Brits say 'no, no, no' to 3D TV

[DB7]

Brits say 'no, no, no' to 3D TV

Brits are steering clear of 3D TV, with only one per cent of the population owning such a set already and a further one per cent hoping to acquire one this coming Christmas.

And consumers in the rest of Europe aren't much keener on the technology, either.

So reveals a survey of European punters conducted online by price comparison site Twenga. Just over 3000 people were polled, in six countries, so if you're willing to accept that 500 Britons realistically show what all the rest of us think, read on.

To be fair, 48 per cent of UK respondents said they would like a 3D TV, but only one per cent of the total said they're definitely getting one this festive season. Five per cent hope they will, but aren't sure.

Even if you count those as folk who will buying into the technology, the total is as nothing comparing to those who won't, whether because it's too expensive (32 per cent), the technology isn't up to snuff (12 per cent), want some other kind of TV (12 per cent), or simply don't want one at all (35 per cent).

Three per cent of respondents said they don't know whether they want a 3D TV or not. We'd put the ditherers into the 'no' camp, along with the one per cent of punters who admitted they don't know what 3D TV is.

The equivalent figures for France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands are slightly different but generally confirm a big public thumbs down for 3D TV because it costs too much or doesn't appeal.

Northern Europeans seems more sceptical: Germans, Brits and the Dutch have higher 'not interested, thanks' percentages than the French, Italians and Spanish populations. But while the latter are keener on owning a 3D TV, they're just as likely to pass by because it's expensive. ®

[jaycad]

i won't be buying one as i made the mistake with 'new technology' many a time in my younger years only for the 'gadget' not to 'take off'!
3D will only be impressive for the honeymoon period then everyone will realise how pointless it is except for stupid CGI 'spiderman' type films!

[DB7]

I haven't even indulged in Bluray yet. Tbh most modern films wash over me so seeing them in 3d brings little to the table; I'm more interested in a good storyline than sfx. (and the Sky subs are pricey)

[Moor Larkin]

I assume 3D only comes in HD, so it's all a bit horse-n-cart isn't it?

The prevalence of CookeryTV should give Smellovision a chance too.......

I think Harry Hill suggested Nigella as the perfect 3D attraction the other weekend. Seems she could launch a whole new technology combo, especially if they also perfect those tactile suits that 20 years ago they told us would be the next big thing.


TV Smell-o-vision: Turn the aroma up for Nigella Lawson please | Mail Online

[moonfleet]

I haven't even indulged in Bluray yet. Tbh most modern films wash over me so seeing them in 3d brings little to the table; I'm more interested in a good storyline than sfx. (and the Sky subs are pricey)

Yes, a good storyline, good actors and inspiration to shoot it
But infortunatly, now people tend to think that the best of cinema = the last technological gadget, pity ...

[sanndevil]

I saw a Sky Sports Premiership game in 3D and thought the result was utterly useless. I blogged the experience at Sky Sports 3D Review: Chelsea v Wigan 2010-09-05 | Badzilla but for those who can't be bothered to click, basically the technology (at least w.r.t. football) doesn't work.

However, my uncle has bought a 42" 3D TV and a subscription to Sky's new 3D channel and he hasn't stop banging on about having to duck out of the way of objects being thrown out of the screen at him. He concedes that the 3D effect doesn't work all the time but seems happy to live with its shortcomings and is genuinely enthusiastic about the experience.

Take your pick.

[GoggleboxUK]

I won't be getting a 3D TV either.

Buying a 5.1 Surround system gave new depth to my in home experience.
Buying a large flatscreen TV improved the view.
Buying an even bigger HDTV made everything look incredible.
Buying a Blu-Ray Player and a new amp brought DTS-HD crashing through my front room.

All fantastic, life changing improvements for a Movieholic but I can't see 3D giving the slightest improvement to my viewing experience and I'd feel like a complete tool sat there in those ridiculous glasses.

I'll pass thanks, bring out the Holodeck and I may be interested.

[MikeB]

I'd be a bit sceptical about the 3D survey - 500 people is a small sample, and it depended what question they were asking. Actually, I'm surprised that 5 people certainly want 3D, since the sets only start at 40 inches and the cost has been relatively high. But you have to weigh these sort of surveys against the (admittedly biased) projections of the Blu-Ray Manufacturers Association, which reckon this is the year it goes big for 3D discs.

Will 3D be a success? Some of people I work with think its a fad, some think its wonderful. I'm agnostic, but having seen the changes over the last three years in TV's, I suspect that the market will get a lot larger fairly soon for three reasons - price, Sony & Rupert Murdoch.

