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

[eclimax13]

i bought 3d simply to get the current best 2d picture at a lower price by selling all the goodies they gave me with it...a nice $600 back from selling the movies, glasses, and blu ray player gave me the 58vt25 for $1900...THANKS 3D!!!!!!...you served your purpose well

[RallyCat]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Thank you......

I don't see why it's so hard for some people to realize that people aren't interested in something that has already failed twice in the past..... it has nothing to do with the cost.

Some day perhaps the only thing available will be 3D televisions, and if that's the case, I won't buy the glasses because I don't care to watch things in 3D....

If the Set comes with glasses, I won't pay extra for the movies because I don't care to see them in 3D

If the movies come as 3D/2D combo packs only..... I simply won't watch the 3D version.....

I just don't care for the "effect" You can tell me it's "realistic" all you want.... but I don't care for 3D in the theater, I don't care for it at home, I think those IMAX presentations are silly.




7 movies..... that's better than I could do, because I haven't seen one available in 3D yet that I would want to own (although maybe that Despicable Me movie for my kids....we'll see)

And you say anaglyph 3D was a fad because the technology was "limited" but you're saying the current one isn't????? Based on the fact that there is a need for glasses (let-alone the health warnings) I'd say it qualifies as 'limited'

It's pretty bad when I can't watch a movie with my 3 year old because he can't keep the glasses on his head, and there are warnings against children viewing it to begin with....

I wear sunglasses when it's bright out..... it's necessary to protect my eyes, but I agree, I don't think wearing the glasses is "that" big of a deal.... it's not to me, but I know to many it is, especially those who already need/wear glasses.

Limited in the fact that the two different coloured filtered lenses, red and cyan didn't do that great a job at cancelling out the other image, resulting in a blurred picture. Also the two different coloured filters over each eye distorted colours as well. Today's 3D corrects those limitations, making it a more viable viewing option.

I don't believe these "health warnings" for 3D viewing. What next, a health warning on a View-Master? Everyday life is 3D but do people walk around with an eye patch on one eye because they prefer viewing in 2D? I can understand if the glasses are a bother or if one is overly sensitive to them, but to say you don't want depth in your photos - that I don't get. Or to even say you don't like 3D in a 3D forum - It's like going to a hockey game and telling everyone around you that you don't like the sport.

2D is fine and my majority of TV viewing is 2D, but I'm one that enjoys 3D now and again. Watching a lot of 2D actually makes those 3D viewings more enjoyable.

As for a 3 year old, someone that young, 2D is all they need. My 4 1/2 year old niece tried on the 3D glasses. She understood what she was seeing - how things appeared to come towards her. But she didn't wear the glasses long and I think she's just too young to begin with to really appreciate what she's seeing - the reason for the glasses and so on. For kids, 2D is all they need.

I'm also a glasses wearer myself and I don't mind the added 3D glasses for the duration of a film.

[Uniquely]

Originally Posted by NewOrder79

This thread is great it sounds like a bunch of people that can't afford a 3D tv so they have to put it down to make themselves feel better. I mean almost all the new tvs have a 3D option whats wrong with throwing on the glasses once in a while and i don't EVER believe glassless 3D will give you the same effect the glasses will. EVER! Because without glasses the 3D effect will not give you the "IMMERSEVE" felling.

I have a 3D ready tv already... and I can certainly afford the glasses and blu-ray player. I just don't care to get them. The only 3D that I've seen that ever gave me that "wow" feeling was in an IMAX theater. I was so excited to see Avatar in 3D at the (non-IMAX) theater, because I hadn't seen 3D (other than IMAX) since Jaws 3 back in the early 80's I think. I couldn't wait to see how much of an improvement had been made in 3D tech since then. I was also thinking this may be what spurs me to go ahead and get the glasses and the 3D blu-ray player. If it had come even close to the IMAX experience for me... I would have loved it and probably made all the tech improvements needed to bring it into the home.... but for me personally it was just meh. I found it distracting and by about 30 minutes in I was thinking how much more I would have enjoyed the move in 2D.

