web
analytics
≡ Menu

Why is 3D not Taking Off at Home?

You might be surprised to know that 3D movies didn’t come about with Avatar, or 1980s yuppies, or even the B-movie trend in the 1950s such as House of Wax. Actually in the first years of the 20th century pioneers such as William Friese-Greene were already wowing audiences with stereoscopic projection. It’s a trick where you project two images onto one screen, get the viewer at just the right distance, and voila: a 3D image. But for some reason, despite coming and going as the new ‘big thing’ for over one hundred years, it hasn’t taken off. Avatar was the beginning and end of the latest real 3D success in cinema, and now we’re seeing that home 3D, despite being pushed on viewers, isn’t being watched. Why should this be?

One of the first things to be pointed out by TV developers at the moment is that 3D is selling much better than ever. They’ve gone from a damp squib of a year in 2010 to figures in the millions in 2012. But these figures are misleading. People are buying 3D TVs, but they’re not watching things in 3D. The root to this riddle is the fact that 3D is now standard in top of the range TVs, meaning consumers don’t have a choice in whether they buy it or not. It comes with the bundle, and like many other features it’s never actually switched on.

When people do use 3D TVs the responses are lacklustre. People either don’t see the 3D image, or see it sporadically. In some cases people even complain of nausea when trying to watch the latest blockbuster at home (who’d have thought?). The problem here is the same problem that Friese-Green faced back in the turn of the 20th century. You have to get just the right distance away from the two images to see them as one. This is easier when you have a huge screen, and a big range of optimum distance to play with. But at home it’s hard to set up just the right conditions.

More important than all this is the fact that people just don’t want to wear glasses to watch TV. We’re averse to new technology that requires more effort, and it’s this apathy more than anything that’s holding 3D back from becoming a phenomenon. And to be fair to viewers, the glasses are restrictive. If you lean back you loose the image in some cases, and it forces you to pay attention to the TV in a way that’s not conducive to relaxation and enjoyment.

Without a way to overcome this hurdle TV companies can’t persuade content makers to invest more in 3D features. There’s a draught of media out there, even for people that are willing to make the leap into new technology. This vicious cycle of apathy leading to lack of commitment, leading to more apathy, means that it’s unforeseeable that 3D can really take off in the home: unless someone can give it a major facelift.

Author Bio:- This post was written  by Carly Featherstone. Carly works for an online store which specialises in Doremi 3D Converters and other video and audio monitoring solutions.

{ 1 comment… add one }
  • kashi

    October 24, 2012, 10:48 pm

    What a nice information, till now i thought that 3D is an invention of 21st Century.

    Reply

Leave a Comment