[raycoleman]

Thinking about buying an LG smart for the new place, but this article is making me a bit worried. The retailer near my place said that the TV's both 2D and 3D content are of high quality, so maybe it's not that much of an issue but what do you guys think? Is it still worth it to get one now?

Not Even the Olympics Can Make 3DTV Worth It | Gizmodo UK

[m11nch]

I can only say that some 3d films and the Olympics for me is great in 3d
I believe that some films are terrible on 3d due to that they have been converted from a 2d source ie "clash of the titans"
but when you get a great film intended for 3d I think the experience is brilliant

[stevelup]

You'll struggle to buy a non 3D TV these days anyway so the point is a bit moot...

[Jason Shouler]

Originally Posted by raycoleman

Is it still worth it to get one now?

As long as you get a good one, as you seen to be thinking of doing, then sure it is

Hell! I even really enjoyed Clash of the Titans 3D (far better than 2D version) on mine

[mocca]

A 3dtv is more than worth it if your going to use it, and if your going to use it alot you'll want one that suits you as an individual tobe able to get the best from it.
I can think of many awsome 3dtv's but the majority do'nt do what i need so there's only a few for me to choose from.


All depends if you like 3d and want to use it alot aswell of what type of source you will be running your 3d from.

I'm a 3d pc gamer that runs sli and plays my games at 1080p/60hz in 3d, as i use mods to accomplish this there's very little out there i can choose from as it allways has tobe based on the same thing, passive.

But if i was to only watch 2d and 3d films with no gaming i'd have a plasma 110%.

All depends on what you want the tv for to say wether it's worth it or not for you, without my 3d pc games the 3dtv would'nt be worth it to me as i'd be stuck using a xbox/ps3 and 3d films.

Some people are happy just for 3d films so a tv is worth it to them and some people only want to play ps3/xbox in 3d so its worth it to them aswell.

What would you do with your 3dtv?

Luckily 3 years in theres over 100 3d films to watch so that should keep you busy for awhile if your only into films, thats around 200hours worth of eye candy.

Ignore articles about 3d, they usually come from fanboys or haters so what one see as awsome others see as awfull, go have a test or buy it and see what there like.
There not rubbish, only people that dont like 3d or have something to moan about slate 3d.

Me and many many others think 3d is fantastic.

[markt3857]

We've got a Samsung 46" 3D LED TV and we're really pleased with it. Watched the opening ceremony with it. Fantastic!

There is a lot of crap 3D films out but there is some good stuff too. Just have to look for it

Good luck

[logiciel]

Originally Posted by raycoleman

Is it still worth it to get one now?

In what sense "worth it" - worth what?
As stevelup says 3D is almost a standard feature now, so it makes very little difference, if any, to the price.
At the very least you get the BBC's occasional 3D offerings, and the makers' free 3D applications provide more.
Beyond that you can add as much or as little of other sources as you like, but you'd miss out by not being able to.

[paulmcp2403]

Good shout Logiciel...I didnt want to appear rude so I didn't say anything. The quicker people use their own common sense and start to accept that you DONT have to watch 3d the better....it's all getting a bit tedious....random journalist who say "I hate 3d...so everyone should...its doomed"....total tripe ! So 3D is doomed....oh yeah?? So here comes the Hobbit, Pixars new movies, Disneys new movies, Dredd, Avengers, Titanic, the new Mad Max rebot etc...the list is huge for 2013 !!

3D on a tv is simply an added bonus...all I can say is get one...sit back and enjoy it buddy....

[Orson]

When I was buying my TV just over a year ago, I decided that 3D wasn't for me, as I didn't particularly like it, I wear glasses, so having 2 pairs made me uncomfortable, and it was a fair chunk more expensive. But there are 5 of us in my family, so add in a couple of friends for the kids, and I'd have needed 7 or 8 pairs of glasses too, which was getting silly with the price.
So for me, it wasn't worth it at the time.

But move on a year, if I were replacing my set now, I'd have no problem buying a 3D TV, as the price difference is negligible, and I just wouldn't bother getting spare sets of glasses.
But if I had to buy extra glasses for everyone, that wouldn't be worth it.