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by robinandtami

I have a 3D ready tv already... and I can certainly afford the glasses and blu-ray player. I just don't care to get them. The only 3D that I've seen that ever gave me that "wow" feeling was in an IMAX theater. I was so excited to see Avatar in 3D at the (non-IMAX) theater, because I hadn't seen 3D (other than IMAX) since Jaws 3 back in the early 80's I think. I couldn't wait to see how much of an improvement had been made in 3D tech since then. I was also thinking this may be what spurs me to go ahead and get the glasses and the 3D blu-ray player. If it had come even close to the IMAX experience for me... I would have loved it and probably made all the tech improvements needed to bring it into the home.... but for me personally it was just meh. I found it distracting and by about 30 minutes in I was thinking how much more I would have enjoyed the move in 2D.

I'm not saying that your imax 3d experience wasn't better, but depending on how long it was before u last saw anything in 3d at imax when sitting down to watch 3d at the cinemas could have made a difference to your opinion. Often we remember things being better than what they were when comparing something from a while ago to now. For example, my dad's wife bought a brand new dyson vacuum cleaner about a year ago, she thought it was a good product but 2nd best compared to some hoover vacuum cleaner which she bought 20 years before. Now I'm not saying that her old hoover wasn't better, but I do believe that she remembered it being better than what it really was. I also believe exactly the same thing happens when some people see a blu-ray movie but think the dvd looks the same, because quite often its been a while since they have seen the movie on dvd, and they think they remember it looking the same when it doesn't.

[Uniquely]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

I'm not saying that your imax 3d experience wasn't better, but depending on how long it was before u last saw anything in 3d at imax when sitting down to watch 3d at the cinemas could have made a difference to your opinion. Often we remember things being better than what they were when comparing something from a while ago to now. For example, my dad's wife bought a brand new dyson vacuum cleaner about a year ago, she thought it was a good product but 2nd best compared to some hoover vacuum cleaner which she bought 20 years before. Now I'm not saying that her old hoover wasn't better, but I do believe that she remembered it being better than what it really was. I also believe exactly the same thing happens when some people see a blu-ray movie but think the dvd looks the same, because quite often its been a while since they have seen the movie on dvd, and they think they remember it looking the same when it doesn't.

That effect certainly exists, but I don't think it's the case here. The IMAX experience I had was an undersea film, and I remember the effect ofgoing through a giant seaweed forest being so realistic, I literally put my hand up to keep the seaweed from hitting me in the face. Avatar had nowhere near that level of realism for me. Who knows.... it Avatar and the new 3D tech hadn't been so overhyped, I may have had a different reaction to it... but as it stands, it was a big let down for me.

[synergy]

Originally Posted by eclimax13

i bought 3d simply to get the current best 2d picture at a lower price by selling all the goodies they gave me with it...a nice $600 back from selling the movies, glasses, and blu ray player gave me the 58vt25 for $1900...THANKS 3D!!!!!!...you served your purpose well

I sold Avatar and am selling the Bluray 3D player (I have a PS3) to help subsidize my VT25. But I am keeping the glasses since I do watch 3D stuff on occasion.

[littlechesney]

What is starting to bother me is the change in direction. It used to be and 3D where available. Now it is moving in the direction of in 2D in selected theatres. Iv seen it on the trailer for Thor and that was also the case for Green Hornet it wasn't in 2D at my local Cineworld.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOddp...feature=relmfu

[koover]

Originally Posted by littlechesney

What is starting to bother me is the change in direction. It used to be and 3D where available. Now it is moving in the direction of in 2D in selected theatres. Iv seen it on the trailer for Thor and that was also the case for Green Hornet it wasn't in 2D at my local Cineworld.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOddp...feature=relmfu

Wow, that's the first time I've seen that. As much as I love 3D, I sure don't want to have that choice taken from me. I don't go to the movies a whole lot anymore except for seeing the so called blockbusters. But when I do, I want to be able to make a choice.
Hopefully this is one of those isolated incidents and not the future.

[bluflu]

I had forgotten all about this thread. I saw "Smackdown" in the topic's title and thought SmackDown wrestling in 3D had been announced!

Wow, a measly 7 post since the beginning of the year. Guess everyone has come to terms and has accepted 3D as the future.

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by bluflu

Wow, a measly 7 post since the beginning of the year. Guess everyone has come to terms and has accepted 3D as the future.

