3D in the Home? Do you care? - Page 10

I have it and think it's OK! Really depends on the movie

Don't care an don't intend begin to care until I can watch 3D movies exactly like I do now with Blu-Ray and DVDs - without glasses and visible from most any viewing angle whether sitting, standing or reclined.

If it came on a new HDTV I was buying I wouldn't mind as long as 3D didn't make the HDTV cost more or hindered performance on useful movies and HDTV viewing.

Not necessarily. There were many die-hard CRT folks that continued to bash decent digital because it "looked" different (digital/sharp even as it evolved. Also, a lot of 3D bashing comes from those that have not seen it done properly, so it looks like crap to them.

When you see it on a good projector that handles it well (large screen, minimal cross-talk, no flicker, PQ calibrated correctly, bright picture coupled with good blacks/detail), other than having to wear glasses, I cannot understand how anyone can bash it. Natively shot movies and animation have such added depth that it increases the overall immersion into the movie. As I said, it has to be done right and that also includes a LARGE screen. 3D done correctly should fill your field of view and TVs don't really do that.

To be ambivalent is one thing, but to bash the technology is an entirely different matter. Most of that has to come from those that don't like change or haven't seen it done right. I agree with anyone that doesn't like the surcharge for the 3D and having to wear glasses, but at some point, we probably won't need glasses and will be even more grateful for all the natively shot 3D source material.

Titanic was good, but is was not shot natively (even Cameron called it 2.5D). Native 3D looks even better (especially when the Directory/DP know what they're doing). Here's a good source for what movies are native 3D. I suggest Avatar, Prometheus, The Amazing Spider-Man, Hugo, and others on that list for excellent 3D PQ. Looking forward to Dredd 3D out on 1/8/13. Lots of positive reviews and native 3D too.

Show me where Cameron called it 2.5D, there was 16 million dollars spent in this conversion and it was awarded with the new THX 3D cert. He would have shot the movie in 3D but the tech wasn’t there and the market did not exist yet, that said he did shot the movie with 3D in mind that is why it translates so well. I know it was a conversion however it is still better than a lot of native shot 3D films. Frankly if you have not seen it in 3D you may not understand, this is 3D conversion done right not the stuff you may be used to. Since you are in this forum thread I do believe you have a 3D HD set do yourself a favor get Titanic 3D watch it and then report back to me. I think your tone will differ. And check this out Titanic.
Edited by PlayNice - 12/13/12 at 4:46pm

Here's what Cameron said about Titanic 3D:

I think he was under the impression it would not turn out as good as it did, believe me and many others it indeed did turn out even better than most native shot 3D. Check it out, see for yourself. And this is from a 29 year old man the grew up wanting to hate this movie due to all the girls his age when this film was released drooling over Leonardo. But really, the movie looks phenomenal and I have over 30 3D blu rays to compare it to including Hugo, Prometheus (my fav native 3D), Avatar, all of the IMAX releases, and Tron: Legacy to name some of the best native shot ones. Then Alice in Wonderland, Piranha, Transformers 3 and Avengers for some of the post converted. And you would not be able to tell Titanic doesn't belong among the native shot ones.

I have to agree, I was extremely impressed when I viewed a trailer for Titanic at the theater for the 3D release, and was equally pleased when I viewed the thing at home. James does know what he is doing when it comes to 3D. I'm waiting for the 3D conversion I hope he does on "The Abyss".

It will be interesting to see if there are any significant number changes in the poll after the Holidays... folks getting a new toy to play with!

I do understand some peoples' feelings about the glasses tho'... I haven't gone outside on a sunny day cause I hate to wear those heavy sunglasses. I also gave up skiing due to the bulky goggles I was forced to wear. If one enjoys doing something, then one will make allowances for the required equipment necessary. I would love hologram too, but holding off enjoyment of this type of media experience for something coming in the unforseen future, and at a price point that will not be inexpensive, seems like taking "fence sitting" to a new height. And remember, sitting on the fence for long periods of time tends to make one a pain in the a$$!

I own the movie and I agree it's excellent 3D. I just wanted to pull up the actual quote (which was "2.9D" rather than "2.5D").

There are still die hard CRT fans but that doesn't make my comment any less true. More than half of the respondants in this thread still either don't care about 3D or don't want anything to do with it. A significant number of th "got it" respondants have stated here that it was on the coat tails of of a display they wanted for other reasons so that is why they have it.

Bashing has validity in that many feel that the effort of manufacturers is being spent going in the wrong direction.

I don't care much for current 3D. When 3d without glasses becomes cheaper and more mainstream, then I'll jump on board. Or OLED with 3D. Having to wear glasses, it's never comfortable to have 2 pairs of glasses on to watch a movie.

