Study: 3D Offers Nothing But Headaches

[Woodsey]

"the technology also does nothing to increase a viewer's immersion."

and what kind of scientific study was used for that?

Well... asking people. (Mind you, it is from Fox.)

OT: I have yet to see or play anything in 3D. So bleh. Doesn't interest me in the slightest.

 

[zehydra]

I said it before and I say it now: 3D sucks, 3D must die!!!

when the Hologram is ready we can talk again.

And I don´t care if the source is FOX or not. I know: I GET HEADACHES and EYE-FATIGUE from 3D movies.

It's unfortunate, really. Tell me, do you dislike 3D for any other reason other than it being exploited as a money-making device, and headaches/eye fatigue?

 

[Davatehi]

Well, I must be fair. Last friday when I went to see captain america in 3d there was one sceene where the shield flew quickly against the screen and that made me flinch. Never thought a 3D movie would be able to do that with me.

Also, I can play the 3DS with 3D on for over two hours no problem. But who knows, maybe I'm some kind of mutant whos power is to be able to watch 3D without headaches! X-men here I come!

 

[zehydra]

Fox News is bad (apparently, I'm British so we don't get Fox) , but they just reported it. They didn't do the study themselves, it done by CSU (California State University) so I don't know why people are complaining

But my view on 3D? If i could watch it, I assume it would be ok. But since I can't stand any type of 3D for more than a few minutes before burying my face in my knees to dull the headache (and in more serious cases, me staggering to the nearest bathroom before my stomach gives up). But since I can't, it's useless to me. Some people like it, some don't, some can't because their body doesn't like it XD One reason I don't have a 3DS.

i have a 3d ready pc, and haven't used that capability for more than an a night's

I've tried 3D a few times. Headaches almost every time, exacerbated since I already wear glasses.

Besides, the novelty never really to me. I find it to be about even more useless than Blu-Ray.

that's because blue-rays are awesome surely?

408960 pixels or
2073600 pixels...

that's a little over 5x the amount of picture detail..
not to mention the audio codec bump

And yet I barely see any difference between SD and HD XD I can sorta hear a slight difference in the sound (very slight I may add). But image wise, they look just about exactly the same to me (an tiny bit sharper, but still, not much).

The biggest difference in SD and HD is between SD and 1080p (the highest HD res at the moment). When people are talking about the "amazingness of HD", they're referring to 1080p.

 

[DarkRyter]

Not too fond of 3d.

Oh, it's neat for awhile, but then my brain jumps out and starts screaming racial epithets.

 

[KingofallCosmos]

Well blow me down! 20 years ago I saw a 3d movie, it gave me a headache.
Last year I saw Alice, it gave me a headache.
Recently I played 3ds, it gave me a headache.
You're telling me 3D gives you headaches? Who knew.

(not at op, at this "news", to be clear)