Thread: 3D TV
View Single Post
Old 01-14-2012, 09:18 AM   #12
Hazzard
Senior Member
Max Brawn
Points: 5,710, Level: 48 Points: 5,710, Level: 48 Points: 5,710, Level: 48
Activity: 10% Activity: 10% Activity: 10%
 
Hazzard's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,521
Training Type: Powerlifting
Fav Exercise: Squat
Fav Supp: Pizza
Reputation: 1950
Hazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good postsHazzard has made some good posts
Default

Personally, I think 3D is one of the worst things to ever happen to cinema in a long time. It doesn't make the story any better, doesn't make you more immersed - especially when I have to wear glasses OVER my own glasses. In addition to the 3D itself (which is often nothing more than a gimmick due to lazy post-conversion e.g. Clash of the Titans), there's a 3D tax that you have to pay along with paying for the glasses themselves. To see a 3D movie in this country, in the evening, it costs about 12 if you go for regular seats, or 14 for "VIP" seats, which are hardly better but take up the entire optimal viewing space of the cinema, which means you're stuck at the sides or right at the front or back. **** cinemas.

But I digress, 3D TVs will never take off unless stereoscopic (3D) visuals are capable of being produced, glasses free, with a viewing angle of more than around 30 degrees. The 3DS is only capable of being glasses free when viewed dead on, otherwise it looks like a blurry mess.
__________________
Hazzard is offline   Reply With Quote