James Cameron: 3D Will Be The Standard Format In 25 Years Or Less

rated by 0 users
This post has 30 Replies | 3 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 26,801
Points 1,212,890
Joined: Sep 2007
ForumsAdministrator
News Posted: Fri, May 14 2010 7:07 PM
If we didn't know any better, we would assume that James Cameron, the guy who directed Avatar, Titanic, and loads of other mega-hits, was a paid spokesperson for 3D. Every place we turn, it's James talking good about 3D, with never a negative thing to say about the format. Without a doubt, James is the most prominent proponent of 3D, and even with the famed Roger Ebert saying that he "hates" 3D and thinks consumers should too, Cameron is plugging away.


3D HDTVs Pushed Hard at CES 2010 in Las Vegas

At this point, it's pretty transparent. Basically, Cameron has now stated a a technology forum in South Korea that 3D will "will replace 2D as the standard, mainstream format for film, television and online content in less than 25 years." He obviously has no way of knowing or confirming this, but getting the word out there will only help his cause. And his cause, obviously, is to promote 3D, which certainly benefits his burgeoning sci-fi movie business. 


Cameron obviously has a bit of 3D skin in the game, albeit blue-green and striped, with a tail.

There's no doubt that 3D is helping to get more and more consumers to the cinema; as of now, very few 3D HDTVs have made their way out onto the market, so the cinema has an "exclusive" on the format for now. Exclusives lead to bigger box office revenues, and Cameron certainly appreciates that.


The biggest reason for our skepticism here is that 3D has been around the block before, and it failed. Just recently it has re-arisen due to marketing giants pushing it down the throats of consumers, but we have yet to see if it will stick this time around. Is the "3D renaissance" for real? Or just another fad? If Cameron has his way, it'll be the only way in 20 or so years, but we'll let the consumers decide instead of just taking his word for it. No offense James.
  • | Post Points: 110
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 5,054
Points 60,735
Joined: May 2008
Location: U.S.
Moderator
3vi1 replied on Sat, May 15 2010 8:11 AM

How can we believe this guy when his time frame for Skynet becoming sentient and launching all of our nukes was so optimistic?

What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

++++++++++++[>++++>+++++++++>+++>+<<<<-]>+++.>++++++++++.-------------.+++.>---.>--.

Top 150 Contributor
Posts 498
Points 6,040
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: South Carolina

3vi1:

How can we believe this guy when his time frame for Skynet becoming sentient and launching all of our nukes was so optimistic?

 

Lol. 

 

- I don't think people should hold Jim's word to that. That's what he WANTS to happen in the next 25 years. I know that he doesn't know if that will actually happen or not. Even though based on current trends it's very probable. 

It's kind of like when people start imagining the future, and that talk show hosts goes like, "in the future..." They are basing that knowledge on what they want to happen and what is probable to happen. 

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,181
Points 90,135
Joined: Aug 2003
Location: United States, Virginia
Moderator

I have a hard time seeing this happen any time ever. 3D comes out any time that big movie pops up in 3D then for the next little while everyone is all about 3D then it dies down. It's fun to watch that big name movie, but after a while it gives me a freaking headache. I can't even lay my head down and watch 3D TV. And unless they solve the glasses issue it is NEVER going to be a standard.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 5,054
Points 60,735
Joined: May 2008
Location: U.S.
Moderator
3vi1 replied on Sat, May 15 2010 4:29 PM

>> And unless they solve the glasses issue

Nail on the head, Bob. Media will cater to the largest audience that it can without irritating. Until 3D is glasses-free, and as cheap as 2D, it will not have the major market share.

What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

++++++++++++[>++++>+++++++++>+++>+<<<<-]>+++.>++++++++++.-------------.+++.>---.>--.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 19
Points 150
Joined: Mar 2010

3D as mainstream in 25 years? We'll have Holodecks :P

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,181
Points 90,135
Joined: Aug 2003
Location: United States, Virginia
Moderator

Khellendross:

3D as mainstream in 25 years? We'll have Holodecks :P

Still waiting on my year 2000 flying cars.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 5,054
Points 60,735
Joined: May 2008
Location: U.S.
Moderator
3vi1 replied on Sat, May 15 2010 8:14 PM

AND I NEVER GOT MY JETPACK!!!!!

