Slashdot Mirror
Sony, IMAX, Discovery To Launch 3D TV Network
adeelarshad82 writes "In a surprising endorsement for 3D display technology, Sony Corp. of America, Discovery Communications and IMAX Corp. have announced plans to form a US television network entirely devoted to 3D programming. The three parties have signed a letter of intent to form the unnamed venture, which is scheduled to launch in 2012. The new network is intended as a sort of carrot to lure buyers to purchase 3D-enabled TVs." Reader jggimi notes NY Times coverage, which points out that this prospective network won't be the first: "Earlier Tuesday, ESPN announced that it would start 'ESPN 3D' in June 2010. The channel will show a minimum of 85 live 3D events during the first year."
They don't seem to be breaking much ground with this. It was already known that the World Cup going to be shot in 3D... ESPN is basically saying they'll make that feed available in the USA because they own the English-language TV rights. Could we please have Sunday Night Baseball and Monday Night Football in 3D?
This is about the point where HD was in 1999. Announced, but not quite online yet and only limited programs are being broadcast. Channels are so light on content they sign off rather than take up bandwidth when they've got nothing to show. This will make more sense when the devices are out and priced like an HD set is today... we're just not there yet.
The first lineup has been announced, it will feature "Comin' Atcha!" "Think Fast!" and "Look Out, I'm Throwing Things At Your Head!"
-with apologies to Michael Kupperman, the hilarious comic artist I stole that joke from
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
You're tuned to the Headache Channel.
http://twitter.com/OLDTELEGRAM
We're starting to hit the point where those with damaged eyes who can see somewhat but not perfectly are getting lost. 3D is useless to the people who have lost depth perception... and HD requires a big enough TV for any additional pixels to be meaningful. At this pace, only teenagers will be subscribing to the highest definition TV services.
Because it's IN THE THIRD DIMENSION!
Also, it's a shame HTML doesn't have a <reverb> tag.
Seriously, this launch is a bit premature. Sure, such technologies exist, but with no market for it.
Unless they're requiring red and blue glasses, no one can watch it in 3D -- 3D broadcasting requires 240hz televisions alongside enough shutter glasses to cover a 20+ person sports gathering.
The American consumer is already tapped out on debt, since they maxed out their credit cards on flat-panel HDTVs in the age of subprime lending, and are probably only using them to watch low-res basic cable now that they have to pay the bills.
It'll be a good 10-15 years before 3D broadcasting will even be considered normal. Yet it's not entirely stupid -- in the business world, people still fall for the "Reagan Star Wars" tactic. Just convince the competition you're revolutionary and they'll waste all their cash trying to catch up to something infeasible...
12:00 am to 6:30 am: 3D infomercials
6:30 am: 3D National Anthem
6:35 am: Scripture Study with Rev. Harlon Stereo
6:45 am: Davey & Goliath in the Land of Three Dimensions
7:00 am: Bwana Devil
9:00 am: House of Wax
11:00 am: Treasure of the Four Crowns
1:00 pm: Pixar Trailer Compilation
2:00 pm: House of Wax
4:00 pm: 3D National News from the rim of the Grand Canyon
6:00 pm: Simpsons 3D episode
6:30 pm: Viewmaster Travelogue Presents: Beautiful Holland.
7:00 pm: House of Wax
9:00 pm: Stetson's Hangout (premiere) Sitcom featuring the wacky exploits of the Tosser Family. In this epiode, Stetson Tosser throws snakes, soiled diapers and a bowl of Jell-0 at the camera.
9:30 pm: Lacrosse championships from Watertown, NY. In 3D.
11:00 pm: Late News hanging from a platform on the side of the Empire State Building
11:30 pm: Viewmaster Showcase: Bible Stories
Sony and IMAX are more known for doing movies... but it's Disney's Pixar and Viacom's DreamWorks that's doing most of the HD movies. IMAX tends to like to upconvert major releases, but they've got limited processing power so they can't do everything... yet.
exactly 3D movies are useless for me as my eyes don't focus in the "right" way.
I see some effects but just get a headache. I think it is some 5-10% of the population suffers from the same problem. That will limit any major 3D tv tech.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Ask yourself this: When was the last time you watched anything and said, "You know what? This is good, but it would better if it was in 3D."