Not me! I like good ol' fashioned 1080p 2D.

I'm not sure that 3D is the wave of the future, but with 3D available on almost all new HT products, I think that soon, 3D will not even be an option. It will be included, whether you want it, or not.

So I guess I was wrong, it is the wave of the future!

[etype55]

What a bunch of grumps.

I don't understand the poop parade saturating the 3D forums. I prefer mayo, I don't like mustard and I will NEVER stalk the culinary forums criticizing those that do. If you've done that about 3D, I'm here to inform you that its bizarre behavior.

In my opinion and according to the sales figures, 3DTV is NOT a fad. This time, its here to stay. And I'm absolutely confident in that because I've been watching my Panny VT25 for a couple of months now. If, after watching quality 3D content on a quality 3D device, someone says its crap, they must be suffering stereo blindness or they are the type of person that would have opened a livery across from the first ford assembly line. I own Deep Ocean and Under the Sea, its just like looking out a frikkin window of submarine in Cozumel and its amazing! No ghosting, rich colors, strong depth and clarity. Provided you have no problems seeing 3D, native and well executed films are, visually, above reproach. I will never get closer to a great white or a .22 pistol toting shrimp. I kept swatting the sea dust out of reflex. My rational mind knows its an illusion, but my irrational mind doesn't and thats the gem of good 3D.

Bad 3D sucks, I was totally unimpressed by the LCD models that I first saw. I left Best Buy that day seeing promise in the 3D idea but far from ready to commit. If this is your only experience with Real3D then you're not properly enlightened. There's ghosting, it can appear expensive and the cardboard cut out was in effect .. not so good. Fast forward to the end of 2010 and I met the Panasonic VT25 Plasma. Instant love, breathtaking. I finally understood what the hype was about. I now have a humble library ranging from MeatBalls to Avatar and a slew of IMAX films.

I was the kid that obsessed over Mutual of Omaha nature flicks on PBS, I watched them on a black and white with bunny ears and tin foil. So please forgive me if I roll my eyes when people complain about wearing glasses. Forgive me if I'm not generally very lenient on the grumps. 3D finally works and it works very well and the chance to own this massive luxury isn't outrageous - decent sets start at $800. If you simply must criticism things, then do so in context and with fact please.

Technology that actually does something besides make you look hip is rare. For those born before 1985, remember when tech could actually bringa new experience or opportunity to your life? 3DTV does just that, why piss on it?

[HeManster03]

Originally Posted by etype55

What a bunch of grumps.

I don't understand the poop parade saturating the 3D forums. I prefer mayo, I don't like mustard and I will NEVER stalk the culinary forums criticizing those that do. If you've done that about 3D, I'm here to inform you that its bizarre behavior.

In my opinion and according to the sales figures, 3DTV is NOT a fad. This time, its here to stay. And I'm absolutely confident in that because I've been watching my Panny VT25 for a couple of months now. If, after watching quality 3D content on a quality 3D device, someone says its crap, they must be suffering stereo blindness or they are the type of person that would have opened a livery across from the first ford assembly line. I own Deep Ocean and Under the Sea, its just like looking out a frikkin window of submarine in Cozumel and its amazing! No ghosting, rich colors, strong depth and clarity. Provided you have no problems seeing 3D, native and well executed films are, visually, above reproach. I will never get closer to a great white or a .22 pistol toting shrimp. I kept swatting the sea dust out of reflex. My rational mind knows its an illusion, but my irrational mind doesn't and thats the gem of good 3D.

Bad 3D sucks, I was totally unimpressed by the LCD models that I first saw. I left Best Buy that day seeing promise in the 3D idea but far from ready to commit. If this is your only experience with Real3D then you're not properly enlightened. There's ghosting, it can appear expensive and the cardboard cut out was in effect .. not so good. Fast forward to the end of 2010 and I met the Panasonic VT25 Plasma. Instant love, breathtaking. I finally understood what the hype was about. I now have a humble library ranging from MeatBalls to Avatar and a slew of IMAX films.

