or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Community News & Polls › 3D in the Home? Do you care?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

3D in the Home? Do you care? - Page 4

Poll Results: 3D In the Home?

 
  • 39% (568)
    Got It
  • 11% (164)
    Want It
  • 18% (259)
    Don't Want It
  • 30% (439)
    Don't Care
1430 Total Votes  
post #91 of 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Dail View Post

You say you haven't tired it then tell people how bad it is? It's gotten so inexpensive to give it a real try it doesn't make any sense to not even try it.
The best TVs are 3D capable
3D Blu Ray players are marginally more expensive than equivalent ones that don't support it. $10 or so.
3D glasses are under $20
There are plenty of 3D Blu Ray disks that get rave reviews around here in the $25-$35 range. 3D movies come with 2D copies, so they incremental cost to try a reference quality one is $5 to $10.
So the incremental cost to give 3D a real try is $40 or less vs not ever trying it.
I haven't watched Avatar since I saw it in the theater because the 3D was so spectacular that I can't imagine that movie in 2D. I'm installing my 3D projector for christmas.
IMax: Under the Sea 3D is supposed to have outstanding 3D.
If you haven't watched either of these on your 3D capable TV, how can you say it doesn't look good. Of course there is "3D" content that would be better labeled 2.5D. But that doesn't mean there isn't any high quality 3D content.

I never said that I haven't tried it. I said I tried to find a TV that didn't come with it but there really weren't any (60" plasma). If there was such a creature, I would have rather saved a few bucks on a non-3D TV because I know I wouldn't use that feature. I ended up having to buy a TV that has it and I haven't bothered to use it because I think 3D looks like garbage. I've seen 3D in IMAX too...still not impressed. You may enjoy it, and that is fine by me. But my impression is that it doesn't look good because much of the background is flat with random things popping forward. Hey, if you like pop-up books too, have at it. But, I prefer flat page reading.
post #92 of 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbailey75 View Post

With 3d, you realize how small your TV actually is, 55" does not do it justice. Wish I had space to set up a projector, that would be the bomb.

No kidding. I have a 65" LG (biggest I could get) and am glad I didn't get the 55" (which was considerably cheaper).

When one of the other TVs in our house dies, I'm taking it down and getting a projector. I actually laid out my theater room for it, but opted for the TV for the time being. If I bought a projector right now, my wife would not be pleased.tongue.gif
post #93 of 413
Should add another option "Haven't Decided yet" to the poll
post #94 of 413
Have it and it has some allure to it, but primarily as a way to show off the system. As for watching in 3D regularly, we tried it but no one in my house was blown away enough to continue asking for it. I never hear "wow, let's watch xyz in 3D". Instead it is more common to watch the movie in 2D, even if we have the 3D copy.

It is neat to have, but I could live without it.


Unfortunatley, I think it lends itself more to science related programs like Planet Earth or The Universe, than it does to movies. If there was a 3D science/history channel, it would likely be popular. As for movies, "meh".
post #95 of 413
On a tv I don't care. On a larger projector screen, it becomes a tolerable novelty. I cheaped out on a projector for my theater build, got an optoma hd33. I will budget more in a few years once passive 3d projectors are reasonably priced.
post #96 of 413
Got it! and 4 of them! Samsung 55" LED 3D Series 8000 for Living Room, Samsung 51" D550 for Bedroom and Panasonic P65ST30 for HT Room! smile.gif
post #97 of 413
its a nice option to have i want to go to a 47" and i'll probably look into a lg passive set
post #98 of 413
Don't care.

3d is a gimmick imo. Even in the theaters it is annoying to me, and I don't think the added annoyance of another pair of glasses is worth it. As someone who wears glasses regularly, I think they suck.

The range of focus on 3d makes it an unnatural experience, and far more than 2d has. If I want to check out some scenery I can in 2d; in 3d it's like someone is kicking my eyeballs to their point of focus. It's a very jarring experience and it happens to me all the time.

