[Artemis Webb]

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.

[Jonty30]

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.

[Terpfen]

“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 can’t say “our new TVs have better image quality than the previous line or competing products”, because the sad truth is that most people can’t 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, it’s generally useless. But what are the TV makers supposed to do? Allow their product lines to stagnate? Yeah, commentators would LOVE that.

[Baynative]

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.

[Daveinyork]

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.

[TexasCajun]

...not until I don’t have to wear one red and one blue lens over my eyes.

[Dr. Sivana]

I'm still waiting for them to bring back Sensurround.

[TomGuy]

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.

[Erik Latranyi]

The porn industry has not flocked to 3D, hence it will not become popular.

[Berlin_Freeper]

Do I really need to post a picture of my 55 inch Sony Bravia HDTV again?

For the past year no one yet has topped it.

[BufordP]

I'll never be in the market for buying any 3D TVs. But to say it's a scam seems kind of absurd. I wasn't much concerned about color quality and such when the family and I were enjoying Disney World's Muppet Vision 3D or Honey, I Shrunk the Audience programs. A lot can be said for having objects on the screen seem so close that you can reach out and touch them or better yet slap you in the face.

[FrankR]

My aunt took me and my cousin to see "Creature From The Black Lagoon" - in 3D - at the old Rialto Theature in Atlanta around 1955. It was pretty neat to me as a kid. After that several other movies came out in 3-D as well as 3-D comics and magazines.

It was a novelty and I enjoyed it, but I'm guessing the expense and work involved in producing 3-D whatever was not generating the return they had hoped for, and it died out. I suspect it will die out again with the TV things too.

A few years ago I found a video tape of the "black lagoon" movie, in 3-D. It's interesting to see it again, but you have to turn the color up way high on your TV to get the full effect. Then, my grandbaby punched out the red and blue lenses on the only pair of 3-D glasses I had, so I can't see it in 3-D anymore. ho hum.

Anyway, I looked at a 3-D TV demo the other day in BJ's, and I was thinking that there are a few 3-D movies out, but will the ongoing production of 3-D movies justify the addition cost of a 3-D enabled television...personally, I think not.

The 3-D fad will fade away again, just like it did in the 50's...that's my prediction and I'm sticking to it....

[Eye of Unk]

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.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

The Colidge Corner Theater in Brookline, MA (possibly the most left wing location in America, judging from the bumber stickers) had a 3D festival a few years back. It was a reprise of a lot of older 3D movies. The first 3D movie, of course, was Bwana Devil, which should tip you off to the fact that for the most part the older 3D movies were pretty cheesy and 3D was just a gimick to get people to watch pretty awful movies.

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.

[digger48]

"I can watch BET in 3-D, But I still cant' pay my 'lectric bill!"

[Notary Sojac]

None of the films mentioned so far can hold a candle to “Dr. Tongue’s 3-D House of Stewardesses”. Scarrrrrrryyyyyy!!!

[rfreedom4u]

I’m holding out for “Hologram TV” so I can move around the picture!

[04-Bravo]

I haven’t seen anything yet in modern 3D. But if a movie has been remastered in Blu-Ray, I really like it.

[rfreedom4u]

oh, and 3D doesn’t work as well for those who are colorblind.

[bmwcyle]

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.