I was the kid that obsessed over Mutual of Omaha nature flicks on PBS, I watched them on a black and white with bunny ears and tin foil. So please forgive me if I roll my eyes when people complain about wearing glasses. Forgive me if I'm not generally very lenient on the grumps. 3D finally works and it works very well and the chance to own this massive luxury isn't outrageous - decent sets start at $800. If you simply must criticism things, then do so in context and with fact please.

Technology that actually does something besides make you look hip is rare. For those born before 1985, remember when tech could actually bringa new experience or opportunity to your life? 3DTV does just that, why piss on it?

I personally have no stock in the 3d revolution, but I do tend to side with other members on the forum here for a few reasons..
1. The glasses are not cost effective if you have more than 1 person in your house(I have 4-5 people depending on the day) that would require them and that is a large investment for a limited selection of content.
2.The selection of programming/content is VERY small. I'm a DirecTV subscriber so I have the 3d channels available to me, but there is like 4 of them and honestly only 1 has content on it that I'm interested in (espn3d) and it doesn't have 24hr "new" 3d programming.
3.I would have to invest money in a new tv/new bd player (receiver being 3d capable was just an extra feature when I upgraded to it) and the way the economy is right now I don't want to go throwing money around when it isn't needed.
4.This is and always will be my biggest gripe with how 3d technology currently and has previously worked..I NEED glasses/contacts to see. Watching a movie in 3d, which includes Avatar/previous IMAX experiences/that mickey mouse 3d thing at Disney world when we took my niece 2 years ago, absolutely gives me a migraine and I border on motion sickness. If they can find a reliable way to bring it to my home without that feeling hitting me everytime, then I would be all for it. Until then that is my biggest deal breaker..

So the reason most people on these forums tend to dump on 3d as a whole is because right now it isn't feasable as a mainstream option for everyone, much like digital downloads(which you should read some of those threads for some hate spewing) and until it becomes more than just a niche in the tech community it will continue to be ridiculed.

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by etype55

What a bunch of grumps.
*snip*

The success of 3D has nothing to do with how good it "can" be... or how good it is....

The obstacles are:

1) Many consumers don't want 3D... and it has nothing to do with glasses, cost, etc.... Why people can't respect the fact that many don't want Blu-ray, many don't want HDTV, and many don't want lossless audio etc... is beyond me. Of course HD content is "better" than SD content.... that doesn't mean everyone wants it

2) Glasses, equipment, and cost.... I don't even think the equipment/cost is a "big" obstacle, because tech prices always go down, but when you consider that many haven't even made the leap to HDTVs yet, let-alone Blu-ray players etc.... it's asking a lot at this time.... But yes, Glasses is an issue for a lot of people.

3) The available titles for 3D are slim pickings right now, and unless you want to count Avatar, there hasn't been a "Serious" film put out in 3D yet that I'm aware of.... again, all of this can change over time, but I think if sales were better, you'd see more titles.


I think 3D will continue to be an "At the cinema" phenomena... but given the choice, I choose to go to the 2D showings, and I've been to IMAX etc.... if that's "Good 3D" I'll just stay home.

[etype55]

Again, all you've said is I don't like 3D, And so the question is not WHY you dislike it, but why anyone would waste time posting in forums designed to support communities that DO like it. The judgements lack context and the misinformation is thick here. Good 3D does not look like staggered cardboard cut outs and ghosting is problem only for poor devices or source material. If a viewer still sees such things on quality gear, then the problem lies with the them and not the tech. 3D is real 3D, its holographic, its silky smooth and it works very, VERY well. I was in the space station last night. then I returned to Oceans Deep. I had to wear glasses , so what. I completely forget about them every time I watch something in 3D, the same way i completely forget Im wearing sunglasses while driving on the highway or lounging on the beach.

Potential 3D buyers may be lurking forums just like these searching for honest feedback from the community. Unfortunately, this thread is full of misinformation and conjecture, LOTS of conjecture.

I'm not suggesting you should suddenly love 3D, if its not your thing I can get it, but guys and girls ..please keep your critiques in context.

Glasses are still annoyingly expensive. But in just 1 year of market activity 3D capable TVs have dropped, and dropped dramatically. Best Buy is a terrible place to shop for TVs, so really a bad reference. They don't sell the Panasonic VT25 series for instance (at least not in my state), which is the top rated TV for both 2d and 3d in 2010. Yet, its price is nearly half that of most of its top shelf competition - so considering that Best Buy won't offer it to their customers probably means one should look else where.


