Virtual I-O going bankrupt and 3D TV

[P3D Jonathan R. Gross <catalyst@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Rolland writes:
> =

> Someone had mentioned the other companies - VREX, 3-D Max, 3-D TV, etc.=
 will
> probably go bankrupt too if they don't start producing more software to=
 view.
> I agree. Why don't they get together and see if they can buy the rights=
 to
> some of the classic 3D movies from the past? =

>
 =

First of all, you forgot NEOTEK.  Secondly, Everybody thinks they know
why cheap,
low quality 3D systems go bankrupt, but when offered a complete, HIGH
QUALITY system,
for less than a 2.8 Realist, those same people come up with all kinds of
excuses about why not to buy.

Also, in this industry, SOFTWARE refers to programs which control
computers, a DATABASE is an organized set of useful data, INFORMATION is
data useful in making decisions, and TITLES are thematic media for
presentation via viewing system (such as computer and video games,
authored works published in an electronic format, and transduced works
such as books, movies, and music which retain their identity in the new
media).  3D cinema converted for viewing on a computer would be
considered a title.

Rolland makes a good point about demand-push marketing.  Without titles,
most people are not interested in new viewing products without a
sufficient collection of title to choose from.  Without published
titles, purchasers must create their own viewing material.  This
difference is sometimes credited to the success of VHS over Sony Beta =BD=
"
video tape systems, and tape systems over laser disk.

JVC, the originator of VHS format, licensed their systems to other
electronics companies, and provided low cost, seller financed
reproduction equipment to publishers that wanted to sell pre-recorded
video tapes.  Sony, on the other hand, wanted all the marbles.  They
initially maintained a monopoly on producing =BD" Beta systems, and
charged publishers big time for reproduction equipment.  Anyone seen a
Beta tape at a video rental place lately?  Sony, vowing never to make
that mistake again, has been on a quest to buy up publishing rights for
desirable tiles, and to get into the production of titles.  (We have yet
to see the effect of that strategy)

Tape (read/write) verses laser disk (read-only), won because viewers
still want to create their own material, or at least have the option of
doing it.  Laser disks made viewers feel captive.  Besides, until there
are enough titles to create demand push momentum, marketers must rely on
demand pull.  These are the early adopters, people who buy new types of
products first.

So that the moderators won=92t feel I=92m too far off track here, this do=
es
relate to electronic stereoscopic display systems.  Until there are
enough titles available for people to justify purchasing a system for a
new media distribution format, products must initially rely on
purchasers who are willing to make their own materiel to view.  This is
why VR-Vision is a high quality (as compared to toy quality) electronic
stereoscopic imaging system available now  for under $300, and comes
complete with NEON, an easy to use program to create images from left
and right stereo pairs.  Until the published stereoscopic titles are
available, purchasers must have their own source material.  The only
titles available currently are aimed at educational institutions. (see
http://www.skypoint.com/~catalyst/stereoscopic.html#Neotek).

Not to worry, though.  I believe that the republication of stereoscopic
titles is immanent with the commercial introduction of Digital Video
Disks (DVD).  DVD offers the storage capacity to hold a full length
stereo movie.  CD-ROMs didn=92t have the capacity, and Video Tapes only
work with NTSC or PAL viewers (TVs) that never had the bandwidth.  HDTV
does have the bandwidth, and is going to be digital as well.

In the mean time, you can do your part to promote high quality
system-independent stereo by publishing your libraries of stereo images
on your computer, and on the Internet.   According to Noel Archambault,
an independant stereoscopic cinematographer for IMAX(see
http://home.iSTAR.ca/~indepth/) :

"The hardware and software installation is easy and straight-forward."

"The .neo format images that you provided from my scans are great! Very
comfortable to view, and virtually flickerless. The resolution is much
better than interlaced systems, and the area of viewing acceptance is
very wide, allowing for multiple viewers at the same time. There was
minimal 'ghosting' on some shots, but much better than other systems."

"Overall its the best 3D computer imaging system I've seen so far."

Don=92t settle for "Toy" interlaced systems that require complex hardware=

and software, or that won=92t work with stereoscopic video.

Jonathan Gross


------------------------------