I'm not a big 3D fan, but I was happy with the red and blue glasses 3D. :-)
I can't see a huge margin of quality difference between the big 3D push right now and the 3D of 10 years ago, but I've not given it a lot of thought.
I very much enjoyed Avatar in 3D, but the whole time I was thinking "I cannot wait to see this on my tv". I was not disappointed in the least. I'd like to see it in bluray on my screen again, as I think I haven't seen it on our new tv.

I agree with Mean D about the discomfort, it takes me awhile to get used to the glasses and it's uncomfortable until my eyes adjust. I can see where people would get headaches.

I'd sit the whole deal straight into the "latest and greatest" garbage can were it my call, but some really enjoy it. As long as it's making folks happy, I'm glad it's around.

I can say that I'd be irked if my theatre were only playing 3D versions of movies I want to see. Fortunately the one we go to has 10 or 12 screens and they always play the non-3D version as well as the 3D. That works for me. :-)
[Reply]

3D in the home will take off if it is embraced by the "adult film" industry. Just keepin' it real.
[Reply]

It doesn't allow the word because we'd rather not have CA come up on search engines for such content.
[Reply]

Kind of like what happened when that industry embraced HD-DVD instead of Blu-Ray? Just keepin' it real, yo. :-)
[Reply]

And 18 months later... the number of 3D sets, players and movies out there has increased greatly.


Laser Disc wasn't really a fad. For being such an expensive early technology it had quite a long run, over 20 years. Ultimately, why it died was the cost and the convenience of newer technology had outpaced it.
[Reply]

3-D is like all the reality shows it's make money right now but everyone gets all fed-up with it it will go the way of the Dodo bird... :-)
[Reply]

I think 3D TV is a fad. It will fade like tight-rolled jeans.

BTW, the 120/240 Hz rating on TVs is not the processor speed. It is the refresh rate. It is a measurement of the number of times per second (Hz, not MHz which would be millions of times per second) the screan is redrawn/refreshed. The higher the number the less blurring you'll see when watching action movies or other fast motion. That said, the human eye has a very hard time detecting refresh rates over about 85 Hz. I have somewhat of a sensitive eye and I can tell see flicker visible due to low refresh rates (especially old CRTs) at rates up to 75 Hz. Once they hit 85 Hz, I can't see the flicker anymore and the screen appears static or solid.

Low refresh rates common to CRTs and low end LCD TVs usually start at 60 Hz. While you may not have a senstive eye that can see the flicker it will still cause eye strain. Again CRTs are much worse than any LCD, but still I would recommend the 120 Hz models. 240 Hz in my opinon is overkill. If you're eye can't detect it, why pay extra for it?
[Reply]

I could go for some 3D "Adult entertainment":-)
[Reply]

no way! there are some things I don't want flying out at me from the TV screen, just sayin'
[Reply]

Someone had to say it...
[Reply]