What happened to 3D TV? At one point, they were touted as the future of television, and for several years all major television manufacturers were offering high-end panels in 3D as standard. After that, they disappeared completely, just as 4K TVs were deployed all over the world.
But why was 4K replacing 3D and the latter’s heyday? Was this just a coincidence? Was it a cost issue? Was it a lack of consumer interest in 3D? Or is 4K easy to create and convenient to see?
The first mainstream 3DTV was unveiled at CES 2010, with most manufacturers exhibiting different types of 3DTV demos at international expositions. Later that year, the first 3D TVs began to hit the shelves.
Like most new technologies, these state-of-the-art panels are expensive, with 40-inch panels starting at around $ 2,000 / £ 1,350 / AU $ 2,600. Prices quickly dropped, and by 2012 you could buy a Samsung 50-inch 1080p Full HD 3D TV for about half the price.
As expected, this will increase sales, with 3D TVs accounting for 25.7% of global TV sales by 2012, equivalent to approximately 25 million shipments. Most manufacturers and experts predict that this trend will continue, with some predicting that 180 million 3D TVs will be sold (via HDTVTest) in 2019.
Needless to say, these predictions were wrong. Both market share and unit sales did not significantly exceed 2012, and have fallen sharply since 2015. As a result, Samsung ended support for 3D TV in 2016, and all other major manufacturers also ended support in 2017. Read below for the reason.
Rise of 3D
So how does 3D work anyway? Basically, 3D is an optical illusion that aims to trick the brain into perceiving a flat two-dimensional (2D) image as a deep three-dimensional (3D) image. This is achieved by stereoscopic vision. Sends a slightly offset version of the same image to the left and right eyes. Our brain then processes these two video feeds and calculates the difference between them. This is perceived as stereoscopic vision with depth perception.
The 2009 3D boom is made possible by the fusion of several technologies. In cinemas, this technology was digital cinema photography. This makes it much easier to capture, play, and view 3D content than film. The 3D debut of this technology was James Cameron’s movie Avatar. The financial success of this movie and the excellent use of 3D paved the way for subsequent 3D movies, and major TV makers, content creators and broadcasters found that 3D TV was just as popular at home. I was convinced.
Another realization technology was sunglasses-style polarized 3D glasses. Unlike older anaglyph (red and green) glass, polarized glass did not distort the color space of the film. Viewers can now enjoy 3D movies without compromising image quality.
The avatar was shot natively in 3D from the beginning, so it worked fine. Unfortunately, most of the 3D movies that came out after that were shot in 2D and converted to 3D in post production, resulting in inconsistent results. Perhaps this and the increased cost of 3D tickets explained the decline in revenue from 3D movies, and as a result, the studio reduced the number of 3D movies produced over time. But if 3D cinema was gradually phased out, why did 3D TV support suddenly and suddenly end?
What happened to 3D TV?
Basically, 3DTV is the same as 2DTV, with additional CPU power to display two Full HD 1080p images at once when in 3D mode. In 2D mode, it behaves like any other equivalent panel. The best TVs since 2010 had the processor power to do this anyway, as they were needed to perform smart TV features and image modification effects such as: Motion smoothing..
Immediately 3D was everywhere. Almost all major blockbuster movies had 3D variants in cinemas, and almost all high-end TVs came standard with 3D. There are two major competing technologies in the 3D TV market, active and passive, each with its own strengths and weaknesses.
Active 3D was endorsed by Samsung and Sony. Here, the TV pulsates between the left and right images about 120 times per second. We used battery-powered “active shutter” glasses to allow each eye to receive only one set of images. The “lens” was a miniature LCD screen that synced with the TV via Bluetooth and became opaque 120 times per second. The active lens flickers so quickly that the illusion of depth perception is maintained.
The main advantage of active shutter 3DTV over passive “cinema” 3DTV was that 3D and 2D modes have the same resolution because each eye receives a Full HD 1080p image.
However, it had some drawbacks. In the first place, they were often fixed to a particular manufacturer. For example, Samsung Active Shutter glasses do not work on Sony Active 3D TV. Second, active shutter glasses are expensive at around $ 100 / £ 100 / A $ 200 per pair, and because they are battery-powered, they are a bit heavy and uncomfortable to wear. To make matters worse, the battery life of early models was limited to a few hours, which wasn’t long enough to watch a 3D movie at once. (However, later models have been slightly improved, but have longer battery life, reduced weight and cost.)
Sadly, all active shutter glasses suffered from both a flickering effect and “crosstalk” -both distracting. Crosstalk became more pronounced as the 3D effect increased. The only solution was to reduce the intensity of the 3D effect or turn it off altogether.
Passive 3D used simple polarized glasses like a movie theater. This is an option recommended by LG and was sold as “Cinema 3D”. They were lighter, more comfortable to wear, less flicker, less crosstalk, worked on all passive 3D TVs, did not require synchronization or built-in power, were much cheaper and cost less. A cup of coffee for a pair.
