Originally Posted by Clark Burk
You're absolutely right. Unfortunately most people never got to see 3D on a set like the C6. Prior efforts with 1080P sets and active glasses had lots of problems that people tired of. Dim pictures with lots of crosstalk. Avatar 2 could be what brings people back to the cinema to see 3D again. It may also be a one trick pony that does nothing to boost future 3D production.
I agree, i have no cross talk or dimness using the strain-free passive glasses on the beautiful OLED set. I didn't love 3D until seeing Cameron's artful use of it to tell his story and portray the world of the story with depth in a way that doesn't fully translate to 2D, rather than as a gimmick as most prior movies had made of 3D.
I didn't like 3D in home displays using active glasses on low resolution 1080p sets that reduced brightness and we're prone to eye strain.
It was the passive, 4k OLED sets that were the first high quality, full HD and bright implementation of 3D that allowed me to appreciate 3D. Unfortunately, the OLED panels were too late to undo the damage to the reputation poor 3D implementations had done to public appeal.
I know from experience, people who believe they don't like 3D, then see a film like Avatar or Hugo or one of the popular Marvel films on a 4K OLED, like me become converts and want to see more.
Which is why, it may take time, and maybe Avatar 2 can do it or maybe it will be too soon, I believe time will come when a quality 3D display that does not impact HDR intensity will be popular enough to bring 3D back to home panels. I know I am not buying a set until my OLED dies or 3D returns. Meanwhile, those of us who are lucky enough to have working OLED panels from 2015 and 2016 can enjoy HDR 4K and full HD comfortably passive 3D that is more clear and bright than even the 3D I see in a IMAX movie theater.
BTW, I don't think the arguments that 3D harms the 2D picture are valid. OLED as a technology took a few years overall to gain the lumen range for satisfying HDR, that wasn't due to 3D capability. Improved HDR capability will help 3D as well. The minimal added production cost may be a valid argument, but then, what about the cost of those unused connections on the back of the set, ARC, all those apps I don't use because I prefer Roku, all those awful picture modes that are only ever justified when trying to sell the panel in a bright store room, and other features of which are, I'd think, less often used than 3D. I for one don't use a flexible screen to wrap around curves in a wall. 3D is more useful to me than a screen that bends and twists.