3D so close you can almost touch it
TV Tonight got a first hand experience of 3D Aussie broadcasting last night, as a guest of the Nine Network. The verdict?
- Published by David Knox
- on
- Filed under News
Rain poured down on the State of Origin game last night, but it couldn’t dampen the enthusiasm for Nine’s debut 3D broadcast.
TV Tonight got a first hand experience of 3D Aussie broadcasting last night, as a guest of the Nine Network.
With next to no interest in NRL (sorry), I was purely interested in seeing how well the 3D held up.
Broadly speaking, it was very bloody good.
The small group watching the test broadcast looked a little like a Roy Orbison Appreciation Society wearing those big, black glasses. But all seemed rather taken by how convincing the 3D was, including yours truly.
Nine had set up two broadcasting units for the event in Sydney: Nine’s standard 2D broadcast, on Ch 9, and a second dedicated 3D broadcast on Ch 40. That meant 3D viewers were watching a unique broadcast with totally different camera angles.
It began with Ken Sutcliffe welcoming us to an historic occasion, ending with him holding out the footy to us. You could almost touch the thing.
Many of the 3D shots were wide, with few of the close-ups that were on offered by 2D. In a game such as this, getting up close is part of the game. Nine had seven 3D cameras on offer.
The 3D worked well when there was foreground action as opposed to mid-field and background only.
Super titles on the screen, and IDs designed in 5 days by zspace, worked extremely well for 3D effect.
The glasses required to watch the game would get tiring after a while.
They have a little “on” and “off” switch that allows the glasses to communicate with the TV set. If you look away during a broadcast (ie to read the Guide, answer the phone, check the time), there is a slight delay as they readjust to the TV.
Should you buy one of these at a starting price of around $2500?
If you are a sports fan: maybe.
If you are not a sports fan: no.
We don’t yet have enough 3D content being produced to warrant a purchase of that price. But as more 3D DVD movies become available, and when more documentaries are broadcast in 3D, it could be one for the wish list.
Wait for the price drops (and ACMA’s permanent approval) before you even think about it.
Share
- Tagged with NRL, State of Origin
25 Responses
The thing is, a 3d tv is not that big of an investment compared to LED, 200hz Lcds, and neo plasmas screens. They are around $3000, which, up until a year or 2 ago, was the average price of your flat panel tv. Seeing as they use the new LED technology, if you were in the market for a new tv, and wanted to buy an LED one, paying an extra $500 for added 3d technology, isn’t that bad of a deal.
The 40″ Sony 100hz LCD I got at the start of ’09 was $2,300, So 3d tv is relitavely cheap in comparison.
If 3d does take off, then in a years time there’s no reason why prices won’t drop to the $1,000-2000 range.
Some news i heard only a couple of days is they have now come up with a 3D TV that does not require the glasses.Technology is great and i’m not surprised i have come up with a solution.Naturally it’s quite a while off as they have only just worked this puzzle out.I’m certainly not going to bother about this current technology i’m going to wait lol
No mention here of what you see on the screen if you don’t have the glasses, but my guess is that it isn’t watchable. So it would be considered rude to switch to 3D unless you had enough glasses for everyone. Think of that for your next footie party.
Nothing here is technologically difficult – been used in scientific labs for at least 20 years. In the end it is just a gimmick, that might be OK if it wasn’t a huge investment and a major inconvenience. Just can’t see it taking off – so most without money to burn will wait and see.
Since you are wearing glasses anyway – a better solution for a single user might be to build the screens into the glasses. A US company called Headplay makes video glasses that it claims are HD and 3D compatible for around US$400 – though the video is actually downscaled to SVGA. Now all you need of course is compatible software or a compatible set-top-box.
Personally, I’m waiting for the Holodeck version.
It’s good if you sit in the right spot in the room with the right glasses on and the equipment setup just right.
That’s not TV, TV sits on a wall or in a corner, entertains, does not demand you conform. Well, one hopes. Meh, I don’t get it, it’s still Emperor’s New Clothes, only they aren’t new.
Nine proved, that delivery of terrestrial 3D in the newer format is just as feasible as cable/satellite delivery, as well as proving that 3D’s benefits are not limited to soccer.
I’d say there weren’t just Nine execs watching this with keen interest.
For all we know, Seven execs probably were watching too, after all, they want to try 3D, with the AFL.
Hell, I’d not be surprised, if a copy of Game 1 ended up in the US.
