WH
It would've been Live & KIcking by then.
I remember on the CiN night the Pet Shop Boys performed in 3D, and there were a few other programmes in the week leading up to it. I think there was a David Bellamy nature programme too, and a Blue Peter special.
The 3D wasn't the red & blue kind, it looked normal on screen.
Whataday
Founding member
thegeek posted:
I've got vauge memories of a Sting (or was it Seal?) video on Going Live with red/green 3D specs - given away free with Going Live magazine?
It would've been Live & KIcking by then.
I remember on the CiN night the Pet Shop Boys performed in 3D, and there were a few other programmes in the week leading up to it. I think there was a David Bellamy nature programme too, and a Blue Peter special.
The 3D wasn't the red & blue kind, it looked normal on screen.
SP
I remember that well - and being very excited to get the 3D glasses with the TV Times. I remember particularly a sequence featuring a girl on a swing proving very effective. My friends at primary school at the time insisted 'it still worked' without the glasses. I don't think they really understood the concept of 3D, despite my trying to explain it to them.
The Real World also did a Smell-O-Vision experiment, with scratch-and-sniff cards distributed with the TV Times not long after. The card had to be cut into individual squares to stop the smells merging. Last time I looked, there were still a few squares in a trinket box my mum used to keep next to the telly featuring The Real World logo. Must look next time I'm at my parents' to see if they're still there.
tvarksouthwest posted:
1982 actually, and the programme was TVS' The Real World, presented by Michael Rodd. The programme about 3D on Monday night was followed by a 3D film on Sunday afternoon (a Western IIRC - who chose it?!)
I remember that well - and being very excited to get the 3D glasses with the TV Times. I remember particularly a sequence featuring a girl on a swing proving very effective. My friends at primary school at the time insisted 'it still worked' without the glasses. I don't think they really understood the concept of 3D, despite my trying to explain it to them.
The Real World also did a Smell-O-Vision experiment, with scratch-and-sniff cards distributed with the TV Times not long after. The card had to be cut into individual squares to stop the smells merging. Last time I looked, there were still a few squares in a trinket box my mum used to keep next to the telly featuring The Real World logo. Must look next time I'm at my parents' to see if they're still there.
DA
They just showed a longer promo that included shots of people wearing red/green glasses and a mock-up of a red/green view of the tower (not actually 3D though).
David
David
CL
HI what would be the best picture out of 3D or HD? Would it be better to watch the show in HD than 3D?
NG
noggin
Founding member
I think I still have "The Real World" 3D show on VHS somewhere (yep - I'm ancient) I think they did two shows on 3D TV - both were based largely around the Philips research labs in Eindhoven. The second show introduced a stab at colour (though it wasn't really that good) - mainly by chosing colours that kind of worked through the filters - and whacking the saturation up. (Lots of red, blue and purple)
The Children in Need stuff (Pet Shop Boys performance, Doctor Who special etc.) was "pseudo" 3D - in that the tracking of the camera with parallax between foreground and background objects gave an impression of 3D when the camera or scene was moving, but it was an impression, rather than an accurate representation, and it stopped when the motion stopped!
The most impressive 3D TV I've seen was also HD - and was over 10 years (probably 15 years) ago at IBC in Brighton. In a Brighton cinema Sony had two High Definition 3 CRT HDTV projectors set-up, with polarising filters on each one. You wore polarising glasses, and got full 60 field-per-second 3D HD viewing on a big screen. It was amazing - though the actual content was a bit "LOOK THIS IS 3D!!!"...
The Children in Need stuff (Pet Shop Boys performance, Doctor Who special etc.) was "pseudo" 3D - in that the tracking of the camera with parallax between foreground and background objects gave an impression of 3D when the camera or scene was moving, but it was an impression, rather than an accurate representation, and it stopped when the motion stopped!
The most impressive 3D TV I've seen was also HD - and was over 10 years (probably 15 years) ago at IBC in Brighton. In a Brighton cinema Sony had two High Definition 3 CRT HDTV projectors set-up, with polarising filters on each one. You wore polarising glasses, and got full 60 field-per-second 3D HD viewing on a big screen. It was amazing - though the actual content was a bit "LOOK THIS IS 3D!!!"...
SP
3D Imax is amazing as well. I went to the one in Bradford a couple of years ago where the screen fills your entire field of view. You do feel like you should be able to reach out and touch what you're seeing.
I'm not sure about the system. IIRC, the glasses provided had grey lenses, not the green and red. The only drawback was that it gave me an awful headache after a while.
I'm not sure about the system. IIRC, the glasses provided had grey lenses, not the green and red. The only drawback was that it gave me an awful headache after a while.
DA
IMAX 3D uses polarised lenses. If you look through a single lens at another pair of glasses, one lens will appear opaque and the other transparent.
I think the headaches come with all these kinds of 3D. Your eyes are trying to focus on the image as if it's at the perceived distance, but it's really all at the screen. The whole red/green separation probably makes it worse too.
David
Quote:
I'm not sure about the system. IIRC, the glasses provided had grey lenses, not the green and red. The only drawback was that it gave me an awful headache after a while.
IMAX 3D uses polarised lenses. If you look through a single lens at another pair of glasses, one lens will appear opaque and the other transparent.
I think the headaches come with all these kinds of 3D. Your eyes are trying to focus on the image as if it's at the perceived distance, but it's really all at the screen. The whole red/green separation probably makes it worse too.
David