4k, bigger cheaper screens seems universally applicable, so I would rather they put efforts into making that come sooner.
post #99 of 413
As with all technology developments, the next big thing is not 'instead of' it is 'as well as' and it never ceases to entertain when folks resistant to change feel the way they do things is threatened. 5-15% of folks will never get stereo3D as they have little or no depth sense other than the normal 2D clues. They do not have the visual perceptions required so a Stereo3D experience is wasted on them. However most of us can 'feel' the difference the extra dimension gives and is, when done well, an enjoyable experience. The development of our visual representations of the world started with cave painting and I wonder if those cave painters, on seeing drawings on paper, would have scoffed and said 'it's just a fashion, spitting ochre over my hands is where it's at and where it will stay". At the moment Stereo 3D is just an occasional treat, like a meal in a fancy restaurant, you wouldn't go there all the time but boy you can tell the difference from McDonalds. I would say the content makers have a long way to go, 3D films are still shot for 2D with fast edits and action when 3D really requires slow movement in order to allow the brain to savor the scenes. All these things will mature and the privateers are already out there developing skills and working on dedicated S3D content that will be more S3D appropiate. I do hope they avoid sticking things through the screeens just for the sake of it and provide, what most of Hollywood has so much difficulty with, - a story.
post #100 of 413
I don't care. I'd rather have a plasma the puts out better full-screen whites than gimicky 3D.
post #101 of 413
IMO observing 3D content on any screen smaller then 110" is not worth it unless your a kid sitting on the floor within 6ft. It is definitely nice watching good 3D material on a 120" with the latest Epson 5020UB light cannon with no ghosting. But even though i have projectors i still watch way more 2D content the same as most folks do and until technology one day eliminates the need of 3D glasses i still see it as a fad that will slowly fade away. Im still wondering how close folks will have to sit in front of the new 4K resolution displays to appreciate the fine pixels?

Regards, wink.gif
post #102 of 413
Have it, rarely watch it - waiting for 84", Passive 3D, Ultra 4K - Then ask me again - for now excellent 2D system that almost looks 3D for now.
Oh yes, a Lottery win to pay for the new set!

I see the gap for the `Don't cares' is narrowing to the `Have it's'!

And closer!
Edited by p5browne - 11/16/12 at 8:50am
post #103 of 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzi93 View Post

If I bought a projector right now, my wife would not be pleased.tongue.gif

This is why I am never getting married, phew, glad I figured it out before it was to late.

Back on topic, I love to have the crispy 3D picture on the W7000 for when I need it. I have to admit, it isn't a perfect technology yet, but it is kinda pretty cool when you see a well made 3D movie on the W7000.
post #104 of 413
3D in an actual theater is 'half-way' acceptable, but that's ONLY if I can't see the movie in 2D. But since there are 500 other people wearing the glasses with me, I don't mind as much.

In the home? no freaking way. The viewing angle to get the 3D is very small and you'd have to sit in the exact center to get it looking correctly, and anybody outside of that zone is out of luck and the movie watching experience is horrible. Plus, you have to wear those stupid glasses.

3D in the home has a long way before I become remotely interested: wider viewing angle, no glasses.
post #105 of 413
Got it.

However, I did not buy a single piece of equipment because it had 3D capability. Then, while playing Gears of War 3 about 5 months ago, I noticed it was 3D capable, so I bought an $18 pair of glasses. I was pretty happy with the results, but again, I wouldn't necessarily go out of my way, more than $20 anyway, to have it. Now that I have glasses and the rest of the tech supports it, I do use it when games support it and watched Avengers in 3D (yes, I know it was not shot in 3D) and enjoyed the experience. Surprisingly, so did the wife.

My feeling is it's a fad and not one I would pay extra for in equipment.
post #106 of 413
OK, while on the 3D subject which 3D movie do you think its the best so far? My opinion Scrooge with Jim Carey, whats yours?????
post #107 of 413
Voted "Don't Care" - and we have a 60ST50, a Pan 3D Capable blu-ray player, AND a 3D Copy of Avatar - free with the player.

But have yet to watch a 3D movie at home, as we have not spent the $$ for 3D Glasses - and don't see much of a chance that we will.....
post #108 of 413
I'm sure there are people who refuse to buy a car until they can fly and run on coffee grounds also.

3D may not be perfect, but aside from color, or digital signal, it really is the biggest break through in home televisions (my opinion)
I just watched "Rescue 3D", a some what cheesy show but the 3D was outstanding, and it was only $15 (cdn)!!!
Yes the "negatives" do take some getting use to, but to me it is worth it.
I would much rather experience something, even if it's imperfect, than not.
post #109 of 413
Being anti 3D is like being anti TV in the time and age of Radio. I can imagine back them people saying TV I don't need that I have my Radio. Wait even better Color TV I don't need that I have my Black and White set it works just fine.

I have a 3D TV and it is the best thing in TV tech I purchased since I bought my first HDTV about 10 years ago. If you have an 3D set at home and have yet to watch a 3D movie, give it a go and see if you do not change your mind. Also a good 3D TV makes all the difference. I myself do not like Active 3D I am a Passive 3D kinda guy. It's the same tech used by RealD 3D in the theaters.

3D is a great advancement and I love using it.

