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

[Red's got the Blu's]

Originally Posted by FreyTheater3D

Lol! For me it is a real chore to watch movies in 2D anymore - my arm gets really tired holding my hand up over one eye through an entire 2-hour movie...

Originally Posted by Jsmith82

This is spot on - you rich dummies!

I always knew I was dumb but when did I become rich?

[Jsmith82]

Originally Posted by Red in 3D

I always knew I was dumb but when did I become rich?

True story, I'm lower middle class and LOVE my 3d television.

I'm pretty dumb though, at least after a few beers. Can't argue that one

[Big3dfan]

Originally Posted by GunZenBomZ

Let's see you need a 3D reciever, 3D player + display (prefer projectors myself). Then you have to go down the dilema of which 3d type passive/active, then which is more expensive to buy glasses for..ow the joy.
[I]

WRONG !

You dont need a 3D receiver

You dont need a 3D player if you were smart enough to buy a PS3 for gaming

Only thing you need is a frigging awesome PJ like Epson 3010 which goes for $1299 on amazon on some lucky days

You dont need to be rich

You are right only one area....yes we are some dumb a$$es because for some reason the 3D industry cheated us into thinking that 3D is awesome. I think its some kind of mass hypnotism !

[Gae]

QUESTION: Do you think 3D is Good?

ANSWER: When done properly...Yes.

Next question please.

Gae

[Uniquely]

I think it's just ok, but my wife really loves it. She swears up and down that it really helps with a particular eye problem she has, and that watching 3d movies is much less strain on her eyes. I'll take it because it's the most excited she's ever been about my lil HT.

[Nommag]

Originally Posted by Uniquely

I think it's just ok, but my wife really loves it. She swears up and down that it really helps with a particular eye problem she has, and that watching 3d movies is much less strain on her eyes. I'll take it because it's the most excited she's ever been about my lil HT.

I read somewhere as well that if you have a lazy eye it can get it up and running again. Sounds good to me

[Uniquely]

Originally Posted by Nommag

I read somewhere as well that if you have a lazy eye it can get it up and running again. Sounds good to me

That is pretty much what she has, although it is usually only noticeable when she is very tired or has had too much to drink. Her optic nerve was damaged due to a vitamin deficiency caused by prolonged gall bladder illness. It hasn't improved the condition at all, but she does say that she doesn't have to "work" so hard to see the 3D images. I think the active shutter glasses play a large role and doubt she would get the same experience from passive 3D. She never noticed such an effect at the theater.

[Uniquely]

Originally Posted by Big3dfan

WRONG !


You dont need a 3D player if you were smart enough to buy a PS3 for gaming

!

You do realize that not everyone is a gamer, and that not every gamer wants a PS3. Right? Neither makes a person stupid.

[Big3dfan]

Originally Posted by Uniquely

You do realize that not everyone is a gamer, and that not every gamer wants a PS3. Right? Neither makes a person stupid.

You dont need to be a gamer to pick PS3 as the most versatile Bluray player, especially when its now selling at dirt cheap prices compared to 5 years ago. The fact that Sony can keep updating it via FW is simply brilliant.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by PaniqL

Do you think 3D is Good

Well, wait, let's define our vague terms, here--
When you say "good", do you mean "Good", as in, the higher, more noble aspirations of man in his pursuit to find a place with his fellow man and his larger meaning and purpose in the universe?

In that case, yes.

Personally i dont really like 3D. Its not exactly 3D and it fells weird wearing glasses.

(Really?...Didn't think it would, to you. )

[FREYMAX 3D]

Originally Posted by Nommag

I read somewhere as well that if you have a lazy eye it can get it up and running again. Sounds good to me

Well, due to my age I have something else that is lazy, and if 3D can "get it up" and running again, I'm all in!!

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by Big3dfan

WRONG !

You dont need a 3D receiver

You dont need a 3D player if you were smart enough to buy a PS3 for gaming

Only thing you need is a frigging awesome PJ like Epson 3010 which goes for $1299 on amazon on some lucky days

You dont need to be rich

You are right only one area....yes we are some dumb a$$es because for some reason the 3D industry cheated us into thinking that 3D is awesome. I think its some kind of mass hypnotism !

If your receiver isn't 3d compatible and you want to be able to enjoy lossless audio as well as 3d, then you do need to buy a new receiver, unless you buy a blu-ray player with twin hdmi outputs, which the ps3 doesn't have.

[tom pain]

Originally Posted by Gae

QUESTION: Do you think 3D is Good?

ANSWER: When done properly...Yes.

Next question please.

Gae

This really. Good 3D can really add a movie. Bad 3D almost ruins the experience for me. I'd much rather 2D over poor 3D.

[Uniquely]

Originally Posted by Big3dfan

You dont need to be a gamer to pick PS3 as the most versatile Bluray player, especially when its now selling at dirt cheap prices compared to 5 years ago. The fact that Sony can keep updating it via FW is simply brilliant.

You can get 3D blu-ray player with built in wifi and streaming services and other apps not even available on the PS3 for $90 these days. If you aren't a gamer... it would make no sense whatsoever to pay more than twice as much for a PS3. Not hating the PS3... mine was a good player until it died... but the three standalones I have bought since then are as good or better; and were much cheaper.

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by BJKH

I didn't like 3D movies in till I watched Hugo 3D in the theatres. After I watched it I started to see the potential that 3D has. I watched MIB 3 in 3D too and it was really cool. But when I watched Star Wars: TPM in 3D, I was really disappointed. I guess its a hit or miss with 3D.

Agree 100% about the 3D in those movies. With Lucas, he approved that level of weaker 3D, probably for budgetary reasons more than anything else, as he clearly knew what Avatar 3D looked like, being one of his inspirations to convert Star Wars. (for the record, I'm a big Lucas Star Wars fan, flaws and all).

MIB3 looked really good for a conversion, great pop to many layers so they're not flat on top of each other as with many SW I 3D shots.

Hugo 3D filmed in 3D looked outstanding for 3D.

But yeah, too many movies don't take enough chances with the 3D and just play it safe. That alone can kill the enthusiasm for 3D movies, getting burned each time a non 3D fan goes to see a movie and is disappointed with the 3D not even worth wearing glasses for.

Lesson? 3D stereopgraphers/filmmakers need to make strong 3D, not weak "3D" that looks more 2D than anything.

3DTVs are great when the right, strong 3D movie is being played.

[i007spectre]

Just watched Hugo so yes it definitely is.

[Taygan315]

As others have mentioned, if the 3D is done right and is strong 3D (rather than subtle), 3D is AWESOME. I am getting a bit tired of seeing half ass conversions however. These conversions hurt 3D and the adaptation of 3D tv's in homes,imo.
If you want the masses to come, release more 3D movies with great quality 3D such as Hugo, A Christmas Carol, Drive Angry, Avatar, Tangled, Resident Evil: Afterlife, and Ultimate Wave: Tahiti.

[Dnsmills]

Am I the only one that thinks the OP was trolling?

BTW FWIW, I love 3D. Except the fact I've spent WAY to much $ the past few months buying up 3D movies.

[MikeCL]

I would like 3D more if it was not like $2000 for a 3D projector.. so for the time being I think I might just stick with the 42" 3d TV.

[Wormow]

I don't mind 3D, used to love it when I was younger but nowadays I prefer 2D over 3D. I find that it takes away some of the color and brightness with the glasses on.