@Paul et al
Brain tumours from mobile phones has been conclusively disproved via numerous scientific studies. Best you go and have a look at the scientific literature. Or just go and google it. I’ll even give you the title of the paper:
Int J Epidemiol. 2010 May 17. [Epub ahead of print] Brain tumour risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the Interphone international case-control study.
The Interphone Study Group.
3D TV uses an optical trick to convince the brain it’s in 3D. *Potential* long term tricking of the visual and neural pathways of the brain could *potentially* lead to permanent brain damage. A condition called binocular dysphoria.
3D TV is not the same as looking at something naturally in 3D using your natural vision. You need to used glasses to induce the 3D effect.
The issue is that none of the manufactures have carried out any health and safety testing to understand the long term effects of constant and continual viewing of 3D TV (and video games).
And by the way – the most serious health effect from a mobile phone we all face is the idiot who uses one while driving! And yes, I do use a phone. 🙂
While cell phones might has a direct impact on your health, which is yet to be proven I don’t see how watching a 3D picture on TV could do the same when you are watching 3D every minute of your life. You are not holding a source of radiation next to your head 24/7.
what, no pictures of you wearing the dorky glasses David? 🙂
@Woody:do you use a mobile phone? If so, then you must realise that there are a number of serious health issues that may arise from using it, the main one being brain tumours.
The point of my comment? None of the health issues associated with 3d tv have been proven. The technology is new, and as with any new tech, there may (key word here is ‘may’) be unknown long term side effects, thus a warning is issued.
When you think about it though, I’m sure watching a regular tv for hours on end, day after day, can’t be good for your health either. Don’t they say square eyes can result from over exposure to the tv screen?
How big was the TV screen David? And how far away from it were you viewing it?
I could imagine smaller sets make it look like an aquarium!
I think I’ll be waiting until they figure out how we can watch 3DTV without the glasses. They say that will be in an estimated 10 years or so. I’m told the price of the glasses is enough for someone to not even bother thinking about buying a 3DTV now. I’ve heard they’re around about $150 a pair.
Seeing that most 3DTVs now have only 2 glasses included, it’ll be real costly if you have a family or if you’re likely to invite friends over for the big game.
@ chk chk, a yess T9500 HD stb box $99, plus a tb $95, a pvr for under $200
I forgot to say that 3DTV is on my Christimas wish list, together with a 1TB PVR 🙂
I wish they would come up with a 3D contact lenses, those glasses were gigantic!
well down C9 for being second banana to bring 3D to Australia. But could someone tell kenny and rabs. They crapped on like it was C9 that invented 3D TV
There seem to be a number of health concerns regarding this 3D technology that no one seems willing to address – since this relies largely on tricking the brain in to believing something is 3D when it isn’t. Could serious brain damage result from watching too much 3D programming?
There’s something like 15% of the population who become ill watching these 3D programs.
I suspect this 3D thing is a bit of a fad.
The idea of 3D be it tv movies whatever has been floating around since the 80’s! I must admit the first time I saw it was at Imax and was a doco on NASCAR’s and honestly it was mind blowing! However this is a screen 4-5 storeys tall. The idea of it on TV i feel is a waste! I agree it would have been nice if the rest of us had have been able to see it just to see the difference, when Foxtel did it on Monday with the split screen it didn’t look all that impressive.
thanks for your fair review even though you are not a nrl fan, i read an article on the abc website about the soccer match on foxports in 3d and all the writer did was bitch about how he doesn’t like soccer, thankfully you are a lot more professional than that.
3D TV’S are a lot cheaper than i thought, most are the same as a regular lcd or plasma was a few years ago. interesting that the in nines promo it was pouring rain, just like on the night. the rain must have looked pretty real in 3d?
A 3d tv is on my wish list
At $2500 for a 3D set i won’t bothering, hell my TV is still a SD CRT, and I’m happy with it thank you very much.
Sounds bloody brilliant, just heard talk of the AFL grand final being broadcast in 3D, hopefully I’ll have abit of spare cash hanging before then to buy one.
I don’t believe it is the next big thing as it has been talked up to be.
Cant believe your not a league fan David. Going to have to cut my views on this site now to…. 3 a day..lol :p
David – did you get a headache after a while?
Watching Avatar in 3D, about 2 hours in my head started to hurt. Just wondering if it was just me?
On the other side, I’m really not sold on 3D TV.
In a year the sets will be half the price and maybe Nine will allow the rest of the country to join in on 3D?
BTW I saw Avatar at the cinemas in 3D, my first 3D movie and while it was good I never thought it was spectacular. Probably spending too much time trying to see the 3D effects.