3D Movies ... Please no!

Personally I really like 3D, I haven't watched too many - only Christmas Carol and Avatar - but I would definitely gravitate towarRAB the 3D option of the film if there is one.

I never really experienced 3D with the Red and Blue Glasses due to my colour blindness it just resulted in my getting a headache. Now though with the Real D option I can get the benefit as much as everyone else and without a headache.

I don't think 3D makes the overall plot or story of a film better but it did enhance the experience a little.

But since there is always an option to watch either 2D or 3D I don't think anyone should be grumbling just watch the 2D version and let the ones who want to watch 3D watch 3D.
 
I'm not excited by 3D at all. It just doesn't interest me.

And I do worry that good storytelling is going to be sacrified for it in the future.
 
I have very bad sight in one eye, so I was having second thoughts about seeing it in 3D. There was no problems at all. Loved the movie.

Also, to those people who say you have to buy a new pair. When I went to see it they asked me if I already had a pair of 3D glasses and if not it'd cost
 
I saw Avatar today in 3D I thought it was stunning, the polarised 3D system is a huge leap forward from the Red & Green/Blue colour filter system. I doubt it would look that good on a TV though even a really big one, just wish I had an IMAX nearby, Avatar must be astounding in 3D on IMAX.
 
It depenRAB. When I saw Avatar in 3D, the glasses were big enough and substantial enough to fit over regular spectacles comfortably. When I saw A Christmas Carol, they weren't. Also the Avatar glasses had decent plastic lenses whereas the others were more or less grey cellophane. Of course Avatar was the IMAX version with seats at
 
Let's clarify things for the very dim.

3D is now here to stay, because it can be delivered cheaply, can be switched on and off (so everything is backwarRAB compatible) and is now effective and believeable.

The glasses are polarisers, so I would think it won't be too long before prescription 3D specs are available from Vision Express or Specsavers, as 3D-in-the-home take off.

The 3D specs you get in the cinema are usually designed to be worn over your specs if you have any, and if they are small and cheap cellophane, go get your money back from the el-cheapo cinema who are ripping you off.

Imax specs and Real3D specs differ due to IMAX being vertically polarised and REAL3D circularly polarised... BOTH should be large and comfortable.

3D is now here to stay, but those of you who hate it can just stick to 2D and leave the rest of us to enjoy it.
 
Home 3D uses different technology to cinema 3D. The TV screen isn't polarised. Instead it alternates between frames intended for either eye, so all you need from the hardware is a fast refresh rate. This means the glasses have to be active; they contain batteries and sensors to blank out each eye in turn, in sync with the TV. So the glasses are relatively expensive. I do hope we'll be able to get them with prescription lenses.

(The expense of the glasses means it is important they are standardised. You'll need to take your own 3D glasses to watch your friend's 3D TV, because he probably won't spend the money to have spare pairs.)
 
some of the new 3D TVs(such as the ones that were used for the SKY HD football match last weekend) use polarised glasses as Real D 3D have been working with all the major players to make sure their glasses work,not daft really considering each tv will have a subsidy on it that goes to Real D
 
Quite. The LCD shutter method is just one of the options. I can't see it being the final option due to the cost and the format incompatibilities.
 
Back
Top