3D may be dangerous to your vision
 

The 3D partisans should find this story interesting. Turns out that there have already been studies done that show that 3D gaming and TV viewing leads to strabismus. Children under seven are especially at risk. But even adults are at risk if they watch enough 3D.

I don't much care for 3D for aesthetic reasons. But now I wonder if the industry hasn't shot itself in the foot with this headlong rush into 3D.

That story is freaking me out Bruce.

Dan

Me, too.

I actually remember those VR helmets being announced as the next big thing, thinking they were a cool idea, and then wondering what happened to them.

Sounds like the slight headache I get a 3D movies is something to avoid for sure.

I can take or leave 3D. I have low vision but still get the effect. I prefer a well done movie rather than something that has gimmicks to make it different than the home experience. I keep thinking Jaws when I think 3D.

For me, the experience of a theater is the experience. When a theater is nearly filled and the crowd is engaged in a great movie, that is a "Theather" experience.

Hopefully, the 48 fps format that someone mentioned early will take the place of 3D. That would be like going from VHS to DVD and then Blueray. That combined with a great movie that generates a great crowd would be my theater experience.

Jeff

Even though it has been talked about and pushed for years, I have doubts if 48fps will ever see the light of day as a popular shooting and projection format. 3D is visually loud, gimmicky and spectacular, all of the things Hollywood likes. Hollywood doesn't do subtle and 48fps would be considered by exhibitors and a large percentage of the public to be subtle.

It's just like when Blu-ray came out. Something like 70% of viewers couldn't tell the difference between Blu-ray and an upconverted NTSC or PAL DVD. If people pay extra for something, they expect to be hit over the head with the "improvement".

Dan

When I went to see Avatar and Alice In Wonderland in 3D, I was constantly just distracted by the 3D effect. It didn't pull me into the movie, it did the opposite. All the people I have been talking to (and literally, all of them) didn't like it either. Everyone I talk to about go seeing a movie in 3D, they all now say: "Meh, I don't like the whole 3D kind of thing".

A week ago I went to see Toy Story 3. In 2D. What a great film. I had no distractions at all, bright colors, and the movie effected me enormously. Because I wasn't wearing any glasses or seeing all kinds of innaproperiate effects, I could also just focus on the story and the emotions.
Glad I saw it in 2D.

Please Hollywood, stop this 3D madness.

Here are some 3D TV issues:

BBC News - Quality warnings issued over 3DTV

All this negativity is going to drastically hinder the holodeck development process. Is that what you want?

I'd assume that would use a totally different technology to 3D TV.

But if the powers that be feel that we're all satisfied with our simple two dimensions, they're never going to work to give us a third, and the tactile feel. MMMM. . .tactile.

YouTube - Virtual 3D Tactile Touch - NTT COMWARE : DigInfo

Or are you thinking of a full suit??

I was just being a jackass. In addition to being 3D, what separates the holodeck from a 2D experience is that the image has substance. . .you can touch/interact, etc. That's what I was getting at.

I guess that would depend if it was virtual substance that give the transparent appearance of real substance.

The one time Ebert agrees with me :D

Re: Roger Ebert: Why I Hate 3-D (And You Should Too)
 

And here we are now Dan :) 3D films haven't gone away, the hype has slowed somewhat but IMO films and the medium is being refined as producers come to grips with it.

Here the sales of domestic 3D TVs have slowed but 3D live sports TV telecasts are growing slowly. Maybe keeping up with the competition. 3D games too.

Cheers.