Consumers don’t understand the benefit of 3DTVs and as a result sales have failed to hit expectations, according to retailers.
This is not confusion. It is refusing to fall under the marketing spell of these companies, especially when money is tight. The article itself states this:
Jay Vandenbree, head of home entertainment at LG Electronics USA, agreed that consumers are confused by the technology. “When you get into $2000 TVs, you start thinking: ‘At what point do I really need this, and is it going to make my viewing experience that much better?’” he said.
He does not agree that there is confusion. The reason he gives is the opposite of confusion – it demonstrates wisdom. They simply do not see the need to buy an all new TV, a new blu-ray player and get glasses for everyone all to watch a movie that sucks.
I have only seen one 3D movie where the technique actually added to the movie and which did not also give me a headache – Avatar. The 3D made this an immersive experience when watching in the movie theater with images 20 feet high.
Yeah, it will really take off. One thing not mentioned at all is that the glasses mean that a lot less light gets through. It is like wearing sunglasses indoors. Unless careful remixing of the colors and lighting is done, the view looks quite muted with the glasses.
II think few people will really start using this in any large scale form for some time. It is just another way for the TV makers to try and get us to buy another TV. But the content is simply not compelling enough yet. There has to be things to watch in 3D that are simply worthless to watch in 2D.
If a movie is not great in 2D, watching it in 3D is worthless. And if it is great in 2D, why do you need 3D?