What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

++++++++++++[>++++>+++++++++>+++>+<<<<-]>+++.>++++++++++.-------------.+++.>---.>--.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 498
Points 6,040
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: South Carolina

Lol the jetpack idea caved so hard.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 9
Points 75
Joined: May 2010
zingwaves replied on Sun, May 16 2010 6:04 PM

Ray, seriously, do you need to listen to those two guys to make up your mind for you? But in a way it sounds like your mind was made up without thinking anyway as you simply choose to side with the "expert" who reflects your own opinion. And why should everyone hate 3d? We should also hate color, stereo and high def too right? Actually all those people that hated those did exist back when they emerged, lol. Did it ever occur to you that Cameron is very optimistic about 3d because he's smart enough to know that with low enough priced tv's, and mass adoption it's really not that hard of a transition? But this change over is scaring some people when they shouldn't even really care...

I consider 3d optional. It's not great for everything and shouldn't be used all the time. However, I think TV's and networks should be capable of doing 3d and it should be built in to future sets. As for his "cause", you are not 100% sure of his intentions, nor do you have any way to confirm what you are saying either. But he has seen the 2+ billion dollars brought in on Avatar and if there is any indication that there is interest in 3D, THAT would be it. So he doesn't need a time machine, or future confirmation or proof to see it will likely succeed. If we waited for proof that automobiles would be a success, we'd all still be on horses.

As for 3d failing in the past, I think you are looking at it wrong. In the past it was never meant to be a mainstream idea because the technology didn't exist to bring it into the home. Sure there was always a neato trick to see bad quality 3d, but that was about it. And going to the movies in the past had only a few good 3d titles. 3D requires high quality or it falls apart and hurts your eyes. It requires high quality, high definition, digital, with high refresh rates in order to be worth it. We only got to HD in the last few years, so no wonder 3D wasn't there before. And high refresh sets only became wide spread about 2 years ago, so no wonder 3d is on it's way now. But a while back, there was no way to see good 3d on a tape VCR, on a 60 HZ set from the 80's or 90's. So that's why this is all changing now. But few people understand or see this fact. And it didn't really fail before. It just was mostly experimental and not meant for main stream. Now it is suddenly going main stream because all of the big problems have been removed.

Then there are those who just bought HD sets in the last few years, or even last year, and they are ticked off that they missed the boat. And I feel bad for them, but that's what happens. Sooner or later, 3d was bound to hit the market and it's this year. But some of those people choose to whine and tell everyone not to get a 3d set because they aren't getting one. That's silly considering, it's just an option on a new TV. No one puts a gun to your head and forced you to watch in 3d. So some people buying expensive new HD sets will probably not mind spending $500 more to make their set a 3D one. And as prices drop, Vizio will be bringing even cheaper 3d sets by years end. I'm not raving about 3d, but again, why not get a new set with 3d if you can? Especially if someone is in the market for a new set.

My 9 year old set is dying, and when I go to buy a new one, I will make it a 3d one. That way I know that for the next 10 years I have a set that can even display 3d, rather than have one that can't. I think most sets sold will be to those who need tv's. But some people will also be tempted to sell theirs and change to 3d. The others with great HD sets can just wait as it's only an option. No reason to attack what will likely be main stream soon.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,181
Points 90,135
Joined: Aug 2003
Location: United States, Virginia
Moderator

zingwaves:
As for 3d failing in the past, I think you are looking at it wrong. In the past it was never meant to be a mainstream idea because the technology didn't exist to bring it into the home. Sure there was always a neato trick to see bad quality 3d, but that was about it. And going to the movies in the past had only a few good 3d titles. 3D requires high quality or it falls apart and hurts your eyes. It requires high quality, high definition, digital, with high refresh rates in order to be worth it. We only got to HD in the last few years, so no wonder 3D wasn't there before. And high refresh sets only became wide spread about 2 years ago, so no wonder 3d is on it's way now. But a while back, there was no way to see good 3d on a tape VCR, on a 60 HZ set from the 80's or 90's. So that's why this is all changing now. But few people understand or see this fact. And it didn't really fail before. It just was mostly experimental and not meant for main stream. Now it is suddenly going main stream because all of the big problems have been removed.

Yeah sure they have fixed that stuff, but the fact is that I still get nauseous when watching 3D for more than 20 minutes or so. I can't lay my head down because if my eyes are not left to right it gets blurry even if I lean my head to the side a decent amount. And finally the glasses. They fix that and maybe they can sell it. But as you said $500 more to get 3D is not a small amount. Most people don't have a spare $500 for a feature that might get big soon.

