles are still required  |
|
By:
I think hd is so good for watching sport that there is simply no need for 3d - for the amount of extra cost vs the improved "experience" it is just not a viable proposition imo
|
|
By:
Plus the specs made you look stupid
|
|
By:
I'd like SKY to not increase their charges in June in line with this closure.
I doubt they will. |
|
By:
This nonsense will be back yet again in another 5 years .......people do not want to wear glasses to watch TV .......apart from the people who already do ......and they don't want a second set ffs.
 |
|
By:
I must admit to feeling a bit sorry for the people who were sucked in by all the hype and are now left with useless kit that they won't be able to give away
 |
|
By:
still be 3d films i think, the next star wars is.
|
|
By:
star wars the next one is shirley
|
|
By:
Hardly useless kit Badger. My TV is superb with 3D, but it's also superb with 2D as well, as are most modern TV's. The manufacturers knew not to put all their eggs in one three dimensional basket.
|
|
By:
They can either make things in 3d from scratch (better) or add the effect later via technology.
There was some film on the other day and I thought "this must have been made for 3d" as there were too many things coming straight at the camera, sure enough it was :) A good 3d film sitting in a good seat in an iMax IS a good experience, I've enjoyed it anyway. Navel Gazer the standard way to do 3d now is different to the crap different coloured lenses, they work by giving you glasses that are a bit like sunglasses, and each lens is polarised a different way. They show 2 images, one for each polarisation, and each eye sees the different image. It works fairly well actually imho. |
|
By:
ah, fair enough treble, I thought some tellys were 3d only, shows what I know
|
|
By:
I really dont think a TV where you have to sit wearing sunglasses every minute you watch it would have been very popular
 |
|
By:
Yes badger they are optional. I don't think you get 3d DVDs but you get 3d Blu-Ray.
In fact some TVs can try to 3d-ise anything, even the news, the computer inside analyses the image and tries to make it look 3D, and it actually works. Games consoles can also play some games 3D so even if Sky don't broadcast in 3D, you can still use it. BBC sometimes broadcasts in 3d like the wimbledon final, some of the olympics and so on. |
|
By:
treble.
I think I remember you giving some advice a while ago about the best TV’s? I am thinking of replacing mine which although it was a good TV when I bought it (Philips 9000 series) is showing its age a bit (particularly with standard def pictures). I haven’t done any research yet but was wondering if you have any recommendations – I don’t mind shelling out for it (within reason!) as I sit in front of it for long enough! Of course, if I have you mixed up with someone else then apologies…….. |
|
By:
I believe the channel isn't closing as such, but it's being moved off the main platform to being an on-demand service on SKY
|