HDTV Almanac - Avatar Is Box Office Boffo!

[alfredpoor]

I’ve mentioned several times that I view James Cameron’s blockbuster “Avatar” as a key factor in determining the fate of 3DTV in the home. It could help launch stereoscopic technology as a central part of the maintstream media, or it could leave the effect in the pile of “gimmicks” used to attract audiences.
It’s still too [...]

[url=http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/columns/2009/12/hdtv_almanac_avatar_is_box_office_boffo.php]Read Column[/url]

[stevekaden]

I saw it, and I am a believer. It had almost none of the 3d in your face fluff - except for a sparkling snow like effect that subtlely came out of the screen and a couple of minor spear points waving at us - that actually fit the camera angle.

It truly enhanced the view, if not the emotional aspects of the story line. I would like to see it in 2d to compare for that aspect.

I think it is a game changer. In fact I see like Finding Nemo, which theoretically sold a $ billion ++ flat screen TVs, this will sell a $ billion 3d ones.

BTW, I did not think it deserved any of the criticism for dialog and story. I thought it brought enough of it's own to take what are classic story constructs that have been done a thousand times - conflict, love, spirituallity, machevilianism (sp?), and built a new combination that has a solid -if not unique- lesson in the other great classic, what is of value. Reminding us that there well maybe value out there in the broad universe of our lives.

[akirby]

UP was the same way - you almost forgot you were watching it in 3d. No in your face 3d for the sake of 3d effects.

[Richard]

With this positive feedback I have a question...?

Do either of you think you can have this same experience at home based on your current screen size and viewing distance?

How much are you willing to pay to have this experience at home? The most expensive investment is replacing the display...

[alfredpoor]

I won't know until I get to meet with folks at CES next week, but I expect that 3D will not cost much more for the TV set. Remember that the Panasonic and Samsung rear projection models that were 3D-ready did not really carry any price premium for that feature. Any LCD panel with 120 Hz refresh rate or any plasma panel should be able to handle the task just fine, so only a little extra needs to be added to the controller circuitry. Those costs could be absorbed easily enough into the existing pricing. The real cost will be in the active glasses that will be required; I believe that they go for $150 to $200 at this point, but I expect that to drop rapidy as demand increases, probably reaching $50 or less in a couple years.

So if you just bought a big flat screen, yes, it will cost a bunch to replace it with a 3D capable one. But many people have a second place for a TV, such as the kitchen or a bedroom, and if you migrate the existing set to a new location when you buy the new screen, the cost is mitigated. And if you're planning to buy a new screen anyway, I don't think it will cost you much more to get a 3D-ready model.

I still think that we're two years too early to be buying these things, however. There's not enough content yet, and I think it will take that long before we have good life stereoscopic production and a sufficient amount of the existing back catalog computer-converted for 3D.

Alfred

[Richard]

Remember that the Panasonic and Samsung rear projection models that were 3D-ready did not really carry any price premium for that feature.

It did come with a price premium since the feature was only available on top of the line models (and rarely purchased for the 3D capability). Based on past marketing history and early adopter pricing I fully expect a 3D buyer will $feel$ their 3D choice regardless of how inexpensive reality might be. At one time we were paying a $1000 premium for an integrated DTV tuner...

[alfredpoor]

I agree that the manufacturers would love to add $1,000 to the price of a TV just for 3D support, but it's not going to happen. First, as Scott Ramirez of Toshiba often says, there's no market above $2,500. (Yes, some sets sell for that much or more, but they are just a sliver on the total revenue pie chart.) Second, everyone will be jumping on the 3D bandwagon next week at CES; Panasonic and Sony will find that their early lead has evaporated. So competition is going to put a heavy downward force on pricing.

Having said that, I agree that the first 3D sets will almost certainly be the premium models. It's easier to bury the extra costs there, and the demand for 3D is going to be low for the first year or two, so it makes sense that the manufacturers will follow the tradition of trying to soak the early adopters as much as they can. But it's not going to be a huge price difference between equivalent models with and without 3D. 120 Hz over 60 Hz is now down to $100 or less; I expect that 3D will start higher than that for a short while, but will rapidly come down about that level.

Alfred