It's fine for movies that are meant to be visual spectacles without much substance (in fact I think it makes them better) but I would find it extremely distracting in more serious films.
Poll: Why do people hate 3D?
- Thread starter Olas
- Start date
Recommended Videos
What are the disadvantages? Uh. Ha. Well, speaking from experience:
1. The glasses aren't always clean. One time, I couldn't even use them, the movie looked LESS blurry without them. And I tried to clean them. Like, every 5 minutes. Because I was watching a blurry, 2-D movie and I didn't have much else to do. Didn't help at all. Believe me, if I could've cleaned them, they would have been cleaned.
2. Hurts my eyes and head after a while. I have to periodically lift them up and give myself a break.
3. It only works for a very specific kind of shot, and ruins others. Look at Prometheus: The opening shots of Earth are fucking astounding, as are many of the really wide "eye-candy" shots. But when it's just a bunch of people with a big, complicated hologram thingie in the middle? Totally ruins it. Everything gets blurry whenever the camera moves too fast, so it's impossible to focus on anything. Plus, the blurriness just adds to my head/eye pain. But the hologram just looks SO COOL I guess it's totally worth it.
4. I know this isn't inherent to 3D effects, but LOTS of filmmakers and studios tend to abuse it. I have a feeling that's what MOST people are talking about when they complain about 3-D. I'm sure there are a lot of people who actually aren't bothered by the effect like I am, but dislike how it's currently being used: As a cheap cash-cow with (somewhat ironically) no actual substance.
5. After reading the OP, I'm not entirely sure we're watching the same 3D movies. The OP seems to be under the impression that stereoscopic 3D effects can mimic an actual 3-dimensional space flawlessly. And it can't. It really, REALLY can't. I mean, sure, 3D is great in theory, but the technology just isn't there yet.
1. The glasses aren't always clean. One time, I couldn't even use them, the movie looked LESS blurry without them. And I tried to clean them. Like, every 5 minutes. Because I was watching a blurry, 2-D movie and I didn't have much else to do. Didn't help at all. Believe me, if I could've cleaned them, they would have been cleaned.
2. Hurts my eyes and head after a while. I have to periodically lift them up and give myself a break.
3. It only works for a very specific kind of shot, and ruins others. Look at Prometheus: The opening shots of Earth are fucking astounding, as are many of the really wide "eye-candy" shots. But when it's just a bunch of people with a big, complicated hologram thingie in the middle? Totally ruins it. Everything gets blurry whenever the camera moves too fast, so it's impossible to focus on anything. Plus, the blurriness just adds to my head/eye pain. But the hologram just looks SO COOL I guess it's totally worth it.
4. I know this isn't inherent to 3D effects, but LOTS of filmmakers and studios tend to abuse it. I have a feeling that's what MOST people are talking about when they complain about 3-D. I'm sure there are a lot of people who actually aren't bothered by the effect like I am, but dislike how it's currently being used: As a cheap cash-cow with (somewhat ironically) no actual substance.
5. After reading the OP, I'm not entirely sure we're watching the same 3D movies. The OP seems to be under the impression that stereoscopic 3D effects can mimic an actual 3-dimensional space flawlessly. And it can't. It really, REALLY can't. I mean, sure, 3D is great in theory, but the technology just isn't there yet.
The 3D that they use in movies at the moment is really bad for your eyesight.
because each eye is trying to focus on a image it percieves as different depths it starts spazzing out.
So while you're watching a 3D movie your eyes and the sight portion of your brain are freaking out trying to rapidly adjust to the different fields of depth.
Needles to say this is horribly damaging to your eye sight.
because each eye is trying to focus on a image it percieves as different depths it starts spazzing out.
So while you're watching a 3D movie your eyes and the sight portion of your brain are freaking out trying to rapidly adjust to the different fields of depth.
Needles to say this is horribly damaging to your eye sight.
I've seen three movies which 3D improved. Lion Kind, Titanic and Avatar. Aside from that, it has always ended up making the movie harder to watch because I friggin' hate wearing the glasses over my own glasses. Not to mention it drives the prices for the movie through the fuckin' roof. And it's worse when we don't get offered a 2D version.
Because 2D movies are way better at giving a sense of depth than 3d movies are. When I close an eye I can barely tell the difference. In a 3d movie everything is "ZOMG ITZ SOOO 3DEEEE!!!!!!" They try and give the impression that 2 people standing just next to each other are actually 1 person in front of you and one giant the size of a large galaxy several light years away. That's probably a big part of why they give you a headache.
Actually, because Orwell used a lot of depth and layering in his movies something like Citizen Kane in 3D might just work.OlasDAlmighty said:but using 3D in a serious film is just silly.
But of course that means converting it to 3D and that pretty much always looks like shit. But I agree, it's just another tool in the director's box and if used right I think it can be pretty awesome. Avatar? Looked stunning. Thor? Could've done without it with ease, not worth the visual strain.
It's just so easily misused and the tech could use some more advancement. I really don't like wearing two sets of glasses y'know.
I can't speak for you, but I don't see everything like they're paper dolls in a diorama, which is what most stereoscopic 3D looks like.OlasDAlmighty said:
So no, it doesn't look "how it's supposed to look".
