Latest Movie News Headlines

The 3D TV fad is dead! Long live 4K!

Jan. 7, 2014by: Alex Maidy

At the Consumer Electronic Show, TV giant Vizio made the announcement that they would not be releasing any 3D televisions in 2014, marking the first manufacturer to abandon the format and sending ripples through the industry. A recent survey of 3D TV owners found that 8 out of 19 regret purchasing the unit which keeps in line with the declining popularity of 3D both at home and on the big screen. Considered a fad despite huge box office numbers for films like AVATAR, ALICE IN WONDERLAND, and numerous post-converted films, 3D has stuck around longer than many thought but is already well into a decline.

The Verge explained that while this does not mean 3D is gone completely, it does indicate a major shift in the technology of home entertainment:

It's also a major blow to 3D in the living room; Vizio sells the most TVs of any company in the US. But Vizio is confident that consumers won't miss it; in fact, the decision was made because Vizio's current customers simply aren't viewing content in 3D often. In 2014, Vizio seems willing to sacrifice what some may consider a gimmick in pursuit of a better picture.

As technology grows and changes, fads will come and go. 3D is, whether you are a proponent of it or not, a fad. The future of home entertainment will be interactivity, cloud-based apps, and higher resolution. With both Ultra HD and 4K televisions coming at consumer prices as well as curved screens and other enhancements to the traditional TV, there just isn't room for 3D when the profits are not there to warrant it.

For those of you unfamiliar with what 4K means, here is a quick breakdown courtesy of Wikipedia:

4K UHD is a resolution of 3840 pixels 2160 lines (8.3 megapixels, aspect ratio 16:9) and is one of the two resolutions of ultra high definition television targeted towards consumer television, the other being 8K UHD which is 7680 pixels 4320 lines (33.2 megapixels). 4K UHD has twice the horizontal and vertical resolution of the 1080p HDTV format, with four times as many pixels overall.

In a nutshell, 4K HD is so crystal clear you could stretch the image the size of a movie screen and it would still be perfectly crisp. The purpose of this on a home TV is negligible at this point, but consider the jump between standard TV to HD and that is what you get from 1080p HD to 4K.

So, for those of you who own 3D TVs, I am sorry. The cable networks that offer programming are dwindling and while you may be able to enjoy your overpriced Blu-rays, I wouldn't hold my breath for the format to stick around until they find a way to make TVs that can produce 3D without glasses.

Source: The Wire

Related Articles

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

6:50PM on 01/09/2014
I've seen 4K footage shot on a Red camera displayed on a 4K screen, and it wasn't impressive at all. I really didn't see a difference between it and 1080p. How much clearer than clear can you get anyways? It's a gimmick.
I've seen 4K footage shot on a Red camera displayed on a 4K screen, and it wasn't impressive at all. I really didn't see a difference between it and 1080p. How much clearer than clear can you get anyways? It's a gimmick.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
-3
2:29PM on 01/08/2014

