Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

3.5M 3D Blu-Ray Discs sold, 50% were actually purchased. Have you bought a 3D Blu-Ray Disc?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
14 replies to this topic

#1 of 15 OFFLINE  

  • 0 posts
  • Join Date: --

Posted July 17 2011 - 06:20 AM

Research firm IHS Screen Digest recently released a report 3.5M 3D Blu-ray discs have been sold since 3D blu-ray inception.  However, the report goes on to state that only 50% of those discs were actually purchased!  The rest of the 1.75M 3D blu-ray discs were part of a bundle package from manufacturers.


TG Daily reported on this and put some interesting statisctics on this compared to the launch of Blu-Ray stating that in the first year of blu-ray only 363K blu-ray discs were sold.  While that is interesting, it certainly isn't an apple to apple comparison as there were many things going on in the marketplace at the time.


1) There was a format war going on, that caused consumers to purchase neither HD optical disc standard

2) There wasn't an installed base of players


It could be argued that there was an equal amount lack of titles available, but that is about where it ends.


There are certainly more than 363K 3D enabled HDTV sets in the market on the first year and the majority of blu-ray players have 3D support in them at an inexpensive price point.  3D is getitng to be a check mark on both blu-ray players and HDTV's these days.


So, why the lack of actual sales?  Is it simply a lack of titles?  Is it the restrictions of the technology (i.e. glasses are bothersome and/or too expensive)?  Is it that the 3D experience on many titles isn't that great or doesn't compare to the theatrical experience?


Interesting questions.  What are your thoughts?





#2 of 15 OFFLINE   Edwin-S

Edwin-S

    Producer



  • 5,711 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 20 2000

Posted July 17 2011 - 06:43 AM

Here is why I think the sales are low. 1) Less discretionary income due to a recession brought on by massive fraud on the part of Wall Street. 2) 3D disc sets and 3D movies are ridiculously expensive. 3) The glasses are annoying to wear, but the biggest problem is that they cut light output to the eye and make everything appear dim. 4) Not enough live action releases; although, I personally believe that 3D works best with computer animated films. 5) A lot of people think 3D is gimmicky and adds nothing beyond 2D. 6) A lot of people complain about being affected healthwise when they watch 3D movies. I believe those are some of the main reasons for the lack of sales. I listed them in that order, but that doesn't mean one reason is greater than another. As for whether 3D looks better in the theatre than at home, I would say it is not a factor in lack of adoption. In fact, in many respects 3D in the home, via active shutter glasses, looks a lot better than at the theatre. The advantage that theatre-based 3D has is screen size. Home 3D loses a bit in that respect because you are always aware of the edges of the screen. Seeing the edges of the screen reduces the immersion factor of 3D. Edit: I should actually amend #4 and say that there is not enough content being released in general. Also, the strategy of exclusive releases tied to a brand of television has probably done a lot to damage adoption. People want a lot of content available at a reasonable price before they will even think of adopting a new technology. Only early adopters have little concern for lack of titles because, in general, they are technophiles who are always attracted to new technology similar to birds who like shiny objects.
"You bring a horse for me?" "Looks like......looks like we're shy of one horse." "No.......You brought two too many."

#3 of 15 OFFLINE   Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer



  • 11,566 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted July 17 2011 - 08:24 AM

Prices are certainly one important factor. In most cases, you can't buy just a 3D title. You must buy the 3D disc bundled with a large assortment of other variations of the same movie on Blu-ray, DVD, and digital copy. I'd be curious to see what the sales would be on a strictly 3D release without the other discs in the case. Of course, that would also means the studios might have to put additional content on the 3D disc like some bonus features apart from 3D trailers. But it could be done.


Certainly home theater aficiandos who know about the history of 3D down through the decades would love to see some older content in 3D. Avatar is great in 3D and so are a host of CGI animated films, but what about classics like Dial 'M' for Murder, Creature from the Black Lagoon, House of Wax, and Kiss Me Kate? People who are enthusiastic about 3D want more than just the latest releases. At least, I do, and so do some friends who have also gone 3D.



#4 of 15 OFFLINE   Timothy E

Timothy E

    Supporting Actor



  • 889 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 20 2007

Posted July 17 2011 - 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by MattH. 
Prices are certainly one important factor. In most cases, you can't buy just a 3D title. You must buy the 3D disc bundled with a large assortment of other variations of the same movie on Blu-ray, DVD, and digital copy. I'd be curious to see what the sales would be on a strictly 3D release without the other discs in the case. Of course, that would also means the studios might have to put additional content on the 3D disc like some bonus features apart from 3D trailers. But it could be done.


Certainly home theater aficiandos who know about the history of 3D down through the decades would love to see some older content in 3D. Avatar is great in 3D and so are a host of CGI animated films, but what about classics like Dial 'M' for Murder, Creature from the Black Lagoon, House of Wax, and Kiss Me Kate? People who are enthusiastic about 3D want more than just the latest releases. At least, I do, and so do some friends who have also gone 3D.


I for one would jump at the chance to buy Dial 'M' for Murder and Kiss Me Kate on BD in 3D.




