Any REALISTIC hope that 3D MOVIES may soon LOSE popularity or die out?

[Snaploud]

I bought a new tv last year, and I never even bothered to use the 3D functionality once.

In theatres, I've found that the 3D image is noticeably darker than the 2D image, so I try to avoid 3D whenever possible. It's not always doable to avoid 3D on opening weekend, though.

 

[Mr Awe]

4k is the new gimmick, and not sure there's a ton more value there, either. Can KINDA notice a difference, but only when like 3 feet from the tv. We're at a point where we've sorta maxed out what the eyeballs can interpret, so just making up new numbers to push sales..

That varies by person. I definitely notice a huge difference between 4k and HD. However, as people get older, the maximum resolution they can see reduces and eventually you would not see the difference.

I agree that 3D TVs are not worthwhile right now. At least not the implementations that I've seen.

Mr Awe

 

[Scout101]

At what distance? I can say that 4k looks more detailed then 1080p if I'm only a couple feet away in a store watching the right content, but how many people watch tv like that?

My 4K tv is 12 feet or so away from my spot on the couch, so not sure I'm really seeing a benefit. Which is fine for now, not really much content anyway.

I'll also say that sometimes the detail is distracting. You're focusing on the action in the middle of the screen, but there's super-fine details over in the left corner. You kinda look over that way, and are then focusing on that little detail over whatever is actually happening in the scene.

 

[Mr Awe]

At what distance? I can say that 4k looks more detailed then 1080p if I'm only a couple feet away in a store watching the right content, but how many people watch tv like that?

My 4K tv is 12 feet or so away from my spot on the couch, so not sure I'm really seeing a benefit. Which is fine for now, not really much content anyway.

I'll also say that sometimes the detail is distracting. You're focusing on the action in the middle of the screen, but there's super-fine details over in the left corner. You kinda look over that way, and are then focusing on that little detail over whatever is actually happening in the scene.

I was maybe 6 feet away and could still notice the difference. Well, we all perceive things differently. I do agree that sometimes the extra detail can be distracting. In fact, I've noticed that things on screen can look sharper than reality!

Mr Awe

 

[Owain Taggart]

I'm not sure 3D will be officially permanent until they stop requiring glasses.

Yeah, it might be the death of 3D TVs, but that doesn't mean the death of 3D presentations in theaters. In fact, I think the theaters are better off this way, as it's one more incentive to get butts into their seats. I think as long as it makes them money, the studios won't stop making them. In fact, theaters like to limit regular showings in preference to 3D and any other extra theatre types, ie deluxe reserved seating with better sound, moving seats, etc. This is just the death of the 3D consumer market.

The current home market trend now is HDR.

A little off-topic, but recently our local IMAX theatre was the first in the country to get an upgrade to laser projection technology, and in the past, the 3D would make my eyes water, but with this upgrade, my eyes were feeling more relaxed. Felt more natural, I gather because the technology was brighter and more natural looking than the typical 3D where it darkens a bit, so less for the brain to process for someone wearing glasses.

 

[Snaploud]

A little off-topic, but recently our local IMAX theatre was the first in the country to get an upgrade to laser projection technology, and in the past, the 3D would make my eyes water, but with this upgrade, my eyes were feeling more relaxed. Felt more natural, I gather because the technology was brighter and more natural looking than the typical 3D where it darkens a bit, so less for the brain to process for someone wearing glasses.

Interesting. I would certainly be more in favor of 3D if it comes without the darkened picture.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

There's an Orson Welles quote explaining why he liked shooting in black and white.

Can't find exact quote but along the lines of 'In black and white your attention is drawn directly to the drama. You're not distracted by the fact the woman's hair is red.'

The same thing applies to 3D. There's so much visual information it's harder to focus on the drama.

But for movies where the drama is dumb and visual distractions are the point, no problem.

 

[Owain Taggart]

Interesting. I would certainly be more in favor of 3D if it comes without the darkened picture.

The interesting thing is that it's required a change in glasses. The old technology required polarized lenses, which were actually lighter than what you'd get at say, most 3D theatres. But they've had to switch to interpolation. So, you have glasses that are about as dark as ReelD glasses most theatres use. But I think that the lasers are able to counter that by providing a brighter image and also switch faster, leaving less for the brain to be confused about. The image was very much clearer and felt more like I was watching a 2D movie. There was a bit of ghosting, but it wasn't enough to be too distracting. I can't speak for everyone of course, but I found it generally more pleasing. Though, keep in mind, I've never gone to a feature film at an IMAX and usually stick to the docs, so the experience may differ for longer movies.

Here's a good article about IMAX's technology:
http://gizmodo.com/imaxs-new-laser-projectors-make-me-wish-i-lived-in-a-mo-1689480610

 

[Commander Richard]

Movies are a visual medium, you're supposed to be taken in by the imagery. What you don't want are unnecessary distractions like in the remastered Star Wars movies where George Lucas threw in little critters doing stuff just because he could.

 

[mos6507]

I think it's ridiculous to invent a new video format and REMOVE a feature (3D) from the prior generation, in the case of UHD blu-ray not supporting 3D. Leave it to publishers to decide whether to support 3D or not. Don't drop support in the spec. That way at least it leaves a niche market.

 

[theenglish]

I find a huge difference in movies that are directed in 3D and those that are simply transferred into 3D. I love the experience in those few movies that are supposed to be 3D where it doesn't matter where you look on the screen the image is still in focus. It can be a very immersive experience.

 

[Tom Hendricks]

I love 3D movies, that's my preferred way of seeing a movie. I'm usually bummed if I have to see a movie in 2D. I also prefer IMAX 3D to regular 3D. I agree that regular 3D tends to be darker than the IMAX. There is only one movie I liked better in 2D than 3D, Rogue One and it was only parts of it. Leia & Tarkin were way more convincing in 2D than 3D. I was hoping to get a 3D, 4K large screen tv in the future but that appears to be moot.