bit-tech.net

Life Without 3D

Comments 1 to 25 of 49

Reply
Xir 26th May 2011, 12:15 Quote
Quote:
he can't even see the killer feature of the films in which he stars
if that's the killer feature, maybe the film should be avoided :D
nmunky 26th May 2011, 12:35 Quote
12% of the movie-going not being able to perceive stereoscopic 3D is another indicator that this technology is just not ready for market. It's benefits are marginal at best and coming so hard on the heels of the general upgrade from SD to HD means it is a more transparent ploy to get consumers to replace perfectly good hardware than the normal AV feature creep.
I think review sites such as bit-tech should not be pushing the 'benefits' of 3D and should be reminding customers that their existing hi-tech HD sets are perfectly capable of forming the centre of a cutting-edge wholly satisfying media setup and the money for 3D could be better spent elsewhere.
RedFlames 26th May 2011, 12:38 Quote
Copy pasta'd [sort of] from twitter:

im one of those that can't do 3d, not only can i not see the effect it usually gives me a massive headache.

One thing that annoyed me greatly is, when i wanted to see Thor [and a couple of other '3D' films] my local Odeon was *only* showing it in 3d, it may be the cheapskate in me but why should i pay extra for something i'll get no benefit [and in some cases a massive downside] from? Going to the cinema isn't cheap as it is

those 'magic eye' pictures and some optical illusions [like the afore mentioned '3D'] don't work for me either...
ZeDestructor 26th May 2011, 12:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedFlames
Copy pasta'd [sort of] from twitter:

im one of those that can't do 3d, not only can i not see the effect it usually gives me a massive headache.

One thing that annoyed me greatly is, when i wanted to see Thor [and a couple of other '3D' films] my local Odeon was *only* showing it in 3d, it may be the cheapskate in me but why should i pay extra for something i'll get no benefit [and in some cases a massive downside] from? Going to the cinema isn't cheap as it is

those 'magic eye' pictures and some optical illusions [like the afore mentioned '3D'] don't work for me either...

Rectify by making a full-face lens that shows only one image? That is IMO the easiest mnethod, and relatively easy to make since you just make glasses that polarise in the same direction as opposed to the usual 90° rotation of one v/s the other lens.
WarrenJ 26th May 2011, 12:55 Quote
I can watch 3D films with relative comfort. However, the DS for me was a load of tosh, all it did was make the screen blurry.
vdbswong 26th May 2011, 13:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJ
I can watch 3D films with relative comfort. However, the DS for me was a load of tosh, all it did was make the screen blurry.

Lol, i was completely the opposite 0.o

Can't watch a 3D film without getting a headache, however the 3DS was completely fine.

However it was more of a 3D effect through depth "into" the screen, whereas most films i've seen do depth "out of" the screen.
MrJay 26th May 2011, 13:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by vdbswong
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJ
I can watch 3D films with relative comfort. However, the DS for me was a load of tosh, all it did was make the screen blurry.

Lol, i was completely the opposite 0.o

Can't watch a 3D film without getting a headache, however the 3DS was completely fine.

However it was more of a 3D effect through depth "into" the screen, whereas most films i've seen do depth "out of" the screen.

Totaly agree, i think depth of filed in a film is way more important than something jumping out at you.

My eyes are less than perfect so 3D is a real struggle for me, i dont seem to see the 'Eye popping' effects that other people see, and i usually feel quite ill when i leave the screening.
mi1ez 26th May 2011, 13:22 Quote
Quote:
If you're colour blind, then old-school red-green 3D probably isn't going to work for you either, as red and green are typically the colours that are indistinguishable if you're colour blind, often being only visible as brown.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but the coloured lenses still filter out the light they're supposed to regardless of whether the user is colourblind?
leveller 26th May 2011, 13:26 Quote
Thanks Ben, great article that gave me a good insight into people with eye problems and problems seeing 3D. Also good to hear that there might be some use of 3D in treating people with eye problems!

