"Why 3D doesnt Work"

[M8Tty1694]

personally i agree i think 3d is a waste of time i can understand its use in 3d imax's but i dont believe it should become soething you have in your home like these new 3d TV's 3d is ok in an imax as the atmosphere is great but 3d at home is pointless and annoying

 

[Tinalera]

I've been working with 3d for many years now, and have a lot of experience with it in the lab, so I was a bit confused by all the talk about how 3d was no good, or didn't add that much.

So I went to a theater and watched Resident Evil: apocalypse

Now, I understand.

When I got my first VR headset, the 3d didn't seem to work well, I was pretty dissapointed. I had to dial the depth down to super shallow, where the 3d effect was at it's weakest. At that point, it seemed almost pointless. I probably would have just taken off the glasses right there and walked away from 3d, but I had just spent a bunch of money on it (well for that time) and couldn't give up that easy.

So I kept using the 3d glasses a few hours a day. I kept messing with the depth settings, and noticed that over a week, I could set the depth higher and higher and still see clearly. At about 2 weeks of multi hour daily use, I could dial it up to 100% depth and see clearly.

Highways in driving simulators stretched out forever into the distance, 3d models looked like you could reach into the screen and touch them. The feeling of immersion was spectacular.

For a movie theater, they have to dial down convergence to where anyone can see it clearly the first 5 minutes you watch. This is why your theater screen looks 70 feet wide and 1 foot deep.

Once you are acclimatized to seeing 3d, and you can set convergence for YOUR eyes (only) you can get some really amazing depth effects that are light years beyond what the current theatrical movies are showing.

And that's a big part of it: no two pairs of eyes are going to be the same as far as adjustments-which is going to make for a challenge for attempted "non glasses" 3D TV's-what make work for one may not work for another, and there's going to be adjustments for each person for their eyesight for the screen.

And for a big movie screen, perhaps that's what may need to be done-everyone has "adjustable" 3D viewer headsets to get the proper effect- but as you said, it took you 2 weeks for the "full" adjustment-hard to do that for a 1 time 2 hour movie.

 

[voodoogmr]

I can definitely see both sides of this. The first few 3D movies I saw in theaters just didn't do much for me. But after Avatar, I started to see the potential. My wife still hates all 3D. It gives her a headache.

I recently bought a 3DTV. Only got it since it was on sale and was the same price as the 2D version. I decided to get one pair of glasses so I could at least try it out. I've been very impressed with it. It's actually better than what I've seen in a theater. Very bright, crisp, and tons of detail. Sure, some content exhibits some "ghosting," but movies like Resident Evil: Apocalypse look incredible. Noticeably better than in a theater. And while the glasses are certainly heavier, they are actually more comfortable to me than the ones in theaters.

Of course, it is clear that there is some content that is poorly made, like some of the 3D concerts they show on the DirecTV 3D channels. Those look like 2D-converted-to-3D stuff. Kinda hard to watch.

But so far, the place where 3D really shines is in video games. Games like Super Stardust HD and Motorstorm: Pacific Rift on the PS3 in 3D are jaw-dropping. Other games, like Killzone 3 and WipEout HD, didn't look very good at all. Quality certainly varies.

Just don't form an opinion of 3DTVs just by seeing demos in a brightly-lit store. For 3D to really look good, you need to darken the room, which is how I watch movies anyway.

Yeah, I could easily live without 3D, but I certainly have new respect for it after seeing it at home. Now, I'll be curious to see how the Nintendo 3DS handheld game system looks later this month. It doesn't use glasses.

 

[rockerrockstar]

I thought Avatar 2d looked better because the colors were brighter. The 3d glasses made everything darker in the theater. 3d was a cool effect but more of a gimmic then something to really make the movie better. I still think the reason Avatar was so successful was not the 3d but the story and the visuals. Avatar also had James Cameron and some pretty great actors on board to boot.

I started watchingin 3d tell it started making me feel motion sick. I enjoyed 2d more in the theater because the colors looked better and I did not feel sick while watching it. I also felt the 3d stuff just distracted from the movie is some regards.