jdm56 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Might wanna think twice: http://www.audioholics.com/news/editorials/sony-confirms-3d-eyestrain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rivernuggets Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 After seeing Avatar in 3-D, my head and eyes hurt the rest of the day. Fine during the movie, but afterward - ug! I don't think my brain and 3-D are a good match. Thanks for posting this article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seti Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I'm all in for 3D : ) I've seen 6 new 3D movies with no issues. Next stop hologrpahic movies : ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted July 22, 2010 Moderators Share Posted July 22, 2010 I am going to ignore the whole 3-D thing, I have not even caught up to the whole HDMI or bluray thing yet, only the TV has HDMI and I still don't have bluray, but my DVD player died so........This stuff changes almost as fast as computers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuzzzer Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 My TV is 3-D ready but I'm not in a hurry to try it out. My PS3 just had a firmware upgrade to make it 3-D game and movie compatible so I guess all I need to get are the glasses. One of the new baseball games for the PS3 is available in 3-D which would be interesting to try out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm56 Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 If they ever get a 3D system that does not require glasses and does not cause your eyes to turn purple and explode, then I would be interested. I'm pretty geeky, but just not quite geeky enough for 3D...yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1101 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 When we came out of Avatar in 3D it was late at night and I distinctly remember the oncoming headlights looked odd (overly yellow and bright), and I definitely felt a little weird trying to drive right away. Noticeable, but no big deal really either. We went back 2 nights later and saw it again in 3D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ironsave Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 We saw several cartoons in 3D this year. ("How to train your dragon" is what I remember right now). I had a headache for about an hour afterwards; but nothing too severe. That being said; for me ; the technology has a ways to go in regards to standardization; formats; etc before I would consider such a purchase. (Like a previous poster said; I would like there to be no glasses necessary)..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilbert Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Not my cup of tea either. It was introduced as a gimmic to get people into movie theaters, just as it's a gimmic today for people to go buy another TV. It's got a loooong way to go IMHO before it becomes a regular part of any countries household television. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boxx Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I'm going to drag my feet on this one... no hurry.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JL Sargent Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 It's cheezy, goofy, and cheap looking. I obviously do NOT get it. No way am I going to wear another freakin pair of glasses just to watch a movie in "3-D". To be honest for the past 30 something yrs I've avoided 3-D movies because it reduces the experience IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rivernuggets Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Roger Ebert doesn't think it's a good thing. I like this reason he gives: IT’S THE WASTE OF A DIMENSION. When you look at a 2-D movie, it’s already in 3-D as far as your mind is concerned. When you see Lawrence of Arabia growing from a speck as he rides toward you across the desert, are you thinking, “Look how slowly he grows against the horizon”? Our minds use the principle of perspective to provide the third dimension. Adding one artificially can make the illusion less convincing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. RF62 Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Me either, no 3-D for me. jdm56 has it spot on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Youthman Posted July 22, 2010 Moderators Share Posted July 22, 2010 I have to admit, 3D is pretty cool in Terminator 2 at Universal Studios in Orlando, Fl. It is an interactive experience using real people as well as a huge screen behind the actors. When the guy's hand becomes the Iron Claw and reaches out into the crow, that's pretty cool and is definitely in your face, much more realistic than what a 2D movie can present, even with perspective. With that being said, I had absolutely no desire for 3D in my home, especially if I have to put 3D glasses on to enjoy the 3D experience. It's a fad, a craze and a marketing strategy. It will work for some, but not for this guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrod Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 Hey guys, this is just mildly related to this discussion, but related none the less... The new Nintendo 3DS (handheld gaming/movie system, which comes out next March. It also has a 3D camera, kinda hokey, but could be fun for the kids) features 3D with no glasses, it debuted at E3 this year to some fantastic reviews. Now obviously this is going to be useless for our amazing home theaters, but it should be really cool, nonetheless. And, maybe a little glimpse into the future of what 3D COULD be. Only time will tell. All this said, I will not be buying a 3D television. The cost/benefit ratio is rediculous right now. I'll invest $300 in a 3DS and give that a shot before I drop $3000 on all the equiptment needed for 3D TV. Jrod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seti Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 It's cheezy, goofy, and cheap looking. I obviously do NOT get it. No way am I going to wear another freakin pair of glasses just to watch a movie in "3-D". To be honest for the past 30 something yrs I've avoided 3-D movies because it reduces the experience IMHO. I couldn't disagree more but that is ok. 3D used to be cheezy goofy and cheap looking. The new technology has finally perfected 3D. If you saw avatar on 3D it was damm near Holographic. Not all 3D movies are filmed properly for 3D. Several movies were computer treated to be 3D where as some of the cartoons and Avatar were made for 3D from the onset. The move from colored glasses to polarized was also a very imprtant step. I don't ming wearing them because everything looks so cool. For me 3D is to movies what stereo or surround sound is to audio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JL Sargent Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 Seti, you said "3D is to movies what stereo or surround is to audio". Now for me, stereo and surround make a movie MORE believable or more real. Does 3D do that for you in those movies? I have yet to experience anything real about the 3D movies I have seen. I just got back from Disney World where we watched 3 different 3D movies in the various Disney parks. Bugs life, That lost fish one, and one other I can't think of. None of those were more believable because of it. On the contrary, they were less believable due to the 3D affects. See what I'm saying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted July 23, 2010 Moderators Share Posted July 23, 2010 Seti, I see from your avatar your trying on the glasses, is the triangle on the head required or just part of the outfit ? [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksonbart Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 I am telling you. those that don't go out a buy a 3D TV right this minute are gonna miss out when they release the Blue-Ray version of 'Cat vs. Dogs, the revenge of Kitty Galore' in 3D. I am telling you mark my words that movie will be a game changer for the technology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seti Posted July 24, 2010 Share Posted July 24, 2010 Seti, you said "3D is to movies what stereo or surround is to audio". Now for me, stereo and surround make a movie MORE believable or more real. Does 3D do that for you in those movies? I have yet to experience anything real about the 3D movies I have seen. I just got back from Disney World where we watched 3 different 3D movies in the various Disney parks. Bugs life, That lost fish one, and one other I can't think of. None of those were more believable because of it. On the contrary, they were less believable due to the 3D affects. See what I'm saying? No not really but if everyone saw things the same this would be a very boring world. From my perspective the 3D does look more real. Instead of looking at a flat screen in 3D objects have depth you can see around them. They also come out at you. Avatar and Monsters vs Aliens so far are the best I've seen. It seems more holographic to me than 3D. I've only seen 3D on IMAX screens so I am not sure how that would translate to a smaller tv in the home. I think I would need a 50 inch screen or bigger. I'll have to demo one at some point. Although I hope it would work well I am skeptical. This may explain some of the headaches. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6080XO20100109 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.