Best 3D movie I have watched is Prometheus.
post #110 of 413
I've got it. I enjoy it when I use it , too. Which is actually more often than I thought I would when I bought the tv.
post #111 of 413
IDC, but they screwed the pooch, majority of HDTVs sold are probably not 3D, how many years ago was it really standard on flat panels? I know DLP had affordable 3D a bit sooner.
post #112 of 413
I have a 3D projector as my secondary setup. The Optoma HD33. For $1000, everyone needs to have a 3D projector set up in their home! It could double duty as your main PJ too. Some documentaries are impressive in 3D with no ghosting!
post #113 of 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by elmalloc View Post

I have a 3D projector as my secondary setup. The Optoma HD33. For $1000, everyone needs to have a 3D projector set up in their home! It could double duty as your main PJ too. Some documentaries are impressive in 3D with no ghosting!

Do People OWN TV's?

I have 3 PJ's in my home. I watch 100% on PJ's ONLY. smile.gif

You can see one of them in my ICON.
post #114 of 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by drhankz View Post

Do People OWN TV's?
I have 3 PJ's in my home. I watch 100% on PJ's ONLY. smile.gif
You can see one of them in my ICON.

Unfortunately I have a 60" (tiny!) plasma in the living room. It's a 20x20 great room that's open and has too many windows. I contemplated for a very long time putting a projector in there, I just could not combat the light during the day!

I hate that so much. If I can get my triple projector eyefinity setup going I'll have 5 projectors in the house, DOWN WITH TV SEts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
post #115 of 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by elmalloc View Post

Unfortunately I have a 60" (tiny!) plasma in the living room. It's a 20x20 great room that's open and has too many windows.

As you can see in my ICON picture - that PJ is in a SUNNY room with ZERO
light control.

The secret is a Bright PJ with a Screen gain of 2+.
post #116 of 413
I am also in the 'got it but don't use it' camp. Seems to me that 3D now comes as a standard feature on most of the larger flat-screens - either 3D or 3D-ready. Consequently, if you are looking for a new set you are going to get 3D whether you want it or not. We have tried it, but frankly, the disadvantages outweigh the advantages for us. Dim, flickering picture, rather unispired content, and the goofy glasses make the 2D version preferable. In fact, I don't generally bother to even buy the 3D bluray.
post #117 of 413
Just purchased a Panasonic 50" GT-50 for my second room and to be honest have no inclination to buy glasses and a even a cheap 3-D player. Happy with 2-D off my Pioneer Kuro. I have over 300 blu ray movies in my collection, so I'm a buyer and not a renter. Right now there is no incentive. I won't pay up to $10.00 more just for a 3-D version of a movie. A 3-D version would have to be included at no additional cost for me to take the plunge and spend more for a player and glasses.
post #118 of 413
Many of us, me included, have high end plasma displays and 2D AV receivers that are only a few years old. If I really cared about 3D I would hold my nose and pay what it took to upgrade to a 3D setup in my home theater. As it is, though, I plan to stick with my 60 inch Pioneer Kuro plasma display and Yamaha RX-V 3900 AV receiver for the foreseeable future.
post #119 of 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayNice View Post

Being anti 3D is like being anti TV in the time and age of Radio. I can imagine back them people saying TV I don't need that I have my Radio. Wait even better Color TV I don't need that I have my Black and White set it works just fine.
I have a 3D TV and it is the best thing in TV tech I purchased since I bought my first HDTV about 10 years ago. If you have an 3D set at home and have yet to watch a 3D movie, give it a go and see if you do not change your mind. Also a good 3D TV makes all the difference. I myself do not like Active 3D I am a Passive 3D kinda guy. It's the same tech used by RealD 3D in the theaters.
3D is a great advancement and I love using it.
Best 3D movie I have watched is Prometheus.

WORD!

A tie goes split: Prometheus / Avatar / Hugo / Titanic / Afterlife / IMAX Under The Sea / IMAX Deep Sea (Live Action 3D); Tintin / Ga'Hoole / Madagascar 3 / Polar Express (Animated 3D)!!!

Know what? Madagascar 3 might just be No. 1 for me right now ... WOW!!! cool.gif
post #120 of 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taranteacher View Post

Know what? Madagascar 3 might just be No. 1 for me right now ... WOW!!! cool.gif

Completely agree, might not be the best movie of the bunch, entertaining none the less, but the 3D effects are top notch. Will be getting Polar express and a Christmas carol for the kids early december can't wait to see the runaway train sequence in polar express. Brave should be on my door step when I get home from work, hope to get that in tonight.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Community News & Polls
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Community News & Polls › 3D in the Home? Do you care?