Originally Posted by RandyT2
used to the extent it is currently being planned for.
You mean the increase of 3D content availability which will lead to increased viewing? If so, what about the fact that 3D games for the PC and the associated hardware to view them in 3D, has been around for quite a number of years. And that 3D has been in the workplace and used as a tool for almost 20 years.
If I am being "overly negative" about it, it's only in an attempt to counteract your obsessive need to gloss over any of the technology's problems. Kind of like the way you spun that statement up above.
If it's a problem, then it should be addressed. I have addressed many problems concerning 3D. I am well aware of the issues at hand.
I have asked you a number of times to provide some evidence of what you think is a problem. You have yet to do so. All I am asking for is proof of statement. That's all. As I have shown, there are problems that can be directly linked to viewing 3D. I have provided independent (of my opinion) evidence. If what you think is a problem . . . is a problem, then there should be information that is available.
You are on a "crusade" to change the numbers in this poll. I, and others, have been telling you that there are reasons for them that you apparently wish not to see (whatever your motivations.)
LOL - that's a heck of an accusation. You really believe that I have the ability to sway someone's vote? That's rich. I am willing to guarantee you that most of the people who vote and have voted on this poll, did so BEFORE they read through the thread.
But you are right. I am on a crusade, which consists of providing educational information, correcting misinformation and dispelling myths, having to do with 3D and 3DTV.
BTW, I could care less about the numbers on this poll.
It's more evident that you can't grasp the concept of causality. If a person doesn't have vision problems, disorientation or headache issues until they start watching a stereoscopic presentation, then it is something about the stereoscopic presentation that is the cause.
LOL - see - you are learning. That is much different then your previous statement:"Oh, that's right, everyone who doesn't like it, or gets headaches just has "broken eyes", even though they have no problems outside of viewing stereoscopic material for any duration."
There are certain physical conditions that exist in people that under normal viewing circumstances, don't produce any physical side affects. But, when they don 3D glasses, they are no longer under normal viewing circumstances. The are seeing unnaturally. Instead of each eye seeing 3D as we normally do, now each eye is only seeing a 2D image which the brain assembles for us and completes the illusion of 3D. But to do this without physical side affects, one's eye muscles must be in balance (along with no existing vision conditions like amblyopia, strabismus or optic nerve hypoplasia). If they aren't, then they get physical side affects. The balance is only required to view 3D.
Fanboyism is hard to fight, as it's seldom rooted in anything quantifiable. So this will be my final attempt. You can be a cheerleader if you want, and I would be there cheering with you, if it were an organic movement brought about by market forces. But it's not, and if the poll and a good number of media reports is any indicator, it looks like it's being foisted upon 80% of those who don't want it, while at the same time being forced to pay for it. Frankly, I don't care one way or the other about this, as I got my new sans-3D set at a great price and won't be buying another anytime soon. Enjoy yours knowing you'll be getting that majority of consumers who don't see things your way to subsidize the R&D and production so you can. Go 3D!
If people don't want a 3DTV, don't buy one.
If people don't want to see a 3D movie, don't see one.
That seems pretty simple to me. It's a subjective issue. Each person decides for themselves whether 3D is something they like. If they like 3D, they will pursue it as entertainment through various outlets. If they have no desire for 3D, there are plenty of alternatives available for them.
The attitude that irks me is the one where people who don't like it feel it should be gotten rid of. A childish attitude at best.
BTW, still waiting for your evidence that pupillary distance can lead to physical side affects caused by viewing 3D