Sky is trumpeting the fact that last weekend’s fixture between Man Utd and Blackburn Rovers (a 0-0 “thriller”) was watched by 200,000 viewers. A remarkable achievement based on average of 133 people per pub in the 1500 or so pubs that have the 3D TVs so far. These are obviously all pretty large pubs!
But is 3D really the future for TV?
Well it won’t surprise regular readers when I say, no, it’s not.
At last week’s Sony Radio Academy Award nominations, Sony was trumpeting its forthcoming 3D TVs, and in one corner of the room they had a prototype on display playing a BluRay montage of football and nature films.
First things first. The technical quality is excellent, and the technology works as well as any I’ve seen. Unlike my cinema experiences until now, the TV (LCD backlit I assume) is perfectly bright enough, although I should point out that I was watching in a darkened club environment. You have to put glasses on of course, but as I say, it was a perfectly enjoyable experience.
So why my negativity?
Well it was the football that did it for me. In the average televised football match as we’re used to seeing them, the vast majority of shots are from one or two cameras placed in a gantry high(ish) above the halfway line. The majority of the action is observed from these views. While other cameras are employed to focus on individual players, and often a Steadicam on the touchline, most of the additional cameras are only really employed for showing replays.
And therein lies the problem. The viewer doesn’t get much of a sense of depth perspective in 3D from that high gantry camera. Therefore, to make you feel more immersed in the game, matches in 3D have to be much more reliant on touchline cameras from the lower angles that allow you to fully perceive the 3D effect. While that might work from a technical and experiential perspective, it doesn’t make for great football coverage. The high camera position allows you to get a good impression of where on the pitch players are, pick up on moves and off the ball runs, and generally be tactically much more astute. Coincidentally, seats near these camera positions tend to be the most expensive in the ground.
So while we all might enjoy seeing the odd game in 3D, it’s offering broadly inferior camera angles for actual enjoyment of the game and the ability to see what’s happening.
That’s my view anyway.
The lady from Sky was a little coy about how much these TVs are going to cost when they’re on sale in the summer. What I do know is that you won’t be watching the World Cup on one – in the UK anyway. The BBC and ITV hold the rights to the competition, and only Sky has, or is likely to have, a 3D channel. It’s possible that some cinemas will be holding screenings in the same way that certain Six Nations Rugby Union games were screened in 3D.
Instead, viewers would do better to connect their 23m HD TVs to an actual HD source – something that’s a little easier now that consumers can start to buy Freeview HD boxes (as well as Sky, Virgin Media and Freesat).
Disclaimer: As mentioned above, I saw the Sony 3D TV at the nominations announcement for the Sony Radio Academy Awards last week where I was an invited guest on behalf of my employer. These views are mine and don’t necessarily reflect those of my employer.