Again, for clarity. This is not a fad, 2011 tvs will not be obsolete in 2012, content is not extensive but there is still plenty of content to be had and more movies are released every month. Read3D is true 3D, depth and space are perceivable and appear very real. Theres fears of side effects but no real evidence has surfaced to support those fears, maybe it will or won't - anything stated otherwise at this point is a guess. An unknown number of people suffer stereo blindness. Plasma is superior to LCD (even with LED) for 3D, and its cheaper. Best Buy is not the best bet for a good purchase or even a great place to view quality 3D. DLP sets is great for 3D as well, but lack the color saturation of a plasma, however you get more inch per dollar ( i think there a great buy personally). Glasses are expensive but if that's your concern just wait. Companies are likely to begin subsidizing their cost. 3D tech is a natural evolution of HDTV, the technology required to make 3D a reality already exists in the better HDTVs. Another strong reason you can expect to see 3D go mainstream very quickly. More quickly that standard HD at least.

[NewOrder79]

Originally Posted by steve1971

I wasnt going to comment until I saw this post. NewOrder I can afford a new 3D tv no problem but I aint going to waste money on a "fad" that has never done nothing for me and never will. 3D to me is nothing but a novelty and to me it always has been. I am sure there are ALOT of people on here that can afford 3D tv's but dont want to upgrade to the newest thing every time it hits the shelves. You want the so called IMMERSIVE 3D feeling? Go to a movie theater with a very large screen because thats the only way to get that IMMERSIVE 3D feeling in my book. That being said dont insult people and say they are jealouse of 3D because they cant afford a 3D tv because I am sure alot of them can and I am one of them.

The majority of people that complain about them yet can't afford them IMO out weighs the people that can afford them but choose not to buy them to the 100th power. IMO it's also not a fad it's here to stay, when i see direct tv coming out with 3D channels and half the tv's at best buy with a 3D option. Then imo it's not a fad. I also have to say everyone that's been to my place to watch it has loved it around 15 diffrent people no one complained about the glasses and they were all shocked by the quality.

[My_Two_Cents]

We all know what they say about opinions, now don't we? I can afford any new 3D set on the market today, but I have ZERO interest in 3D. It does not "immerse", it detracts from the content (for me). There has yet to be a 3D pictures that even comes close to the overall quality of a top-of-the-line 2D picture. Some people want 3D, and that's fine, but I'd rather the display manufacturers spend their research time and money on improving the 2D picture as opposed to junking-up sets with 3D capability (hopefully NOT to the detriment of the 2D picture).

Just because they continue to make and market 3D does not mean it is not a fad. It may not die-out this year or next, but I'd be VERY surprised if it's still around in 5 years.

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by etype55

Again, all you've said is I don't like 3D

Hmmm I read what I posted.

I am making an argument for why 3D's adoption is, in my opinion, "Unlikely" on a large scale.... I eluded to the fact that I don't like 3D at the end of my post, but it doesn't in any way support or contradict the points I made about the obstacles 3D has in its' way....

I think you're looking at every post that doesn't declare 3D as "the wave of the future" as "Some hater who doesn't like 3D" and you're not open to accepting the fact that there is more to large-scale-adoption of a technology other than people experiencing it, and saying "oh that's nice"

Here, I'll help you out....

Good 3D does not look like staggered cardboard cut outs and ghosting is problem only for poor devices or source material.

And regardless of how good it looks, that doesn't make people buy it.

Glasses are still annoyingly expensive.

I said price was only a very small negative for 3D, but at least you are willing to admit there is a difference, so there's hope yet.

Again, for clarity. This is not a fad, 2011 tvs will not be obsolete in 2012, content is not extensive but there is still plenty of content to be had and more movies are released every month.

I don't think many people are concerned that their HDTVs are going to be obsolete.
I know plenty of people who don't have an HDTV at all.... and many who have Blu-ray players for their ability to play Netflix etc... and have no desire to buy an HDTV... Just because I have two Blu-ray players that are 3D ready, doesn't mean I've adopted the 3D technology, so anyone who uses T.V. and BD player sales as support for their argument that 3D is growing in popularity isn't seeing the whole picture.