Passive glasses were a great option in all but one. That is, I cut the vertical resolution in half. On a Full HD 1080p TV, this resulted in 540 lines, much like a standard definition (SD) TV. This also produced a very noticeable “screen door effect” that reduced image quality, which became more and more distracting as the screen size increased.
Sadly, there was no ideal 3D solution, and even the best 3D TVs suffered from some inherent problems. Two common complaints were eye strain and eye strain. This made some people uncomfortable watching for long periods of time. Stronger 3D effects and rapid changes on the screen tended to exacerbate these.
The need for stereoscopic vision for 3D to work means that some people are unable to perceive the effects of 3DTV. This includes people with only one functional eye, people with lazy eyes, and so on. We do not recommend 3D content for people under the age of 6 as it may be due to eye strain. It is also recommended that you look at it moderately even in your early teens. Of course, this reduces the potential viewers of 3D TV.
Another problem with 3D TVs is that they were a hassle. To watch 3D content, you need to find and wear 3D glasses. If they are active shutter glasses, you need to turn them on and sync via Bluetooth, remembering to charge them. You can do other things while watching TV, such as using your smartphone or pottering around your room, because you need to take off your 3D glasses to interact effectively with your surroundings. lose.
For some, this 3D annoyance was a movie night treat (along with surround sound and popcorn) and wasn’t used on a regular basis.
However, 3D TV has always had great potential. The situation might have been different if it had been introduced a little later in the history of television development, closer to the advent of 4K than HD.
Where do 4K TVs come from?
4K TV is a TV with a resolution of 3840 x 2160 pixels (also known as Ultra HD). Packed with twice the horizontal and vertical lines of a 1080p “Full HD” 1920 x 1080 screen, you get four times the pixel density for the same screen size for clearer, clearer images.
4K is made possible by several technologies that enable higher resolution streaming, including high-speed HDMI 2.0, 4K Blu-ray discs, and increased Internet speeds. These were essential because the file size of native 4K content is much larger than the file size of Full HD.
The advantage of 4K over regular HD is that it can make images brighter and clearer, especially when combined with other technologies such as OLED and HDR. This is most noticeable on large screens. A 40-inch 1080p screen can look very sharp at normal viewing distances, while a 65-inch screen can look slightly blurry due to the pixels further apart, but a 65-inch 4K TV. Maintains razor-like sharpness.
However, 4K has some drawbacks. Initially, due to the lack of native 4K content, viewers had to rely on upscaled 1080p content. Some TVs handled this upscaling well, but others were unsightly and definitely looked worse than 1080p. Another problem was the lack of a fast enough internet. This means that the streamed 4K content is unreliable and prone to buffering. An offline 4K Blu-ray player can be a costly solution. It is 4K and its only use with so many pixels is to complete a 3D TV.
However, 4K resolution passive 3D could have been the ideal home 3D TV solution. With the 2160 vertical lines, 3D images look great and crisp, even when halved to 1080 lines, while retaining the benefits of a passive 3D TV. LG has created several such sets, such as the LG OLED65E6V.
Unfortunately, when most manufacturers phased in support for 4K, they ended support for 3D TVs, so few people experienced this. So why did 3D suddenly fall like a hot potato?
It all depends on how quickly the 4K problem was resolved. Live broadcasts such as BT Sports Ultra HD and streaming services such as Netflix Ultra HD have begun offering 4K content, and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have deployed ultra-fast fiber broadband to meet the demand for 4K.
The lack of physical 4K content has been resolved with a Blu-ray 2 pack that includes both standard and 4K Blu-ray. 4K Blu-ray players have appeared in many people’s homes by default. This is because all video game consoles, such as the latest generation Xbox One S and current generation PS5 and Xbox Series X, come standard with an integrated 4K Blu-ray player. .. With easy access to 4K content and viewing on most high-end TVs with 4K screens, it was only a matter of time before 4K TV became the new standard.
But why did 4K replace 3D TVs instead of complementing them?
Shooting native 3D content requires complex and expensive camera setups, and post-production conversion from 2D to 3D is time consuming and inconsistent. Native 4K shooting is now nearly standard, and 4K content can usually be quickly and easily downscaled to 1080p. This makes 4K a more attractive proposal for content creators.
For many viewers, 4K is much more convenient than 3D. Watching 4K is less hassle than watching Full HD. Just turn it on, sit down and watch. For example, no additional accessories or facewear are needed.
By the way, in the heyday of 4K, I think that combining 4K and passive 3D could have contributed to the ultimate home viewing experience. But who knows that perhaps 3D TV will come back in the future as it is incorporated into other technologies? The advent of 8K TV shows that consumers’ desire for higher resolutions hasn’t diminished. If 4K could complete a passive 3D TV, imagine what 8K could do for it.
4K TV had to save 3D – this was the problem - Texasnewstoday.com
Read More
No comments:
Post a Comment