There is an interesting piece in the New York Times today about the campaigns being prepared by television manufacturers to sell us on the expensive idea of 3-D on TV. Samsung alone will spend $100 million this year on marketing it to us.
TV manufacturers are betting on 3-D. There are forecasts that consumers will buy 3.5 million to 4 million such sets, or about 10 percent of all United States television sales, this year. But that may be optimistic. Different and incompatible technologies mean that one maker’s glasses, for example, cannot be used on another’s television model. “The glasses go for a premium — around $150 — which means it’s costly, for example, to have a few people over for a Super Bowl party, unless it’s ‘bring your own compatible spectacles,’ ” said Ross Rubin, an analyst for NPD Group, a market research firm.
This is all such nonsense! I see in 3-D all the time, it is the natural way of seeing for human beings — and we do it without having to resort to fancy glasses. Why would I want to pay extra for what is normal? For me, one of the aesthetics of watching television or film or even fine art is that 2-D is NOT normal, and the skill is in translating a regular 3-D world into the artistic constraints of 2-D.
I’ll stick with the unreality of movies and TV and paintings, thanks very much.