I'm not suggesting you should suddenly love 3D, if its not your thing I can get it, but guys and girls ..please keep your critiques in context.

Again, you're just dismissing a solid argument because you think I have some sort of vendetta.... If 3D can continue to be available to those who want it, great, but I am just providing reasoning of why it's going to remain a niche market, and not widely adopted.

If a viewer still sees such things on quality gear, then the problem lies with the them and not the tech. 3D is real 3D, its holographic, its silky smooth and it works very, VERY well. I was in the space station last night. then I returned to Oceans Deep. I had to wear glasses , so what. I completely forget about them every time I watch something in 3D, the same way i completely forget Im wearing sunglasses while driving on the highway or lounging on the beach.

It appears your ability to speak for the masses is better than anyone else's ability to give an opinion on consumer behavior based on years and years of examples from various technologies.

AGAIN.... you have to understand that consumers are notorious for their irrational buying habits, and then you factor in something that is taste subjective (again, you have to realize that some people just prefer a good 2D image, and it has nothing to do with them not seeing 'proper' 3D ) and you have a recipe for disaster.

[Cevolution]

Anybody who hasn't seen a 3dtv in a home has no business even talking about it. Seeing 3d at the cinemas or a 3dtv in a store is not quite the same as seeing it at home, so if u have only seen it in a store or at the cinemas, then keep your opinion to yourself.

[etype55]

Originally Posted by Ricshoe

We all know what they say about opinions, now don't we? I can afford any new 3D set on the market today, but I have ZERO interest in 3D. It does not "immerse", it detracts from the content (for me). There has yet to be a 3D pictures that even comes close to the overall quality of a top-of-the-line 2D picture. Some people want 3D, and that's fine, but I'd rather the display manufacturers spend their research time and money on improving the 2D picture as opposed to junking-up sets with 3D capability (hopefully NOT to the detriment of the 2D picture).

Just because they continue to make and market 3D does not mean it is not a fad. It may not die-out this year or next, but I'd be VERY surprised if it's still around in 5 years.

Well informed. You should probably take a second to learn how 3D works, and the tech required. Because 3D capability is, ispo facto, better 2D. This was my address. You don't like it, I get it. Its cool. But you have a lot of opinion without any information, at least as evidenced by your presumption that 3D detracts from better developed 2D. No law against that of course but it is rather silly.

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Hmmm I read what I posted.

I am making an argument for why 3D's adoption is, in my opinion, "Unlikely" on a large scale.... I eluded to the fact that I don't like 3D at the end of my post, but it doesn't in any way support or contradict the points I made about the obstacles 3D has in its' way....

I think you're looking at every post that doesn't declare 3D as "the wave of the future" as "Some hater who doesn't like 3D" and you're not open to accepting the fact that there is more to large-scale-adoption of a technology other than people experiencing it, and saying "oh that's nice"

Does this qualify as argumentum ad hominen? It certainly borders it.

I'm simply not going to address posts one by one. I'm going to recognize the trends of community chatter , in this case of the opponents, then make broad retorts. I never said anything about wave of the future and I certainly didn't try to establish criteria for making that a reality. That's someone else's job that knows a lot more than me. My argument was simple, criticize but do it in context. And i think that making essential statements about products or capabilities that one has not or cannot properly experienced is problem with this thread. Many things are being said which are frankly not true. Good 3D IS a holographic picture event. That was a fully spatially constructed Octopus I watched hunt last night. I don't care if it adds anything or not to a persons viewing experience - its your time not mine spend it in ways best for you, but don't tell the wide world that all 3D is card board cut outs or worthless - because thats blatantly untrue.

I'm not speaking directly to you, Im not debating you. I'm criticizing the quality of the discussion in this thread and addressing popular chatter.


edit for typo and clarity

[NewOrder79]

I have a VT25 and i love it, the 3D immerses me into the movie more then 2D does as long as it's done right. It takes a normally mediocre movie like step up 3D and makes it really cool and a movie i've watched a few times and love. My only question is what are people doing on the 3D section of these forums talking out against them when they don't own one? Oh well to each his own i love it.