Homepage » News Archive » View News Item 4399

Virgin Media launch 3DTV today
Tuesday 28 September 2010 10:41:18 by John Hunt

Virgin Media have announced the launch of their 3D TV service today just beating Sky to the posts who are launching their 3D Channel on Friday. The Virgin service is available to viewers who have a V HD or V+ HD box, and a suitable 3D TV. After successful tests and demonstrations on Virgin Media stores, the company is pleased to announce the launch of the service. Content comes via Virgin's movies on demand services powered by FilmFlex, and the company will be looking to add more to its 3D portfolio over the coming months.

"We're really excited to bring a taste of 3D to our customers in the comfort of their own homes. As we've already seen with the take-up of high definition programmes, viewers are continually looking for new ways to experience their favourite shows, and with the addition of 3D On Demand, they will be able to watch eye-popping movies whenever they want!"

Cindy Rose, (Executive Director of Digital Entertainment) Virgin Media

'StreetDance 3D' is the first title available at £5.99 for a 24 hour rental. Further movies are expected to be launched over the coming months such as 'Garfield's Pet Force 3D' in October, 'Disney's A Christmas Carol 3D' in November, 'Step Up 3D' in December and 'Despicable Me 3D' in early 2011.

Whilst content on Virgin is sparse, Sky's service launching to consumers on Friday will offer a dedicated 3D channel which will be showing live coverage of the Ryder Cup in 3D, as well as films including the latest Ice Age and Monsters vs Aliens, both in 3D. Crucially, the channel is free for viewers who subscribe to Sky World and Sky+HD.

[ Topic: Content | 14 comments | link to this item ]

Comments

Posted by AndrueC about 1 year ago
Nice. A load of old tripe in 3D.

Posted by Legolash2o about 1 year ago
How about Avatar 3D, Clash of the Titans 3D or any GOOD and RECENT film????????

A Christmas Carol in 3D, WTF?!?!?!?

Posted by john ( staff member) about 1 year ago
Clash of the Titans looked horrible in 3D! Don't know why they bothered. Made the film worse. Even the Indian company they outsourced the conversion to said that. They did it in 8 weeks when you need more like 16 to do a semi-decent job. They should ban post-conversion and only release things filmed in 3D.

Posted by PeterR123 about 1 year ago
Good conversion is fantastic - people don't understand that lots of Avatar was converted. Obviously, all the backgrounds were CGI and therefore had to be converted. Conversions allow far greater control over the 3D effect and every asect of every frame. Shooting in "native 3D" is cumbersome, expensive and not simple because a myriad of problems arise when you slap two camera together."Native 3D" films use conversion to fix the problems. In brief, good conversion is much better that native 3D in about 80% of situations because it is far more flexible and cheaper. (Yes, Clash was bad).

Posted by Dixinormous about 1 year ago
Six quid?!?!

Unsurprising and par for the course from Virgin though, go for the headlines and worry about the actual product later.

Posted by andrew ( staff member) about 1 year ago
Not convinced by 3D yet, the need for the glasses is a pain (when you wear glasses already), and for casual viewing its no good.

Unlike HD this does have the potential to be a tech fad

Posted by mitchja about 1 year ago
Also not convinced by 3D either. I don't see the point and I certainly wont be rushing out to buy a 3D TV.

Posted by john ( staff member) about 1 year ago
Good 3D does look amazing, Avatar being the best example. I have yet to see a good conversion though. One of the main problems with 3D is they need to learn how to film it and the viewer needs to learn how to watch it. In a conventional 3D environment the viewer can choose what to focus on. In a 3D film, some things are out of focus which is un-natural for the brain.

The recent trend to make everything 3D is annoying, particularly with some of the poor results. You also lose much of the high-definition of a film by going 3D which I'd personally rather keep (think the Dark Knight!).

Posted by EnglishRob about 1 year ago
So basically Virgin are launching 3D movies first but Sky seem to have a better line up of 3D movies. Doesn't matter much to me anyway at the moment, haven't got a 3D telly and I think it'll be a good few years before I do get one. I guess for the few that can afford a 3D TV then it's probably pretty good.

Posted by MarkHampshire about 1 year ago
I too wonder why 3D would take off now, when it has been tried before and died a death. It's a bit like the Amazon "Kindle" thing: the ability to read a book on a screen. People stopped reading books en-masse a while back and I don't see why, just because they're rendered on a computer screen, people will suddenly want to start reading again. Time will tell :-)

Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
3DTV will flop, can sort of understand the idea in a theatre (even though i also think its daft) some films do indeed look nice. In the home though i somehow dont see masses rushing out to buy a big new 3D TV for thousands, and then half a dozen 3D goggles at 100 quid a throw, well not unless your stupidity level is 3rd dimenion also ;) After a few hours it also gives many headaches still so not ideal for the couch potato watching several hours straight (like 5 hours of golf or similar they have already tested).

Posted by xb0xguru about 1 year ago
@Legolash2o - they mean the 2009 version of the movie starring Jim Carrey.

@MarkHampshire - don't even compare the anaglyph 3D to what's being achieved now. It's night and day. The new Kindle is amazing - my missus has one. If you're a book reader then it's a must-have. Going on your comments for both, I'm wondering what decade you think you're in.

Posted by xb0xguru about 1 year ago
@CARPETBURN - I wonder how many other people thought VHS would flop, or DVD for that matter (why do I need a film on disc when I have it on tape?). How about the first plasma screens? 42" Philips for £7000? Granted, the timing for 3D couldn't be at a worse point, what with the majority of people just purchasing their first HDTV, but prices will reduce and the technology will improve. You can get passive 3D TVs (40") for less than £800 and the cost of the glasses is minimal. This is not a fad - the market is moving towards 3D whether you like it or not.

Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
DVD almost didnt survive, neither did bluray.
(not enough space to write about how both almost died but just about survived).
People are not going to rush out and buy 3D TVs, its more than likely 3D will just automatically become a built in feature of new TVs if it survives at all.
This poll whic went up tonight coincidentally enough http://fwd.five.tv/gadget-show/blog/what-do-you-think-about-3dtv and many more on the net disagree with you so far.