yep
overrated
fad
hologram is the next, just like star wars

I worry about it when they say it is bad for kids eye development if they watch it too much.
And that was a from a manufacturer of 3D TVs (Sony?) who have a great interest in selling the product obviously.

Yes I hope so , because I just bought a really cheap tv non 3d

There's only a couple movies in 3D. I find it adds a little extra... I saw The Lion King 3D the other day, it was good.

I play WipeOut in 3D (PS3), offers more immersion.

Harold and Kumar in 3D was good.

Yes really HATE the 3D movies
what is the point of having super huge mega wide screen at the cinema, when all you get is the crystal ball like image focus point in the middle and every thing else fuzzy around the edges.
2D is actually more real life as you can focus on any point and see a clear image so you actually see more of the movie and whats going on in the back ground.

Interesting tech but not worth the hype

A lot of the movies also still use old fashioned cinematography which cuts between wide shots and close-ups every few seconds. That gives me a headache.

3D movie technologies are not all the same.
You guys understand that there are two types of 3D technology right?

'Active 3D' = glasses with batteries; the glasses are powered to blank out each eye successively, in synch with a film that is projected in two different images alternately (ie- switching back and forth between two different images- one for each eye).

If the synch between the glasses and the projected images is off slightly or the batteries in the glasses are getting flat, then you will experience flickering which may give headaches.
Also, at home you can't really watch an 'Active 3D' movie with the curtains open or lights on, as you will also get the 'flicker effect'.

So IMO, 'Active 3D' is the inferior product. It just sucks.

On the other hand there is 'Passive 3D'.
'Passive 3D' = no batteries.
The movie is played as two images, one for each eye, at the same time and each image is projected in a different polarization; the glasses have a different polarization in each lens, which means each lens only lets through the image meant for each eye.
Therefore, there is no flicker or degradation of image quality at all.
You get the full 3D effect over your whole view, there is no 'sweet spot', your whole field of vision takes in the 3D.

'Passive 3D' is the far superior product, and there are now tvs on the market which use the same passive technology as the cinemas do = no expensive glasses and batteries to buy, ever.

If you are watching 3D movies with battery powered glasses, switch cinemas or get a tv that has the passive technology.
'Active 3D' is crap.


Now as for movies, well there needs to be a lot more development in the way movies are created for 3D, some are movies that were made in 2D and then converted for 3D, which is no good.
Other movies that were made for 3D still have a lot to develop as far as the use of the camera shots etc, to take full advantage of the medium.
The 3D movie industry needs to be given a chance to develop properly and mature- if we shut down everything that wasn't a raging success at the onset, we'd not be flying around in airplanes today, as well as many other things.

The best 3D movie to take advantage of the medium is Avatar, I don't care that the story was wildly unoriginal, the effects and the way the movie was made for 3D was freaking awesome.
If you didn't see it at the movies with 'Passive 3D', you missed out.

FlySurfer said...

GreenGriff said...

Yes really HATE the 3D movies
what is the point of having super huge mega wide screen at the cinema, when all you get is the crystal ball like image focus point in the middle and every thing else fuzzy around the edges.
2D is actually more real life as you can focus on any point and see a clear image so you actually see more of the movie and whats going on in the back ground.

Interesting tech but not worth the hype

Cinemas suck anyway, salty popcorn, people, more people, and even more people coughing and spluttering, crap on the screen, reflections from lights, spot lights beaming down on you... and 3D doesn't make that any better, SPECIALLY if you sit too close.
You don't have a 3D TV, do you?

My TV is crystal clear and Avatar 3D and Tron looks awesomely crisp and detailed.
With the latest firmware I also have 0 crosstalk.

Those who have a decent 3D TV, eg: Samsung 55D8000, Panasonic TH-P55VT30A, Elite Pro 60X5FD, please explain to those trying to wind/kitesurf on a boogie board, what the real experience is like... only marginally better

Passive 3D is gay, lame low res BS, and for poor people... LG uses it on their Big W TV's.
Active 3D is IMAX flicky 3D, and batteries run out when you need them... or you borrow the battery for your car key. And the Mrs did manage to break the screen on one of the glasses though.

Is it a fad? No, it's just a standard feature these days that adds a little to the right movie.

BTW: for the Home Theatre folk here, get your TV calibrated... I have a Spyder4Elite and it made a HUGE (5%) difference in contrast, clarity and colour of the material coming from my HTPC... prior to that I was sure my TV looked awesome, and I even followed the settings from a professional TV reviewer.

But what is your 3D system?
Active or Passive?
Are you wearing battery operated glasses or glasses without batteries?

It has to be one or the other doesn't it?
Or doesn't your system require glasses?

Oh yeah baby, what I've been waiting 7 years for...

bought a 60 inch plasma lg 3d hdmi smart tv for 1350$ today misses made me get one ....Spent half a day chancing it but that was the cheapest. The pixels and stuff on the latest 4,000$ tv's move quicker than the eye can see.

http://dicksmith.com.au/product/GE6644/lg-60-quot-3d-full-high-definition-plasma-tv-60pz570
If you pick one up for a better price post it here and give a reference !!! It a good bargaining chip.

oceanfire said...

FlySurfer said...

lots of superior sounding stuff

But what is your 3D system?
Active or Passive?
Are you wearing battery operated glasses or glasses without batteries?

It has to be one or the other doesn't it?
Or doesn't your system require glasses?

Also curious, as could be in the market for a 3D tv soon (despite my whinge above )

GreenPat said...

oceanfire said...

FlySurfer said...

lots of superior sounding stuff

But what is your 3D system?
Active or Passive?
Are you wearing battery operated glasses or glasses without batteries?

It has to be one or the other doesn't it?
Or doesn't your system require glasses?

Also curious, as could be in the market for a 3D tv soon (despite my whinge above )

Whatever it is it is HEAPS better than ours (and we're stupid).

FlySurfer said...
769kWh! Lol.

Plasma TVs are basically space heaters with moving pictures on 1 side.

the glasses switch off everytime you switch channel Its overated.

Big thumbs up for 3d tv (just watch an i max underwater doco.)