What do you think about 3D? Do you like it? Hate it? Think it's better than 4K?

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

Please provide a link to the study and documentation that supports this generalized statement.

And after you've done that, please explain to me what your point is considering that consumers are not buying Blu-rays at the same rate that they bought DVDs during the same timeframe.

In this forum, I've done it several times, including graphs and charts. I really don't want to do it again. I've covered ticket sales, for theatrical releases; and equipment sales, along with Blu 3D releases. It appears that statements of fact are equated with attacks against the world of 3D itself, which is the exact opposite of what I'm thinking.

I'll ask not to think I'm giving you the elbow, here. I can easily show the data; you can find it with a bit of research. I'm asking for the reasons behind the data, and my motivation for my interest is suspect, along with my penchant for needling people who dwell on the tree, instead of the forest.

My point is simple: Equating prior technology rates of adoption, and resistance to widescale adoption, should be the very reason savvy marketers have a road map to avoid the same pitfalls. They haven't. Why? It's an industry of multi-billion dollar, recurring revenue - what the heck is the problem? I think you've identified a tiny portion of it, not the overall motivating factor, and one that is easily overcome - the "stick in the mud" factor of electronic Luddites. I don't think that's it. If it is, it's industry-driven, since it's not hard to sell people on something good.

I'd rather start there in the discussion, if possible.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

how do cheap tickets compare to expensive new equipment? IF the argument is people where buying tickets for sound and colour when they where new then the reality is that people are now buying tickets for 3D presentations if that was not true there would not be this discussion.

They're not a quick to buy 3D tickets as they were, back in the day. It's really expensive. Our Little League baseball coach took us to the movies after a Saturday game; I did the same with my Scouts, every couple of months. Nowadays, a $6 kids matinee ticket costs $3 more for 3D; spread that across 20 kids, and now it's an issue. I really don't know what ticket prices were between color, and black and white, back in the day, or if there ever was one.

The point is access to the medium. For theaters, it's steep. I have frequently heard from people that unless everyone in the family is hot for some movie, they pick the 2D option over 3D, based on tight money alone. This limits 3D, and in previous posts, I showed the delta (along with explanatory graphs) showing how 3D was affecting overall revenue - based on the cost of 3D. Hype aside, it's an issue, and very little of the industry's overall output is in the medium. If it paid for itself handily, you'd see a lot more of it. Perhaps (hopefully soon) we will.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Now as for TVs and players and receivers most people don't buy new ones every day so if they are not ready to replace their stuff it does not matter if they are not buying 3D stuff and there is not a day every few years when everyone buys new equipment in order to coordinate stuff. So if Joe is buying something new and it is 3D good for Joe and if Frank is keeping his old stuff for another year good for Frank.

If any of my stuff quits on me, I'll replace it with 3D equipment. I toyed with the idea of getting a 400 disc player from Sony, but it wasn't 3D; I dithered, and they pulled it off the market. The reason is pretty apparent - it wasn't 3D, and Sony is invested in this thing - so that actually worked out well for me, but again, if a player quits...I will definitely get a single player of some type that's 3D compatible. No glasses or TV, but why fool around? Same with receivers. Or televisions, for that matter.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I can't see how some kid back in 39 going 20 times to see GWTW because it was 39 and there was nothing else to do means some guy today needs to buy 20 3DTVs so the rate is the same.

You're right, that's not valid. But the sea change in viewing habits changed twice - broadcast media in the 1950's, and recording capability (live and pre-recorded) in the 1970's. Those were the real changes since the early 30's, and everything else is just refinements. Stunning refinements, perhaps, but just refinements.

[amandadun]

It seems there are many negative opinions about 3D movies being released these days, especially with the higher cost at the box office and how expensive the tvs and glasses are. I'm surprised to see so many people with 3D televisions on the forums.

What are your opinions on the matter? Are there really benefits to 3D versus regular movies, or is it an annoying gimmick?

