Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Television Displays Graphics Build Technology

BBC Gives Up On 3-D Television Programming 120

RockDoctor writes "After spending several years on supporting the uptake of 3-D TV, the BBC has accepted that people don't want it, and are turning off their 3-D channels following an uptake of under 5% of households with 3-D equipment. I can just feel the joy at not having wasted my money on this technology."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

BBC Gives Up On 3-D Television Programming

Comments Filter:
  • Buddha says... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Zemran ( 3101 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @12:08PM (#44195361) Homepage Journal

    ...stop wanting stupid shit

  • by Joe_Dragon ( 2206452 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @12:11PM (#44195397)

    3D needs to drop the glasses to work.

  • by i.r.id10t ( 595143 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @12:13PM (#44195413)

    And a common standard... otherwise it is VHS vs. Beta again.

  • Re:Hooray! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) * <> on Friday July 05, 2013 @12:31PM (#44195643) Homepage Journal

    Get rid of the shaky camera effect too. Every single shot in Man of Steel was filmed that way and it was intensely annoying.

  • by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve ( 949321 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @01:05PM (#44195935)
    As expected, here's the general themes of the posts so far:

    1) I hate 3D. Therefore this thrills me.
    2) 3D has always failed. No surprise here.

    Well, here's reality. 3D movies are here to stay. But despite the usual hysterical ramblings that insist that "everything" is in 3D, reality begs to differ. Major Hollywood big budget action flicks (ie. superhero moves, "stuff blows up" movies) will be in 3D. Comedies and dramas likely will not be. All animated films from any major studio will be in 3D from now on. Roughly 20% of the films released will be in 3D. The market has shown a willingness to support 3D under these conditions. However, 3D TV penetration is low. TV providers aren't carrying 3D feeds. I actually do have a 3D TV, which I love, but my TV provider chose to not carry any 3D channels. So although I have the equipment necessary to watch TV shows in 3D, I cannot do so. So it's no surprised that 3D TV channels are dying. But in terms of movies, sorry folks, but it's staying.
  • Re:Hooray! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by KZigurs ( 638781 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @01:23PM (#44196135)

    Actually I felt that the movie was ruined due to 3d. If half of your movie consists of blatant 'show-off 3d' shots it's rather hard to enjoy the story.

    I tried.

  • Well, DUH... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Kazoo the Clown ( 644526 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @01:44PM (#44196335)
    How many times is it going to take for these bozos to recognize that 3D has been around since the invention of photography and it's always been a niche market? Anyone who did NOT see this coming is completely unqualified to be working in marketing or the entertainment industry. Those who did see it coming merely used it as a means of generating short-term profit by fleecing the uninformed. Perhaps some day 3D will be ubiquitous, but it will take far more than an expensive TV with too little 3D content to get us there. 3D is routinely used as a boondoggle to sell short-lived products, that's mostly what it's been good for. The longest lived 3D product has been Viewmaster, which frankly, is not even as good as the old stereoopticon-- but the only reason it has survived (and barely, at that) is it's dirt cheap and a cute gimmic for about 5 minutes. Most viewmasters sit unused in a drawer for years and years or end up in thrift shops. I'm someone who loves 3D, but as much as I'd like it to succeed, I had no interest in buying a 3D equipped TV with nothing to watch but Avatar and a few cartoons. In fact, I haven't even gone blu-ray, since the value added given my eyesight these days is pretty minimal...
  • Re:Fads (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @01:56PM (#44196443)

    The thing about 3d is that you need to get it right (enough) before it really gets popular.

    The Old 3D movies failed because of the Blue/Red filters really messed with the colors in the movie, once Color movies became more popular the 3d effect was less popular.

    The New 3D movies (are better) and seem to be still somewhat popular in the theaters. The Polarized Glasses give you a better view and still get the 3d effect. However, there are still the headache problems, and the movie makers still exaggerating the effect, they are thinking 2d and adding a 3d effect to it.

    The 3D TV isn't there yet. People don't watch TV like they do for movies. It is much more distracted, we watch TV, play with the Dog or the Kids, perhaps browse the internet on our phone or laptop, we get up cook dinner.... Having glasses that makes you just sit there just isn't the TV Experience.

"I'm not afraid of dying, I just don't want to be there when it happens." -- Woody Allen