Interesting that you published the articles with Nvidia and ATi, even though you have problems appreciating 3D, were they your interviews?

added:

After Joe has done his game reviews can he pass on the games to a 3D fan who can then add a mini-review on whether the game is suited to 3D or not? That would be awesome.

added:

65" glasses-free 3DTV debuting this weekend in Covent Garden - might be worth a visit by any Londoners who need to check out 3D for themselves. I'd certainly go if I was nearby.
mi1ez 26th May 2011, 13:36 Quote
Just finished. I can see 3D to a certain extent, but I don't find it emmersive and it just doesn't feel right. I believe this is down to the fact that your eye has to focus on the same field, not matter how near or far the convergence of your eyes tells you it should be.
Mankz 26th May 2011, 14:12 Quote
yay! Someone else who cant see 3D!
feathers 26th May 2011, 14:50 Quote
Too many wishy-washy complainers complaining about 3d and saying how it gave them headaches, dizziness, made them spew, made them kill their best friend or neighbour, dropped their IQ by 70% and worse. Quit complaining and learn to see in 3d like the rest of us. So you have only one eye? Quit bitching and spend time developing it to a point where breasts no longer appear flat and lifeless.

You think the world is flat because you have only one good eye?

It's flat because you're stupid.

When you wise up and develop your inner 3d you will be free to enjoy life and stop complaining.
Cei 26th May 2011, 14:55 Quote
I can't see 3D due to having a lazy eye as well, despite being made to wear patches when I was young. So I don't care about 3D one bit.

The interesting thing is that my other half is also not interested, despite being able to see it. She doesn't want to get a 3DTV that I can't see, and is happy to be at the middle ground which we can both see 100% - namely HD. So that 12% of the population who can't see 3D may influence the households they are in, to the point where nobody in that household utilises 3D.
vdbswong 26th May 2011, 15:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by feathers
Too many wishy-washy complainers complaining about 3d and saying how it gave them headaches, dizziness, made them spew, made them kill their best friend or neighbour, dropped their IQ by 70% and worse. Quit complaining and learn to see in 3d like the rest of us. So you have only one eye? Quit bitching and spend time developing it to a point where breasts no longer appear flat and lifeless.

You think the world is flat because you have only one good eye?

It's flat because you're stupid.

When you wise up and develop your inner 3d you will be free to enjoy life and stop complaining.

Someone obviously has no clue about how 3D works at all.

A movie IS flat since it's captured on film and projected on a screen.

Depth in a movie is only something your brain creates because it "knows" that it's not supposed to be flat.

As for 3D, you do realise that 3D Movies aren't ACTUALLY 3D and are merely an optical illusion design to trick your brain into thinking something is 3D right? Because if not, you're more stupid than your ignorant post already implies.
arcticstoat 26th May 2011, 15:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by feathers
Too many wishy-washy complainers complaining about 3d and saying how it gave them headaches, dizziness, made them spew, made them kill their best friend or neighbour, dropped their IQ by 70% and worse. Quit complaining and learn to see in 3d like the rest of us. So you have only one eye? Quit bitching and spend time developing it to a point where breasts no longer appear flat and lifeless.

You think the world is flat because you have only one good eye?

It's flat because you're stupid.

When you wise up and develop your inner 3d you will be free to enjoy life and stop complaining.

Do you really think this, or are you just trolling? If it's the former, why don't you actually read the article?
dec 26th May 2011, 15:53 Quote
I can see in 3D but i still dont like 3D. After seeing a 3D movie (Piranha) the 3D affect didnt add anything to the movie, it was just another piece of selling-candy like how quad-core was like 5 years ago. It reminded me of those pop-out books from elementary school. Like "OOOOOO A POP OUT BOOK! IT LOOKS SO REAL!" and the little kids ate it up. I'll just wait for the world to "get older" and move on from 3D.
feathers 26th May 2011, 16:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by arcticstoat
Quote:
Originally Posted by feathers
Too many wishy-washy complainers complaining about 3d and saying how it gave them headaches, dizziness, made them spew, made them kill their best friend or neighbour, dropped their IQ by 70% and worse. Quit complaining and learn to see in 3d like the rest of us. So you have only one eye? Quit bitching and spend time developing it to a point where breasts no longer appear flat and lifeless.

You think the world is flat because you have only one good eye?

It's flat because you're stupid.

When you wise up and develop your inner 3d you will be free to enjoy life and stop complaining.

Do you really think this, or are you just trolling? If it's the former, why don't you actually read the article?

I'm kidding. Been a lot of discussion about 3d recently. I guess it doesn't work for everyone. A friend of mine also says he can't see 3d (all of his eyes work). I personally find it works well and have never had issues with it.

