NEW YORK - It's the mystery of watching golf on TV. A player hitsa putt, the ball starts rolling toward the hole, then with nowarning it curves hard to the left.
Not anymore.
To the few Americans who own 3-D-capable television sets, everyundulation of the greens at Augusta National will be visible duringthe Masters. No longer will putts break for seemingly no reason orwill viewers struggle to judge the distance from golfer to hole.
A special national broadcast of the Masters this week is thefirst of what could soon be many 3-D sports events available on homeTVs.
ESPN will launch a 3-D network later this year in time for theWorld Cup.
A live stream of the Masters will also be available for 3-D-capable computers.
Sports fans hearing such announcements are left to wonder how toaccess 3-D telecasts - and whether they're even worth it.
On the access front, the answer is viewers must own a 3-D-compatible set to watch the broadcasts, and they'll need to find outwhether their cable service provider carries a separate 3-D channel,which is also necessary for viewing.
Is 3-D worth it? For golf, at least, the third dimension makes amajor difference. A demonstration by Comcast of Masters test footagelast week showed how the wide shots and attractive scenery make forthe eye-appealing equivalent of a nature film.
More importantly, 3-D has a practical benefit for rabid golffans. Now they can play caddie from home, judging how hard or atwhat angle a putt needs to be hit to roll through the undulations ofthe green and into the hole.
Comcast executives agreed that golf works especially well in 3-D. For sports like basketball and hockey, with their tight camerashots and quick action, the learning curve is steeper for networks.
Mark Hess, Comcast's senior vice president for advanced businessand technology development, predicted that soccer and baseball willalso work well in 3-D from the beginning.
The Masters 3-D telecast will feature two hours of live afternooncoverage each day, mostly of the back nine, with its own separatecommentators.
Sports fans will have to decide how practical it is to watchsports in 3-D. Viewers must wear special glasses, and the effectworks best if they're looking directly at the TV from a couple ofyards away. So multitasking and 3-D don't go well together.
But it's best to think of 3-D as an optional feature on a high-end HD set instead of a different kind of television. Viewers canswitch back to a regular HD feed if they don't want to watch a 3-Dbroadcast. Consumers in the market for a new TV may opt for a 3-D-capable set even if they don't plan to watch anything in 3-D rightaway, especially as prices continue to come down.
For instance, the original list price for a 2009 55-inch LED TVfrom Samsung was $3,999.99, while the company's 2010 3-D LED TV ofthe same size is listed at $3,299.99.
Glasses add to the cost, starting at $149 each, although thecompany is offering two pairs for free with certain purchases.
Mark Francisco, an engineering expert from Comcast, said thateventually 3-D technology will evolve so glasses aren't needed, butthat could take 10 years.
