Skip to comments.Why People Should Stop Being Duped By the 3D Scam
Posted on 04/23/2011 7:18:10 AM PDT by Clint Williams
"The entertainment and electronics industries keep trying to push 3D on consumers, even though a lot of smart people have caught on to the fact that it is a scam and not innovation as the industry would like you to believe. From the article: 'This is a bad experiment that the industry is forcing consumers to subsidize. And since they cant create a better product, theyve simply latched on to 3D as a marketing ploy that the entertainment and electronics industries can use to trick people into thinking that they are getting a superior experience. Its only working because just enough people are falling for the scam to keep it alive.'"
Why should anybody care if 3D is a “marketing ploy” or not? If consumers want 3D it will be a success. If they don’t it will flop. It’s called the free market. This simply isn’t a big deal.
When I went to see Avatar, 3D, in the theatres, I got something for my money.
I got very dizzy in the forest scene where the guy was trying to control that big bird.
Otherwise, wasn’t really worth the money.
Scam is a strong word in this instance.
Now that HDTV adoption has crossed the 50% barrier, TV makers need something new to drive sales. They cant say our new TVs have better image quality than the previous line or competing products, because the sad truth is that most people cant discern image quality. Many people even buy HDTVs and hook them up to SD sources and think the resulting picture is automatically HD, even though it actually looks worse than the picture on their old SDTV.
When you have a market immune to improved quality, you have to go with new features. 3D is the new feature. Yeah, its generally useless. But what are the TV makers supposed to do? Allow their product lines to stagnate? Yeah, commentators would LOVE that.
I watched a bit of a 3-D B-Ball game at Costco. It gave me a headache. I don’t think I could never watch that for long. A movie like Braveheart would be impossible, I think.
3D is an optical illusion that works very well. I’ve seen 3D IMAX. It felt real. It was worth it. Tonight, my wife and I are going to see Rio in 3D.
...not until I don’t have to wear one red and one blue lens over my eyes.
LOL. I'm subject to vertigo, and have enough problems with 2D.
Agreed - as opposed to the green movement that while trying to do the same is using the force of government on the market.
3D has popped up several times since the 50s.
It was ‘the current rage’ and then it disappeared, because the technology just wasn’t there.
Maybe having a 3DTV in the den will keep the technology around, but then you gotta keep up with those glasses, etc.
I would hold off jumping into the home 3D fad until there are plenty of programs/movies available to watch. Until then, it would still turn into another passing fad.
The porn industry has not flocked to 3D, hence it will not become popular.
For the past year no one yet has topped it.
Wait until you see Star Wars In 4-D!
Nobody has “topped” it because most of us get over putting our $%^&s on the table by the time we get out of college. You big TV, congrats, don’t care.
Why they should care is that a lot of money is being thrown around that might just go down the toilet. Movie theaters will need 3D to stay popular for the better part of a decade to make up for what they spent to upgrade their theaters. If 3D crashes tomorrow a lot of people that spent a lot of money on 3D TVs are going to be feeling kind of dumb. Just because it’s the free market doesn’t mean somebody might not get screwed.
XBR9, by chance? I'm going to need the picture, or at least the model #, before I can agree or disagree with you :)
I have an older 57” Toshiba 1080P DLP, back when I bought it the technology was sound, its still a RPTV and thus not a flat screen but was ideal for gaming, its only drawback was the lamp assembly that was poorly designed and required a replacement yearly.
Its my personal TV and the rest of the family uses a 50” Panasonic plasma which has awesome colors and brightness.
This year I am planning on upgrading to a 65” plasma since the prices are much more reasonable, and I have read a lot about the new 3-D Tv’s and players. For the last year all my movies bought have been Bluray, and will continue to be so for some time as I don’t think a better format will evolve anytime soon.
I have heard of LED Tv’s having problems so I’m not going to jump in on that yet, the plasma has that awesome high contrast factor and with a refresh rate of 240hz would be perfect for high speed images. So that is what I am going to buy, a non 3D high hertz plasma.
The one my wife and I went to see was Kiss Me Kate. It's a movie well worth watching on its own. Unlike most cheesy 3D movies, which use color separation, and blue red filters, this one used polarization separation, which is considerably more expensive. The glasses appear to be grey if you look through either one of them. If you place a pair of them against each other they are either grey or opaque, depending on how the lens are oriented.
If you watch the movie on television or in 2D there are alot of scenes that lose a lot of their appeal. In the opening scene, Ann Miller's character tap dances on a table in Cole Porter's apartment, framed by three hinged dressing mirrors at about a 60 degree angle from one another. Filmed from different angles and with cameras at various angles, the effect of 3D is dramatic, with the multiple reflected Ann Millers appearing at different depths. During the dance, she whips off various pieces of her ensemble (garters, for instance) and flirtatously tosses them in direction of various observers, the camera angle moving rapidly from the prespective the thrower, Ann Miller, to the target. The effect in 3D is dramatic, you really feel like she is tossing her lingerie at you.
