• On TV.com: New TV sex symbol: Vintage black PORSCHE
January 15, 2009 10:00 AM PST

3D is coming to a living room near you

by Marguerite Reardon
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 60 comments

A CES attendee checks out LG Electronics' 3D LCD TV.

(Credit: Marguerite Reardon/CNET News)

Three-dimensional TV is coming to a living room near you. But will the technology spur a consumer spending spree like digital and high-definition TV did before it? Or will 3D end up being the next big flop?

One thing is clear, TV manufacturers need something new to get people buying TVs. Over the last couple of years, TV manufacturers have experienced a sales boom as consumers upgrade to digital TVs in anticipation of the government's mandated switch to digital TV broadcasts in February 2009. Eager shoppers have also been upgrading to high-definition TVs as movie studios, cable and satellite operators, and TV broadcasters have begun offering more programming in HD.

But as the economy worsens, the forecast for the TV market is looking grim. The LCD TV market is only expected to grow about 17 percent in terms of units shipped in 2009, according to research firm DisplaySearch. This is down from growth of about 29 percent in 2008. Plasma TV growth is also expected to suffer with the market only expected to grow by about 5 percent in 2009 compared with a 24 percent rise in 2008, DisplaySearch said.

As a result, TV makers are looking for the next hot thing to attract new consumers. And some are hoping 3D TVs could be it.

At this year's Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, four of the top selling TV manufacturers--Samsung Electronics, Sony, LG Electronics and Panasonic--showed off their latest versions of 3D TVs. Panasonic set up a mini-home theater where its 103-inch, plasma 3D screen showed clips from New Line Cinema's Journey to the Center of the Earth and Walt Disney Pictures' animated film Bolt. They also showed high-definition 3D footage from NBC's broadcast of the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing.

While some manufacturers, such as Mitsubishi, Phillips, Samsung, and Sharp, have already begun selling 3D-ready TVs, the top four manufacturers plan to have new, advanced 3D TVs on sale toward the end of 2009 and into 2010.

But the big question is whether consumers, particularly American consumers, will be willing to upgrade to a new TV just because it has 3D. Pricing for today's 3D ready TVs is comparable to other flat-screen HDTVs. Samsung and Mitsubishi currently sell their 3D-ready TVs for between $1,000 and $2,800, depending on functionality. These prices are in line with average prices for HDTVs that don't offer 3D readiness.

Keisuke Suetsugi, a manager for the audio visual center at Panasonic, believes that even the newer, more advanced 3D TVs will not cost much more than TVs without 3D. So for consumers already in the market for a TV, adding 3D readiness might not add much cost. But will 3D be enough to compel cutting-edge consumers to replace their 2- or 3-year-old TVs? That's what TV manufactures are hoping.

Three-dimensional movies have been around since the 1950s. And for most of its lifespan the technology has been seen more as a gimmick than something that truly enhances the movie-going experience. But newer technology and advanced special effects are helping 3D movies break into the mainstream.

TV makers believe that much of the demand for 3D will come from Hollywood, which is pushing 3D in a big way. Last year, DreamWorks announced that all its films will be produced for 3D production beginning in 2009. The company has partnered with chipmaker Intel to build processors that will help make 3D in the home a reality.

NBA basketball fans watch a live 3D broadcast of Game 2 of the 2007 NBA finals.

(Credit: NBA)

Sports leagues have also been experimenting with 3D technology. Both the National Basketball Association and the National Football League have broadcast events and games in 3D to movie theaters.

From a technical standpoint, the technology is available and mature enough today to make 3D TVs available at a reasonable cost to consumers. But there are still a few drawbacks that could prevent 3D TV from becoming the next big thing in home entertainment.

For one, to get the really cool, immersive 3D experience without getting a massive head-ache, consumers will have to wear special glasses when they're watching TV in 3D. The glasses are needed because 3D imaging requires sending a different image to each eye. And the glasses help merge the images in the mind and trick the brain into thinking that it's seeing a single 3D image.

I checked out Panasonic's home theater in 3D. I must admit, the experience was phenomenal. I felt like I was on the floor at the Olympics opening ceremonies in Beijing right alongside the hundreds of dancers and drummers. But without the glasses, the image looked fuzzy.

Panasonic's Suetsugi admits that in a perfect world, consumers should be able to have the immersive 3D experience without wearing glasses. But he said that it will be at least 10 years before the technology is advanced enough to provide a similarly robust 3D experience without glasses.

"Glassless 3D would be ideal," he said. "But it's just not possible to do that now and get the same quality experience. You would need at least 50 times more pixels to get a display to provide the same 3D experience that we provide with our TV. We are still 10 years away from that kind of technology."

