Movies / HDTV: 2D vs 3D

[oz]

3D has not come close to fully catching on, but it seems to be hanging in there. Still, I'm not sure that it will ever become the standard way to view movies and television. If they could make it all work properly without the requirement for 3D glasses, I'm thinking that might change things.

In the interim, what do you guys think about the movies that are now coming out in 3D, when compared to the 2D versions of the same movie?

Do you find a big difference in the 3D quality of movies viewed at the theater vs the same movies viewed on your 3D capable HDTV at home?

Thanks for any info / opinions regarding 2D vs 3D.

[Irithori]

Well, I happen to have a 2D Beamer and a 3D TV (55").
There are two issues with 3D from my pov:

1) The tv screensize is too small.
It makes a lot of difference, if you can always see the surroundings vs your whole view is catched by the screen in a real cinema.
In a shop, where they let you test you dont realize that, because you are very close to the tv and also there is probably a lot of distraction.

2) The kind of movies you get in 3D is mostly limited to standard hollywood blockbusters.
From time to time it might be nice to watch 30m robots fight it out while the latest starlet shows what she´s got, but there are much better movies out there.
better == weirder, deeper, funnier, etc
I am not saying hollywood cant make good movies (they can), but they do have certain recipes and repeating storys.
"Good guy wins", "If story fails, explode some stuff", etc

But back to my point, the movies I am currently *more* interested in, wont be in 3D for a long time, because the studios are much smaller.


So in conclusion: For me it´s a nice additonal gimmick, but not a must have.
My TV just happened to have this feature, because of the product line I was interested in.

[oz]

I'm pretty new to the whole 3D thing, and not overly thrilled with the experience so far. I've not seen any recent 3D movies at the cinema, and having only a couple of 3D Blu-ray disks, and nothing else much to compare it to, I'm not sure what should be expected from the 3D format just yet. DirecTV does broadcast a little bit of 3D, but it hasn't been enough to get a good feel for the format.

Yeah, I can see how the HDTV screen size being much smaller than a theater screen might cause some loss of the overall 3D effect. I wonder if keeping the room very dark when viewing 3D content would help any since the room surroundings wouldn't be quite as apparent?

As for 3D content, it seems that Hollywood has gone big on creating "post production" 3D versions, rather than filming in real 3D. I ran across an online article the other day that includes listings of "real 3D" and "fake 3D" content, but I'm not sure how much difference real 3D vs fake 3D really makes since I only have a couple of 3D movies at this point.

Thanks for the feedback, Irithori!

[jmadero]

Personally I think 3D is a short lived fad. I think this for a lot of reasons, the glasses are just strange and make the viewing experience awkward at best, expensive, awkward and goofy at worst. Cost, while coming down, is still high. Most movies aren't even being released on Blue Ray in 3D because they understand it's just not worth it. I was in the market for a new tv last year and ended up looking at a lot, ultimately I ended up getting a LG LED tv, still probably the best viewing experience I've ever seen. My in laws came over the other night and saw it on for the first time and all of them (parent in laws and grandparent in laws) were amazed at the quality. I could be very wrong but I think 3D has a few years left, I've heard that a few studios are starting to do some more artsy stuff with 3D but ultimately, sales numbers are horrible and aren't getting better.

This aside, I just saw Hugo in 3D a few weeks ago and that was quite an experience, I was pleasantly surprised as it was probably my 5th 3D movie in theater and the first to impress me. Lastly, I did see that a company has come out with a set of glasses that supposedly turn any 2D tv into a 3D tv (now this could be interesting for everyone as they only cost $35 a pair vs. the standard $80-$125 for the "true 3D glasses") The reviews looked decent on them.

Ultimately, my LED high contrast ridiculously thin tv has met and beat all expectations and I just wasn't willing to fork out the extra thousands for a 3D equivalent.

[oz]

Personally I think 3D is a short lived fad.

Yeah, I thought that at first as well, but I'm no longer sure what to think.

There are a number of movies already set to be filmed in 3D this year, and the major manufacturers all seem to have 3D HDTV and 3D Blu-ray player models readily available to consumers. Even the AV receiver that I purchased recently is indicated as 3D ready. The movie industry just keeps introducing more 3D blu-ray disks, too, some of which are post production 3D instead of being filmed in 3D, but still considered 3D content.

Overall, it seems to me that the 3D effort is on the increase, although not nearly at the level many were hoping for. Considering the huge leaps in technology recently, I'd think that 3D could only get better, cheaper, and easier as we go forward, and all that could happen fairly quickly.