There are other shots, like the fire eaters blowing directly into your face that need to be seen in 3D to be appreciated.
I would say that it was the only 3D movie where 3D actually added some value and was used ingeniously, that I have ever seen. Still, it was more a stunt than anything else, but a clever one. In point of fact, 3D vision breaks down at about the distance of your finger tips. Outfielders don't use 3D vision to track fly balls, seamtresses us it to thread a needle. I seriously doubt that I will ever invest in 3D home entertainment equipment.
I'd think Dr. Who would be a better candidate for 4-D.
Went to a 3D XXX flick in the late 60s. Some of the shots were rather interesting in 3D. LOL.
I am getting enough slaps from just reading this thread about “3D”, Thank You!
Keep laughing or you will cry!
None of the films mentioned so far can hold a candle to “Dr. Tongue’s 3-D House of Stewardesses”. Scarrrrrrryyyyyy!!!
I thought about Sensurround yesterday, when I saw the Charlton Heston movie “Earthquake” listed in our TV guide.
You got a bunch of leftist tripe along with your experience.
Me to. After one watching of the last three Star Wars pics I can’t watch them again. Proves that Lucas, very good as a producer and special effects, is a terrrible writer and director.
I’m holding out for “Hologram TV” so I can move around the picture!
I haven’t seen anything yet in modern 3D. But if a movie has been remastered in Blu-Ray, I really like it.
I am one of those who gets a headache and really doesn’t see the 3D effect all that well so I can happily not buy into it. If there is ever a true demand for it, the market will comply if allowed to.
oh, and 3D doesn’t work as well for those who are colorblind.
I tried to watch Avatar and just could not get past the first 30 minutes, It really was not that good of a picture.
Special effects were interesting but I could not get into those planet creatures.
John Candy was great. I also like Count Floyd and the guy Eugene Levy played. SCTV was a lot of fun.
I have immunity from such propaganda.
I agree. The 3D technology is not very good and it will be better in the next generations to follow. I don’t think the extra cost is worth it.
Back in the 60’s, I distinctly recall a gigantic pair of boobs swinging my way. I ducked.
watch a 3-D movie and my eyes are so weird I don't trust myself driving for nearly 30 minutes later.
Wonder if it is the longer exposure that does that? My wife has the same problem.
I missed Earthquake in sensurround but they used it for Midway also. It had Heston in it as well and I got to feel it in theatre for that one. It shook you in your seat for whenever there was an explosion on screen.
The process does tire and weird out your eyes and length of exposure would be a factor. The occasional 3D is ok but I would quickly begin to hate it if it was an everyday thing.
Check out the latest Panasonic 65 inch plasma with 3d. I checked it out and it’s awesome, the 3d effect is incredible. If you have a PS3 it is also a 3d blu-ray player, provided you did the firmware update via the internet. 3d games look really cool too.
The Panasonic uses glasses, I”m hoping soon you can get the same effect without glasses.
I had sentimental reasons for preferring a plasma TV. I studied engineering where the original tech was developed, and one of my classmates led its commercial R&D and licensing for many years.
But when it came time to get a TV display again (after not personally having one for several years) I went looking in the stores, paying special attention to the plasma displays and comparing them to the LCD/LED models.
Over the period of a year and a half, and observing a dozen plasmas set up in half a dozen stores, I consistenly noticed poor contrast from the plasmas compared to the others. Every single plasma had a greenish tint where the image should be black.
Sabotage? How could it be occurring in every display unit in every store over such a period of observation?
I finally threw in the towel and got a Samsung "LED." (I wonder what the'll call real LED TVs when they arrive.)
A little off topic, but I also got a Samsung receiver that plays movies from the internet. That plus my DVD/Blu-ray collection are all I watch.
I have a Netflix on-line viewing account, but many of the shows are difficult, some impossible, to watch because of hiccups in the transmission. A friend has a Roku box which apparently fetches and stores entire programs/movies ahead of time, so you don't see the transmission hangups.
Ralph Kramden would buy a 3D TV.
But I hear better stuff is coming so I am holding out.
I saw Avatar in 3D IMAX. It was breathtaking! I went and saw it again. It was again breathtaking. Very seldom have I ever felt a movie was worth the price of admission in recent years, but this was worth much more.
Was the movie a silly liberal fantasy? Yes. Were the special effects well done? Extremely. But the 3D made up for for the film’s faults, and elevated the film’s other strengths to such a degree that I’d gladly go see it again.
Now, home 3D? My wife wants it - badly! But I’d just as soon spend our money on SHTF supplies, and my time planting food and cleaning our guns. Home 3D ain’t gonna be worth much when the grid goes down in the coming conflagration.
3D makes me dizzy.
I already see in 3D without nausea producing glasses.
I’d probably pay a premium for 3D gaming, but I find it doesn’t add to the movie experience.
“Midway”, that’s the other movie I was trying to remember. Thank you.