Oakley Inc., maker of stylish eyewears and a subsidiary of the Milan-based Luxottica Group, unveiled its venture on high-fashion 3D glasses after receiving the official certification from RealD Inc., a major supplier of 3D movie technology. These glasses are aimed at combining style and comfort, while watching 3D content both in 3D theaters and 3D TVs, except on IMAX and Dolby 3D Digital Cinema screens. The glasses won’t require batteries from active, shutter-based liquid-crystal 3D glasses. They use passive 3D technology, which is the one typically utilized in home entertainment systems and RealD 3D theaters.
Business and Consumer Potentials
According to Oakley executives, their 3D glasses are optimized for 3D viewing and not for outdoor or sports use. They offer a wide field of sharp vision that virtually eliminates the ghosting or “crosstalk effect” between viewed images.
Since the hype for 3D movies continues to thrive, the recent 3D technology offered to the movie audience shows a decent business potential for companies supplying materials for 3D viewing. In terms of making 3D glasses looking much better when worn, this is a positive step towards the improvement of the annoyingly goofy rectangle-framed glasses handed out in theaters and even those cardboard frames given as freebies in conventions and other 3D events. It is also a good way to maintain hygienic personal glasses instead of wearing public-worn glasses handed out in theaters. Of course, the tag price for this high-fashion 3D glasses is yet another concern.
Watching Films on 3D
Personally, I believe there are two sides to the 3D filmmaking trend: 3D as a viable format entertaining the audience in its own level of cinema viewing; and 3D as a lousy fad and excuse to earn extra through more expensive movie tickets. Unfortunately, many studios produce 3D movies with the format merely utilized as an afterthought. This makes many 3D movies nothing but trashy flicks capitalizing on the hype. To date, I only enjoyed two films in their 3D grandeur: “Avatar” and “How to Train Your Dragon.”
My Take On Investing on 3D Glasses
Like 3D primarily existing as a fad and not utilized for its best potential, production of 3D glasses is a mere fad and a marketing pop. To be practical about it, I wouldn’t invest on such, unless it’s affordable enough that I could actually spare a few bucks for it. In such case, it would probably become a collectible item rather than an ideal investment. I still feel that it’s more like a business gimmick than something worthy of real distinction.
Like many technologies, the slow enhancement of 3D technology is primarily meant to rake in as much profit as possible. Instead of fast-tracking the development of 3D viewing without glasses, companies would rather try to produce cashcow materials before making the very technology obsolete in a few years.
This shares the same concept as mobile phones, laptops, and other gadgets with versions having very minimal improvements from one model to the next. It’s pretty much like automobile companies that would rather continue to make cars using gasoline instead of making prioritized developments for vehicles that don’t rely in gasoline anymore — amidst the fact that it’s actually an ideal plan to venture into.
The technology of 3D movie viewing without glasses is already within our midst. Why not advance our technology accordingly, instead of making significantly slower developments for the sake or profit? As for me, if these 3D glasses would cost more than $30, I’d probably pass the fad and just wait for 3D viewing without glasses to become an available technology.