Study: 3D Offers Nothing But Headaches

Earnest Cavalli

New member
Jun 19, 2008
5,352
0
0
Study: 3D Offers Nothing But Headaches



According to a new study, not only do 3D films carry a massively heightened risk of causing headaches, the technology also does nothing to increase a viewer's immersion.

Fox News reports:

Moviegoers who watch 3-D films do not experience more intense emotional reactions or a greater sense of "being there" than those who watch 2-D movies, a new study finds. The 3-D versions also don't help you remember the movie better than 2-D versions.

The 3-D movies did, on the other hand, come with a risk of discomfort. Compared with 2-D movie watchers, 3-D movie-watchers were about three times more likely to have eyestrain, headache or trouble with vision, the study showed.


Though California State University's L. Mark Carrier says that moviegoers may enjoy 3D films for other reasons (or for the sheer technological novelty in play), his findings argue that the gimmick is no better a story telling platform than traditional two-dimensional films. "All other things being equal, I would say you're increasing your chances of having some discomfort," Carrier said.

For the study, Carrier and his colleagues surveyed 400 students following a mix of 2D and 3D screenings of recent, popular films such as Dreamworks' How To Train Your Dragon [http://www.amazon.com/How-Train-Your-Dragon-Single-Disc/dp/B002ZG97YM]. Participants were then asked to rate the films and describe their emotional reactions to the subject matter.

According to Carrier, those who viewed the films in three-dimensions showed no more cognition or attachment to the movies than those who viewed them in the traditional two-dimensional fashion, though there was a marked increase in headache activity among the former group.

As Fox points out, the 3D films also carry, on average, a $3 higher ticket price than their 2D counterparts.

Before any of you decry this news based purely on its connection to the Murdoch media empire, I will also point to the reams of anecdotal evidence saying this exact same thing since the recent revitalization of 3D. How many of you 3DS owners switch off the handheld's key selling point after a few minutes of use?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, short of vibrating movie seats [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053363/] and physically muzzling teenage girls, the movie-going experience has hit its peak.

Source: Fox [http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/08/08/3-d-movies-boost-headaches-not-enjoyment/]
(Image [http://www.flickr.com/photos/rdenubila/4997236801/])

Permalink
 

Jandau

Smug Platypus
Dec 19, 2008
5,034
0
0
Earnest Cavalli said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again, short of vibrating movie seats [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053363/] and physically muzzling teenage girls, the movie-going experience has hit its peak.
How about vibrating teenage girls? That would improve the moviegoing experience, right? :p

Seriously though, this is one of those "Duh, really?" studies. 3D barely adds anything to a movie, even at its best. And it usually isn't at its best. It also stupidly iflates ticket prices. I skipped on watching Thor because none of the theatres were playing it in 2D where I live. Now I'm stuck waiting for the DVD... :(
 

ImprovizoR

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,952
0
0
Yet, they keep trying to implement it every 10 years or so. It looks like they succeed this time.
 

FalloutJack

Bah weep grah nah neep ninny bom
Nov 20, 2008
15,489
0
0
You will understand if I say that this is a load of malarkey, right?

Basically? Me likey 3D. Me not worried about little bigger price tag for it. Me thinks this research is like most research of this nature: Based upon skewed figures and inconclusive.
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
20,154
4,920
118
They really needed a study to come to this very obvious conclusion?
Earnest Cavalli said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again, short of vibrating movie seats [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053363/] and physically muzzling teenage girls, the movie-going experience has hit its peak.
I guess that means they're gonna have to start making actual better movies...

[sub]Dammit.[/sub]
 

Sniper Team 4

New member
Apr 28, 2010
5,433
0
0
Glad to know it's not just me. 3D movies hurt my eyes literally. I have to take the glasses off some times and give my eyes a break--which turns the movie into a blurry mess, so I quickly put them back on and suffer. To date, I've only seen two 3D movies. Assuming the original Star Wars Trilogy does come out in theaters in 3D, I will see three more, but then I'm done.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
Haha, I keep seeing the question, "did they need a study for this?".

The answer is a resounding YES! Companies and government bodies can do nothing without studies, they are literally incapable of any rational or critical thinking. They in fact only did the study because people were complaining about 3D. So, they had to be sure.... just to be sure that most people weren't wrong and that the minority of people who like them weren't in fact right, that this was the best way to do anything.
 

