Re: [photo-3d] Re: Coming to a theater near you

["John A. Rupkalvis" <stereoscope@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

There is no legal requirements concerning special equipment on a TV as long
as it does not exceed the bandwidth or radiation or other potentially
harmful limits specified by the FCC and the other appropriate government
agencies.   If there were, it would not be possible to have set top boxes
(cable, satellite, digital TV, etc.), let alone all of the hours of
stereoscopic television that have already been sent to subscribers by C3D
television.

I agree with you regarding the superiority of large screen theatrical 3-D
over small screen television 3-D.   However, I regard small screen
television 3-D as superior to small screen flat television.

JR

----- Original Message -----
From: "Herbert C Maxey" <bmaxey1@xxxxxxxx>
To: <photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 4:52 PM
Subject: Re: [photo-3d] Re: Coming to a theater near you


> >>2nd - Sagging theatre revenues.  The best stereo delivery
> >>systems (polaroid and LCD glasses) are either not workable
> >>or somewhat marginal on home TV.  What this means is that
> >>any film presented in stereo could ONLY be seen in its full
> >>glory in an honest-to-God movie theatre.
>
> Any film is better on the big screen. As for IMAX being the Technology in
> place for 3D Movies, I do not agree. IMAX is expensive to show and
> requires far more than 90% of theater owners would agree to. IMAX is
> great, but to be successful, 3D has to be in most of the theaters not
> just a few.
>
> As for TV, who says we need to display them stereoscopically on the TV? I
> do not think this is a requirement for success. All movies are better in
> a theater. The only requirement for TV distribution is that nothing
> special be required for the viewer to see the program. This is a legal
> requirement.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>