I think the real problem with eye strain is People dont relax their eyes. They Look using their eyes, rather looking harder for things than letting the eyes relax.. so the 3d works.. That just my opinion.
I don't know what you mean by relaxing your eyes. If you mean looking away or something like that for a few minutes then I just wouldn't want to bother doing that because I usually want to see every detail of the movies I watch.
I was thinking more of the Fountain :2thumbsup: They are supposed to re-do all six in 3d; and since it's Lucas' I would expect it's not going to be terribly done like The Last Airbender or the other converts. Starting with Episode I +_+
i'd love to see a big ol spaceship in 3d. but i think the first 3 episodes would be the only ones that'd fit the 3d thang
You mean 1-3 or the original trilogy? Cause I don't see how anyone could consider Episodes 1-3 fit for viewing..
3d ewoks and 3d jar jar binks, couldn't do it. Right after Avatar ended I said out loud bye bye Star Wars, Twas a moment for me.
That was Aronofsky? Oh dear, what a complete load of pish that was. I went to the cinema to see that. Bored all the way through. Looks good, but that's it's only redeeming feature. They can do that as well now, but apparently it isn't the same as filming it in 3D. Same as redoing old black and white films in colour isn't the same.
I've never actually seen a 3D film, didn't want to pay the extra cost, but tbh I think it would get on my nerves a bit and strain my eyes
I can only do 3d every once in awhile or I else I can get an seizure. I love watching very scenic movies in 3d . but other than that, I dont see the point.
I voted not sure. It's a nice addition to film but I for one hope it doesn't become the main thing. Another thing I could take or leave is the blue ray thing by the way.
3D is amazing IF you pay for it lol. 2 years ago I got a Mitsubishi WD-73835 long b4 the 3D craze was talked about BUT they did promise 3D compatibility once the standard was set for the industry. I paid 2000.00 delivered to my front door. Now they want 3500.00 for the same damn TV because folks will pay it for the so called NEW CRAP that was available in 2008. They want 150.00 apiece for a GOOD set of glasses. I paid 110.00 for a PAIR on E-Bay. This is why I get mad sometimes when I now about the technology and then watch as they rape the public by simply calling it new and improved. I will say it is not a fad and the bigger the screen the better the effect. For size right now a DLP tv is the way to go. It does not require and emitter for it uses the DLP bulb to sync for the 3D effect. Give them time to program a little better for it let the price drop or I have links for those that want them for the lowest prices on the net if you want to get involved. Have A Great Day Mr.Wags
I'd rather just go see 3-D movies at the theatre to be quite honest. It gives me a false sense of acceptance that I am spending $8, when I can spend $8 a month for unlimited movies through Netflix...lol.
This is basically Apple's business plan. But the technology sector isn't the only culprit. Two words: bottled water.
Here's to hoping they still cancel that Yellow Submarine CGI 3-D remake. They should just re-release the original in theatres on IMAX and offer acid for anyone that wants it.
i voted not sure, as i don't think regular tv and movies have succeeded in the present i guess i have high standards . . .
They will never be the norm with the glasses but give them time to figure a way without them and cut down on the headaches it gives and maybe but until then some folks have still not bought hd tv's yet so maybe 3D needs to be looked at like extra gravy with your biscuits or back in the day when Jerry was in a good mood and jammed for an extra 4 hours JUST BECAUSE it's the right thing to do Have A Great Day Mr.Wags
I think the 3D phase will come to pass again.. just like it did in the 80s.. sure it was cool for awhile.. but then it just gets over done... i think 3D gaming will be a bigger success than movies come the next couple years
