03.31.2010 11:00 AM
Dealers Doubt 3DTV
3DSpecsDALLAS: Consumer electronics dealers are not so sure about stocking up on 3DTV sets. Retailers met this week in Dallas for the Brand Source and Home Entertainment Source Spring Summit, Dealerscope reports.

One Memphis, Tenn., dealer told the publication he intends to wait until next year to sell 3DTVs because he expects compatibility problems to arise.

"I've been selling to many of my clients for 20, 30 years. I don't want to jeopardize those relationships with something I'm not sure of,” Ken Bourgeois of AV Fusion said.

Other dealers were reluctant about the shutter glasses necessary to view 3D content on a 3D-compatible set. The glasses can’t be swapped between sets, so people can’t schlep them to the neighbor’s for a Super Bowl party. One retailer mentioned the paucity of 3DTV content, and said people are more interested in Internet-connected TVs right now.

The chief of the HES was the 3DTV devil’s advocate of the
Dealerscope piece. Vance Pflanz of Sioux City, Iowa, said he started carrying Sensio-enabled 3D sets when those first came out. Sensio introduced real-time 2D-to-3D video processing six years ago. (See coverage at Popular Mechanics). It first integrated 3D processing into a TV set in late 2007 in an agreement with Kerner Optical, a spin-out of Industrial Light & Magic.

Anthony Celeste of
Tom’s Guide is another 3DTV skeptic. Celeste says 3DTV is not fully cooked.

“A major obstacle in creating 3D software and hardware exists in that the spec hasn’t even been finalized yet,” Celeste
writes. “I’ve heard a lot of 3D proponents defend this by saying that Wireless-N products were released without a final spec, and that worked out fine. However, I feel this is a weak argument. Wireless-N was essentially an upgrade to Wireless-G. 3D is not just an upgrade to 2D, its new technology.”

“CE Dealers Still Skeptical” is at

Post New Comment
If you are already a member, or would like to receive email alerts as new comments are
made, please login or register.

Enter the code shown above:

(Note: If you cannot read the numbers in the above
image, reload the page to generate a new one.)

Posted by: Deborah McAdams
Wed, 03-31-2010 03:54 PM Report Comment
The thing that annoys me more than anything is the attitude of the PRO3d camp. Or really of any emerging technology. They always look upon the consumer as being unready or unsophisticated enough to grab hold of the technology. This is simply untrue. Consumers know what they want. They are not inadequate children needing to be cajoled into buying the latest high tech. Consumers don't need 3-D. Especially when you consider that most of the prevailing delivery systems (cable, satellite, network) are barely up to the task for 2-D ! What consumers want is choice, not to pay for content they never use, and a consistently high quality 2-D image. Get all of those 3 first before you shove 3-D down consumers throats!
Posted by: Deborah McAdams
Wed, 03-31-2010 04:10 PM Report Comment
Clearly we don't have the bandwidth to send two separate video streams, and the FCC wants us to have less, not more. So, we need a clever standard to send a compatible 2D main picture plus a much smaller compressed channel of differences to make the second eye signal. We need a standard interface for active glasses. This is obviously not ready for prime time.
Posted by: Deborah McAdams
Sun, 04-11-2010 09:25 PM Report Comment
I am Deaf and my biggest concern is does 3dtv able to provide cc for deaf people? cuz from what i heard from my friends they say no but i had to research it first before i believe them...
Posted by: Deborah McAdams
Fri, 04-02-2010 01:18 AM Report Comment
Jumping into 3D when we don't even have a viable standard for all of the components (picture, metadata, audio placement, even closed captioning) is not only foolhardy but pointless. The last thing we want to dump on the consumer is still another Betamax/VHS HD-DVD BlueRay dilemma. And to expect all of those practically new 2D tv's to be put by the wayside is dreaming with no grounding in reality. Most of our programming on high count cable and satellite systems is still 4X3. Let's get away from that before we introduce still another untested, non-standardized system.

Thursday 11:07 AM
The Best Deconstruction of a 4K Shoot You'll Ever Read
With higher resolutions and larger HD screens, wide shots using very wide lenses can be a problem because they allow viewers to see that infinity doesn’t quite resolve into perfect sharpness.

Featured Articles
Exhibitions & Events
Discover TV Technology