Cheers - Amanda

[Captain Jack]

We nitpick on here, but get the wrong idea, 3D is still pretty darn awesome, I think a lot of us know the potential that is there in 3D so want to see 3D excel. If we see a bad conversion or a native production that is not shot with TLC, we will pick it apart, but when it does all come together, it's pretty darn mind-blowing, doesn't get better than a good 3D title.

[Gae]

It depends on the film. When a 3D film is done properly and shot natively with a good parallax I love it and it really adds to the movie experience. Unfortunately, when a 3D movie has a shallow depth and doesn't immerse me, or when it is a conversion (both good and bad as I don't wan't them to replace native) I'd rather watch a full resolution 2D version because I get annoyed when a film is labelled 3d and its a poor attempt at it. With today's technology, there's no excuse to make a bad 3D film unless you are just a poor film-maker or have no idea of how 3D should really look. So I'd rather sit happily watching a 2D film than watching a poorly done 3D movie and stewing over how bad it is.

So...

Great 3D....love it and I want to see more.

Poor 3D (or a conversion) ...prefer to just stick to 2D.

Gae

[EricJ]

I remember watching an old demonstration film for HDTV that explained how people reacted when RCA first introduced color television:
Even if Bonanza or Disney or Ed Sullivan were broadcasting in color, you could still watch TV in B/W, but if your neighbor had just gotten one of those new color sets...WOW!

The metaphor worked perfectly for seeing football or PBS in hi-def for the first time, now it's TV we take for granted.
It's the same thing with 3D Blu: You could watch Avatar in 2D, just as you could watch it on a B/W set, but if your set could play 3D, why shouldn't it?

[AutomaticDriver]

Originally Posted by Gae

It depends on the film. When a 3D film is done properly and shot natively with a good parallax I love it and it really adds to the movie experience. Unfortunately, when a 3D movie has a shallow depth and doesn't immerse me, or when it is a conversion (both good and bad as I don't wan't them to replace native) I'd rather watch a full resolution 2D version because I get annoyed when a film is labelled 3d and its a poor attempt at it. With today's technology, there's no excuse to make a bad 3D film unless you are just a poor film-maker or have no idea of how 3D should really look. So I'd rather sit happily watching a 2D film than watching a poorly done 3D movie and stewing over how bad it is.

So...

Great 3D....love it and I want to see more.

Poor 3D (or a conversion) ...prefer to just stick to 2D.

Gae

You do realize that even Native 3D films have some converted scenes.

[ObiWanShinobi]

To me, 3D films with pop-out effects are fun and can add a sense of immersion. Avatar 3D, A Very Harold and Kumar Christmas 3D, and Legend of the Guardians 3D are not only fun to watch in 3D but at times jaw dropping in the way things pop off the screen in incredible "reach out and touch" detail.

Then there are some 3D films that have zero pop-out effects and focus more on added a sense of depth. Some do it well and handle the sense of depth perfectly given whats being seen up close and off in the distance and when done right it makes the movie interesting to watch/look at. Its a more modest form of immersion in my opinion but i enjoy it. When its handled wrong its a disaster though...it can make some movies look downright awful. One film that I constantly refer to when it comes to "bad 3D" is Thor 3D. Its not only awful use of 3D but it makes the ENTIRE picture look like crap save for some daylight scenes.

If I were to rate 3D as whole right now, given what movies are out that use it on a scale of 1 to 10 I'd rate it a strong 7 with tons of future potential.

[Gae]

Originally Posted by 3DForLife

You do realize that even Native 3D films have some converted scenes.

Well, unless its laden with special effects, then it shouldn't be really. I understand that films like Transformers have to be both native and converted of course because of the amount of effects but there's no reason for all live action not to be shot natively though.

Personally, I wish more ordinary, non special effect movies were made in 3D too. I think it would really add to the drama....people walking down streets or even just walking down coridoors and into buildings...it looks great in 3D. For me, 3D is all about depth and immersion and feeling closer to the drama.

Gae

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by ObiWanShinobi

If I were to rate 3D as whole right now, given what movies are out that use it on a scale of 1 to 10 I'd rate it a strong 7 with tons of future potential.

