Misuse of 3D lenses to Blame for Dim Movies?
By
Cass_,
Posted on: 2011-05-23 24:39 in Comic and Hero-Villain Culture
Quote:
If the 3ds is any indication of a TV or movie screen using a direct no glasses 3d model it would never work for a large crowd or audience. Its just to personalized to having to hold it or view it at just the right angle. Dont get me wrong the 3ds works, but it couldnt be the main tv in your home in a neutral spot for multiple viewers.
|
Originally Posted by Rodion
3D won't be universally accepted until the technology actually works for everyone. Right now, you need the glasses and that's a stumbling block. Also, many people get headaches or are nauseated by the effect.
There are designs for direct view 3D TV sets, but I can't say how good they look. As I understand it, they also have viewing angle and size limitations and aren't yet applicable to movie theaters. All current 3D technologies depend on a trick -- presenting a different image to each eye -- rather than actually rendering a "solid" 3D image that you can view directly with your own eyes. What's the difference? If you watch a contemporary 3D film and move from one side of the screen to the other, you'll see the same image from every angle. In a real 3D presentation walking from one side of the image to the other would show you the left side of a character's face in profile, then the face straight on, then the character's right profile. The problem is, directors wouldn't want to use real 3D, because they couldn't control the exact presentation of the image to all viewers. They also wouldn't be able to play the "jump out of the screen" trick in a real 3D system that projects the image in a tank or on a stage. When you come right down to it, 3D isn't really very important. When we view real life the 3D effect is extremely small -- our retinas are basically flat and the parallax effect at the distance we sit from a theater screen is vanishingly small. That is, the distance between our eyes is a couple of inches and we often sit 50 to 100 feet away from the screen. Only when we get really close to things do our eyes actually perceive two substantially different images. Systems like IMAX give you a more immersive experience without the need for glasses. Being surrounded by the image gives a more visceral sensation than having sharks pop out of the screen at you. But that system has its own problems, too -- the curvature of the screen often distorts the image. Until the distortion problems are resolved I'm not going to bother with 3D. And that's going to be another two or three generations of technology, at a minimum. |
Quote:
Yet. Technology will improve. Many companies are working on it.
|
Originally Posted by QuiJon
If the 3ds is any indication of a TV or movie screen using a direct no glasses 3d model it would never work for a large crowd or audience. Its just to personalized to having to hold it or view it at just the right angle. Dont get me wrong the 3ds works, but it couldnt be the main tv in your home in a neutral spot for multiple viewers.
|
Quote:
Have to agree with this. Give 10 years and we might see 3D TVs without the glasses. 3D movie screens without the glasses would require something else since it would require not using a projector or some new technology. Glasses-free 3D TVs for about 10 people should be |
Originally Posted by Zikar
Yet. Technology will improve. Many companies are working on it.
|
possible eventually.
I personally like my 3DS, but the 3D camera should have better resolution, waiting for 3D movies on Netflix, and the lack of 3DS games are some major problems.
The first step in being sane is to admit that you are insane.
Quote:
Well, they already have HD 3D TVs that don't require glasses. The only problem is viewing angle and price.|
Originally Posted by starphoenix
Have to agree with this. Give 10 years and we might see 3D TVs without the glasses.
|
Price will come down naturally as time goes on, so it's all about that viewing angle.
Until it's a volumetric display it's not 3D, it's just annoying.
While I've occasionally regretted not getting "the movie theater" experience for a film, I've never felt I missed out by not watching a movie in 3D.
3D-Only views = me waiting for the Blue Ray release.
Friends of mine have lamented the 3D age because they bring their kids to see the movies, and the ticket prices add up quickly on the family budget. My reply was, "Just stop going to the 3D version. If enough people did this, the studios would eventually get the hint and stop cramming it down our throats." The problem is the theater they typically go to usually doesn't have the 2D version playing. My solution: that's what DVD is for.
Arc# 92382 -- "The S.P.I.D.E.R. and the Tyrant" -- Ninjas! Robots! Praetorians! It's totally epic! Play it now!
Arc # 316340 -- "Husk" -- Azuria loses something, a young woman harbors a dark secret, and the fate of the world is in your hands.