3D Frustrating, pathetic lack of 3D software... (1 Viewer)

[Cees Alons]

The marketing hype dictates that we call this "3D". But of course that's not what it is.


What these systems really offer is a stereo view. One of the many possible versions.



Cees

 

[Douglas Monce]

Originally Posted by SilverWook

3D's previous failures were both bad projectionists and bad movies. A stinker is not going to pack them in no matter how many dimensions it has. And if the illusion didn't work for you the first time, or your eyes hurt, you're not likely to want to repeat the experience.


I happen to be a migraine sufferer. I've yet to have any problems with the new technology. I've gotten headaches from movies being out of focus and those shot in nausea-o-rama like Blair Witch. (IIRC, a lot of people had viewing problems with that little 2D film!) Even at home, those tv shows whose producers think "shaky cam" is the bomb make me a little queasy on a large flat panel.


If Hollywood can figure out the best projects to use 3D for, and always give people the 2D option, there ought to be a way to keep everyone happy.

Of course there were some crap films in the previous batch of 3D films, but there were also classics like The Creature from the Black Lagoon and It Came From Outer Space. I would say that we have the same situation today, with a few good or at least interesting films being made in 3D and then lots of crap.


I find when watching 3D on the display sets in stores, that when ever there is some fast panning, there seems to be some slipping between the eyes. Almost as though one of the eyes is getting the wrong frame, or maybe just half a frame. I don't know if that is a sync issue or a problem with the refresh rate of the display.


Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

Originally Posted by Cees Alons

The marketing hype dictates that we call this "3D". But of course that's not what it is.


What these systems really offer is a stereo view. One of the many possible versions.



Cees

Quite true. And I must say that I've always thought that it looks, as some others have pointed out, like looking at a pop up book with one flat image in front of another. While its interesting to see a film or two, I have no desire to see every film, or even most films in this format.


Doug

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

Although I have some interest in 3D, I think it will take a long time to get enough content to make it viable. Despite the effect they may have had if they were shot in 3D, I do not want to see converted movies. I have no interest in the majority of animated features, so there would have to be a body of live action films that are actually worth repeated viewings before the format would be a consideration, and the glasses requirement is a huge disincentive. If a holographic presentation could be developed that did not require eyewear, that would be a far easier sell for me.