For those who haven't read the "International 3D Awards" thread, just look at what wins for getting shown on broadcast/satellite TV in other countries:

Electronic Broadcast Media (Television) - Entertainment: Fields of Valor: Civil War (3net)
Electronic Broadcast Media (Television) - Live Event: Ayumi Harmasaki: Arena Tour (Sony Japan)
Electronic Broadcast Media (Television) – Ad/Commercial: Best Buy 3D
Electronic Broadcast Media (Television) – Short: Foster the People - Don’t Stop (Digital Revolution Studios)
Electronic Broadcast Media (Television) - Live Sports: Champions League Final (BSkyB)

International “Jury Prizes” were presented to:
KT Skylife (Korea) – 3D Microspace
NHK (Japan) – The Great Eastern Japan Earthquake and Tsunami
Nippon Television (Japan) – 3D Baseball Live

The grudge-carrying ticket-whiners have rendered the US so 3D-illiterate compared to other countries right now, it hurts.

[AutomaticDriver]

Originally Posted by Gae

Well, unless its laden with special effects, then it shouldn't be really. I understand that films like Transformers have to be both native and converted of course because of the amount of effects but there's no reason for all live action not to be shot natively though.

Personally, I wish more ordinary, non special effect movies were made in 3D too. I think it would really add to the drama....people walking down streets or even just walking down coridoors and into buildings...it looks great in 3D. For me, 3D is all about depth and immersion and feeling closer to the drama.

Gae

I feel the same way.

[Gae]

Another reason that 3D would be great for ordinary dramas is that it works better with slower paced shots. So with this type of film, with less cuts we would enjoy looking around the environment a bit more, soaking up the depth and feeling more a part of the on-screen action.

I wrote a short article on this recently...The Psychology of 3D and Movies

Gae

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by Captain Jack

We nitpick on here, but get the wrong idea, 3D is still pretty darn awesome, I think a lot of us know the potential that is there in 3D so want to see 3D excel. If we see a bad conversion or a native production that is not shot with TLC, we will pick it apart, but when it does all come together, it's pretty darn mind-blowing, doesn't get better than a good 3D title.

Well said.

I personally love seeing things in strong, unmistakable 3D.
For those who dismiss 3D as a gimmick, close one eye if you see with two eyes, and keep it closed the rest of your life. Then come back and say three dimensional sight is a gimmick. As my signature suggests, the glasses are the only gimmick. Just as if you had to put on special lenses to see a movie in color instead of black and white, or had to wear head phones to listen to the sound on a movie all the time.
A pain in the @ss for most people, but I don't mind personally with battery free glasses. And many don't mind with the battery ones either for the HD advantage offered.

3D is one of the last features to conquer in terms of replicating our 5 senses onto a TV 'screen'. Think about the future. 3D will be as natural as stereo surround sound, color TV, moving images and digital photographs are now.

It's sad how the mainstream dismisses 3D just cause you have to wear lightweight glasses (most passive 3DTV's allow the use of the real D 3D glasses from the theater) for the time being.

But if the growing 3D library is any indication, a turning point might be around the corner for 3DTV.

Sorry for that boring rant.

[Gae]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Well said.

I personally love seeing things in strong, unmistakable 3D.
[B]For those who dismiss 3D as a gimmick, close one eye if you see with two eyes, and keep it closed the rest of your life. Then come back and say three dimensional sight is a gimmick.

Yes Zivouhr. After reading this I just did another test with my eyes...try it everyone.

1) Hold an object (say a pencil) in front of your eyes and close one eye.
2) Take note of where the object is in relation to a background object.
3) Keeping the object still, close that eye and open the other one.
4) Take note of where the object is in relation to the same background object.
Now quickly switch between each eye and note the difference of the position of the object. The separation between each eye is huge isn't it?

Now compare that type of separation with the type we are seeing in a lot of current 3D films and you can see why a lot of the 3D films fail to wow us.

Gae

[Jsmith82]

I love it, pop out effects are fun and all however it's the depth that really seems to add a new sensation to movies for me. A good example would be Sanctum, the scene where they come up on the cave. In 2d, that shot was beautiful and colorful. In 3D, it was still beautiful and colorful but you really got an idea of how big and deep that cave was.

