3D Top 30 Must Own 3D Blu-Ray Releases (2 Viewers)

[marcuslaw]

'Crazy' is watching Alien and Star Wars in black and white, which is what I did one evening just for fun. Alien looked especially creepy in monochrome, well worth a look.

I have too many films on these shelves, I need all the space I can get. Some people throw away the cases too and keep the discs in binders, members of this forum. I would never go that far.

I save the stickers from the shrinkwrap and place them on the inside of the Blu-ray case. [emoji50]

 

[marcuslaw]

I believe Paramount might have just become the first major studio to join Shout Factory by bundling a 3-D disk with the UHD in the Star Trek Beyond 4K + 3D Gift Set (2016) ($49.99) which is currently pre-order priced at just $1 more than the standalone UHD packaging. What's surprising is that the latter doesn't come with the 3-D disk. On the other hand, you could get just the 3-D/BD combo for $29.99.

 

[marcuslaw]

Anyone have any thoughts on Deep Gold (3-D)? I discovered that it's a post-conversion but quite frankly never heard of the film.

 

[Paul Hillenbrand]

Anyone have any thoughts on Deep Gold (3-D)? I discovered that it's a post-conversion but quite frankly never heard of the film.

Suggest you ask "the13thman" as he was the one who verified there was no region coding on it.

 

[phillyrobt]

thoughts on Deep Gold (3-D)?
Yes..rented it from 3d Blu ray Rental. it had some good shots of bodies of water as well as a library and Philippines scenery. But basically a sub B Movie...

 

[Panman40]

Well it's not looking good for 3D blu ray being bundled with the 4K UHD copy in the UK,
Giving it some serious thought though I'm not sure I am to bothered, 3D is never going to get 4K treatment but if the 3D is of good quality I would only watch that anyway.
So I'm going to decide if a given film will be watched in 2 or 3D then buy accordingly.

Saying that I don't have a 4k display or player anyway!, Yet .

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Well it's not looking good for 3D blu ray being bundled with the 4K UHD copy in the UK,
Giving it some serious thought though I'm not sure I am to bothered, 3D is never going to get 4K treatment but if the 3D is of good quality I would only watch that anyway.
So I'm going to decide if a given film will be watched in 2 or 3D then buy accordingly.

Saying that I don't have a 4k display or player anyway!, Yet .

And what is the REAL shame is that 4k Blu-ray promised the end of active glasses. No more battery operated glasses since the passive would provide true HD in both eyes.

...at leas that is what was explained to me.

 

[marcuslaw]

And what is the REAL shame is that 4k Blu-ray promised the end of active glasses. No more battery operated glasses since the passive would provide true HD in both eyes.

...at leas that is what was explained to me.

Ron, that's the first time I ever read that. The UHD alliance and BDA wrote how much more detailed it would look. Some marketing material might have said 3-D-like. On the other hand, I have heard 8k is even closer.

 

[Todd Erwin]

And what is the REAL shame is that 4k Blu-ray promised the end of active glasses. No more battery operated glasses since the passive would provide true HD in both eyes.

...at leas that is what was explained to me.

Ron, most 3D-capable 4K sets are passive. The only active display I'm aware of is Sony's 75-inch model.

 

[marcuslaw]

And what is the REAL shame is that 4k Blu-ray promised the end of active glasses. No more battery operated glasses since the passive would provide true HD in both eyes.

...at leas that is what was explained to me.

I'm sorry, apparently I misunderstood you before. With the Sony 940C, I get 1080p to the L and R eye.

 

[Paul Hillenbrand]

And what is the REAL shame is that 4k Blu-ray promised the end of active glasses. No more battery operated glasses since the passive would provide true HD in both eyes.

Full HD passive 3D has nothing to do with 4K Blu-ray.

If 4K 3D Blu-ray ever becomes reality it would require active glasses all over again for 4K resolution per eye, until 8K 3D display's become available for passive 4K per eye.

The end of active glasses was promised with 4K 3D display UHD resolution providing passive 1080P true HD in both eyes using current full HD Bu-ray 3Ds, and the promise was fulfilled as the passive glasses option exists here and now.

 

[Tino]

Ron, most 3D-capable 4K sets are passive. The only active display I'm aware of is Sony's 75-inch model.

Sony's 65" 930D is active( although I hear the 3D is terrible)

 

[Panman40]

The tv that I recently got for my parents is a 4K set which has passive 3D, it's good 3D but not as good detail wise as my active 1080 3D display, brightness wise yes it's great and the passive glasses are easy for my mum 80 yrs and dad 82 yrs old to use .

 

[Panman40]

And what is the REAL shame is that 4k Blu-ray promised the end of active glasses. No more battery operated glasses since the passive would provide true HD in both eyes.

...at leas that is what was explained to me.

Ron, I think you have been misinformed or confused 4K with 3D somehow.

I believe that a 4K passive 3D tv will give the same 3D detail as a 1080p active 3D tv but with easier on the eye passive glasses that won't flicker under electric or natural light.

Apologies Ron, was late last night when I replied so ignore my strange rambling .

 

[Panman40]

Full HD passive 3D has nothing to do with 4K Blu-ray.

If 4K 3D Blu-ray ever becomes reality it would require active glasses all over again for 4K resolution per eye, until 8K 3D display's become available for passive 4K per eye.

The end of active glasses was promised with 4K 3D display UHD resolution providing passive 1080P true HD in both eyes using current full HD Bu-ray 3Ds, and the promise was fulfilled as the passive glasses option exists here and now.

Who actually promised the end of active glasses Paul ?, I think that's a strange statement.

 

[Paul Hillenbrand]

Who actually promised the end of active glasses Paul ?, I think that's a strange statement.

Agreed. It's just that UHD made passive glasses possible for full-resolution 1080P HD 3D viewing.

 

[Paul Hillenbrand]

The tv that I recently got for my parents is a 4K set which has passive 3D, it's good 3D but not as good detail wise as my active 1080 3D display, brightness wise yes it's great and the passive glasses are easy for my mum 80 yrs and dad 82 yrs old to use .

What a great son!
Resolving detail depends on display technology. Passive UHD OLED rivals my theatrical experiences.

 

[Panman40]

What a great son!
Resolving detail depends on display technology. Passive UHD OLED rivals my theatrical experiences.

Well I didn't actually pay for it .. , they had a Samsung plasma D6900 for 4 1/2 yrs which developed a fault and was written off under the 5 yr warranty. I chose the LG 4K for them as the 3D was supposed to be good, they certainly are making good use of it!.

 

[DaveF]

Coming in to test the 3D waters 2016 doesn't look promising. I reviewed Ron's Top 30 list looking for blu-rays to add to my wish list. The top choices aren't available. Several films of interest as more than a mere 3D demo are priced ludicrously: $32 for House of Wax, $50 for Wreck It Ralph, $50 - $70 for Finding Nemo and maybe $125 for the Toy Story trilogy in 3D! And the rest appear to be movies not really worth buying on their own merits, since I've got 3D demo material.

I'm not optimistic I'll watch much 3D in the new home theater.

 

[Tino]

Gotta get em when they're on sale. I've paid no more that $27.99 for a 3D title and I own all the ones you mentioned. And the Toy Story trilogy are cheaper individually than the boxed set. I think I paid $20 each for them.