I sold it since it came out and basically told customers it was little to no extra cost. When it was time for me purchase my 65VT50, I wanted to play with it at home and check it out, but it wasn't a deciding factor in choosing my panel.
Now that I have it, experiencing it in my own home is amazing and blows me away, WAY better than any 3d at the theaters. It is a much more immersive experience when combined with the rest of my home theater (depending on the film, of course).
I have even had grumpy friends complain that I have a 3d set and they cant watch, I picked up extra glasses and said "if you hate it, we can watch in 2d." They looked at me and said really? We never switch back to 2d once its up and running.
I'm not here to say 3d is the future, but I am saying its a damn cool feature, and it is a lot of fun to show things off in 3d. I still enjoy my VT50 in both 3d and 2d and I think thats whats its really all about, to have the option and ability to do what I want when I want.

I have it

Even though I have a 3D projector at home the novelty wears off quickly. Lately I have watched a lot of movies in 2D & 3D to compare and most of the time the #D version was not worth the extra discomfort from the glasses and lower light output.

I got 3D with a passive Vizio set. I like it, but really don't watch the 3D stuff much, as I only have a few discs and don't really like paying $25 or so for a single movie. If they ever come down to the $12 range, I'm sure I would watch more of it. I was also a bit unhappy when I got Tron and found much of the movie in 2d.

We enjoy our 3D Sammy LED TV. I probably have close to 20 3D movies. We get a kick out of it, and it makes things a little more fun.

As I'm designing my theater, I am going to make sure the PJ is 3D. I won't always want to watch in 3D, but i want to be able to

I got 3D with LG active plasma TV and of course with a 7.2 AV sound system. Great movies like Avatar are worth to watch in 3D mode.

I got it (Panasonic 65" plasma and OPPO player). I LOVE IT. Of course it all depends on content - as with anything else. When it works, I feel like I'm watching through an open window, and it stretches back into the scene in a very natural and immersive way. I don't care so much about stuff that floats out of the screen into my space. That's usually gimmicky-looking and rarely done well (but is effective on some occasions). Two thumbe up from me!

I enjoy watching a 3D movie once in awhile, but it is not something that I have a desire to do all of the time. I do wear prescription glasses so having to put 3D goggles on top isn't that enjoyable. I would like prescription 3D glasses, but there doesn't seem to be a plethora of options in that department (Sony XBRHX909). The added expense of the 3D movies themselves is another irritating problem. Living in Canada seems to mean being stuck paying high inflated prices (E.G. Finding Nemo in Canada was $34.95 on sale (if you can call it that) while you could source it from amazon.com at 27.99 (even less with coupon savings). I predict that the 3D market will strangle itself because of this issue. I'm more interested in 4K technology than 3D.

got one
love it - especially XXX looks great in 3D

I have been a big fan of 3D since its early conception, about 10 years ago, with edimentionnal glasses. At that time it was flickering (only 30fps/eye) but in a dark room, on a big screen, doom 3 with a 15" sub-woofer in my back was a truly terrific experience, I can recall falling off my chair several time...

Now I have a 3D projector, A 3D camcorder, a 3D screen on an Alienware laptop and best of all a Sony HMZ-T1 (3D head mounted display)... I can't play game in 2D any-more and I still fall off my chair from time to time. Best part is that ANY PC game can be played in 3D, It is disappointing that only some PS3 title can be played in 3D...

However, movie wise, I am very disappointed that it is almost impossible to rent a 3D BD and there very few title anyway, most of them are for kid or are simply terrible movies that needed the 3D hype or nobody would have bothered watching it. Besides Avatar, there is only How to train your dragon that was awesome and I can't even find the 3D BD here in Canada. But at least its good for porn, there hundred of title in that category so it look like its the main market for 3D content.

I saw a glass free 3D TV prototype that has multiple point of view, if you bend your head, you can see behind the foremost object... That was truly amassing but it wont be on the shelf before 2015...
There is also the Oculus rift 3D head mounted display that look promising with a wide field of view and a built in gyroscope to adjust the point of view... these technologies look promising, I'm eager to see these new tech in my living room.

Bottom line, I LOVE 3D for gaming (Because there is a LOT of content, any PC game!) but movies, yes I like it but there is no content so I watched only 3 3D movies this years (Avatar, How to train your dragon and Underworld 3) needless to say the last one killed the 3D movies hype I had, I almost felt asleep and haven’t bought an other 3D title yet...
Edited by madhak - 12/14/12 at 11:27am

Done properly, 3D in the home is GREAT! We sit 13 ft away from a 134”(diag) 2.35 ratio cinecurve screen and feel like we are in the movie. I have a feeling that those who voted Don’t care or Don’t want it, have never experienced a proper 3D presentation. I accept that there will always be those that just don’t like it, but I have trouble believing that more than 50% of forum members fit in that category.

Are the poll results reflective of the question whether you like 3D, or do you like or accept its current implementation? I think most opponents and “don’t cares” are responding to the implementation rather than the 3D experience.