I honestly just see this as another quick 3D fad. It is not going to take off big this year because everyone that produces TV is not going to go out and double there cameras to record it and people like you said are just not getting HDTVs it's going to be at least another 10 years before they all upgrade to 3D TVs.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 639
Points 7,630
Joined: Jul 2009
ClemSnide replied on Sun, May 16 2010 9:20 PM

Oh, hey, I trust Jimmy. I also trust Bruce Willis when he said that print is dead... I understand that's why Amazon hasn't sold any Kindles, and the ereader market is so moribund. Also, I trust Richard Stallman that we'll all be running free software on text-based GNU-UNIX (not Linux) systems. Of course, I believe that Apple is going out of business-- heck, I've been hearing people say that since 1978. I know I'm going to live to 120, which Dr. Benjamin Rush stated was the theoretical limit on human age, which could be achieved once we solved the problem of infectious diseases. And I change religions weekly because every time a new televangelist comes on and says that only through his faith can you get into Heaven, I jump at the opportunity.

But I wonder if in 2035, someone will dig this article up and have a good laugh over it. At that time, of course, it will be beamed directly into our brains. I know that's going to happen.


"I didn't cry when Bambi's mother was shot... but I cried when HAL was turned off."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,181
Points 90,135
Joined: Aug 2003
Location: United States, Virginia
Moderator

ClemSnide:
But I wonder if in 2035, someone will dig this article up and have a good laugh over it. At that time, of course, it will be beamed directly into our brains. I know that's going to happen.

Na we never dig up old stuff just to laugh at it

 

  • | Post Points: 35
Not Ranked
Posts 9
Points 75
Joined: May 2010
zingwaves replied on Mon, May 17 2010 1:49 AM


Hmmm, that's too bad you get sick, but in my opinion 3d should be no different than looking around your room if it's solid enough.  I keep
hearing that low refresh is what makes some people sick.  That and poorly set disparity settings in the process.  Also once a person gets sick once or twice, there is an effect of memory that brings that sickness back even if the newer 3d is good, sometimes.  Not saying the nausea isn't real, but in some cases it can be effected by memory from past bad experiences. 

 

 Unfortunately many 3d sets are at 120hz, 60 per eye even though Samsung is up to 240hz, but that's only 1 month old.   The one I'm geting will be 480, with 240 per eye and should be even smoother.  It comes out in August of this year.   So what I wonder is what  HZ the set was you were you watched at to cause nausia.   And you're right $500 extra isn't a small amount, but when considering a new set for the next decade, it's not that bad for some people.  And again, the 3d sets Vizio brings will be cheaper than current non 3d sets prices at this moment.   At that point all 3d and 2d set pricing will shift a little.   But I'd try newer sets at higher refreshes to see if it solves it for you in the future.  I hope it does.    I've also known people to get sick with badly produced 2d movies from flicker and weird motion etc.  It's true 3d must be more precise to work,  but they seem to be on a roll this year with high hz sets.   I even read about one this week, that's experimental that's over 1000 hz even though I think that's more than is needed.  If it looks 100% real and solid, it shouldn't cause nausea, but I don't think over 480 will be needed, hopefully.   And maybe some people will always be susceptible.     I guess we'll see how it works out as it happens.

And I agree with you it won't take off big in one year.  It never does just as HD didn't get big in a year either.  Most people will wait until their sets go bad.  Luckly for me, my set is nearly dead and I can justify buying one this year even though it will hurt the pockets some as I am not rich.  That said, I don't think it will be just a fad any more than stereo, or surround sound is.  If you look around, not everyone has surround, but it's still semi popular and successful enough. I think maybe 3d could end up being popular in about 4 years since they are trying to go fast.  I even saw a 3d camera the other day for only $475.  High price, but not that high.  And it will likely be $290 on sale in two years.  Just saying, I think this time 3d will stay even if it won't be an overnight change.   And it will always be an extra option, but a cool one.  Again, I think the sudden burst towards 3d is due to the latest advances in cheaper electronics and higher detailed sets that are just emerging..  What was too hard to accomplish in 2000,2005 is now happening.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 9
Points 75
Joined: May 2010
zingwaves replied on Mon, May 17 2010 1:50 AM

That 10GHZ cpu is historically funny, LOL!!!    Big Smile

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 9
Points 75
Joined: May 2010
zingwaves replied on Mon, May 17 2010 1:50 AM

That 10GHZ cpu is historically funny, LOL!!!    Big Smile

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,181
Points 90,135
Joined: Aug 2003
Location: United States, Virginia
Moderator

zingwaves:
Unfortunately many 3d sets are at 120hz, 60 per eye even though Samsung is up to 240hz, but that's only 1 month old.   The one I'm geting will be 480, with 240 per eye and should be even smoother.  It comes out in August of this year.   So what I wonder is what  HZ the set was you were you watched at to cause nausia. 

