How are they planning to deal with losing it? I was curious how the hardware companies, which fight for every point of market share jealously, could cavalierly ignore the large number of us who won't like this new direction. It looked fine to him, just not 3D.Īt CES this year, the trend toward 3D in home television sets was unmissable, but there was no mention by the manufacturers of how this move would affect flat viewers. While I find viewing 3D imagery uncomfortable, Daniel Terdiman, another person at CNET who can't see 3D, saw the 3D version of Avatar and wore the 3D glasses. Of course, we are social beings, and not being able to view 3D means that group or family outings to 3D showings are awkward for the flat viewers, who may have to sit through a showing that will cause headaches or just look bad to them.īut the flat-viewer's experience with 3D imagery can vary. Plus, we didn't have to wear those dorky glasses.
As a bonus, the theater was nearly empty-the 3D showing down the hall was more crowded. Flat-viewers, like me, can watch 2D versions of 3D content. Me, and millions of people like me, are being left behind by content and hardware companies as they move to 3D. Nor does it work for a small but significant percentage of the population - 4 percent to 10 percent, depending on which expert you ask. The technology that's supposed to convince me that a 3D image exists when I look at a 2D screen doesn't work for me. ( CNET) - When it comes to 3D television, I don't see it.
0 kommentar(er)