This was for another topic but I captured this image using my cell phone by pausing a movie, holding the phone steady on a book, then taking 2 pictures of the screen - one through each lens of a pair of 3d glasses. This to me was an example of tasteful 3d pop out (cross your eyes and bring the images together):



All in all it is still a growing technology but I love it, so does my wife - once we finish out our basement we're planning on buying a 3D projector to up the anty, figure by that time my son will be 4-5 years old so I'm sure he'll love it. Comes down to personal preference, and I just can't get enough.

The best part and what "it's black or it's white" crowds fail to mention when they start bashing the format is this: You don't have to have it if you don't want it. Don't like 3D? Don't buy 3D!

[hsox05]

Originally Posted by Jsmith82

I love it, pop out effects are fun and all however it's the depth that really seems to add a new sensation to movies for me. A good example would be Sanctum, the scene where they come up on the cave. In 2d, that shot was beautiful and colorful. In 3D, it was still beautiful and colorful but you really got an idea of how big and deep that cave was.

This was for another topic but I captured this image using my cell phone by pausing a movie, holding the phone steady on a book, then taking 2 pictures of the screen - one through each lens of a pair of 3d glasses. This to me was an example of tasteful 3d pop out (cross your eyes and bring the images together):



All in all it is still a growing technology but I love it, so does my wife - once we finish out our basement we're planning on buying a 3D projector to up the anty, figure by that time my son will be 4-5 years old so I'm sure he'll love it. Comes down to personal preference, and I just can't get enough.

The best part and what "it's black or it's white" crowds fail to mention when they start bashing the format is this: You don't have to have it if you don't want it. Don't like 3D? Don't buy 3D!

lol I can't cross my eyes far enough to get the images together. Probably doesn't help that I'm on a widescreen monitor, but nonetheless, it doesnt work for me

To answer the question, I thought everything coming out in the theaters in 3D was annoying... until I got a new TV that happened to be 3D ready. I put a couple of 3D blu-rays on just to check it out, and I've gotten hooked. I'm now in the "Awesome" camp and hope they continue to come out with as many 3d films as possible

[Gae]

Guys, just download StereoPhoto Maker (Google it...it's free) and then you can view any SBS picture in various outputs....the easiest being anaglyph red/cyan glasses of course. Here we go...converted in Stereo PhotoMaker



Gae

[Jsmith82]

Originally Posted by hsox05

lol I can't cross my eyes far enough to get the images together. Probably doesn't help that I'm on a widescreen monitor, but nonetheless, it doesnt work for me

Scoot back

[DualEdge]

Originally Posted by EricJ

For those who haven't read the "International 3D Awards" thread, just look at what wins for getting shown on broadcast/satellite TV in other countries:

Electronic Broadcast Media (Television) - Entertainment: Fields of Valor: Civil War (3net)
Electronic Broadcast Media (Television) - Live Event: Ayumi Harmasaki: Arena Tour (Sony Japan)
Electronic Broadcast Media (Television) – Ad/Commercial: Best Buy 3D
Electronic Broadcast Media (Television) – Short: Foster the People - Don’t Stop (Digital Revolution Studios)
Electronic Broadcast Media (Television) - Live Sports: Champions League Final (BSkyB)

International “Jury Prizes” were presented to:
KT Skylife (Korea) – 3D Microspace
NHK (Japan) – The Great Eastern Japan Earthquake and Tsunami
Nippon Television (Japan) – 3D Baseball Live

I hadn't seen this data previously, but I couldn't agree more with the Ayumi Hamasaki Arena Tour concert. It's my reference demo disc for my home theatre. It's a shame that it is only available in Japan as it really shows the potential for how immersive 3D technology (when done right) can be.

[Grif32]

Its both, it's awesome what they can do with 3d but it's annoying when they put out a crap 3D movie. I feel like a of times they just rush crap out just to cash in the higher prices.

I feel they put out way more crap then they do the good 3D!