Reports over the weekend suggest the take up of 3D TV has not been the roaring success everyone seemed to expect. Sure, the State of Origin (for those who care) and some of the soccer matches were broadcast in 3D – actually processed 2D I am told reliably – but only to a small viewing footprint, so this is hardly a gauge.

The questions is simply this; would you have coughed up a few thou’ to watch a couple of football matches and a game of backyard cricket? Damned if I would.

We would be led to believe that the switch to 3D will be progressive and ongoing, but really, when you think about it, apart from perhaps the initial novelty, what sorts of programs would you think would have value added by being in 3D? Oprah? The Chaser Boys? Masterchef (gawd forbid)!

No. They would have no further redeeming qualities in my opinion, and because of that, as a film maker and occasional TV shooter, I would not invest in the equipment to make a change as I did from say, analogue to digital or SD to HD.

3D is a specialist niche – much like IMAX I suspect – and is suited to footage that will benefit from it. And this appears to be sport. As has been previously mentioned, I did see footage shot in true 3D (as against the Australian programs that as said were “processed”) of laps of the Nurburgring, and that was impressive.

But for the life of me, I cannot imagine Home in Away seen the same way.