#5 of 15 OFFLINE   Craig_Ehr

Craig_Ehr

    Second Unit



  • 327 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 15 2002

Posted July 17 2011 - 09:53 AM

I will not buy live action 3D conversions on BD3D, which is consistent because I won't see them at the theatre either. I own 5 titles so far and have some others on pre-order: Resident Evil: Afterlife Coraline Tangled TRON: Legacy Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs

#6 of 15 OFFLINE   dmiller68

dmiller68

    Supporting Actor



  • 667 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2009

Posted July 17 2011 - 10:31 AM

I have quite a few 10+ 3D Bluay titles. I think the pricing drives me a little crazy $10 more for the same move in 2D. Since most of them only have 1 disk with both version it is even more crazy. However, this is the fun of adopting before popular. I do think that bundling is hurting them as well. I would like to get a copy of Megamind but I'm unwilling to pay a fortune for it.

Equipment: Panasonic TC-P65VT25, Panasonic DMP-BDT100, Pioneer Elite SC-37, TiVo Premiere XL, Limited Edition MW3 XBOX 360s with Kinect, Apple TV
Speakers: Definitive Technology Mythos XTR60 (3), Definitive Technology Mythos XTR20BP (4), Definitive Technology SuperCube II


#7 of 15 OFFLINE   RobertR

RobertR

    Lead Actor



  • 9,533 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 1998

Posted July 17 2011 - 10:46 AM

I bought a 3D plasma, NOT because it has 3D, but because the top of the line features were only available with a 3D model. I SOLD the 3D title that came with it (Avatar) for over a hundred bucks. I'm glad I got the money. :)

#8 of 15 OFFLINE   Charles Smith

Charles Smith

    Producer



  • 4,257 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 27 2007
  • LocationNor'east

Posted July 17 2011 - 12:17 PM

I likewise bought a 3D plasma, not for the 3D but because the top of the line features were only available with a 3D model.  I GAVE AWAY the Ice Age Whatever the F* It Was, kept the Coraline which I'll eventually watch, ordered the free Avatar, and bought Tron: Legacy.

So, let's see... that nets out to:  one (1) 3D purchase.


There are one or two IMAX titles out there that I'd enjoy having, but not for the ridiculous price tags.  I enjoy 3D, but no more 3D for me until a frickin' catalog title is released.




#9 of 15 OFFLINE   RickER

RickER

    Producer



  • 5,130 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 04 2003
  • Real Name:Rick
  • LocationTulsa, Oklahoma

Posted July 17 2011 - 12:35 PM

I have Tron Legacy in 3D. Only because i bought the 5 disc set for less than if i had gotten Legacy, and the original Tron separate on Blu. I do not own a 3D TV, and do not see one in my future. But i do own 1 movie!

#10 of 15 OFFLINE   robbbb1138

robbbb1138

    Second Unit



  • 265 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2008

Posted July 17 2011 - 03:38 PM

I don't own a 3D TV, but I do own a single 3D Blu-Ray, just because Disney's $10 off deal on Tangled was only if you bought the big combo pack, so it was ultimately cheaper to just get the 3D disc that I'll never be able to use (pretty much the same way that I view any combo pack these days).

#11 of 15 OFFLINE   Paul D G

Paul D G

    Screenwriter



  • 1,621 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 24 2001

Posted July 17 2011 - 07:56 PM

You also have to consider the titles vs the people buying them. I'm not going to buy a title just because it's in 3D. I have to want the movie. I don't have a 3D tv, but AFAIK, the only title I've bought with a 3D version available was Tron Legacy. So out of the dozen or so titles I've bought in the past year, only 1 was available in 3D. So that'd be a sale of 1 for me.


Plus, I would only invest in a properly made 3D film, not a conversion (ie Avatar vs Alice in Wonderland).



#12 of 15 OFFLINE   Worth

Worth

    Screenwriter



  • 1,175 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 17 2009

Posted July 18 2011 - 01:19 AM

I bought a 3D plasma, NOT because it has 3D, but because the top of the line features were only available with a 3D model.

Likewise. I bought both a 3D plasma and 3D blu-ray player recently because they had the performance and features I was looking for, despite the 3D. The TV didn't come with the glasses and I haven't bothered to buy them. I wonder how many people have bought 3D compatible hardware even though they have no interest in 3D?
Sealed with a curse as sharp as a knife. Doomed is your soul and damned is your life.

#13 of 15 OFFLINE   cineMANIAC

cineMANIAC

    Screenwriter



  • 1,928 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 03 2008
  • Real Name:Luis
  • LocationNew York City

Posted July 18 2011 - 01:36 AM

I always considered 3-D a gimmick to be conservatively enjoyed once in a while in a theater. Nowadays, everybody and their mothers are releasing everything in 3-D regardless of whether or not the film is worth sitting through for 2 and a half hours. I don't have a need to replicate that experience at home.
 

RIP Roberto Gomez Bolanos. 


#14 of 15 OFFLINE   Merrick Gearing

Merrick Gearing

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 161 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 27 2008

Posted July 18 2011 - 05:56 AM

Too expensive.  Too gimmicky. Too often its poorly done.



#15 of 15 OFFLINE   Phoebus

Phoebus

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 111 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 28 2010

Posted July 18 2011 - 08:25 PM

I own over ten 3D blurays. No 3D TV, no monitor, just a projector and a 3d conversion box. Nice big image, flicker specs. And a relatively inexpensive set up. And sort of portable, too! So, with my set up, the prospect of showing off some fifties 3D to go with my cinerama, vistavision and 70mm blus makes me check the home theatre forums daily for news of such a coming release - all to little or no avail. :-( Seems crazy that not one single fifties 3D "carrot" has been dangled towards the buying public to date. And yet my gut says we'll have some arrive by late autumn. [not as though I don't Know these movies in 3d, I just want a version I'm able to comfortably project for friends.]