Its true that many 3D sets are more expensive at the moment (the 40 inch 3D 8000 series Samsung is £1699, whereas the 2D 6 series is about half that, and that without the extra equipment), but the difference is coming down a lot, and you can buy the 40 inch Sony Buy Sony Bravia KDL40HX803 LED HD 1080p 3D Capable Television, 40 inch with Built-in Freeview HD online at JohnLewis.com 803 for £1173. The 2D EX713 is £899 (you get VAT back on both at the moment). The difference is about 30%, but the 3D has a 200hz screen. True, you have to get extra equipment, but £250 for a pack would see to that (and occasionally its free on all brands), and the price of the TV might actually be the same in some cases..

The real killer is the slightly posher NX713. Its currently £1299 (less without the VAT), and is normally 2D. But upgrade the software on board via the net (and this ones wireless from the box) and its 3D! Same goes for lot of other Sony kit (and the other brands will follow). Its been rumoured for a while that 3D TV's cost little more to make than 2D TV's, and if that true, increasingly your TV will be 3D capable if you want it or not. True, it wont be for the cheapest models, but if next years models comes in at around a £1000 in March (which is average for 1080, 100hz LED in a 40), they will have wireless on board and be 3D capable. You just need to update the software....

The same goes for Blu ray players (the excellent Sony 570 is 3D out of the box, and at around £200, is about what a normal mid level player was last year). Prices will come down, and the range of sizes will increase. The 35% of people who thought it too expensive will probably shrink in time, just as the number of people who would never buy a flat screen TV has also dropped dramatically.

The next factor is Sony, but not for TV's etc. Its the fact that the Playstation 3 (with a Blu ray player, which helped fuel the demand for both discs and 1080 TV's) is now 3D capable via the net (the same goes for Xbox). Most of us on Britmovie don't game, but if you can play a computer game in 3D, you'll want to. I had a guy stand for 5 minutes last month looking at a 3D TV, and just say 'wow' a lot (it was on a very good offer and he bought it). The film looked great, but its was the gaming which took his breath away. Thats going to be big. Put it this way, one new version of Call of Duty took 250 million dollars in sales on its first day alone. If your going to buy a new TV, playing games in 3D will be another reason to go for a 3D TV.

And of course Sony own a major Hollywood studio, and have close ties with the rest of Hollywood. 3D films make more money, and you can help fill the need for software for your hardware. Spiderman 4 in 3D? Probably not my cup of tea (and I'm sick of Monster v Aliens), but your kids will love it.

R. Murdoch owns Fox studios, which will make 3D films for his 3D Sky Channel, which will show 3D content, including 3D sports events, which will enable him to charge extra (eventually). 3D sport isn't for everyone (and I have yet to see a game of footie in 3D , so I cannot comment), but if you get it as part of your package, I suspect it will start to be thought of in the way way Sky HD was when it came out.

These are powerful factors pushing the new technology - it doesn't mean it will become standard, but the trend has been that new technology has started slow, and then gone mass market, using various wedges to convince people to make the jump . Its not for everyone, and there will be many who don't want or need it, but I don't think its going to go away.

Last week my store had a stand outside the shop (we are in a shopping centre) showing off 3D. The feedback from loads of people was that they hadn't thought of 3D before because they didn't think it would be any good, they couldn't think why they would want it, and it cost too much.
They then said (once they'd tried it) that it was good, and that they would think about it. It doesn't mean they will buy it now, but at the right price they will take it seriously, and if it becomes standard (even is an extra), they will possibly buy it anyway. And of course we already have 3D HD home video cameras - its another reason to possibly buy a TV - to see yourself in 3D, no matter what your doing....

As I said, I'm agnostic. But even three years ago, if you'd said you could get a TV showing HD as standard from an ariel, that can surf the web, take pics from your phone wirelessly, has games onboard and is the thickness of a pen for less than £600-700, I would have been very surprised looking at what we had at the time. Now you can do all that, so I wouldn't be surprised at the sort of leaps in technology that might happen in the next five years.

If your wondering about the new kit (Blu ray, etc), have a look at this blog What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision - Blogs, not quite life changing, but certainly very happy. Watching a film in 1080 is so much better in Blu-ray. Goldfinger in Blu-ray? Goldfinger [Blu-ray] [1964]: Amazon.co.uk: Sean Connery, Gert Frobe, Honor Blackman, Shirley Eaton, Guy Hamilton: DVD Sounds wonerful.