3D is a waste

Its great on Avatar and....well I guess just Avatar, but in general and why it will never be made mainstream is 3D has nothing to offer most genres or TV shows. Like how would the godfather or any serious drama really benefit from 3D, Don Corleone isn't gonna throw a banana at the screen so that it whooshes by us in the theater. But you can be damn sure just as with Blu-Ray that old movies scanned at 4K will have outstanding resolution and bring out clarity and things you couldn't see before.
Its great on Avatar and....well I guess just Avatar, but in general and why it will never be made mainstream is 3D has nothing to offer most genres or TV shows. Like how would the godfather or any serious drama really benefit from 3D, Don Corleone isn't gonna throw a banana at the screen so that it whooshes by us in the theater. But you can be damn sure just as with Blu-Ray that old movies scanned at 4K will have outstanding resolution and bring out clarity and things you couldn't see before. Also for anyone that says 4K doenst make a difference hasn't seen anything natively recorded on 4K resolution, its pretty incredible and actually give you that 3D feeling bc of how much depth it has. My only caveat is to skip 4K with *k but again no one films in 8K yet so it would be a waste. Also just like a Blu-Ray picture can up-convert your DVD to 1080 resolution the same can be done with Blu-Ray on 4K and would look just as good as those DVD's look now on Blu-Ray players
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:36PM on 01/09/2014
The hell are you talking about? You can't create resolution where none exists. Upscaling is a bullshit word flung around by Best Buy chimps in order to sell things. And not for nothing, but exactly what media format are you gong to view that clear, deep image with? Streaming? Good luck. Hope you have an inexpensive access plan because you'll need to max it out. That's assuming of course they can develop a compression mode that doesn't wreck the image quality. Yeah, Netflix will stream 4K just
The hell are you talking about? You can't create resolution where none exists. Upscaling is a bullshit word flung around by Best Buy chimps in order to sell things. And not for nothing, but exactly what media format are you gong to view that clear, deep image with? Streaming? Good luck. Hope you have an inexpensive access plan because you'll need to max it out. That's assuming of course they can develop a compression mode that doesn't wreck the image quality. Yeah, Netflix will stream 4K just like 1080. Maybe in 20 years or so.
10:51AM on 01/08/2014

Guess I had good timing

I bought a 32" LCD about 10 years ago. Last year I re-upped to a 51" Samsung Plasma. It was "smart" and had "3D," not that I wanted those things. It was only 600 USD, and they threw in a smart 3D Blu-Ray player for free.
I really don't use the 3D all that much. Sure, it looks cool, but I don't need it, and it doesn't add anything, IMO. But the TV has great resolution, refresh, contrast, etc.

I'm sure 4K and 8K UHD looks good but there's 2 key elements here: 1-Price. Consumer-available
I bought a 32" LCD about 10 years ago. Last year I re-upped to a 51" Samsung Plasma. It was "smart" and had "3D," not that I wanted those things. It was only 600 USD, and they threw in a smart 3D Blu-Ray player for free.
I really don't use the 3D all that much. Sure, it looks cool, but I don't need it, and it doesn't add anything, IMO. But the TV has great resolution, refresh, contrast, etc.

I'm sure 4K and 8K UHD looks good but there's 2 key elements here: 1-Price. Consumer-available doesn't mean reasonable for the bottom 98%. I'm not buying a TV for 2 or 3 grand - period. That's a mortgage payment. Not going to do it. That 32 inch TV I bought cost $1,700 - and in hindsight, I should have waited 2 years. I'm never paying more than 800 for a set - ever. In 5 years, when I might even think about giving up this sweet set, these UHD TV's will be more affordable. The fact that the sets for sale are 4K UHD, and not 8K UHD, makes me think this is planned obsolescence (once 4K prices go down, 8K will appear.) Element #2 - and this is big: there's not much media for this yet. Blu-Rays won't be able to take care of this, and cable doesn't have much. If the media isn't good enough, the set is a non-starter.

My point being - if you want a 3D set; they are as cheap as they are going to get, basically are a free add-on - and wait 5-7 years to get an affordable UHD box, when you see. Early adopters is a big risk/reward proposition.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:10AM on 01/08/2014

"enjoy your overpriced BluRays"?