A 120Hz set is what I have used at the house. I'm not saying I hate 3D or anything. I actually had a freaking blast playing Left 4 Dead 2 in 3D. I just don't really think it is going to take off as big as people are thinking right now. It is just not practical. I wouldn't mind being proven wrong, but I don't think people are going to wanna watch stuff with glasses on all the time.

Maybe it will take off in a way like you said earlier. 3D just being build into sets so when the next Avatar comes out people can break out the glasses and watch it at home, but I don't think it will be the standard.

Also yeah the 10GHz thing is very funny. I got a chuckle out of it the other day. So I found an excuse to post it.

  • | Post Points: 50
Not Ranked
Posts 9
Points 75
Joined: May 2010
zingwaves replied on Mon, May 17 2010 2:59 AM

Actually what's strange is that  the latest intel i7's are sort of like the functionally of 10ghz in comparison to the year 2000.  Actually they may be a tad better, but it just didn't happen like they thought it was going to happen which made it funny.   I think the best ghz reached was 6ghz-7ghz in oc.   But nothing turned out like they thought it would.  Even the mac guy there was preaching motorola/ibm, not realizing macs would end up switching to use intel in 7 years.  lol. 

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 9
Points 75
Joined: May 2010
zingwaves replied on Mon, May 17 2010 3:08 AM

@bob_on_the_cob

 

120 probably isn't high enough to be sure it doesn't cause nausea, since you are only seeing 60hz per eye.  So there might be hope for you in the future.   With the Vizio, you'd see 240 per eye, or 4 times as frequent.  But we are all different, and I have no idea what you see or feel.  3d will probably always make some not feel good.  Thankfully it has an option to turn it off.  And I never disagreed with you that it would take time for 3d to "take off".  However, 2010 is a big boost like I've never seen before.  Google "3d sets"  They are popping up everywhere.  I also agreed, and said before that 3d is an optional and once in a while experience.  I would hate watching in 3d all the time when I get my set.  I expect to watch in 2d most of the time.  I'm getting the set because it's a nice 72 inch 2D set, with the option that leaves me the opportunity for 3d which I also like.   Also as I said in my other recent post, I had read through more of the comments.  THey just get better and better, lol.


  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 9
Points 75
Joined: May 2010
zingwaves replied on Mon, May 17 2010 3:21 AM

@ bob_on_the_cob

I gotta get off of here for now, but thought you might like this

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/home-theater/more-details-on-hdis-100-inch-laser-3d-tv-more-energy-efficient-lower-cost-walks-on-water/1571

" The rep claims that it solves the issues with shutter-based 3D glasses, such as the nausea and headache that some people suffer from after watching 3D video using slower refresh rates."

I'm not sure their claim is true, but it it looks interesting.   I'll never be able to test it since I don't get sick.   Also they are will be ready for production in a year.  And I agree with you.  3D isn't going to be super BIG, and it will take a while, but just saying I think it's arriving...

also

"HDI concocts 100-inch laser-based 3D HDTV, calls rivaling technology child's play"

http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/17/hdi-concocts-100-inch-laser-based-3d-hdtv-calls-rivaling-techno/

and yes, probably expensive, but it's a start...  Going out to buy an 10GHZ cpu now.  ;-)

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 9
Points 75
Joined: May 2010
zingwaves replied on Mon, May 17 2010 3:33 AM

 

Ok, just to let you know, I just watched the video on the 2nd link, and the guy does indeed say that the smoothness of the over 1000hz means no headaches.  You should see the video on that link.  Too bad it won't be cheap at first.  But maybe 480 would be enough?  Ok, gotta run

 

http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/17/hdi-concocts-100-inch-laser-based-3d-hdtv-calls-rivaling-techno/

 

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 1
Points 5
Joined: May 2010
Mike00k7 replied on Mon, May 17 2010 8:02 AM

The 3D movie gives you a 3D image of what's on focus, but if you try to focus another objects in the scene u simply can't and the stereoscopic *** gives you nausea and eyes pain if you try that. That's why it don't depends on the Hz of the TV but on where you are watching, so stay focused! Also a bad sync between glasses and monitor can give you headache. Obviusly u need 120hz for the stereoscopic ***, but imho more than that is only marketing.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 283
Points 2,780
Joined: Sep 2004
Location: Canada, Nunavut
Chainzsaw replied on Mon, May 17 2010 2:03 PM

@ 3vi1

Hope this blows your mind...

http://www.martinjetpack.com/

If you have a spare 100k...you can have your jetpack :)

Current computer:

Asus G73JH-A1

Core i7 720QM

Mobility Radeon 5870 1GBVRAM

8GB Ram

1 X OCZ Vertex 2 120GB SSD

1 X 500GB HDD

17.3FHD (1080P) Panel

Blu Ray Drive (reader)