Taesoo Park, a chief research engineer at LG, which makes 3D display monitors for advertising and digital signage, agrees. LG plans to start selling its 3D TVs, which require glasses, late in 2009 or in the beginning of 2010. Its glassless digital signs were also on display at CES.

"Glassless 3D is available today for digital signage and advertising," Park explained. "But the technology is not ready for TVs, because it would hurt people's eyes or give them a headache to look at today's 3D displays for any length of time. It will be at least a decade before we can get the technology to make glassless TV a reality."

That said, some manufacturers claim they have developed technology that doesn't require glasses. Phillips uses a technology it calls WOWvx. 3M and Toshiba also showed off glassless 3D screens at CES. 3M has created a thin film technology that can be used to beam light selectively to the viewer's right and left eyes.

But glasses aren't the only thing that could hold back 3D adoption. Currently, there's no standard way to get 3D footage from the movie studios or from a live broadcasts to the home. Companies, such as Panasonic, are already working on developing a standard. But industry watchers fear that competing standards could emerge and spur another "format" war like the one that pitted HD DVD and Blu-ray against each other.

Panasonic's Suetsugi said he is hopeful that a common standard for 3D Blu-ray hardware, software, and TVs will emerge sometime this year, paving the way for 3D TV sales to pick up in 2010.

In addition to the standards issue, another hurdle for 3D TV has to do with the high production cost of shooting movies and events in 3D, as well as, the high cost of transporting the video across networks. Three-dimensional video requires multiple cameras for shooting. And it also requires multiple high-definition streams for transporting the video over carrier networks.

Regular standard definition television broadcasts consume more bandwidth capacity than other types of traffic like audio or text. High-definition video eats up even more. And it would likely take at least two full high-definition channels to broadcast live just one game in 3D.

This means that service providers, such as cable or satellite operators, would have to upgrade their infrastructure to handle the high bandwidth demands. Verizon, which is deploying fiber directly to consumers' homes for its Fios service, is already in good shape. But others such as Comcast and Time Warner Cable, are already finding it difficult to carve out enough bandwidth for regular HD video as well as Internet video on their networks.

"Transporting live, high-definition 3D streams is very expensive," said Steve Hellmuth, executive vice president of technology and operations for the NBA. "So there has to be sufficient demand and a pool of content before satellite and cable operators will devote resources to delivering it. I really think that Hollywood will initially drive adoption of 3D in the home."

Marguerite Reardon has been a CNET News reporter since 2004, covering cell phone services, broadband, citywide Wi-Fi, the Net neutrality debate, as well as the ongoing consolidation of the phone companies. E-mail Maggie.
Recent posts from CES 2009
2010 Best of CES Awards - call for entries
3D is coming to a living room near you
Haier launches new line of Rhapsody Ibiza players
Alpine KTP-445 Power Pack adds easy amplification
CES 2009: Computers and hardware wrap-up
CES 2009: Home audio wrap-up
CES post-show wrap-up: HDTV
CES 2009 home video wrap-up
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 3 pages (60 Comments)
by 8301 January 15, 2009 10:06 AM PST
I, for one, won't buy a new TV until the technology is extended into at least the fifth dimension.
Reply to this comment
by timber2005 January 15, 2009 6:01 PM PST
Well with DVR you at least have the 4th dimension covered.
by mifdez January 17, 2009 10:14 PM PST
just watch Dr Who...he covers all five dimensions
by dascha1 January 15, 2009 10:08 AM PST
Does 'bulge' mean anything to optic terminators?
Reply to this comment
by Mergatroid Mania January 15, 2009 10:32 AM PST
It's just a gimmik. If you need to wear glassed to see the 3D effect, it's not worth bothering with.
Sure, seeing the occasional movie in 3D in a theator is pretty cool, but I'm not interested in replacing my expansive widescreen LCD TV just to have a gimmik available.

That said, I have bought a couple of 3D movies that use the colour glasses, but again it was just a wim (and it didn't work any better than it did back in the 50s). I would not be interested in watching TV using glasses of any kind, colour or lcd. And as well, if I'm buying a new movie to take home and watch, I'm not going to bother with 3D since it could only be played on a 3D TV (unless they put both a 3D and 2D version on the same DVD). I'd hate to tell a friend he can't borrow a movie because it won't work on his TV.

Why don't they just add smell'o'vision to TVs? You could smell what's going on in the movie, and they could charge you for smell refills....duh.

