3D Depth: Do you prefer strong 3D or conservative 3D?

[UFAlien]

As long as it's done well, I'm usually fine with any of these. It's an artistic decision, unless the conversion company just screwed it up. I WILL say, however, there are times when the actual usage of 3D is underwhelming.

Case in point, Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance. It was converted, sure, but it was planned for 3D the whole way through. With the inherent absurdity of the script, character, and directors, I was really expecting a lot of pop-out. Unfortunately, there was very little. That said, I'd debate its status as "conservative/weak 3D" - there was usually a lot of clear depth and some very substantial doubling without glasses. It was really just the cinematography that didn't take advantage of it.

I know a lot of people had similar expectations of Star Wars, but that seems misguided and silly to me. It was shot in and planned for 2D over a decade ago. Anyone who saw it in 2D should've realized there were very few places to apply pop-out without creating awful window violations or completely redoing the effects. Much of the depth was conservative but I felt it worked well, though I can understand how some people could be disappointed.

I guess I just... can't vote in the poll since there's no option to match.