3D Video Content, is it just a gimmick or the future for Movies and TV?

CES is in full swing in Las Vegas right now and the emphasis is clearly on 3d content. Blu-Ray finished the 3d spec last month, pretty much every TV manufacturer (LG, Vizio, Toshiba, Panasonic, Sony) have made complete commitments to 3d in their upcoming lines of HDTVs, and even broadcast media (CBS, Discovery, ESPN) have begun to dip their toes in the 3d pond.

With all of this going on, I wonder what the XBMC community's take is on everything - is it a gimmick?, is it the future?, is it easily implementable on XBMC?

Let the ideas flow

One vote for "gimmick".

Stereoscopic 3D graphics have been available on the PC, in one form or another, for a long, long time now. Heck, years ago NVidia even released special drivers that add such effects to pretty much any game that uses Direct3D.

And why isn't everyone using these drivers today? Because they're no where near as interesting as they sound, when you get around to trying them for yourself.

Now, you might say "so what, a 3D depth illusion in software isn't the same as what these LCDs are doing - these let you get different views of the action depending on where you are relative to the TV". Well that's all well and good, but if you were sat down in front of one of these new screens, how long would it take before you got bored of moving around the room to get the different views, and having to find where the kids left the special glasses each time you want to use them?

Not long, I'd wager.

And then there's the eye pain you'd get out of wearing the likes of these babies...

If I'm playing a game and want to move the camera, I'm happy to give the thumbstick a tap rather then get up and walk around. The thumbstick gives me a greater range of movement anyway; you can't expect to walk around behind the TV to get a complete 180-degree view change.

If they want to add 3D effects to videos, then they might as well just forget the fancy LCDs and glasses, and stick a thumbstick on TV remotes. Assuming they can find any producers willing to create movies compatible with the displays (the amount of extra footage + equipment required would up costs no end during the recording stages).

At first, sorry for my bad english...

I would like play stereoscopic content in xbmc-live with dual-head (2 beamers).
Ok, there is a commercial software called "stereoscopic-player", but it is for windows.
I think at is time for an opensource version and xbmc is very cool with stereo it would get mega cool ;-)

Ok. the easyst way, I think, is to play a side by side video with xbmc with dual-head graphics card.
the 2. one is to play a video where the left and right video is above/below in one stream (file).

Maybe there is a opensource stereoscopic player out, but I don't know.
I am searching for a long time for that tool.

+2 for gimmick 3d is old hat and is not the way forward.

That what I wanted is allready there...

What is a side by side stereomovie, a very wide "cinemascope", that is no problem for xbmc to play this.
The problem was, how tell I ubuntu to make a big desktop with dual output,
but the newest nvidia driver has all what I need in it.

Both?

I think 3D display is the future... eventually, and the current technology just doesn't make it practical or enjoyable yet. There is no denying that a well done 3D production adds a huge increase in immersion into the experience. It transforms the perspective from "watching something filmed that is being shown to me" into "being there for the filming of the actual events."

That being said, even though it is a massive step up in the reality of the experience, it "gets old" quickly with today's technology not because 3D itself is annoying or gimmicky (no one complains of walking around seen stereoscopically in everyday life, do they?), but because the technology required to give you that experience is clunky and annoying. The technology reminds you that it is very artificial, which sort of negates the whole purpose of 3D to begin with. No one wants to put on a pair of glasses that flicker like the devil every time they sit down for TV. Not even for routine movie watching. So until the magical technology arrives that allows me to simple sit in my recliner and see 3D display in front of me, no glasses, holding my head a certain way, sitting really close to the display, etc. required, then 3D isn't ready for prime time.

I think if you have invested in a true home theater - and I'm talking controlled lighting environment, projection screen of 100+ inches, well done multichannel sound, proper seating - then having the ability to watch the "occasional" movie in 3D would be nice. I could see putting on the glasses in one's home theater to see Avatar in 3D, with friends over and such. But that would probably be a once every few months experience. Far from 3D being a "routine" part of the viewing experience.

Wont matter to me. I am uninterested in "movies" in 3D. Ironic that the more effects we get, the lower the quality of the movie content. Notice that even in the Matrix movie when they duplicated the one character the scene with fighting was a joke.

I prefer intelligent story telling over "effects." Mind you a well done effect is worth everything. Example - the Abyss. Very few effects but so well crafted.

I'm going for "gimmick" as well. I refuse to spend a ton of money for a TV that requires me to wear goofy-looking "glasses".

I really think this technology, for home use, is in the 'infant' stage. My gut feeling is that the uptake for this round will be minimal, but as they continue to get the non-glasses requiring TV's perfected, it will end up becoming more and more prevalent.

I can easily see myself wanting one of these just for the enhancement to viewing sports, tv, etc., it would bring if things were filmed with 3D as avatar was - not as a gimmick, but just as a technology to have content be viewable in 3D.

gimmick