what are you talking about? for a few bucks more than the average BD i get the DVD, the BD, the digital copy and my 3D. I mean, we are talking $5, man! You really do sound like youre throwing an I-told-you-so at one of your buddies when you have more than jumped to a conclusion in a public forum. ___________ is dead is the oldest tech headline and is wrong half the time. how many of us heard DVD was dead when BD arrived? or plasma was dead when LCD hit it big? sure there are fewer plasmas out
what are you talking about? for a few bucks more than the average BD i get the DVD, the BD, the digital copy and my 3D. I mean, we are talking $5, man! You really do sound like youre throwing an I-told-you-so at one of your buddies when you have more than jumped to a conclusion in a public forum. ___________ is dead is the oldest tech headline and is wrong half the time. how many of us heard DVD was dead when BD arrived? or plasma was dead when LCD hit it big? sure there are fewer plasmas out there but they are there to serve cinema lovers, just like 3D. its a niche market but its still a market. and throwing your lot in with Vizio is like saying "Xbox is dead because KMart isnt going to carry it!" BFD.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:33PM on 01/08/2014
not true, just look at bestbuy add when it come sout here is Movie for $15 on DVD, $20 on Blu-Ray (usually with DVD also) and here is $35 for the 3D, my 2 friends with them always say the price is crazy and unlike those normal blu-ray and DVD's the 3D movies never come down in price
not true, just look at bestbuy add when it come sout here is Movie for $15 on DVD, $20 on Blu-Ray (usually with DVD also) and here is $35 for the 3D, my 2 friends with them always say the price is crazy and unlike those normal blu-ray and DVD's the 3D movies never come down in price
11:10AM on 01/09/2014
not sure where your buddy lives but here its more like $15 for DVD, $20 on BD, $25 for combo pack, $29.99 for 3D combo. i dont but DVD anymore, so im automatically in the $20 price range, and thats if i dont think that much of the movie. I always get combo packs for loaning out to some of my less fortunate/educated friends who dont have BD, I need the digital for my kids and so i have to pay $25 minimum. for me, that next $5 is a no-brainer. Plus, i love it! watch Jurassic Park or Avatar or
not sure where your buddy lives but here its more like $15 for DVD, $20 on BD, $25 for combo pack, $29.99 for 3D combo. i dont but DVD anymore, so im automatically in the $20 price range, and thats if i dont think that much of the movie. I always get combo packs for loaning out to some of my less fortunate/educated friends who dont have BD, I need the digital for my kids and so i have to pay $25 minimum. for me, that next $5 is a no-brainer. Plus, i love it! watch Jurassic Park or Avatar or even Tangled in 3D at home and tell me its not worth it.
+6
9:21AM on 01/08/2014

who cares?

i just bought a vizio 3d tv a couple of months ago. never been happier with anything in my life. it's incredible. i have one and i'm not sad at all by this news. movies will still come out in 3d at the theatre. and still be made to by for consumers. it's not like it's disappeared. why hate on something that makes your viewing experience better? never understood the hate on 3d. pricing? who cares? don't buy it. i like the option. and for the record if you haven't seen a 3d movie in
i just bought a vizio 3d tv a couple of months ago. never been happier with anything in my life. it's incredible. i have one and i'm not sad at all by this news. movies will still come out in 3d at the theatre. and still be made to by for consumers. it's not like it's disappeared. why hate on something that makes your viewing experience better? never understood the hate on 3d. pricing? who cares? don't buy it. i like the option. and for the record if you haven't seen a 3d movie in imax format, you're missing out. if you do, you know that anything else feels weak compared to it.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:35PM on 01/08/2014
except every sales figure, consumer report, consumer report cards and content providers think its crap, I guess those were the ones that cared...the ones that mattered
except every sales figure, consumer report, consumer report cards and content providers think its crap, I guess those were the ones that cared...the ones that mattered
7:05AM on 01/08/2014

4K?

