my thoughts on 3-d tv
these days it seems like a lot of media and technology companies are irresponsibly “leaping” before they really take a close “look” at 3-d television. it wasn’t too long ago that consumers made the expensive and inconvenient switch from analog to digital television. the switch was an economic boom to electronics manufacturers and retailers who capitalized and profited from the move to hd. for a while, the government even offered incentives/rebates to spur consumption and jump start consumer spending (again) on large ticket household items. however, the introduction of new 3-d television technology and consumer electronics couldn’t have happened at a worse time. as a result, it seems doomed to fail and here’s why…
1. cost consciousness - most consumers in the past 24-36 months have already purchased new HD compatible televisions for their homes. while television technology does change from year-to-year and offer some advancements, consumers typically wait 5-7 years before purchasing a new television. in large part, consumers have already upgraded their televisions to newer digital models and given the current economic climate will probably not be purchasing a new 3-d model anytime soon.
2. shrinking household budgets/incomes - as a result of the current economic climate most large ticket items have been placed on hold until households feel more secure about the economy and other related things like job security. 3-d televisions are a luxury that most cannot afford or have assigned a low priority to.
3. price points - the introductory models of 3-d televisions are listed at higher price points than hd televisions which increases the barrier to entry for cost conscious consumers. in order for the 3-d experience to be the best, consumers will have to purchase larger televisions at costs that far exceed hd versions.
4. novelty/gimmickry - i think that 3-d television is a novelty and a gimmick. having to watch a program while wearing a pair of 3-d glasses doesn’t seem like something consumers will want to do day-in-and-day-out. for one experience? great. for daily use? not so much.
5. the experience - it’s cool the first time you experience 3-d television, but over a prolonged period of time it could lead to eye strain, vertigo, and epileptic seizures. the verdict is still out, but my guess is that prolonged usage is probably not a good thing.
6. lack of programming - this single most important reason why 3-d television will fail is due to lack of programming. the discovery channel, sony, and IMAX recently announced a strategic partnership and the creation of a new network for 3-d content. disney also recently announced the creation of an espn 3-d network. considering that most of espn’s sports programming is live, the network will go dark when 3-d programming isn’t available, which will be most of the time.
7. content costs - 3d content, compared to the cost of producing hd content, is significantly higher in production cost. the process to overhaul content that includes 3-d is labor intensive and very expensive. revamping a studio’s catalogue to meet 3-d standards is a huge headache that no studio will want to endure, especially considering the current low adoption rates. can a sitcom in 3-d really provide audiences with significantly more visual depth? probably not.
i can appreciate the studios and manufacturers getting excited about the technology. however, i think that it should be used only sparingly or on revamped classics. i can think of a few titles that i could get excited about.
