The 2012 edition of the Olympics is firmly behind us and contrary to what everyone might have believed, 3D TV sales didn’t get the shot in the arm as TV makers had hoped it will. The London Olympics was one one major international sporting event since the advent of 3D technology on to the big scene and a lot of preparations were done to make the best of the opportunity that the biggest sporting event on earth presented. Unfortunately, all of those didn’t seem to have been able to evoke a positive response among TV buyers. There has been no substantial increase in sale of 3D TV sets nor were there a sharp rise in 3D viewership. Panasonic can be considered to be among the more optimistic among TV makers and had even gone on to proclaim the Olympics will be the kind of stimulus for 3D TV that Avatar has been for 3D films.

“The 2012 Olympics will be the watershed event for 3DTV similar to what “Avatar” has been for theater,” Panasonic had stated almost a year ago.

SO where did things go wrong? Here are a few possible reasons.

People have already grown used to live shows. They’d like to witness the thing as it happens and this has been the norm for decades now. So its all but natural for people to also expect a similar sort of thing even if it is being transmitted in 3D. Sadly, 3D signals weren’t as widely available as 2D while what is even more worse, some regions got the signals a day after the event actually took place. Enough to remain loyal to 2D, more so as picture clarity had improved drastically over the last few years.

The quality of the 3D images beamed were also not up to the mark. There weren’t as many 3D cameras to cover a particular event from as many angles as its 2D counterpart. Also, of all the 3D cameras put to use, a majority of them were small single cameras with fixed “inter-ocular” distance that produce lesser quality 3D images. Top that off with a production team that lacked experience on the 3D aspect.

What also can be considered an important reason that led to less popularity of 3D is the fact that there was no hue and cry made of it. There were no dedicated advertising campaign to highlight the issue so that there were far less people aware of there being special arrangements being made for 3D broadcast and it would be a new immersive way of watching TV.

In the end, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that there were far less people that watched the Olympic proceedings on a 3D TV than on a HDTV. A 3D TV costs more and also requires people to wear special 3D glasses in majority of the cases. So there should be a compelling reason for consumers to spend more on a 3D capable set and an overall improvement in quality of 3D broadcast is what is needed to make consumers to switch over to 3D big time.

via

Sovan Mandal (694 Posts)

Sovan Mandal is the senior tablet and tech corespondent for goodereader.com and 3D Specialist. He brings a international approach to news that is not just applicable to the North American market, but also Asia, India, Europe and others. Sovy brings his own writing flavor to the website and is interested in Science Fiction, Technology and Writing. Any questions, send an email