Sorry, but I am a freak for 3D. Bought myself a home theater projector and a 120" screen so I could watch it as close as possible to the real deal. Then, I've gone out and purchased all of the 3D Blu-Rays that I could afford so that I would have a library of content. And that, friends and neighbors is the rub. 4K will be an incredible advance for home movie viewing, sure, but without content, it's not a gimmick; it's utterly useless. And shout all day long about streaming and up scaling if you
Sorry, but I am a freak for 3D. Bought myself a home theater projector and a 120" screen so I could watch it as close as possible to the real deal. Then, I've gone out and purchased all of the 3D Blu-Rays that I could afford so that I would have a library of content. And that, friends and neighbors is the rub. 4K will be an incredible advance for home movie viewing, sure, but without content, it's not a gimmick; it's utterly useless. And shout all day long about streaming and up scaling if you like, the fact is both of those things are myths. Certainly for the foreseeable future they are. Until we get news of a for,at change that will allow us to purchase 4K content- ACTUAL 4K content- the screens will simply be something nice to brag about, nothing more.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:54AM on 01/08/2014
I'm not a huge fan of 3D media, but I have the set. But you're absolutely right about the 4K content. Also - the existence, but commercial unavailability of 8K makes me nervous. Once the 4K gets more affordable, they'll pull back the curtain. We are looking at a decade of overpriced sets now. I'm fine with 1080p for now - call me old fashioned.
I'm not a huge fan of 3D media, but I have the set. But you're absolutely right about the 4K content. Also - the existence, but commercial unavailability of 8K makes me nervous. Once the 4K gets more affordable, they'll pull back the curtain. We are looking at a decade of overpriced sets now. I'm fine with 1080p for now - call me old fashioned.
4:44PM on 01/09/2014
I'd be a helluva lot less irritated with the 4K situation if a new format change was in the wind. But so far all they talk about is streaming UHD content, which just doesn't work for me. Don't get me wrong, love Netflix, but there's no way in Hell they can get 4K going without compromising the image quality. And what's the point of UHD if you can't get the full image?
I'd be a helluva lot less irritated with the 4K situation if a new format change was in the wind. But so far all they talk about is streaming UHD content, which just doesn't work for me. Don't get me wrong, love Netflix, but there's no way in Hell they can get 4K going without compromising the image quality. And what's the point of UHD if you can't get the full image?
+6
6:39AM on 01/08/2014
I recently viewed 4K TVs, and I could not see a difference between 4K and 1080p. I felt like this was "the emperor's new clothes" kind of situation. I didn't see a difference, but the salesman kept saying it was visibly there. He kept selling the hell out of it. Though I couldn't see it. I can see a huge difference between old 480p CTR TVs and 1080p, but 4K felt like snake oil. At least with 3D, I can actually see what it is offering. 4K gives me nothing but numbers and a salesman's assurance
I recently viewed 4K TVs, and I could not see a difference between 4K and 1080p. I felt like this was "the emperor's new clothes" kind of situation. I didn't see a difference, but the salesman kept saying it was visibly there. He kept selling the hell out of it. Though I couldn't see it. I can see a huge difference between old 480p CTR TVs and 1080p, but 4K felt like snake oil. At least with 3D, I can actually see what it is offering. 4K gives me nothing but numbers and a salesman's assurance that it is "awesome".
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:10AM on 01/08/2014
I thought the same too. Last month I checked out certain brand's 4K TV and I don't see the difference between current HDTV's 1080p and 4K TVs. However, the 4K TV's picture seems to flow better but that's probably because of that 4K TV's special option or whatever.
I thought the same too. Last month I checked out certain brand's 4K TV and I don't see the difference between current HDTV's 1080p and 4K TVs. However, the 4K TV's picture seems to flow better but that's probably because of that 4K TV's special option or whatever.
10:55AM on 01/08/2014
I think the lack of real 4K media is part of the problem. Pixels are pixels - if you have more, the capacity for a smoother screen is better. Compare an iPhone pre-retina with a retina version. But if you don't have the media, it's like looking at a non-retina app on a retina phone; it looks just as bad.
I think the lack of real 4K media is part of the problem. Pixels are pixels - if you have more, the capacity for a smoother screen is better. Compare an iPhone pre-retina with a retina version. But if you don't have the media, it's like looking at a non-retina app on a retina phone; it looks just as bad.
2:22AM on 01/08/2014
If they can make 3D TV without viewers wearing the 3D glasses, 3D TV of that caliber might even out-sell the 4K TVs.
If they can make 3D TV without viewers wearing the 3D glasses, 3D TV of that caliber might even out-sell the 4K TVs.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:02PM on 01/07/2014

Doubtful

I'm pleasantly shocked at the fellow protesters on this site. Every time I make a pro-3D comment, it's met with a shitstorm of negativity. So, thank you for restoring my faith in this site.
Vizio is a discount TV manufacturer (more appropriately, a "repackager"). There is still Sony, Samsung and LG who (presently) will have 3D tvs. The international market will continue the demand for 3D content and tv's.
I can understand some of the hate, as a small percentage of people get a sort of
I'm pleasantly shocked at the fellow protesters on this site. Every time I make a pro-3D comment, it's met with a shitstorm of negativity. So, thank you for restoring my faith in this site.
Vizio is a discount TV manufacturer (more appropriately, a "repackager"). There is still Sony, Samsung and LG who (presently) will have 3D tvs. The international market will continue the demand for 3D content and tv's.
I can understand some of the hate, as a small percentage of people get a sort of vertigo watching 3D, causing nausea and headaches. I personally love it, anx would prefer it over 4K, as a decent 4K display would be enormously expensive!
Finally, I just got a PS3, and Crysis 3 and Ratchet and Clank are spec-fuggin-tacular in 3D!!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:52PM on 01/07/2014
Meh, 3D and 4K are both gimmicks. If you're really into watching movies, go for plasma. It isn't popular because it isn't as "brightly colored" or as cost-effective to manufacture. It also doesn't support 3D as much. But it produces the best, most natural color and shows a movie the way it needs to be seen, unlike 90% of LCDs and LEDs that just blow the color and brightness way past insanity just to attract the mass public.
Meh, 3D and 4K are both gimmicks. If you're really into watching movies, go for plasma. It isn't popular because it isn't as "brightly colored" or as cost-effective to manufacture. It also doesn't support 3D as much. But it produces the best, most natural color and shows a movie the way it needs to be seen, unlike 90% of LCDs and LEDs that just blow the color and brightness way past insanity just to attract the mass public.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:43PM on 01/07/2014
Love it or hate it 3D is not dead, nor is it going anywhere! 3D is a technology that can evolve. James Fucking Cameron won't let 3D die! Ps they have made a no glasses required 3D tv. Just hasn't hit the market yet.
Love it or hate it 3D is not dead, nor is it going anywhere! 3D is a technology that can evolve. James Fucking Cameron won't let 3D die! Ps they have made a no glasses required 3D tv. Just hasn't hit the market yet.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:43PM on 01/07/2014
Love it or hate it 3D is not dead, nor is it going anywhere! 3D is a technology that can evolve. James Fucking Cameron won't let 3D die! Ps they have made a no glasses required 3D tv. Just hasn't hit the market yet.
Love it or hate it 3D is not dead, nor is it going anywhere! 3D is a technology that can evolve. James Fucking Cameron won't let 3D die! Ps they have made a no glasses required 3D tv. Just hasn't hit the market yet.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
-11
9:07PM on 01/07/2014

Awesome!!

I said 3DTV was a fad when it started, and I am beyond glad that it is dying now. I don't want to wear glasses to watch my movies or play games. In fact it suggested that you not drink while watching a 3D feature. While I don't drink all the time; I do enjoy drinking and relaxing while watching a movie. Please let us all remember this later. Do not bring back this technology, just leave it alone!
I said 3DTV was a fad when it started, and I am beyond glad that it is dying now. I don't want to wear glasses to watch my movies or play games. In fact it suggested that you not drink while watching a 3D feature. While I don't drink all the time; I do enjoy drinking and relaxing while watching a movie. Please let us all remember this later. Do not bring back this technology, just leave it alone!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:28PM on 01/07/2014
Also from CES is this incident: [link]

I have a 3D projector at home and I've really been enjoying it. Seen Pacific Rim about three times at home.
Also from CES is this incident: [link]

I have a 3D projector at home and I've really been enjoying it. Seen Pacific Rim about three times at home.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:02PM on 01/07/2014

3d tech is cheaper now; time to plug the newer thing to gain back costs.