That said, I might be interested in 3D for my computer monitor, if it worked well. But of course, that's already available.
Reply to this comment
by brief January 15, 2009 2:46 PM PST
They DO put both 2D and 3D versions of the movie on the same DVD... at least they did so with the recent "Journey to the Center of the Earth" movie.
by tommyflorida January 16, 2009 12:30 PM PST
Bring on 3D - it will be awesome. I wasn't alive in the 50's but I recall how much fun I had with my ViewMaster as a kid.
by gtdtm January 15, 2009 11:01 AM PST
HDTV's are cool, but 3D TV seems like another example of companies trying to tell the consumer what they want rather than consumers driving demand for products that they truly want...Some of the economic problems can surely be pinned on the fact that consumers are buying to have the next great thing, not because what they already have isn't good enough. When the money becomes a little more tight, or the credit lines run out people aren't buying the "futuristic" technologies that companies try to push on them...hence a contraction in retail spending.
Reply to this comment
by Inconnux January 15, 2009 11:03 AM PST
I want hologram tv! :)
Reply to this comment
by ncaissie January 16, 2009 11:05 AM PST
Me too.
That would be a better step then 3D.
Have a big square table in the middle of your living room with a cube of holographic TV. That would be Awesome.
by loose_screw January 15, 2009 11:15 AM PST
I saw them at CES, and I was not impressed. The 3D technology is far from perfect, and they gave me a headache after a little while. Also, the fact that you have to put on special glasses to view them pretty much makes the technology a dud. I mean, if I have the TV on in the family room and I'm in the kitchen cooking, I don't want to have to wear glasses to view the TV. SUCK.
Reply to this comment
by galeso January 22, 2009 2:31 AM PST
Now putting the TV into the glasses so you only need glasses would be very Cool.
by blusky08 January 24, 2009 11:40 AM PST
YEAH, THEY ALREADY HAVE LCD VIEWING GLASSES:
https://www.zetronix.com/index.php?cPath=26

IF YOU HAVE TO WEAR GLASSES ANYWAY, WHY NOT SKIP THE EXTERNAL TV COMPLETELY??
by blusky08 January 24, 2009 11:49 AM PST
WHOOPS.
THEY ALREADY HAVE 3D LCD GLASSES!
http://www.zetronix.com/product_info.php?products_id=124
by The_happy_switcher January 15, 2009 11:22 AM PST
Might be cool for porn.
Reply to this comment
by karpenterskids January 15, 2009 12:44 PM PST
3-D porn? Ooo...you might be on to something there, young man.
by Logotrope January 15, 2009 2:13 PM PST
48DD in 3D?!?
by dctech08 January 16, 2009 3:41 AM PST
lol
by ncaissie January 16, 2009 11:05 AM PST
Thats where smellevision may be good (or bad) LOL
by joebuck January 15, 2009 12:03 PM PST
every 30 years 3D makes a come back and every 30 years it disappears, hey anyone remember SCTVS 3d house of horrors.
Reply to this comment
by ErnieTheBear January 15, 2009 1:00 PM PST
I'm trying to think of how I could be any less interested in 3D, without being comatose or dead. It's just not coming to me. A 10-minute movie at Disneyland or a planetarium is fun every couple of years, but more than that? Pass, thanks.
Reply to this comment
by 2ndfallout January 15, 2009 2:26 PM PST
I for one think it is a pretty cool idea. I'm not big into the glasses, but either way it would be awesome to play video games like CoD5 in 3D!
Reply to this comment
by uhpl508 January 15, 2009 2:36 PM PST
I think I'll be more interested when glassless 3D makes it to my computer or cell phone screen and what hardware manufacturers will have to do to create useful interfaces for working like that.
Reply to this comment
by WORSTBABY January 15, 2009 3:45 PM PST
there are people today rewashing paper plates that only last year bought a 65 inch plasma. let's all get really real here. your foreclosure notice will likely be a very exciting 2 dimensional black and white piece of paper.
Reply to this comment
by Kev_Orng January 16, 2009 10:51 AM PST
Well, could be worse. Could be raining.
by RobertFHarwood January 15, 2009 4:47 PM PST
I didn't see an explanation as to why there needs to be a different TV other then to interput the signal so that the left and right signals can be put it on the screen. If so it is only a converter box of a difference.
Also, I noticed that the Red Camera has a standard camera mount that has a setup for 3D by adding a second camera and mounting the cameras on the left and right post instead of the center ones.
Reply to this comment
by tekwiz4u January 15, 2009 5:01 PM PST
3D is a FAD. It will pass like it did with the Rubik's Cube and JAWS 3 in 3D.
Reply to this comment
by EdMazza January 15, 2009 5:49 PM PST
For those who think that 3D TV is just another gimick, Wrong. Yes glasses are still a bit hokey. However, today there are many glasses free screens available. As the screens improve with higher definition and better refresh rates, these screens will provide a better 3D televison experience. Take a look at manufacturers such as Alioscopy, Sharp, NewSight. Many manufacturers that are producing the glasses versions of the 3D screens are touting release in 2010. I believe that a viable glasses free TV screen will be ready for the market at the same time.
Reply to this comment
by cardcltr76 January 21, 2009 4:50 PM PST
I have a mitsubishi hdtv and have already seen Journey to the center of the earth in 3d.
With the glasses the 3d was very good and I didn't have to buy a 3d tv.
Barry Sokolsky
by cjbuchmann January 15, 2009 8:49 PM PST
If im gonna get 3d, I don't want to see the 3d in front of me. I want to be immersed in the center of it. See into the middle of the action! More like a holographic interface. If you can do that, then sign me up! Otherwise, I wouldn't touch it with a nine and a half foot pole!
Reply to this comment
by cyberspittle January 15, 2009 9:00 PM PST
Why not have the glasses on the TV so we don't have to look like dorks? Can't the 3D lens be in front of the TV or does the filter (glasses) have to be a certain distance from the screen. 8^D
Reply to this comment
by random truth January 15, 2009 9:37 PM PST
no it cant. The 3d illusion is because it is feeding your eyes 2 different pictures.
by EdMazza January 16, 2009 10:06 AM PST
The glasses on the TV as you put it already exists. It is called a parallax filter. This filter feeds seperate visions to the left and right eye. The best screens have six or more channels so that it can be viewed over a wide range across the front of the screen and not just directly in front of it. Many manufacturers will be producing higher density screens which will improve the clarity of the 3D image. GLASSES FREE TV IS ON ITS WAY.
by Writerman-UK January 16, 2009 2:20 AM PST
No matter how good the technology, I won't be rushing out to buy it. You can bet your bottom dollar that, just like HD, that wonderfully perfect picture will be ruined by the dorks at the TV station stamping a logo over it. Just imagine what fun the broadcasters will have with 3D DOGs.

