I don't understand why the polarization method can't be/isn't used on TVs, just at the theaters. If we all need new TVs anyway, why is the method that needs expensive glasses becoming the frontrunner for at-home 3D (besides the money grab, that is)?
Because you can't do it with a TV: you'd need a dual projector system.
3D TV technology is never going to catch on with glasses.
The future might be 3d, but it will be naked-eye 3d or nothing. For so many reasons.
Convenience, for starters.
All technology takes the shape of convenience. That is its only goal.
Also, the way TVs are so pervasive. Think about watching sports in bars, or the big flatscreens they have in picadilly. People will not walk around all day in 3d glasses, so that technology will be strictly limited to voluntary viewing, which also limits advertising which is a major no no.
They can't sell me a new BMW if I'm not wearing the 3d glasses and the price is blurred out and unreadable.
I don't understand why the polarization method can't be/isn't used on TVs, just at the theaters. If we all need new TVs anyway, why is the method that needs expensive glasses becoming the frontrunner for at-home 3D (besides the money grab, that is)?
Because you don't watch TV like you play a handheld console. The 3D glasses method means you don't need to worry about being in the sweet spot.
The problem with the 3D glasses method is that's not how we watch TV anymore. People do other things while watching shows these days, and 3D glasses aren't conductive to that.
I don't understand why the polarization method can't be/isn't used on TVs, just at the theaters. If we all need new TVs anyway, why is the method that needs expensive glasses becoming the frontrunner for at-home 3D (besides the money grab, that is)?
Because you can't do it with a TV: you'd need a dual projector system.
Sorry, should have been more clear. There's something that prevents some new TV from spitting out two polarizations at once? I'm assuming there is.
I don't understand why the polarization method can't be/isn't used on TVs, just at the theaters. If we all need new TVs anyway, why is the method that needs expensive glasses becoming the frontrunner for at-home 3D (besides the money grab, that is)?
Because you don't watch TV like you play a handheld console. The 3D glasses method means you don't need to worry about being in the sweet spot.
The problem with the 3D glasses method is that's not how we watch TV anymore. People do other things while watching shows these days, and 3D glasses aren't conductive to that.
I was talking more about the cheap glasses method as opposed to the shutter glasses one. I can understand the no glasses constraint. I guess I just don't get why the polarization w/ cheap glasses can't be done on TVs.
That's why 3D needs to be done with holograms. Which is why they are way to early with trying to push it s a format. HD is nowhere near standard yet, throwing this on top is just dumb. Especially since there are going to be a lot of pissed off consumers who just splashed out on a 'future proof' 1080p HDTV only to find out now everything is 3D.
Should have gone for smell-o-vision.
Rami on
Steam / Xbox Live: WSDX NNID: W-S-D-X 3DS FC: 2637-9461-8549
3D TV technology is never going to catch on with glasses.
The future might be 3d, but it will be naked-eye 3d or nothing. For so many reasons.
The future won't even be TV. It'll be a laser console that beams the images to each of your eyeballs directly, with support for 32 normal people, or 64 pirates.
3D TV technology is never going to catch on with glasses.
The future might be 3d, but it will be naked-eye 3d or nothing. For so many reasons.
Short of holograms, any glasses free 3D will have to have set viewing angles that are basically determined by the distance between our eyes.
Or at least I can't think of any other option. And will holding your head that still for 2 hours be more comfortable than wearing glasses?
Like I said, either something new will have to be invented, or it will simply not catch on. Not outside of the premium cinephile demographic. Like those anamorphic TVs.
I'm sure I saw something on engadget ages ago about a curved screen implementation that worked much better.
Short of science-fiction holograms, if 3d wants to be the norm, it can't require glasses. That alone limits its appeal too much. As was said, convenience beats all.
I don't understand why the polarization method can't be/isn't used on TVs, just at the theaters. If we all need new TVs anyway, why is the method that needs expensive glasses becoming the frontrunner for at-home 3D (besides the money grab, that is)?
Because you can't do it with a TV: you'd need a dual projector system.
This isn't true. You double the pixel count and put a polarizer in front of each pixel. Or leave the pixel count and put a polarizer/LCD to rotate the polarization of the light in front of every pixel. Its likely just expensive. And that's just two off the top of my head.
So what you're saying is that the glasses demote the 1080p back down to a 1080i?
With two projectors the glasses don't throw out anything... except half of the light coming from the screen I guess. Light is nice, in that it doesn't really talk to other light unless you put it in some nonlinear material. So you can put two signals on top of each other (in this case with different polarizations) and not lose anything. If you were doing something like the above, you'd be halving the frame rate.
I don't think it will catch on without glasses either though. Unless the industry just forces it down our throats, which it seems they're trying to do right now.
The main problem with them trying to introduce 3DTVs is that the general public just got used to the idea of HDTVs. When everyone just spent a bunch of money on a TV, they're not going to want to rush out and buy another new TV right away. Especially with the way the global economy is right now.