The current implementation is most appealing to those with exceptional equipment and viewing rooms. If you have a large enough display and room configuration to achieve a viewing distance to screen width ratio of 1.3 or less and have a totally dark environment, today’s implementation produces excellent 3D results. I totally agree with those that dislike the heavy, awkward glasses, but this technology is still in its infancy and will get better.

We have been adding audio channels for years to improve the HT experience of being there, or immersed, in the soundfield. I don’t hear many HT enthusiasts complaining about surround sound, we embrace it and keep adding channels. I see 3D as a parallel effort to provide the same immersion into the video portion of the movie experience. Leaving the theater after experiencing Avatar in Imax 3D, I felt like I had just visited Pandora. My goal has been to recreate that experience in my home theater. With the release of Avatar 3D on BluRay, I find that I have almost achieved that – except for the unwieldy glasses!

"It just kills me to read about people and their need for perfection of 'black levels' 'sharpness' 'color'."

I'm still in the dark about what "black levels" are.

"Sharpness" and "color" are cool.

"I am only 50, but started out with a 12" B&W TV, cable,lol, try "bunny ears", remote, that was my brother and I.
Then came OMG "color" ! !, wow!!"

I look back on 50 with a stoic's scorn:

We didn't have TeeVee at all until I was 12-years-old, though just about everyone else in the universe had it. We had radio and books. Never had cable (except for clothes-drying line). "Remotes" were in the remote, unknowable future.

Didn't have color until years after growing up and leaving home.

"Picture still had more snow than our drive way in December, but it was color!"

Snow!? Before we had TeeVee, I had to walk to school every day, in 6 feet of snow, twenty miles each way, and uphill in both directions. Those were what senile fools would call "the good old days," before the Laws of Physics were enacted.

As for 3D? Just this year I bought a 40" 2D, of the view that it will be my last so must last. I viewed 3D as a passing fad -- and now I wonder if I should have waited so I could experience what all the apparent fuss is about. Then again, I don't relish wearing two pairs of glasses at the same time, one eye blue, the other red, and possibly suffering induced headaches and being eaten by the "Life of Pi" tiger.

I'll go without, semi-comfortable in the knowledge that my eyes are already 3D with one pair of glasses, and wholly comfortable with the fact that all the dangerous animals are safely constrained in 2 dimensions.

We didn't have TeeVee -- but we did have View Master!

Gad, you're old!

My son in law has a 65 inch Panasonic plasma too. I have been very impressed with its 2D performance but have not seen much 3D on it. As noted in earlier posts, I don't much like3D because the combination of the 3D glasses on top of my regular glasses bugs me. Still, when my 60 inch Pioneer Kuro plasma finally gives up the ghost I will almost certainly replace it with aPanasonic plasma.

I thought 3d was gimmicky at first.. Checked out a few demos nothing extraordinary but recently bought a pnd64d7000 for a terrific price and thought we would give it a whirl... Wow..!!! I was very impressed... Colors seem very true, bright and crisp. Now I have 5 or 6 3d blurays and get excited when a new releases... Everyone that comes over wants to watch something in 3d. My wife's uncle reminds me of ebenesor Scrooge... I hadn't seen him smile in the 14 years I've known him... He popped the glasses on during xmen and POW...!!! Smiles from ear to ear.. I'm not gonna lie it wasn't a pretty sight, for his teeth aren't the prettiest but never the less... It is neat..

That's the only "for" 3D vote I have: as the volume of 3D product increases, the price for 2D will drop (as in many instances it is now less expensive for blu-ray than for standard).

So, manufacturers: keep producing the 3D I don't want!

3D is just another cheap fad to sell more tvs.

When it came time to upgrade from my, still functioning well, 3-gun Barco, to new tech, I chose the affordable JVC X3, with 3D. Love it, love it. As of today, I have a large and expanding DVD & BD library with 66 3D titles. Watching 3D on a 136 inch widescreen (with 11.2 sound) is as awesome as being in my local V-Max cinema.

I'm glad my set has 3D capability though I haven't cared that much to date about what is available in 3D. When a live event has been well produced in 3D, it can be terrific. The Summer Olympics in 3D had many events that looked just o.k., and others that left you feeling you were right there on the sidelines, or alongside the athletes as they competed. I DVR'd some of it and the segments still carry that "being there" feeling. For instance, the Canoe/Kayak Slalom through rapids was fun to watch in 2D, but 3D took it to a whole other level; you felt as if you were right there in the rapids with the competitors. The production values were terrific, and it was 3D at it's best. ESPN 3D was mostly repeats of past events, what was available did not impress me, and I cancelled it after a few months.

As has been noted above by others, once you are over the initial "wow" of 3D, you start to look for content that is good, and production values that excel. And we have to keep in mind that technological advance doesn't always yield better art. Some movies are better in b/w than color. And in many of the hdtv forum discussions people often comment that they prefer movies to look like movies, rather than live digital recordings created by the smooth motion settings and higher refresh rates that new hdtv's offer. Quality 3D content still has a ways to go.
Edited by baggers - 12/14/12 at 2:57pm