HDMI Out

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,181
Points 90,135
Joined: Aug 2003
Location: United States, Virginia
Moderator

Chainzsaw:

@ 3vi1

Hope this blows your mind...

http://www.martinjetpack.com/

If you have a spare 100k...you can have your jetpack :)

Ha Ha. That thing is sweet. Huge, but sweet.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 3,698
Points 55,965
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: United States, Massachusetts
ForumsAdministrator
MembershipAdministrator
Dave_HH replied on Tue, May 18 2010 9:18 AM

Gotta say, great to see all the lively discussion on this topic. Zingwaves (and others), thanks for your insights and contributions here!

Editor In Chief
http://hothardware.com


  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 283
Points 2,780
Joined: Sep 2004
Location: Canada, Nunavut
Chainzsaw replied on Tue, May 18 2010 5:47 PM

@ Marius Malek

Hold your horses, and horses hold your breath!

Your dreams of jetpacking are almost coming true, just have to follow this link :)

http://www.martinjetpack.com/

By the way, I think 3d will be standard in less than 25 years, since it took less time to go from regular SD channels to HD...it isn't complete, but it's getting there.

Current computer:

Asus G73JH-A1

Core i7 720QM

Mobility Radeon 5870 1GBVRAM

8GB Ram

1 X OCZ Vertex 2 120GB SSD

1 X 500GB HDD

17.3FHD (1080P) Panel

Blu Ray Drive (reader)

HDMI Out

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,374
Points 80,315
Joined: Nov 2004
Location: United States, Arizona
Moderator

3d is cool and all but I could never deal with it. If they went to completely 3d that will be the day I dont see that movie. also what about the people with one eye where 3d wont work on them?

"Never trust a computer you can't throw out a window."

2700K

Z77 GIGABYTE G1.SNIPER

GIGABYTE GTX670

G.Skill Ripjaws X 16gb PC2133

Antec P280

Corsair H100

Asus Blu-ray burner

Seasonic X650 PSU

Patriot Pyro 128gb SSD

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 283
Points 2,780
Joined: Sep 2004
Location: Canada, Nunavut
Chainzsaw replied on Wed, May 19 2010 9:53 AM

They already make TV's that don't require glasses...but you have to sit in a specific spot to see them. In the future people won't need glasses for their 3D TV's, and people with one eye should have no problem seeing 3D either as the shuttering process will be built into the TV instead of glasses.

Current computer:

Asus G73JH-A1

Core i7 720QM

Mobility Radeon 5870 1GBVRAM

8GB Ram

1 X OCZ Vertex 2 120GB SSD

1 X 500GB HDD

17.3FHD (1080P) Panel

Blu Ray Drive (reader)

HDMI Out

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 283
Points 2,780
Joined: Sep 2004
Location: Canada, Nunavut
Chainzsaw replied on Wed, May 19 2010 10:23 AM

@ Dave from HH :)

Whats your opinion on 3DTVS?

I wouldn't mind getting one...but they seem to command a $1000+ price premium on even LED based LCD's. It still blows my mind how fast they went from SD tvs, to HD, and now from HD to 3D.

Current computer:

Asus G73JH-A1

Core i7 720QM

Mobility Radeon 5870 1GBVRAM

8GB Ram

1 X OCZ Vertex 2 120GB SSD

1 X 500GB HDD

17.3FHD (1080P) Panel

Blu Ray Drive (reader)

HDMI Out

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 3,698
Points 55,965
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: United States, Massachusetts
ForumsAdministrator
MembershipAdministrator
Dave_HH replied on Wed, May 19 2010 11:56 PM

Chainsaw, I'm sitting this one out for a bit for sure. This is going to be one of those standards and technology developments cycles that will take a bit to wring out. We'll keep a close eye on it here though and see if we can figure out a way to reasonably test/evaluate them too perhaps.

Editor In Chief
http://hothardware.com


  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 283
Points 2,780
Joined: Sep 2004
Location: Canada, Nunavut
Chainzsaw replied on Thu, May 20 2010 10:21 AM

I totally agree with you on that the technology will take time to wring out all kinks.

It would be really neat though to see a review of one of the better units out there!

Current computer:

Asus G73JH-A1

Core i7 720QM

Mobility Radeon 5870 1GBVRAM

8GB Ram

1 X OCZ Vertex 2 120GB SSD

1 X 500GB HDD

17.3FHD (1080P) Panel

Blu Ray Drive (reader)

HDMI Out

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (31 items) | RSS