Or press releases, even. Like I know Konami was last night, but not live, and someplaces in like 25 minutes should have the info. I'd also like to know where I can get information on the DA2 booth that is supposed to be on the show floor, the Atlus announcements, etc.
I was talking more about the cheap glasses method as opposed to the shutter glasses one. I can understand the no glasses constraint. I guess I just don't get why the polarization w/ cheap glasses can't be done on TVs.
Ah, gotcha.
Polarized tech requires even more expensive screens than shutter (which this new wave of 3DTV is banking on) tech. Theatres use it because they can eat that huge cost upfront, and make it back on ticket sales. Manufacturers can't count on consumers doing the same.
Surprisingly, shutter tech is the cheaper of the two for a larger screen.
You can find 3D PC monitors that use the polarized tech for a decent price, but once it gets bigger, it becomes horribly expensive.
Last night's Konami conference is supposed to go up on 10 minutes.
Only problem is I don't know where. Links?
Konami starts @6pm ET, video to go up later. G4 isn't live streaming it
From g4tv.com:
Wednesday at 9PM PT / 6PM ET | On G4TV.com
We'll likely see Saw II, Silent Hill and Castlevania: Lord of Shadows, but will we see an announcement from the creators of Metal Gear Solid? G4 won't stream this live but we will post it ASAP afterwards.
george-x on
0
Warlock82Never pet a burning dogRegistered Userregular
edited June 2010
I thought Konami's conference was listed as 1pm PST (or at least that's when they would show it), aka right now.
The future won't even be TV. It'll be a laser console that beams the images to each of your eyeballs directly, with support for 32 normal people, or 64 pirates.
Oh man, those pirates are always getting better experiences than us legit consumers.
1:21PM And we're rolling. First up is a trailer montage. Apparently the Konami code was required to unleash this flood from a digital vault. Not a great password, guys. So predictable!
I remember when Konami practically dominated the Arcades and SNES.
What the hell have they contributed this gen, besides MGS4 and two Silent Hills?
1:21PM And we're rolling. First up is a trailer montage. Apparently the Konami code was required to unleash this flood from a digital vault. Not a great password, guys. So predictable!
I remember when Konami practically dominated the Arcades and SNES.
What the hell have they contributed this gen, besides MGS4 and two Silent Hills?
Yu-Gi-Oh!
edit: Oh, and that Pro Evolution Soccer game. Some people like that.
1:21PM And we're rolling. First up is a trailer montage. Apparently the Konami code was required to unleash this flood from a digital vault. Not a great password, guys. So predictable!
I remember when Konami practically dominated the Arcades and SNES.
What the hell have they contributed this gen, besides MGS4 and two Silent Hills?
Yu-Gi-Oh!
edit: Oh, and that Pro Evolution Soccer game. Some people like that.
The day they make a Yu-Gi-Oh! online multiplayer game, I'll be all over it.
The main problem with them trying to introduce 3DTVs is that the general public just got used to the idea of HDTVs. When everyone just spent a bunch of money on a TV, they're not going to want to rush out and buy another new TV right away. Especially with the way the global economy is right now.
Especially when the cheapest HDTV is around a $100 for a television that is good for a dorm room or a bedroom, but not a living room, which cost around $400 or so. Trying to force people to pay $3000 now to play games is a horrible idea, and a good way to gurrantee a failure.
HAHAHHAHAHAHAH CHECK OUT KONAMI'S KEYNOTE OH GOOOOOD
Edit: you are missing the best spectacle ever
Edit: Seriously it's like one big keynote designed to feel like Miyamoto's Zelda demonstration.
Kastanj on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
SteevLWhat can I do for you?Registered Userregular
edited June 2010
I'm just going with the Joystiq liveblog.
"1:43PM There was some man-breast slapping taking place on stage. Now there's more -- the Slang rep is being seriously manhandled. To the point that he's now been taken out back. Good luck, dude!"
Posts
Because you can't do it with a TV: you'd need a dual projector system.
The future might be 3d, but it will be naked-eye 3d or nothing. For so many reasons.
Convenience, for starters.
All technology takes the shape of convenience. That is its only goal.
Also, the way TVs are so pervasive. Think about watching sports in bars, or the big flatscreens they have in picadilly. People will not walk around all day in 3d glasses, so that technology will be strictly limited to voluntary viewing, which also limits advertising which is a major no no.
They can't sell me a new BMW if I'm not wearing the 3d glasses and the price is blurred out and unreadable.
Same.
Where do I get my prescription 3D glasses? Oh wait.
Because you don't watch TV like you play a handheld console. The 3D glasses method means you don't need to worry about being in the sweet spot.
The problem with the 3D glasses method is that's not how we watch TV anymore. People do other things while watching shows these days, and 3D glasses aren't conductive to that.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
Short of holograms, any glasses free 3D will have to have set viewing angles that are basically determined by the distance between our eyes.
Or at least I can't think of any other option. And will holding your head that still for 2 hours be more comfortable than wearing glasses?
