Interest in 3D TV is Falling, Says UK Retailer

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
TOPICS
Jane McEntegart
Contributor

Jane McEntegart is a writer, editor, and marketing communications professional with 17 years of experience in the technology industry. She has written about a wide range of technology topics, including smartphones, tablets, and game consoles. Her articles have been published in Tom's Guide, Tom's Hardware, MobileSyrup, and Edge Up.

  • SteelCity1981
    Not to mention watching something in 3D after a while can lead to eye strain and give you a headache. 3D was a fad it was big in the 1950's and then it faded away until the last 5 years when it came back again because of HD and now it's beginning to fade away again.
    Reply
  • dns7950
    All TVs should be 3D, they just need to make them cheaper. A lot of people would get them if there wasn't such a high premium over a comparable 2D TV. I bought 3D TV in 2011 ($1600 for a 55" Sony NX720) and I definitely don't regret it. 3D is something that makes movies WAY better when done properly, but if done wrong it makes for a rather unpleasant viewing experience. I would say the biggest problems with 3D are the issues some TVs have with crosstalk (not sure if this is still a problem, but my TV has some issues with it. Maybe it's just older or cheaper models), and the fact that a lot of movies are filmed in 2D and then converted to 3D post-production as a gimmick, which makes them look like crap. If you have a good quality TV and the movie is filmed properly (Avatar for example) then there is no comparison, the upgrade to 3D is like the difference between a DVD and a Blu-ray, it adds so much depth.. I don't think the fact that glasses are required is hurting TV sales, you need glasses when you see a 3D movie in a theater and that doesn't hurt ticket sales...
    Reply
  • spentshells
    I still want one but I'll never pay 800-900 for a 47"
    Reply
  • aznplayer213
    I bought a high end plasma and was not surprised that all tvs around that price (3k USD) were smart and 3D capable. I'm a purist in terms of image quality and have not liked how companies have been focusing on different tv features. Luckily, the inclusion of OLED technology in sets starting in 2014 and onwards will finally yield tvs that can and will surpass the ever impressive Pioneer Kuro line.
    Reply
  • StarBound
    Bought one of the active Samsungs. Was let down. Bought an passive LG one, was more impressed. The glasses 3D is annoying and there is no real tech that immerses you into a true 3D experience. Even the occulus rift has its short comings. At this point I am just using my passive 3D for the full screen 2 player split screen thing.
    Reply
  • drwho1
    I was never interested on 3D TV's.
    I'm also not interested on "smart TV's" either.
    Now 4K/8K this I'm interested in. (for both TV and PC monitors)
    Reply
  • SteelCity1981
    you can turn a regular flat screen tv with 120mhz into a 3D TV with a 3D converter kit.
    Reply
  • aznplayer213
    just a quick reminder of 4k and beyond: we're still in development of hdmi 2.0 for 4k 60hz for tv use. right now, hdmi 1.4a will only output 4k at 24hz. if the tv has mini display, you can run that at 4k 60hz...
    Reply
  • Chetou
    The interest in 3D is even smaller than they think. Fact is many 3D TV sets are simply higher quality models for 2D viewing. The best Plasmas just happen to be 3D capable, but that 3D is not the reason most of them are bought.
    Reply
  • de5_Roy
    who cares about 3d when 4k is right around the corner.
    3d in tv was a gimmick at best, bad experience with bad results at worst.
    in pc displays, the attraction of 3d monitors was the 120hz refresh rate instead of 3d. :lol:
    Reply