I wish my other body parts worked as well as my 3d decoding.
Xlog 26th May 2011, 16:11 Quote
I wish there was a switch on 3D glasses for 2D mode, so that then I inevitably end up in a 3D movie, I could still watch it in the good old 2D.
Just for the record - I can see "3D", but limited DOF makes watching it too much of a chore.
leveller 26th May 2011, 16:25 Quote
YouTube adds stereoscopic 3D today (apparently).

This gimmicky fad is dying rapidly. ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dec
I can see in 3D but i still dont like 3D. After seeing a 3D movie (Piranha) the 3D affect didnt add anything to the movie, it was just another piece of selling-candy like how quad-core was like 5 years ago. It reminded me of those pop-out books from elementary school. Like "OOOOOO A POP OUT BOOK! IT LOOKS SO REAL!" and the little kids ate it up. I'll just wait for the world to "get older" and move on from 3D.

You think that was bad ... this might work better (more scarier) ... or not!
ZeDestructor 26th May 2011, 16:46 Quote
I want holograms now....
leveller 26th May 2011, 16:59 Quote
VR makes a comeback in 2011?!


Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeDestructor
I want holograms now....

Holography (see pic) and the companies website
Cool_CR 26th May 2011, 17:06 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmunky
12% of the movie-going not being able to perceive stereoscopic 3D is another indicator that this technology is just not ready for market. It's benefits are marginal at best and coming so hard on the heels of the general upgrade from SD to HD means it is a more transparent ploy to get consumers to replace perfectly good hardware than the normal AV feature creep.
I think review sites such as bit-tech should not be pushing the 'benefits' of 3D and should be reminding customers that their existing hi-tech HD sets are perfectly capable of forming the centre of a cutting-edge wholly satisfying media setup and the money for 3D could be better spent elsewhere.

Over 15% of people are legaly blind or hard of hearing its just a sad fact not all of us can get everything out of every experiance.

Hard on the heals of SD to HD REALLY, my HD tv is nearly 5 years old life cycles of tec man were moving on.

Personaly i would like the resolutions to get another bump but clearly 3D is not hard to do just need higher screen refresh rate and a pair of polarised filters (havent had the pleasure of active shutter or filterless 3D yet). I honestly dont see your problem as its just a feature like Stereo 5.1 or 7.1 not everyone hears the difference it wont make a bad movie good or a good movie bad.

Its not like they stopped DVD's when BlueRay came out. Why would they stop doing 2D edtions?

As for the last point um I look to review sites to tell me about new tec not tec I already have, I already did the research on that is I know my screan is good.

As with everything early adopters beware your path might not become standard you risk being deadended and the prices will drop a huge amount as the tec becomes mainstream. But None Of This Should Be News To A Tec Enthusiast.

Just make sure you buy the right Hardware and software for your needs if you cannot see 3D go 2D and if you can and dont get the negative side effects then i really dont see why having the option is a bad thing.

Good place to test is the cinema (pick a movie that was shot in 3d not a convertion although cartoons are good to bight colour palet definatly comes up better IMO) 8-12 quid and you will soon know if its for you or not.
feathers 26th May 2011, 17:15 Quote
Well said Cool_CR. The amount of hostility levelled at stereoscopic 3d is astonishing. I don't think 3d is being forced on everyone. It's an option and it will become more so as it's refined. That doesn't mean everyone will be forced to use it so I don't see what all the negativity is about (not so much this thread but in the other recent bit-tech 3d articles).

I personally love 3d. I've rendered in 3d, played games in 3d and taken photographs in 3d long before this most recent push towards stereoscopic tech. The reason we're seeing it emerge in a big way now is simply because the processing power is available to deliver 3d in high definition. Given time things will settle down and some standards will be set for 3d so we aren't faced with a bunch of competing technologies from various companies.
oasked 26th May 2011, 17:28 Quote
I have amblyopia (lazy eye), and I can see 3d just fine! I do think it is just a massive gimmick though.

I never could get magic eye to work though...
Da_Rude_Baboon 26th May 2011, 17:32 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by feathers
So you have only one eye? Quit bitching and spend time developing it to a point where breasts no longer appear flat and lifeless.

I lol'd. :)
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums