http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/ Engadget Comments for Timeframe for the 3D infiltration? 3 - 4 years, says Panasonic president http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/Oct 8th 2009 12:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/
I say, "Bring it on -- but keep it an **OPTION**." That way those of us who are interested can enjoy while those of you who are in denial about it no longer being a fad don't have to worry about it.]]>Oct 8th 2009 10:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/Oct 8th 2009 1:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/
Manufacturers should stop focusing on 3D and widgets, and instead work on getting a full browser built in to the TV.]]>Oct 8th 2009 2:49PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/
Wow! It's really staggering how you people are complaining about what comes down to a minor inconvenience (assuming that you don't have vision that requires enormous vision-correction glasses).

As long as 3D is an option and not a requirement, then you are under absolutely no obligation to partake in any 3D experience. But stubbornly refusing just because you have to wear some glasses for two hours in the privacy of your own home is mind-boggling.]]>Oct 8th 2009 10:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/Oct 8th 2009 1:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/
I have seen "Up" in 3D and I didn't really see the main benefit of that film being in 3D. I know the 3D was meant to be hidden and not jumping out at you all the time, so that it doesn't take us out of the story. Maybe that's all it was, but I think the story was so good that seeing it on a normal 2D screen would've been fine.

I disagree with the grumpy people who want 3D to go away because it gives them headaches. If you don't want 3D, then don't buy a 3D set, or if it comes with it, don't turn it on ... ever. The manufacturers have to keep putting out new sets and we'll have to go through the glasses phase for at least the the better part of the next decade.

I look forward to having a Bioshock game or even Mario Kart in 3D. I owned the SegaScope 3-D Glasses from the Sega Master system about 20 years ago and (even though I was younger) I was still very impressed with them back then. Games are the main reason many people will be buying a 3D TV (at least in the early stages).]]>Oct 8th 2009 3:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/and likewise colour or color (as the spell checker seems to prefer) to take a
hike.

It is still way to early in to form a considered opinion.
because not much quality 3D content has been made.
However there are some movies U2 3D and most of the animated cartoons
that are improved by 3D.

you can't compare the sound of the first talkies to a modern movie sound track
and likewise the color of the first color movies.

3D still has a long way to go but I have little doubt that it in 5 years time people will
be looking at normal movies the same way that they look an black & white movies now]]>Oct 8th 2009 2:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/Oct 8th 2009 5:56PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/be looking at normal movies the same way that they look an black & white movies now"

I very seriously doubt that. And I don't see how talkies or the introduction of color in movies has any relationship to the fad of 3D.

I really don't care one way or the other if the industry wants to indulge in 3D, but if they don't offer 2D versions (and well done transfers at that) as the standard, they *will* lose my business.

By the way, I love black and white movies.]]>Oct 8th 2009 9:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/Some people even wear sunglasses just for fashion.


The relationship is obvious these represent technological improvements to movies.

3D provides a more realistic view of images that have objects in the distance (and therefore a better picture). H.D. provides more detail and so a more realistic image (but I don't see to many people calling this a fad).

I think people tend to miss the more subtle improvements in the picture because of the
in your face 3D effects which depending on the movie may or may not have a place.

Please note I did not say black and white movies are bad I like many B & W movies myself
but if I could only ever watch 1 movie it would be Avatar.]]>Oct 9th 2009 12:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/Oct 8th 2009 3:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/UK Sky TV to launch 3D TV in 2010 following record Sky+HD growth

Sky has announced that the number of customers choosing Sky+HD, the UK’s only high definition (HD) service currently capable of broadcasting 3D services, has increased to 1.313 million following record growth.

Customers have responded in record numbers to Sky’s high quality and great value HD service. Sky has more than doubled the number of HD customers in the last year alone with over 90 customers* an hour joining Sky+HD.

In the next step in the Sky+HD journey, Sky today announced that it will launch the UK’s first 3D channel next year. The channel will offer a broad selection of the best available 3D programming, which is expected to include movies, entertainment and sport. The service will be broadcast across Sky’s existing HD infrastructure and be available via the current generation of Sky+HD
set-top boxes. To watch 3D, customers will also require a new '3D Ready' TV, which are expected to be on sale in the UK next year.

]]>Oct 8th 2009 4:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/Oct 8th 2009 5:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/
Smell-o-vision?
]]>Oct 8th 2009 6:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/Oct 8th 2009 6:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/
Do I really want to see survivor in 3D? Or Drew Carey on the Price is Right.

While even the red/blue 3D is a fun experience on my 100" screen I just don't see this catching on.]]>Oct 8th 2009 9:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/Oct 9th 2009 1:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/
But I suppose that's one way to take advantage of a Red One 4K camera.]]>Oct 9th 2009 12:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/
and I don't intend to buy Avatar AT ALL until it is available in a proper 3d format and I have the proper 3dtv to watch it. I won't even buy it at all in a 2d or red/blue version.]]>Oct 9th 2009 7:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/08/timeframe-for-the-3d-infiltration-3-4-years-says-panasonic-p/Oct 9th 2009 8:50PM