As a grumpy old man, I find all these advances in TV technology quite depressing. Better picture, better sound, better everything except programmes. A few decades ago I had only four channels but could usually find something worth watching on one or two of them. Now there are dozens of channels but I'm often stuck to find one single item worthy of my time in an entire evening.

There's one good thing to come out of all this. I am rediscovering reading.
Reply to this comment
by Kev_Orng January 16, 2009 10:58 AM PST
Well, I'm not a grumpy old man, I'm just wary of extra monthly bills I don't need. But I'm with you. Four channels for free off the rabbit ears. I'm just a converter box away from getting them in HD. And there's usually something to watch on one of those four, if I'm in the mood for TV. Paying for TV, pfft.

Plus, I don't live in the US so I have another two years before I have to get the converter box.
by BSinton January 16, 2009 8:05 PM PST
There is also the Internet, where lots of good things abound, well like the cnet site we are on.

I spend more time on the Internet than watching TV. Use Google to look up anything.

I am old but hopefully not grumpy (only 78)
by memeroot January 16, 2009 2:57 AM PST
Will probably be looking to upgrade my plasma in a year or so, 3d without much price increase would be a feature that would make me coose one set over another... what we need most however is standards and support.
Reply to this comment
by dctech08 January 16, 2009 3:44 AM PST
3d glasses? hummmm. so then, when you invite friends over to watch TV, you gotta have extras. might be fun for the rich and experimental. my sister gets migraines from such images.
Reply to this comment
Showing 1 of 3 pages (60 Comments)
advertisement

About CES 2009

Add this feed to your online news reader

CES 2009 topics

CES 2009 Awards


Best of CES and
People's Voice Award

Since 2006, CNET has presented the Best of CES Awards, given to the top product in 10 categories as well as one coveted Best in Show award. See the gadgets that topped our list for this year, and find out the People's Voice winner, decided by more than 10,000 member votes.

Now accepting submissions for the 2010 Best of CES Awards.


About CES

The Consumer Electronics Show (CES) is the world's largest consumer electronics trade show. CES 2009 is scheduled for January 8 through 11 in Las Vegas, and it will feature thousands of exhibitors showcasing their latest tech products. CNET's team of reporters and reviewers will be at the show, covering technology's heavy hitters and previewing thousands of products before they are released to the public.

Each year, CNET, in partnership with the Consumer Electronics Association, produces the Best of CES awards at the International Consumer Electronics Show. The CNET editorial team recognizes the best new products at the show with awards in 10 categories, an overall Best of Show award, and the People's Voice award, which is selected by CNET's online audience.