Visio makes cheap, low-end but functional products. I think consumers who WANT 3d would be willing pay a little more.
3d happened to be a "bonus feature" on my TV. I bought it based on the best 2d presentation within my budget.
However, there is plenty of shit that will have little and/or NO change in quality from 1080p to 4k. And the difference on screens below 120" will be not worth the cost. Until they are the same price as other TVs. *shrug*
Visio makes cheap, low-end but functional products. I think consumers who WANT 3d would be willing pay a little more.
3d happened to be a "bonus feature" on my TV. I bought it based on the best 2d presentation within my budget.
However, there is plenty of shit that will have little and/or NO change in quality from 1080p to 4k. And the difference on screens below 120" will be not worth the cost. Until they are the same price as other TVs. *shrug*
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
6:47PM on 01/07/2014
I have my LCD flatscreen and still use a DVD player. As long as I can see the movie, Im fine
I have my LCD flatscreen and still use a DVD player. As long as I can see the movie, Im fine
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+11
6:24PM on 01/07/2014

lol, stop the presses!

just saw this... [link]
just saw this... [link]
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:45PM on 01/07/2014
Some people don't research enough before they post articles! Good find.
Some people don't research enough before they post articles! Good find.
+14
6:12PM on 01/07/2014
4K in the home is currently just as much of a gimmick as 3D. You'll need an absolutely massive TV to really get the benefit, and for anybody but tech afficionados, those will likely be out of reach. Likewise, there are no reliable 4K content delivery systems available right now. Streaming is going to be a no-go for anybody who doesn't have a top tier internet connection. For most people it's difficult to get a reliable 1080 stream out of Netflix without drops in quality. It's not going to
4K in the home is currently just as much of a gimmick as 3D. You'll need an absolutely massive TV to really get the benefit, and for anybody but tech afficionados, those will likely be out of reach. Likewise, there are no reliable 4K content delivery systems available right now. Streaming is going to be a no-go for anybody who doesn't have a top tier internet connection. For most people it's difficult to get a reliable 1080 stream out of Netflix without drops in quality. It's not going to become a TV standard anytime in the near future. Just look how long it took to get HD. A 4K broadcast standard is a LONG way off. Everyone cannot wait for the day to abandon physical media... and yet we're now anticipating another resolution jump? Those two simply don't work together right now.

I'm not saying 4K won't ever be a thing. I work in post-production and 4k images can be incredible on the right display. But for the time being, having a 4K capable TV will be an absolute waste for the vast majority of people.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+21
4:53PM on 01/07/2014

I'd much rather have 3D than 4K

and I'm absolutely fine with keeping my blu-rays and never purchasing a 'super duper 4K blu-ray', which I'll never be able to tell the difference on anyway (unless I have a ridiculously huge TV which I'll never have... 40-50 inches is the perfect huge size for a home TV for me). This whole 4K thing is just silly, and I'm betting the masses will bite even less on it than they have on modern 3D. And yeah like the guy below said, '3D TV is dead!' is really jumping the gun. Vizio is a good cheap
and I'm absolutely fine with keeping my blu-rays and never purchasing a 'super duper 4K blu-ray', which I'll never be able to tell the difference on anyway (unless I have a ridiculously huge TV which I'll never have... 40-50 inches is the perfect huge size for a home TV for me). This whole 4K thing is just silly, and I'm betting the masses will bite even less on it than they have on modern 3D. And yeah like the guy below said, '3D TV is dead!' is really jumping the gun. Vizio is a good cheap brand, but also a brand I would never buy if I'm making a large purchase already, of something like a TV.

