Sky to Broadcast 3D TV in 2010 Comments

Since I had the "pleasure" of seeing this first hand at their Bafta talk about a month ago, I must say:
A) It still hurt my eyes after a while
B) There didn't seem to be any solution for people already wearing glasses*.
C) The 3D-capable HDTVs were hideously expensive.

I'd personally say 2011 is too soon. Kudos to Sky for having the guts to invest in 3D TV tech early on though.

*Yes, you can "see" the 3D by placing their specs over yours, but it's not exactly comfortable; as anyone who's tried placing sunglasses over their normal ones will tell you.

@drdark - Yes, that would be a sticking point for me too - the damn specs. If only Sky's system didn't need them? And also agree that 2011 is too soon - everyone's still in the process of upgrading to HD - still it's one for the future.

Yes, what drkdark said, Kudos to Sky.
Their financial model seems sound to date, more customers for HD every day according to a report this week, if I remember rightly, something like three million now.

Apart from the sensational aspect of the viewing experience, I hope 3D for the footie (which I think they have most in mind) cures the problem of sometimes not being sure which direction the ball is going on occasions, but also if IMAX is anything to go by, depth of field is sometimes an issue.

PS, just heard on the radio about Sir Bobby Robson, RIP Sir - great guy.

Well, given that I've had the idea on how to build a proper 3D TV for around 25 years, I can't believe people are trying to use those silly cardboard spectacles. It's actually only in recent years that the tech to make my 3D set has been readily available.

Filming would be no more difficult than today though a lot of CPU/GPU grunt would be needed to work out the "picture" for display. Today's GPU's might be able to crack that.

Good luck Sky in convincing everyone who has just spent £500 plus on a new big flat screen TV to go out and buy another one for 3D.