Question regarding Avatar 3D

[AntonyF]

For those that have seen the 3D version...

If one does't wear the glasses is it 'normal', like if you were watching a 2D version?

I ask because I want to see it in 3D, but my dad probably won't (he's got a bad eye, so wouldnt' really benefit from it). But I don't want to see it if it means for him it looks strange.

Thanks.

 

[shivkala]

No, it's blurry without the 3D glasses, so one of you will have to make a sacrifice. Sorry.

 

[David cgc]

It's not so much blurry, but a double image (since the pictures for both eyes are on top of each other, and you don't have the glasses filtering one or the other out).

 

[Harvey]

In any event, it's unwatchable without the 3D Glasses at a 3D screening.

 

[AntonyF]

Okay, thanks.

 

[Brit]

Antony, I have one bad eye, I saw the three d version with my daughter, I did have to wear the glasses but I couldn't see the three d effect, it just looked like a regular flat version to me. Your Dad should be able to see the movie just fine, he just will not see the effect.

Brit

 

[AntonyF]

Well he's said he's okay with wearing the glasses (I wans't sure he would be). So he can wear them if need be, but maybe not benefit from the 3D!

Even my eye sight is a bit crap in one eye, so I always feel I'm squinting to get the best 3D effect.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Well, if he isn't able to appreciate the 3-D side of the film at least he will still be watching it in Digital, which is (in my impression as an ex projectionist) a MASSIVE leap in visual quality than is usually presented in cinemas these days.

Most people don't got to the cinema because of the annoying customers or high prices, but for me it's the simple realisation that cinema chains simply can't be arsed to hire a projectionist who cares a jot enough to spend 5 seconds putting the image into focus. Watching Sherlock Holmes was a severe chore yesterday!

So, your father e may not be able to see the full experience, but it will be at least crystal clear!!

I found I was one of the minority who achieved an astonishing headache from watching the film in 3-D and hence whenever a talking heads scene came about I flicked them off and suffered the dual-image.


Hugo - His first and likely last 3-D experience

 

[AntonyF]

Hugo - His first and likely last 3-D experience

I really do wonder how 3D will do. I want to go as a novelty, but no way do I want to be wearing extra glasses on a regular basis. 2D will be my preference, it's just easier.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Hugo - His first and likely last 3-D experience

I really do wonder how 3D will do. I want to go as a novelty, but no way do I want to be wearing extra glasses on a regular basis. 2D will be my preference, it's just easier.

I saw quite a few 3D films last year, it did give me a headache a couple of times but when I got my glasses that stopped. I just slip the 3D glasses on on top of my normal glasses and it's fine.

Some films do work really well in 3D, others it doesn't make a difference really. I think it's the sort of thing they'll get to grips with and we'll see a lot of worthwhile 3D films in the future, but for more it's a lot of gimmick with only some substance.

I can't see if replacing 2D in the same way colour replaced black and white, or talkies replaced silent movies, but I can see it being a legitimate style of cinema.

I really can't see it being the next big thing for home use like Sky seem to be hedging their bets on though.

 

[AntonyF]

I really can't see it being the next big thing for home use like Sky seem to be hedging their bets on though.

The studios and tech manufacuters will push it down our throat, as they want the next big thing. Like VHS to DVD to BluRay, they want to innovate just so they can sell everything again.

Sky I suppose are less invested in that, but are keen for competitive advantages over freeview etc.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

On seeing the 3D version of Avatar, I didn't get a headache as I usually do, but I think this was a result of me subconsciously closing my left eye a lot of the time. I had to force myself to open that eye whenever the action looked like it might benefit from 3D. I guess I could have saved myself a few quid and gone to see the 2D version instead. I also don't think I'll be in the target market for a 3D TV.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

I really can't see it being the next big thing for home use like Sky seem to be hedging their bets on though.

The studios and tech manufacuters will push it down our throat, as they want the next big thing. Like VHS to DVD to BluRay, they want to innovate just so they can sell everything again.

Sky I suppose are less invested in that, but are keen for competitive advantages over freeview etc.

Well it looks like Blu-Ray will be able to support 3D without much trouble anyway, but obviously there'll be a need for 3HD TVs, as I believe they're being called right now.

Sky have been working on 3D for a while now and had test runs on live sport already, and it appears their HD boxes will be compatible with it too. They're even talking of launching a 3D channel this year. I suppose to them it's another service they can add another tenner a month on for.

 

[captcalhoun]

i'll get excited about 3D when you don't have to wear the fucking dorky glasses

 

[Bob The Skutter]

i'll get excited about 3D when you don't have to wear the fucking dorky glasses

There are some 3D TVs out there that don't need the glasses, a couple of different types, what that basically uses a lenticular screen so you get a 3D effect, but you have to be sat in just the right position to see it, and therefore only works for 1 or 2 people.

Another one which uses a camera to track the eyes in the room and refocuses for a few different people. But still I think that's limited to around 4 viewers at any given time.

 

[23skidoo]

For what it's worth, here in Calgary Avatar is being shown in both 3D and 2D versions, so depending where you are there may be a no-glasses option available.

I'm also unable to see proper 3D with the glasses due to problems with my eyes (Journey to the Center of the Earth didn't work at all and just gave me a headache). If they're serious about 3D becoming the new norm (like they also claimed back in the early 1950s! ) they're going to have to come up with a no-glasses option otherwise they're going to disenfranchise a lot of ticket buyers. And Blu-Ray buyers, too, because I won't buy the home version if a 2D version isn't included otherwise it'll just be a waste of money for me. (I am taking a leap of faith that the release will include both versions).

Alex