It's fine if people dislike 3D (though some get to Twilight level obsessions about telling the world how much they loathe it, rather than doing the logical thing and just avoiding it), but the whole '3D is a gimmick!' thing in particular never made any sense. The best example is that 3D is just as much of a 'gimmick' as Colour. 3D is not necessary for a film to be complete, for a film to be enjoyable -- and neither is colour. These are nothing but additions/enhancement ('gimmicks' if you must) and, if you put aside your personal opinion (say you love colour and dislike 3D) then you see that they are really both the same in concept: an addition to the viewer's movie watching experience.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
5:52PM on 01/07/2014
I agree that these things are just additions and not necessary to enjoy movies. But 3D was starting to ruin the quality of movies for a while there, because producers were having the story cater to 3D, instead of the 3D catering to the story.
I agree that these things are just additions and not necessary to enjoy movies. But 3D was starting to ruin the quality of movies for a while there, because producers were having the story cater to 3D, instead of the 3D catering to the story.
6:29PM on 01/07/2014
@marlo - hmm... examples? I mean sure many films have here and there moments like an arrow shooting at the screen -- but if you look at it filmmakers have been using that technique for ages now, throwing stuff at the camera, so it's actually really not just for 3D or anything new. I don't think I've seen a movie where the story caters to 3D/suffers because of it, because any story can cater to 3D (it's how it's shot that needs to cater to 3D, not the plotting, for the 3D to be an effective
@marlo - hmm... examples? I mean sure many films have here and there moments like an arrow shooting at the screen -- but if you look at it filmmakers have been using that technique for ages now, throwing stuff at the camera, so it's actually really not just for 3D or anything new. I don't think I've seen a movie where the story caters to 3D/suffers because of it, because any story can cater to 3D (it's how it's shot that needs to cater to 3D, not the plotting, for the 3D to be an effective tool/addition). I think the only concern with most producers with the 3D isn't to have the movie cater to 3D but, as we've seen, just to have it IN 3D before it hits cinemas -- you know, for the extra dough. That was the problem, that they didn't utilize the 3D technology with passion and artistry like some other producers and filmmakers do, but rather as a money making tool.
+16
4:51PM on 01/07/2014
You can't jump from one extreme to the other chasing a bandwagon.

3D is not the future of all of video, but that doesn't mean it is dead either. It is something the studios cynically tried to use to justify higher ticket prices, but there are movies that were genuinely enhanced by 3D. Did you watch the Life of Pi in 3D? It was simply glorious. Gravity too would not have been the same in 2D. The 3D enhanced the sense of floating in space.

So 3D will remain as an option. Not mainstream of
You can't jump from one extreme to the other chasing a bandwagon.

3D is not the future of all of video, but that doesn't mean it is dead either. It is something the studios cynically tried to use to justify higher ticket prices, but there are movies that were genuinely enhanced by 3D. Did you watch the Life of Pi in 3D? It was simply glorious. Gravity too would not have been the same in 2D. The 3D enhanced the sense of floating in space.

So 3D will remain as an option. Not mainstream of course, but it isn't going to disappear.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:46PM on 01/07/2014

nonsense

it was clear from the beginning that it would take 3D some time to get its way into the living rooms.
For one, there is a lack of content and therefore little incentive to buy a more expensive 3D TV of the first generation. Right now it is only the blockbuster movies which are released on 3D Blu-Ray. There is no real TV content - YET.
Also most households do not upgrade their TV that often. It took almost ten years for HD Flatscreens to become dominant on the market. And for many people that
it was clear from the beginning that it would take 3D some time to get its way into the living rooms.
For one, there is a lack of content and therefore little incentive to buy a more expensive 3D TV of the first generation. Right now it is only the blockbuster movies which are released on 3D Blu-Ray. There is no real TV content - YET.
Also most households do not upgrade their TV that often. It took almost ten years for HD Flatscreens to become dominant on the market. And for many people that upgrade is within the last few years so they feel little need to upgrade to 3D OR 4K when there is hardly any content on regular TV.