Sony certainly is, if you're going by Big 5-6 movie studios, being larger than either of NBCU, Newscorp or Disney in 2008 according to wikipedia. Arguably, Sony might historically have had a stronger identity in its electronics branch, but after Howard "I'm a guy who doesn't see anything good having come from the Internet" Stringer took over it seems to be shifting over from not being entirely competitive in the electronics market to trying to be a 'media company'. Which may not exactly be a brilliant idea these days. And with a CEO like that, they've certainly become a company I avoid handing any money to as far as far as possible.
if you can stand Dr. Tongue's "3D House of Stewardesses," this has a chance. lame concept, will have lame execution, even lamer if they play "let's break the fourth wall."
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
The list below was quickly trawled up on google, I dont discount you could be right.
My main point is media companies seem to see 3d as some saviour giving a unique selling point whilst protecting demand (profit) from pirates.
Sorry, try your "I hate the future" speech a little bit more.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Wow, you gave 3D an entire movie experience before deciding it's fate?
And you're skipping blu-ray... uh huh. I'll come back to you in a year when you can't even find a non-bluray DVD player on the market any more.
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
Well, the light output of an LCD is naturally polarised, so an LCD using polarised glasses is actually far easier to make than a temporal interlacing design (using shutter glasses). Also, shutter glasses require ridicorously high refresh rates and still cause eye strain, not to mention the glasses are powered and thus are heavier and can run out of batteries.
One thing I think will be interesting is whether there will be enough time for the fixed-perspective "3D" to really take off before "true" 3D becomes practical (using screens whose pixels can emit different light colours in different directions, a la HoloVizio). Generating a display like this is tractable (I presume they're using a lenticular sheet system with multiple columns of pixels behind each lenticular strip) but capturing live video in such a manner will prove an interesting challenge.
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
tThHiIsS iIsS tThHeE vVeErRyY fFiIrRsStT tThHrReEeE dD pPoOsStT
cCaAuUtTiIoOnN mMaAyY cCaAuUsSeE nNaAuUsSeEaA
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
Let me guess you have no depth perception and are partially blind? Watching Avatar in RealD 3D was quite an experience. It wasn't just me either, people were standing up in the theater trying to grab the RealD introduction out of the air. No flicker, no headaches, no red/blue tinting.
I am not easily impressed.
"I don't know that atheists should be considered citizens, nor should they be considered patriots." George HW Bush
Sorry to be a pedant, but it's only 3D when I can walk around the TV and see things from every angle. This is stereoscopic; "3D" from only one viewpoint by tricks of the eyes+brain.
Really? People trying to grab things from the air? I don't know if that is a testament to the 3D or the stupidity of the average theater goer in your area.
There's like a 100 posts and not single mention of 3D porn and not a single 3D porn joke.
Just when I caved and bought my 58-plasma, now they're gonna make it obsolete? Will this work on existing TVs?
The 3D effects were blurry and made me feel nauseous.
Furthermore, everyone else in the theater was a nerd. Everyone but me had these big thick plastic glasses on.
I really don't see what the hype was about.
I want some of what you're dropping.
7 - 10% of the population are left handed (wikipedia), but that doesn't stop almost all handed tools being right handed only.
I think that companies would be prepared for 5 - 10% to be overlooked in the pursuit of new TV/home entertainment/3D-DVD sales...
I see some effects but just get a headache. I think it is some 5-10% of the population suffers from the same problem. That will limit any major 3D tv tech.
About 10% of the male population is colorblind. That still doesn't prevent half the video games that come out using purple/pink/red/cyan/dark blue/light blue as the major team colors.
True.
And your TV can only display yellow by tricks of the eyes+brain.
My interpretation of what goes on is this: there's a red dot and a green dot close to each other. These emit intensity-equal streams of "red photons" and "green photons" (of appropriate wavelengths). Pairs of these hit neighbouring cones in your eye, the long-wavelength cone reacting to the red photon and the medium-wavelength cone reacting to the green photon.
Your brain then (acts as if it) assumes the activations of the cones were due to the same photon source. But the only way for one photon source to activate the long and medium wavelength cones equally is if the photon source is yellow.
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_vision
Pedantry is fun. And the brain always computes on the information it is fed; there's never raw access (what would that even mean?).
Not surprisingly, we design display/video technology such that after processing by our brains, we have the desired perception.
So what if it's stereoscopic and not real 3D? The real world is always viewed through a stereoscopic lens (figuratively speaking).