|
CES 2010: BDA shows off new 'Blu-ray 3D' logo
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 7 January, 2010
The Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) has revealed the new logo for the Blu-ray 3D standard, which was ratified in December.
The specification allows for 1080p resolution delivery to each eye while wearing stereoscopic glasses, and will work on any compatible 3D display, including LCD, OLED and Plasma.
Blu-ray 3D also specifically calls for PlayStation 3 consoles to have full BD 3D content ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Senior Member
28 product reviews
|
7. January 2010 @ 15:42 |
Link to this message
|
I'm still catching up on CES coverages. Good to see that this is compatible with current blu-ray players, but will it work with non 3D display's, like Samasung's PN50B850?
Quote:
...will work on any compatible 3D display, including LCD, OLED and Plasma.
Also, I don't think that there are that many movies out that will really benefit from being viewed in 3D, besides films like Avatar.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
gregTO
Inactive
|
7. January 2010 @ 16:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
There are probably hundreds of 3D movies that could benefit from being restored and ported to 3D Blu ray not to mention all the films currently in production. Films from the 50's, early 80's and the past 5 years will provide plenty of 3D viewing options and let's not forget the 1974 classic "Andy Warhol's Frankenstein" (aka "Flesh For Frankenstein") in 3D! Combine that with upcoming 3D TV broadcasts and I think we'll have a fun way of watching TV at home in years to come.
|
|
stumpied
Junior Member
|
7. January 2010 @ 18:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
I would of much rather watched Avatar in 2D and there is no way I'm going to be watching any 3D in my house any time soon.
I have yet to see any movie in 3D that I thought was worth the price increase, infact, it made it much less attractive to me.
I know a bunch of people are going to disagree, but thats my opinion and I see what I see.
|
|
embo22000
Junior Member
|
7. January 2010 @ 21:34 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by stumpied:
I would of much rather watched Avatar in 2D and there is no way I'm going to be watching any 3D in my house any time soon.
I have yet to see any movie in 3D that I thought was worth the price increase, infact, it made it much less attractive to me.
I know a bunch of people are going to disagree, but thats my opinion and I see what I see.
What you are insane 3D its worth the price in most movies. Its a awesome experience the first time you see it then you get used to it but some movies make it worth really good like Avatar. Plus this is only the beggining im sure they will make it even better in a few years.
|
|
KSib
Member
|
7. January 2010 @ 23:50 |
Link to this message
|
Most people will probably disagree with your 2D being better than 3D comment. I do agree that some movies shouldn't use it, just like some Wii games shouldn't use the waggle. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. But I think Avatar did a pretty good job.
It should get better over time.
|
Staff Member
4 product reviews
|
8. January 2010 @ 01:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
Only thing I don't really like about 3D is the glasses wash out the colors of the film usually. (Up, Avatar, etc)
|
|
av_verbal
Suspended permanently
|
8. January 2010 @ 08:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
is this really news?
|
|
SProdigy
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
8. January 2010 @ 13:21 |
Link to this message
|
Yeah Avatar in 3D was so incredible had me thinking "Could I watch this any other way?" including buying the Blu-Ray when it comes out. Experience isn't the same.
I agree to, that just because you can, doesn't mean you should when it comes to 3D.
And whats up with that logo? Is that the best they could do? Seriously!
|
Newbie
|
8. January 2010 @ 13:32 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by stumpied:
I would of much rather watched Avatar in 2D and there is no way I'm going to be watching any 3D in my house any time soon.
I have yet to see any movie in 3D that I thought was worth the price increase, infact, it made it much less attractive to me.
I know a bunch of people are going to disagree, but thats my opinion and I see what I see.
I Agree 100%
I felt a little ripped off after seeing UP in 3D. 3D degrades color and clarity.
|
Newbie
|
8. January 2010 @ 13:39 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by SProdigy:
Yeah Avatar in 3D was so incredible had me thinking "Could I watch this any other way?" including buying the Blu-Ray when it comes out. Experience isn't the same.
I agree to, that just because you can, doesn't mean you should when it comes to 3D.
And whats up with that logo? Is that the best they could do? Seriously!
Sony must had one of those company art contests. "Who can come up with the best blu-ray 3d logo?"
I think someone in accounting won.
|
Senior Member
|
9. January 2010 @ 17:47 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by gregTO:
There are probably hundreds of 3D movies that could benefit from being restored and ported to 3D Blu ray not to mention all the films currently in production. Films from the 50's, early 80's and the past 5 years will provide plenty of 3D viewing options and let's not forget the 1974 classic "Andy Warhol's Frankenstein" (aka "Flesh For Frankenstein") in 3D! Combine that with upcoming 3D TV broadcasts and I think we'll have a fun way of watching TV at home in years to come.
Good luck !
This 3D frenzy thing tech it will be gonne as fast as it come out !
1.-Production is to Costly and labor intensive for a CGI wich is a headache for many TV and Movie Studios.
2.-3D TVs, Players or Home Theaters.... never will bet Theather 3D Systems.
3.-People better have a big Screen 3D-TV to really be effective, you need to be situated directly in-front at specific distance other wise it's a blur.
4.-People still too strapped to even buy a regular HDTV.
5.-3D is just once in awhile Good Treat, wich is why is best seen in a Movie Theater, as it has been for decades.
6.-If you invite your friends to show-up your 3D System, you better provide them with Stereoscopic Glasses or tell them to go back home.
7.-This Technology will never catch-on. that's is why nobody rides a Roller-Coaster to go to work 'cos is completely impractical and it will lose it's appeal.
|
Senior Member
|
9. January 2010 @ 17:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
8.-3D TV Broadcast is plan it for only USA, like the ESPN etc.
|
Senior Member
|
9. January 2010 @ 19:01 |
Link to this message
|
9.-If 3D tech became something in the near future it will be integrate into the TV-Set as a convertion of 2D into 3D.
10.-3D NEVER WILL REMPLACE HD.
Live Free or Die.
The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Senior Member
28 product reviews
|
21. January 2010 @ 17:59 |
Link to this message
|
After reading a few articles, supposedly you also need an 3D TV as well. If this is the case, 3D will not do well, especially since many consumers in the past few years, have shelled out a lot of money just to upgrade to 1080p TV's. If you can do it with current Blu-ray's and HDTV's, then fine, this will be a neat thing to have sometimes, otherwise I don't see this catching on.
|