Last but not least 4K isn't all that impressive. It was a very visible jump in quality from DVD to BR. From BR to 4K? Not so much. Only if you are very, very close to the screen or project your movies on a big wall. So I don't see 4K becoming relevant for the endconsumer market within the next decade. Nevertheless their producers obviously will continue to claim it is the inevitable future we should embark in while it is still fresh and flawed and offers little real content for a hefty price tag.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:39PM on 01/07/2014
4K is even more of a gimmick than 3D. Avatar was shot at 1080p & The Avengers was shot at 2K, and did those films look bad on a giant IMAX screen? Do those films need 4K resolution on a small living room TV? Most films shot digitally are shot at 2K and will never be native 4K.

Also, anything less than theater sized screens is worthless at 4K. Our eyes can't see the difference between 4k and 1080p on a 60" tv, unless you are an inch from the screen. Here is an article on that: [link]
4K is even more of a gimmick than 3D. Avatar was shot at 1080p & The Avengers was shot at 2K, and did those films look bad on a giant IMAX screen? Do those films need 4K resolution on a small living room TV? Most films shot digitally are shot at 2K and will never be native 4K.

Also, anything less than theater sized screens is worthless at 4K. Our eyes can't see the difference between 4k and 1080p on a 60" tv, unless you are an inch from the screen. Here is an article on that: [link]
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+11
4:39PM on 01/07/2014

3D tv

I love my 3D TV! IMAX Under the Sea 3D is quite good.
I love my 3D TV! IMAX Under the Sea 3D is quite good.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:38PM on 01/07/2014
SCCCOOOORRREEEEE!!!!
SCCCOOOORRREEEEE!!!!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:30PM on 01/07/2014

4K doesn't matter... yet

Netflix and other streaming sites already have a hard enough time streaming 1080p HD and Blu-Rays can only burn 1080p which means a 4K television is going to be like watching a VHS on a plasma HDTV. Obviously major motion pictures aren't shot in 1080p, they're shot at 4K or higher, but unless it is being projected on a 50-foot screen, we're not going to see much of a difference. It will one day, but not yet.
Netflix and other streaming sites already have a hard enough time streaming 1080p HD and Blu-Rays can only burn 1080p which means a 4K television is going to be like watching a VHS on a plasma HDTV. Obviously major motion pictures aren't shot in 1080p, they're shot at 4K or higher, but unless it is being projected on a 50-foot screen, we're not going to see much of a difference. It will one day, but not yet.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:40PM on 01/07/2014
Amen
Amen
4:44PM on 01/07/2014
Avatar was shot at 1080p. Avengers was shot at 2K. In fact any film shot on the Arri Alexa is 2K because that is the highest resolution it can record. And the Arri Alexa is a VERY popular digital camera in Hollywood.
Avatar was shot at 1080p. Avengers was shot at 2K. In fact any film shot on the Arri Alexa is 2K because that is the highest resolution it can record. And the Arri Alexa is a VERY popular digital camera in Hollywood.
4:21PM on 01/07/2014
3D has become more prominent in recent years but there were 3D movies as far back as the 1950s, so it really isn't a fad. Honestly I'm more neutral when it comes to the technology. I've seen a few movies that look very good (i.e. 2009's A Christmas Carol, Avatar--not a fan of the movie but the 3D aspect was virtually flawless). I've watched other 3D movies on Samsung and LG 3D LEDs and they actually look far superior than viewing a 3D movie in the theater, strangely enough.
3D has become more prominent in recent years but there were 3D movies as far back as the 1950s, so it really isn't a fad. Honestly I'm more neutral when it comes to the technology. I've seen a few movies that look very good (i.e. 2009's A Christmas Carol, Avatar--not a fan of the movie but the 3D aspect was virtually flawless). I've watched other 3D movies on Samsung and LG 3D LEDs and they actually look far superior than viewing a 3D movie in the theater, strangely enough.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:20PM on 01/07/2014
All I need is a good old HD ready plasma TV with a decent sound setup.
All I need is a good old HD ready plasma TV with a decent sound setup.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
View All Comments

Latest Movie News Headlines


Top
Loading...
JoBlo's T-Shirt Shoppe | support our site... Wear Our Gear!