| Squilliam said: Even in the short term these active shutter 3DTVs are obsolete. Obviously in order of priority it will go something like this: Passive >>>> Passive glasses >>> Active Glasses which corresponds in reverse order of the above with: Little 3D content <<< moderate 3D content <<< mainstream levels of content. When all is said and done, the active shutter 3DTVs may end up like the HD CRT style screens in the U.S. Remember the complaints about the fact that the PS3 didn't support 1080i? We may see the same complaints as passive glasses replace active shutter over the coming years. Passive glasses only have the one valid complaint, which is people don't like to wear glasses. Active shutter has about 3 major complaints. The cost/inconvenience of glasses which need to be charged, major losses to contrast/colour gamut and the fact that people need to wear glasses. So automatically you'd have to be pretty foolish to buy a 3DTV this year. |
That and the current lack of 3D content in general. Buyers pay an early adopter premium price as it is with most new consumer technologies.
Personally, I'm not "allergic" to glasses, but the current level of content available simply doesn't offset the price. With any luck, by the time more content is shot in 3D (broadcast programming), autostereoscopic displays will be common enough to be accessible to general consumers.