Moor Larkin, as for Nigella? Since all 3D TV's can turn normal 2D into 3D (although the depth perception isn't huge, particularly on SD, but not bad on HD), and La Lawson will no doubt be on the box this Christmas in HD (BBC HD is one of the channels on both Freeview HD and Freesat), you can watch her in 3D and enjoy....

[Big Figure]

I'd feel like a complete tool sat there in those ridiculous glasses.

Apart from the cost, that's the killer for me too.

[hhhhancock]

I've not seen 3D TV yet although a local pub shows Premiership games in 3D - must really have to go along to have a look. The price of an equipped TV is prohibitive at the moment and until the price comes down to something comparable with a 1080p TV I can't see many people considering buying one - except the very rich of course. I had Sky HD for over a year but found the improvement is gave insignicant so gave it up a couple of months ago.
As long as your favourite viewing (sport or film) is of a watchable quality you very quickly lose yourself in whatever it is on view and the little bells and whistles mean very little to your enjoyment.

[Harbottle]

No I can't say that 3D TV interests me in the least to be honest. I'm another who has not succumbed to Blu-Ray either, as I watch very few modern films DVD works fine for me. I must admit I am toying with getting a recordable BR drive for my PC though. This would make backing up stuff to disk so much easier with 25GB to play with, especially now that reasonably priced media is starting to appear.

[Arfur Teacake]

3D failed in the 1950s movies and ITV's experiment in the 1980s.
So whats new?
oh yes the technology ......glasses

[Steve Crook]

3D failed in the 1950s movies and ITV's experiment in the 1980s.
So whats new?
oh yes the technology ......glasses

Now that they're using polarising glasses they don't look quite as silly as the ones with a different colour over each eye

You could wear these walking down the street


But if you wear them for a few hours (and I have done so) they still give you eye-strain and headaches

Steve

[CaptainWaggett]

Now that they're using polarising glasses they don't look quite as silly as the ones with a different colour over each eye

You could wear these walking down the street


But if you wear them for a few hours (and I have done so) they still give you eye-strain and headaches

Steve

They aren't much fun if you already wear glasses. And they aren't much good for those of us who multitask while watching tv.

[Steve Crook]

They aren't much fun if you already wear glasses. And they aren't much good for those of us who multitask while watching tv.

You can get clip-on 3D (polarizing) glasses for those that already wear glasses to watch films or TV

All of these are the fancier, and more comfortable versions, not the cheap disposable versions that they hand out in cinemas

If you are multi-tasking then you'll just have to take the glasses off when you start doing the housework or the washing up

I wonder if they do bifocal or varifocal versions?

Steve

[Santonix]

I watched some of this years Ryder Cup on the latest Sony 3Dtv, which uses electronic glasses. The picture quality and realism was stunning. I also watched a tennis match on a Samsung 3D set using polarizing glasses and it was no where near as good.
I will be going down the 3D route and will purchase when more material becomes available and prices have settled down.

[jaycad]

the only people who will look normal in the new 3D glasses are rick moranis,elvis costello and vic reeves!

[Steve Crook]

I watched some of this years Ryder Cup on the latest Sony 3Dtv, which uses electronic glasses. The picture quality and realism was stunning. I also watched a tennis match on a Samsung 3D set using polarizing glasses and it was no where near as good.
I will be going down the 3D route and will purchase when more material becomes available and prices have settled down.

And when they've decided on which technology to use for 3D on TV
If you buy now you might finish up with something like the Beta-max tape. Technologically superior, but nobody's using it

Steve

[Santonix]

Well I've taken the plunge and bought a 3D HD TV. Its the latest model from LG which uses "Cinema 3D" negating the need to use electronic glasses, indeed it's supplied with 7 pairs of glasses saving me a fortune on buying extra electronic ones at £100 each. It's a 47" LED Smart TV that wirelessly connects to my router giving me TV access to stuff I normally watch on my computer like BBC iplayer. The LG replaces a 42" Sony plasma which has given good service. The picture quality of LG is amazing and much better than the Sony it's replaced.

Good news for me as the BBC is broadcasting both the Men's and Ladies Wimbledon finals in 3D.

[Arfur Teacake]

I watched some of this years Ryder Cup on the latest Sony 3Dtv, which uses electronic glasses. The picture quality and realism was stunning. I also watched a tennis match on a Samsung 3D set using polarizing glasses and it was no where near as good.
I will be going down the 3D route and will purchase when more material becomes available and prices have settled down.

Wow! Eastenders in 3D - cant wait