Also, it washes out the color palette.
Also, it's three bucks more.
If I can see the movie in 2D, I much prefer that.
Personally, I actually like 3D. Most of the time it's used badly, but the few times it's used well, specifically Avatar and How to Train Your Dragon, more than make up for it with me. Also, it's not like theaters have stopped showing movies in 2D, and I very seriously doubt that they ever will, which provides a very easy solution to a movie with bad 3D.
It's an effect which adds production cost to a film and jacks up ticket prices, while adding nothing to the overall experience.
It's worse for gaming because you need special hardware to get it to work.
It irritates me as well. When I saw Avengers in the cinema in 3D, it was fine for the most part, but the 3D heavy scenes made my eyes hurt.
It's worse for gaming because you need special hardware to get it to work.
It irritates me as well. When I saw Avengers in the cinema in 3D, it was fine for the most part, but the 3D heavy scenes made my eyes hurt.
Oh God 3D is just awful, I found it awful on Avatar which seems to be the film most people are OK with it being on.
I've seen, Avatar, Harry Potter and Resident Evil in 3D just to make sure I really did hate it. Everything was blurry, my brain struggled to process the 3Dness, which is why it was probably blurry; the quality seemed poor, the glasses you're provided just seem like cheap ones that don't really help and frankly it spoilt the movies for me (Although, Avatar and HP were crap anyway)
I've seen, Avatar, Harry Potter and Resident Evil in 3D just to make sure I really did hate it. Everything was blurry, my brain struggled to process the 3Dness, which is why it was probably blurry; the quality seemed poor, the glasses you're provided just seem like cheap ones that don't really help and frankly it spoilt the movies for me (Although, Avatar and HP were crap anyway)
the only reason i will ever watch a 3d movie is when the color doesn't get muted by the thing, i don't have to wear glasses over my giant ass hipster glasses and directors get a mandatory 6 month course in how to use the fucking thing. no more stupid gimmicky things jumping at me.
oh and i will not pay more money for 3d.
also: wtf is up with people calling normal movies 2D? it creates the illusion of distance and perspective, just like those damn glasses do, until we start projecting holograms we will have have a flat plane with gimmicks attached.
oh and the whole "full screen local MP" is super cool
oh and i will not pay more money for 3d.
also: wtf is up with people calling normal movies 2D? it creates the illusion of distance and perspective, just like those damn glasses do, until we start projecting holograms we will have have a flat plane with gimmicks attached.
oh and the whole "full screen local MP" is super cool
It's not as bad as people make it out to be, but it is abused by studios. If done properly it can be excellent, if done badly it can damage a film. If a film was actually filmed with 3D cameras, I am a lot more likely to see it in 3D. Post production 3D is a big no-no in my book, although there are exceptions.
People like to say that 3D is to add depth instead of things popping out of the screen, but I like both. Seeing a well shot 3D world can be a sight to behold, but I also enjoy the occasional "HOLY SHIT" popout moment during action sequences and the like.
People like to say that 3D is to add depth instead of things popping out of the screen, but I like both. Seeing a well shot 3D world can be a sight to behold, but I also enjoy the occasional "HOLY SHIT" popout moment during action sequences and the like.
it's darker than non 3d, and i am more or less a person who has one active eye, so i have hard time seeing it, and because of it, i tend to get headaches
Pretty much this, I'm not particularly bothered by it though either way. My main experience is with the 3DS where I swear it's mostly pointless or not implemented well to enhance the experience.Daystar Clarion said:
Looks kinda pretty sometimes I guess, but if i take my specs off I can't see the game well enough at the right distance so i can't really play in 3D at night.
Drains the battery too.
So yeah, meh, I don't hate 3D, it just doesn't matter to me.
I didn't hate 3D at first.
But nowadays, i'm just sick of paying extra (where i live, there's almost never the alternative to see a 3D Movie in 2D) for movies where i either "forget" halfway through the movie that it is in 3D or find the 3D distracting because of the forced viewpoints of 3D (as in, you can't look at things out of focus or else the 3D effect gets weird), the darker image or because of headaches.
I really only enjoyed 3D in animated Movies (Up, Coraline and Avatar because...well, say what you want, it's pretty much a CGI Movie) where you can actually create a convincing illusion of depth (well, that worked in Avengers too, but only in like 2-3 scenes in the whole movie) or in movies where it's just a shameless gimmick and the movie revels in it (Drive Angry, Resident Evil:Whatever)
But nowadays, i'm just sick of paying extra (where i live, there's almost never the alternative to see a 3D Movie in 2D) for movies where i either "forget" halfway through the movie that it is in 3D or find the 3D distracting because of the forced viewpoints of 3D (as in, you can't look at things out of focus or else the 3D effect gets weird), the darker image or because of headaches.
I really only enjoyed 3D in animated Movies (Up, Coraline and Avatar because...well, say what you want, it's pretty much a CGI Movie) where you can actually create a convincing illusion of depth (well, that worked in Avengers too, but only in like 2-3 scenes in the whole movie) or in movies where it's just a shameless gimmick and the movie revels in it (Drive Angry, Resident Evil:Whatever)