[m11nch]

The hobbit has got a new 3d camera system thats meant to to top notch, hoping it will redeem some of the tosh that has been put out by the film companies over the last few years trying save Money buy filming in 2d and converting to 3d whilst charging extra for the privilege and making people believe that 3d is not all that

[derek500]

Originally Posted by Orson

But move on a year, if I were replacing my set now, I'd have no problem buying a 3D TV, as the price difference is negligible, and I just wouldn't bother getting spare sets of glasses.
But if I had to buy extra glasses for everyone, that wouldn't be worth it.

Go for a passive set. I got seven pairs with my LG and they're much lighter than active shutter and fit over prescription glasses comfortably.

[logiciel]

Originally Posted by paulmcp2403

3D on a tv is simply an added bonus

Not all that long ago I heard from a guy in the US about the new Smart TV he'd got and said I thought it was a total waste of money.
That opinion gradually changed but it was still a bit of a novelty when I got one - with 3D as well, of course - two years ago.
Now both are just little extras that are close to being standard.
Unfortunately at that time they did add a noticeable amount to the prices.

[Jason Shouler]

Originally Posted by logiciel

Now both are just little extras that are close to being standard.

Speaking for myself I certainly wouldn't class 3D or SMART capabilities as "little extras"

With experience of both, the notion that I'd ever consider buying a TV without them is frankly untenable!

To experience 3D was my prime reason for purchase in the first place

[logiciel]

I wouldn't consider buying a TV without them, and 3D was the reason for my purchase two years ago.
What don't you agree with about my comment - that they are little, or that they are extras, or that they are close to being standard?

[raycoleman]

Thanks guys for the input. I'm much more confident with the decision to purchase one now. It's quite an investment so I'm just making sure that I will not regret it. I'm late to this 3D wave so just started doing my research recently Seems like most people really enjoys it. Going to pick up the LG soon.

[logiciel]

As we said, it makes very little difference to the price now, so it adds very little to the investment.

[boyflyhigh]

I love watching the Olympics 3d. The match up between Brazil and Mexico in football was insane. If you don’t like it in 3d, you can watch it hd. Every brand like LG or Sony will show you hd and 3d.

[limey in france]

3D is great imo. Last year, I was devastated after seeing how awful the 3D was on my sony active 3D bravia. Especially after seeing how good the passive LGs were in the shop when I went back to complain about my sony.

In the end, I got a full refund and now have one of those super perfoming passive LGs in my living room. 3D is well worth it. Even my gf who hated the sony loves watching 3D now. Ofcourse some films are better than others. Avatar, despicable me, happy feet 2 (which was unwatchable on my sony.. the film is ok at best also) etc are mind blowing in 3D.

People say that passive is not full HD, and I dont have trained eyes, but my tv looks far better than SD when watching 3D blu rays. The 2012 LGs are displaying some fine 3D, and I am sure that i would be difficult to have better 3D in your house for the same cash.

3D is here to stay. I think the next thing will be which method will become the standard: Active or passive

[ArmitageShanks]

On the rare occasions where I've had doubts about the value of 3D, all I have to do is stick on How To Train Your Dragon...and yes, it's very definitely worth it. Even my older brother, who (rightly) thought that the Olympic 3D experience was poor, was finally convinced after he saw that.

[Jason Shouler]

Originally Posted by ArmitageShanks

Even my older brother, who (rightly) thought that the Olympic 3D experience was poor, was finally convinced after he saw that.

If you mean the nightly OBS summaries then I'm inclined to agree but thought both the opening and closing ceremonies to be very impressive (also in the 3D aspect )

What surprised me was that the quality was noticeably superior via cable (VM) then FreeView. (watched opening via FV but closing via VM)

Not really sure why this should be

[ArmitageShanks]

Originally Posted by Jason Shouler

If you mean the nightly OBS summaries then I'm inclined to agree but thought both the opening and closing ceremonies to be very impressive (also in the 3D aspect )

The 3D was pretty good, but I wasn't too impressed by the content for the most part

Originally Posted by Jason Shouler

What surprised me was that the quality was noticeably superior via cable (VM) then FreeView. (watched opening via FV but closing via VM)

Not really sure why this should be

Might be a bitrate difference?

