The viability of consumer 3D

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

The viability of consumer 3D

Virtual Dave
Quite often I come across articles which shrug off the possibility that 3D will receive wide-spread acceptance in the general consumer marketplace.

But they are wrong.  Way back in the sixties professor Marshall McLuhan wrote a book called "Understanding Media".  It was a dense, abstract and opaque examination of the relationship between humans and the creations which extended their physical beings.  I.E. a hammer is an extension of our fist, giving our bodies more power to accomplish a task which cannot be accomplished without that tool.  Cut to the chase, media is an extension of our nervous systems which allows us to exchange information with others using that medium at the time.  Thus "The Global Village" concept was given to the world.

With the Internet Prof. McLuhan's analysis seems even more prescient. I read his book on the recommendation of my boss, the program director of an independent TV station where I worked nights to pay my way through Art school. It was for me, a moment of epiphany.  

In a nutshell, he was relating television as an extension of our nervous systems.  He labeled it a "cool medium" because it required our cerebral participation to complete the process.  Where movies relied on "persistence of vision", to develop the illusion of movement, Television presented scanned lines which required assembly in the human brain to actually exist as an image.  Consider this:, it's not clear if animals can assemble this information into a perceptual image.

The conclusion which can be inferred from this theorem is that media which engages the human brain is particularly compelling.  Ever sit in a waiting room and try to ignore the TV in the corner?  It's tough.

3DS is like that. It requires active participation of our minds to complete the experience.  Movies only require the passive participation of our retinas.

It is this active engagement of the human mind which makes TV a unique experience.  Honestly, most of us will watch anything rather than nothing.

3DS works using similar neural processes.  It is the brain, not the eyeball, which creates the illusion of depth, making it a "cool medium" in McLuhan's analysis.  (Here I speculate.)

So if you think TV is a fad, and color TV a passing fancy, go ahead and ignore 3D.  You will be proven wrong because as Prof. McLuhan famously said, "the medium is the massage".  (If that doesn't resonate with you the read the book - "Understanding Media", or one of the spin off books like "Understanding, Understanding Media").  

It's not TV, It's Not HBO, it's your brain connected to the world.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: The viability of consumer 3D

chaumi
Can't agree more. There still seem to be a number of comments on various forums which suggest most people don't believe that 3D TV will become mainstream. Of course, there's the possibility that those who don't believe in it are just more vocal about it than those who do.

For anyone who has seen a good quality 3D movie at the cinema, I can't see how they wouldn't want to reproduce that experience at home....and now that pretty much every new 3D TV released sits at the top of each manufacturers ranges - hence you're pretty much guaranteed a superb quality 2D TV along with 3D capability - its almost a no brainer to go 3D (assuming your budget can stretch to it.

Availability of 3D content is another question of course. There's enough to be going on with for hardened fans, but you can't fail to see that for the average person it's a potential worry. More 3D content (or much improved 2D to 3D conversion) should seal 3D TVs long term success.
www.3dtvguide.org
Loading...