Roganzar

Winter is coming
Jun 13, 2009
513
0
0
ImprovizoR said:
Yet, they keep trying to implement it every 10 years or so. It looks like they succeed this time.
Actually, its more like 30 year rotation. You know long enough to get the next generation of movie producers to think they have the next big idea. Movie Bob covered this recently.
I have no use for 3D and never did. A little scientific backing is nice though when I declare my disdain for the gimick.
IMAX is totally worth it though. Huge clear picture, great sound thats the way to go. Not 3D IMAX just IMAX.
Oh and can we muzzle the elderly as well as vibrating teenage girls? Also, can we apply shotgun blasts rectally to anyone answering and talking on their cell phone in the middle of the theater? Its okay if your a parent and it vibrates and you leave to answer it but talking during the movie should be an executable offense.
 

TwoSidesOneCoin

New member
Dec 11, 2010
194
0
0
While I can't say that I've gotten headaches from watching 3D movies, I can however safely say that, I'm not really impressed with them. Yay, the movie pulls a matrix slow-mo sequence so they can make the scene pop out at you! whoop-de-fucking-doo!

I'd think that if the whole 3D craze failed back in the day, they would have realized that maybe it wasn't the greatest idea to bring it back.

Also, did anyone else read the thread title as: Sony: 3D Offers Nothing But Headaches, and immediately think it was just Sony taking a shot at Nintendo's 3Ds or was I the only one?
 

TheDooD

New member
Dec 23, 2010
812
0
0
Earnest Cavalli said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again, short of vibrating movie seats [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053363/] and physically muzzling teenage girls, the movie-going experience has hit its peak.
They'll be a major influx of women going to see action movies. With lots of explosions and shaky chase scenes, Mike Bay would make a killing off this.
 

Pinguin

New member
Aug 15, 2009
139
0
0
Hmmmm, a quandary. On the one hand it's Fox News, so I feel I _should_ disagree with it. On the other hand, it tallies exactly with my own beliefs about the gimmick that is 3D in films.
 

Reaper195

New member
Jul 5, 2009
2,055
0
0
I have yet to receive a headache, but 3D has given me a massive case of "I am aware I am wearing these shitty glasses.....all the time', distracting me from the movie and wanting it to end so I can get them off my face.
 

Fiz_The_Toaster

books, Books, BOOKS
Legacy
Jan 19, 2011
5,498
1
3
Country
United States
TwoSidesOneCoin said:
Also, did anyone else read the thread title as: Sony: 3D Offers Nothing But Headaches, and immediately think it was just Sony taking a shot at Nintendo's 3Ds or was I the only one?
I did for a second, but then I realized they can't throw any stones since they are making a huge push with 3DTVs, one push being bundled with Resistance 3.

OT: I've only seen one 3D movie and I had a massive headache and my eyes were not happy. I'm hoping this "no shit sherlock" study will convince companies to just stop and recognize it for the gimmick that it is. But I don't see that happening anytime soon.
 

Not-here-anymore

In brightest day...
Nov 18, 2009
3,028
0
0
Emotional immersion be damned. It looks cool if done right (see: Avatar, Toy Story 3, and [from what I hear] How to Train your Dragon)

When it's used to the same gimmicky effect as the old red/cyan glasses though (look, things jumping out of the screen), it looks crap. Use it for more visual depth, fine. Don't gratuitously fling things out of the screen though.
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
"L. Mark Carrier says that moviegoers may enjoy 3D films for other reasons (or for the sheer technological novelty in play)"

3D confirmed for tech-hipsters-only.

PS: I'm so hipster I Hated 3D before everyone else.[/ironic]
 

BSCCollateral

New member
Jul 9, 2011
51
0
0
I can't say I'm surprised. People can't really see in three dimensions more than few yards. The only time I saw a 3D film that really worked for me was 3-D Space Station, a documentary about the ISS. Since that was mostly in tight quarters, the 3D looked natural.
 

Stall

New member
Apr 16, 2011
950
0
0
Oh boy. A sourced article that is throwing around statistics like hard fact and truth. I don't really care about the content... this use of such a wonderful scientific field just depresses me.
 
Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
DaxStrife said:
Wow, first time I ever believed a story sourced from Fox News. :p
This is the first sign of the Apocalypse, isn't it?

Next we'll have people admitting DRM just pisses off legitimate customers.

Perhaps the idea of muzzling teenage girls is "slightly" wrong though? Just saying...