[Jason Shouler]

Originally Posted by ArmitageShanks

Might be a bitrate difference?

That's what I thought too.

The thing is, I can't see much of a difference in HD quality between FV and VM which suggests the bit-rate is only reduced during a SBS broadcast

Surely nobody would be daft enough to reduce broadcast bitrate at the very time when you need it most

[MonkeyPrince]

Anybody watching the free Sky 3D week?

There's been some really good stuff on there.

Docs, Olympics, concerts etc

The History of the World in 2 Hours was particularly good.

Channel 217 free until Monday (in HD too)

[logiciel]

Free in the sense that you have to have any Sky subscription and the HD pack, rather than the normal requirement of the full SkyWorld subscription.
I don't know what "concert" you've seen, but there's a very limited range of programming that gets repeated many times over.

[MonkeyPrince]

Hmmm, free as in I have a basic subscription plus HD only (not Skyworld)

Whilst I can't comment on the repeating of programmes, it's been good timing for me as I only got a 3D TV last Friday.

The stuff I've seen so far this week has impressed me (the 'free' week was a coincidence), but I won't be upgrading to the full sub when the week is over.

I recorded a rock gala concert and there's a couple more later in the week I think (Snoop, Kaiser Chiefs, Isle of Wight, Kylie) not sure whether they'll be any good though.

Don't think I'll be able to watch the footy at the weekend in 3D as I don't have Sky sports.

[derek500]

Originally Posted by MonkeyPrince

Don't think I'll be able to watch the footy at the weekend in 3D as I don't have Sky sports.

You will!! The same as the FA Cup Final was available on Sky 3D for non ESPN subscribers.

[MonkeyPrince]

Originally Posted by derek500

You will!! The same as the FA Cup Final was available on Sky 3D for non ESPN subscribers.

Do you know whether I'll lose access to all the recordings after the 'free' week is up?

[MonkeyPrince]

Originally Posted by raycoleman

Thanks guys for the input. I'm much more confident with the decision to purchase one now. It's quite an investment so I'm just making sure that I will not regret it. I'm late to this 3D wave so just started doing my research recently Seems like most people really enjoys it. Going to pick up the LG soon.

I've loved the 3D so far (more than I thought I would), and my wife has been converted. She hated the effect watching Avatar at the IMAX in London, and also in Alice in Wonderland at the local.

We both found the images to be blurry and quite dull (and we got nausea each time), we didn't bother trying any others after that.

Watching the Olympic closing ceremony (and the repeat of the opening ceremony) blew us away. We've even started turning the 2D to 3D effect on every now and then (I did for the England footy last night, then tried it for Celeb Big Brother)

Personally I don't like the active 3D. It gives me nausea, I hate the flickering and the image doesn't seem as bright (I understand it's more detailed, but I can't notice the difference).

My new 55" LG came with 7 pairs of glasses. The other night 3 friends came over and we all watched the closing ceremony together. No nausea and a fantastic picture. Viewing angles were really wide too.

Active glasses (£50 a pair?) would have cost a fortune for the 5 of us.

I needed a bigger screen, and my choice was a 60" without 3D or a 55" with.

I'm glad I chose the 3D

Just my two penn'orth

[logiciel]

Originally Posted by MonkeyPrince

Hmmm, free as in I have a basic subscription plus HD only

Yes, free and £30+ a month aren't quite the same thing.
Like broadcasts, recordings depend on your subscription, so without SW they won't play after the "free" period".

[derek500]

Originally Posted by logiciel

Yes, free and £30+ a month aren't quite the same thing.
Like broadcasts, recordings depend on your subscription, so without SW they won't play after the "free" period".

Someone from Sky on another forum says different. As they were broadcast with HD sub encryption, it won't change after the free period.