Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Sifter3000, 12 May 2010.
I don't get the beef over 3D.
I tend to want to barf after watching 3D for 1 hour, though.
I have a Zalman 3D monitor at home which using polarised glasses, rather than the shutter type. I have tried the nvidia shutter glasses before but I always see ghosting. I think is is down to me having a "lazy" eye. I don't seem to get this problem with the polarised glasses - they work perfectly.
As to whether 3D will become more main stream is a different question, it's all down to taste and if you can stomach it. I know a lot of people who think 3D looks great but for prolonged use it can be nauseating - it seems rickysio is one of them
I watched Avatar in 3D at the imax which was amazing but after about 2 hours I also felt a little queasy, although that could be because of the size of the screen. I feel fine playing games on the Zalman 3D monitor at home.
3D cinema isn't new. It was also a fad about 30 years ago. The technology has moved on, but the general public is still getting used to HDTV, so I suspect 3D will once again die a long, drawn out, apathy-induced death.
Couldn't care less about 3D. Would only buy a 3D TV if it cost zero extra and my current TV broke.
Its not like HD is even for the most part as high res as computers have been for years, let alone has many TV channels actually available in it.
I suspect we'll have hologrammatic 3D before HD-3D is ubiquitous.
let's watch dancing with the stars in 3d!
3d is the best thing ever for about 30 mins but gets dull after that.
still worth it for the occasional buzz though and not that expensive
Played COD6 on a 3D monitor with Polorised glasses, it was the tits.. However, I still think that any extended play sessions (more than 45mins) would result in eye strain. I find 3d Cinema quite bad to the point I would prefer to watch the 2D version of the film than suffer the 3d one.
I think the problem with 3D is your eyes are seing a "pseduo-3d" image whilst your brain is clealy saying "It's not 3D, it's a trick on a screen". :/
page me when i can get a holodeck
I enjoyed Avatar in 3D but am not bothered about watching everything in 3D. I haven't had the chance to play a game in 3D yet and would love to try it, but acording to bit-tech I'm not missing out on much!
A couple of corrections needed (2 more in the quotes too but I assume they were present from wherever they were pasted from):
passive polarised lenses for thie 3D glasses
the 3D Blu-ray spec has only just [been] released
+1 to that
3d gamin's success isn't dependent on the technology, it's dependent on the quality of the content available for it. So far, I've managed to get a hands on experience on a 2D platform beat em up from Blitz Games...was a poor effort actually...yeah....that was a 2D game using 3D tech....such a waste.
Now combine Battlefield, Natal, 3D and a solid VOIP and I'm sold.
Assumptions assumptions..... Where I live there are two cinemas close by. An older one which uses Active shutter glasses and a newer Multiplex that uses passives. As you can see some cinemas use active and some do not. Personally I find the active glasses have a better quality. This could be down to the fact that I have so far only seen Big Budget films like avatar and Star Trek at the cinema that uses active glasses.
typo on the article:
"you'll but more expensive glasses but it"
It does seem to be horses for courses as I'm the opposite - I get a blinding headache after just a few minutes using the active lenses and it takes quite a bit of effort to focus on the image yet I can see the 3D effect perfectly with the passive polarised lenses and don't feel any eye strain afterwards. The less said the better about the passive, coloured lenses...
well you are ment to take a break every 1hr so if your eyes hurt after 45mins maybe thats telling you its time for a break.
As a glasses user the 3d tech is wierd and causes eye strain. Till it becomes that you dont need the stupid 3d glasses that arnt comfortable to wear then i cant see it ever taking off.
I really hope to see ATI get behind Nvidia's 3D tech since I really dont want a giant format war on PC. If the tech is there why battle it? The best option would be improve upon it.
I have a contact lens wearing day when I know I am going to see a 3D film. In fact if I end up getting a 3D TV and play 3D PS3 then I am thinking I may as well properly research laser eye surgery.
As Grimloon said, it is horses for courses. Some like it, some hate it. I'm a lover. It works very well for me and I don't get sick or eye strain.
Yes, because those of us with vertical and horizontal alignment issues (cross-eyed, for those that were never on the recieving end of the name) will actually be able to see it then - though still in our normal 2D view of the world.
I've not yet seen a 3d telly, but if it's anything like the stuff from years ago, it'll make the images unviewable for the likes of me.
Could be the new weight loss program for the ever growing couch potato society. Watch too much tv puke up those cheetos.
Separate names with a comma.