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
Sorry, should have been more clear. There's something that prevents some new TV from spitting out two polarizations at once? I'm assuming there is.
EDIT:
I was talking more about the cheap glasses method as opposed to the shutter glasses one. I can understand the no glasses constraint. I guess I just don't get why the polarization w/ cheap glasses can't be done on TVs.
Well, it's not invented *yet*. There is nothing to say such a technology could not potentially be invented in the future.
Should have gone for smell-o-vision.
The future won't even be TV. It'll be a laser console that beams the images to each of your eyeballs directly, with support for 32 normal people, or 64 pirates.
Like I said, either something new will have to be invented, or it will simply not catch on. Not outside of the premium cinephile demographic. Like those anamorphic TVs.
I'm sure I saw something on engadget ages ago about a curved screen implementation that worked much better.
Short of science-fiction holograms, if 3d wants to be the norm, it can't require glasses. That alone limits its appeal too much. As was said, convenience beats all.
With two projectors the glasses don't throw out anything... except half of the light coming from the screen I guess. Light is nice, in that it doesn't really talk to other light unless you put it in some nonlinear material. So you can put two signals on top of each other (in this case with different polarizations) and not lose anything. If you were doing something like the above, you'd be halving the frame rate.
I don't think it will catch on without glasses either though. Unless the industry just forces it down our throats, which it seems they're trying to do right now.
Or press releases, even. Like I know Konami was last night, but not live, and someplaces in like 25 minutes should have the info. I'd also like to know where I can get information on the DA2 booth that is supposed to be on the show floor, the Atlus announcements, etc.
Ah, gotcha.
Polarized tech requires even more expensive screens than shutter (which this new wave of 3DTV is banking on) tech. Theatres use it because they can eat that huge cost upfront, and make it back on ticket sales. Manufacturers can't count on consumers doing the same.
Surprisingly, shutter tech is the cheaper of the two for a larger screen.
You can find 3D PC monitors that use the polarized tech for a decent price, but once it gets bigger, it becomes horribly expensive.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
Last night's Konami conference is supposed to go up on 10 minutes.
Only problem is I don't know where. Links?
Edit: I guess here?
Blog||Tumblr|Steam|Twitter|FFXIV|Twitch|YouTube|Podcast|PSN|XBL|DarkZero
Konami starts @6pm ET, video to go up later. G4 isn't live streaming it
From g4tv.com:
Wednesday at 9PM PT / 6PM ET | On G4TV.com
We'll likely see Saw II, Silent Hill and Castlevania: Lord of Shadows, but will we see an announcement from the creators of Metal Gear Solid? G4 won't stream this live but we will post it ASAP afterwards.
Edit: Yeah, what above said.
Blog||Tumblr|Steam|Twitter|FFXIV|Twitch|YouTube|Podcast|PSN|XBL|DarkZero
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/06/16/konami-e3-2010-keynote-live-from-the-los-angeles-convention-cen/
Too bad that is blocked from here (I can only get the RSS feed which won't contain any of the stuff after the "Read more" button)
I'm confused, I thought this thing already happened last night, but was behind closed doors. Is this a recorded live blog or something?
Blog||Tumblr|Steam|Twitter|FFXIV|Twitch|YouTube|Podcast|PSN|XBL|DarkZero
They were on for Ubisoft and EA, but I'm positive this conference will trump both.
Blog||Tumblr|Steam|Twitter|FFXIV|Twitch|YouTube|Podcast|PSN|XBL|DarkZero
G4 has a funny little blurb if you click on that link now.
Oh man, those pirates are always getting better experiences than us legit consumers.
I remember when Konami practically dominated the Arcades and SNES.
What the hell have they contributed this gen, besides MGS4 and two Silent Hills?
Blog||Tumblr|Steam|Twitter|FFXIV|Twitch|YouTube|Podcast|PSN|XBL|DarkZero
Yu-Gi-Oh!
edit: Oh, and that Pro Evolution Soccer game. Some people like that.
The day they make a Yu-Gi-Oh! online multiplayer game, I'll be all over it.
Also check this image out.
Hilariously appropriate for the SH reveal.
Blog||Tumblr|Steam|Twitter|FFXIV|Twitch|YouTube|Podcast|PSN|XBL|DarkZero
Especially when the cheapest HDTV is around a $100 for a television that is good for a dorm room or a bedroom, but not a living room, which cost around $400 or so. Trying to force people to pay $3000 now to play games is a horrible idea, and a good way to gurrantee a failure.
Edit: you are missing the best spectacle ever
Edit: Seriously it's like one big keynote designed to feel like Miyamoto's Zelda demonstration.
"1:43PM There was some man-breast slapping taking place on stage. Now there's more -- the Slang rep is being seriously manhandled. To the point that he's now been taken out back. Good luck, dude!"
edit: reposted with correct image
EDIT: About the Luchadore thing, not the Saw thing.
They announced a new Silent Hill?