HDTV Almanac - 15 Million 3DTVs by 2012

[alfredpoor]

Futuresource has announced a study that predicts an installed base of 15 million 3DTVs in the U.S. by the end of next year. They point to the increased content that is becoming available as the driving force behind this forecast. And other prognosticators are saying that this figure is way too high, especially when you [...]

[url=http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/columns/2011/03/hdtv-almanac-15-million-3dtvs-by-2012.php]Read Column[/url]

[stevekaden]

Really the 15m number seems paultry given the number of sest sold.

While many may not start with 3D glasses sooner or later the owners will take advantage of the 3D feature - ever if just in a token way. I would suggest that people who are not 3D compatible might not suppress the market or use of the feature eithers. Because that person will probaby only be one member of a couple or family. Okay, there are singles out there too, but more couples and families.

I found I was typical in not taking the steps to go HD source after getting my first HD set. This is probably similar - but once it became easier to get HD source it naturally followed to use it. Here it is easy as soon as the hardware is purchased.

[alfredpoor]

Steve, I agree completely with your example of people not getting HD source content for their HDTVs initially. We also saw the same lag between technology and implementation with USB ports on computers, HDMI connectors, and even Bluetooth in cell phones. (How many of us have Bluetooth in our phones and never use it? I'd guess that it's the vast majority.)

There's no harm in getting a product that has a feature that you won't use (or won't use yet) if you can justify the purchase based on the value of the features that you will use. At least that's how I see it.

Alfred

[AVInsights]

IMHO.......not a shot. As streaming becomes better & better[content's not so bad right now] & more apps are added to TV's, 3D will fade & fade & fade!!!!!!!!

[alfredpoor]

Bob, you don't think that the streaming will offer 3D content? To me, that's a bit like saying that stereophonic sound is good enough, so why bother with 5.1 surround? It doesn't matter whether your getting it on disc, broadcast, cable, or streamed over the Internet. I expect that you'll have the choice of 3D content as well as 2D from the streaming services. It's already been produced; why not offer it and try to earn a little more from it?

Alfred

[AVInsights]

Alfred,
You "might" have swayed me...a little bit. Again, only in my opinion, AFTER the HDTV explosion and they made their money[as well as glutting the field], the manufacturers needed a new money-making idea....1st 3D, now new apps on the new displays. I'm thinking 3D is only a merchandising fad DICTATED by the TV manufacturers just like HDTV was DICTATED by the US Government. HDTV is great, works & makes the "experience" all the better; 3D, on the other hand, doesn't have much material, the "glasses" etc., etc.

[alfredpoor]

Bob, I don't intend to sway people. I just hope to poke them from time to time, enough to keep them a little off balance. <g>

Alfred

[Rodolfo]

Furthermore, because 3D is mostly a feature of higher end models (so far) I also suggest the CEA should find a way to segregate the statistics they maintain of DTV lines sold on the past 3 years (2008, 2009, and 2010), not just the number of overall sets I followed for years to monitor the HDTV implementation in the US:

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/articles/20 ... eholds.php

That will facilitate an apples-to-apples comparison to show how many DTVs of the higher-end lines on previous years compare now with those similar TV lines in 2010/11 that happen to have the 3D feature into them.

I would not be surprised if around 10% of the TVs sold on any given year are of higher-end lines and that number would be just below the 5 million per year some wizards are tossing to the air regarding 3DTV.

Additionally, although it is easy to compare how many HDTVs sold on the first years against how many 3DTVs sold on the same period (which is certainly superior), the 3DTV of today has an easier ride to find a home because the digital conversion is already completed and 3DTV uses that technology, a luxury HDTV did not have.

The availability of abundant HDTV content watched on a 3DTV provides a much better fall back plan than what the beginning of HDTV had, with only NTSC and 480i/p DVD as a fall back plan to watch when no HD content was available when one wanted to watch it.

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra

[Hugh]

Rodolfo,
Long time my friend. Just wondering if the current crop of 3D sets offer a great picture when only viewing 2D content? Trust all is well with you and yours.

Hugh

[Rodolfo]

Hugh, what a surprise, I hope you and Paula are doing well, you worried me after not hearing from you for so long.

To respond to your question, coincidentally I wrote an article about that exact subject and I believe Shane is releasing it next on the 3D series I am producing.

The short answer is:

A) Active-shutter 3DTVs should not produce 2D viewing problems because they do not use the panel screen to do the 3D effect and the video processing for frame-sequential 3D is suppose to be out of the way when showing 2D.

B) Passive 3DTV with the cheap 3D glasees could, autostereoscopic 3DTV could as well, because they are both using the screen and video processing to show 3D and if some of that cannot be moved out of the way when viewing 2D (i.e. how can one move away a lenticular screem that is built into the panel?) then I would be cautious and test them well before signing the check.

Remember the first RPTVs in 1998/9 with CRTs and lenticular screens? Remember the effect when one changed the angle of view? we got accustomed because it was the only game in town back then, but now is a different story.

I was about to test again the 3DFusion autostereoscopic next week in NYC and my purpose was to do 2D viewing not only 3D, that I already did, but I am not sure we can fit it on a tight schedule.

Take care Hugh,

Best Regards,

Rodolfo