3D

[Macawmoses]

This board is to discuss the current 3D trend. Any and all 3D related threads may go here...from perceived 3D, like Q*Bert, to real 3D like the 3DS. Dreamworks in 3D is game, as is Sharkboy and Lava Girl (aka Red/Blue Glasses).

[Nayrman]

Technically 3DS and Avatar aren't 3D, it's simply a layering effect that gets implemented by the special glasses.


Also, in case anyone hasn't noticed: 3D serves absolutely zero purpose to movies and never will. It has always, ALWAYS been a stupid means of over charging ticket prices and a gimmick to get people into the theater to compete with home entertainment. As far as movies go, it will never be effective. This isn't like CG where it can be used to make the visually impossible possible, it's a gimmick plain and simple. Just like motion controls. District 9 was a far better movie than Avatar without it's massive budget, army of CG workers, and 3D. A better movie gets by on story and characters, not visual trickery. And until you learn that Hollywood, people will continue to not go see as many movies as they did before. Fuck Avatar's "record" box office numbers. It's easy to make profit records when you overcharge your consumer base to see it in "STUNNING SUPER FANTASTIC ISN'T A GIMMICK 3D".


That's all I have to say on that.  :|

[Gwen Khan]

Technically 3DS and Avatar aren't 3D, it's simply a layering effect that gets implemented by the special glasses.


Also, in case anyone hasn't noticed: 3D serves absolutely zero purpose to movies and never will. It has always, ALWAYS been a stupid means of over charging ticket prices and a gimmick to get people into the theater to compete with home entertainment. As far as movies go, it will never be effective. This isn't like CG where it can be used to make the visually impossible possible, it's a gimmick plain and simple. Just like motion controls. District 9 was a far better movie than Avatar without it's massive budget, army of CG workers, and 3D. A better movie gets by on story and characters, not visual trickery. And until you learn that Hollywood, people will continue to not go see as many movies as they did before. Fuck Avatar's "record" box office numbers. It's easy to make profit records when you overcharge your consumer base to see it in "STUNNING SUPER FANTASTIC ISN'T A GIMMICK 3D".


That's all I have to say on that.  :|

I agree with Nayr, and that makes me feel sick for some reason

[Kayo]

I agree with Nayr as well. I would much rather watch a movie simply by looking at a screen, than by looking at a screen through intercourse ing big, bulky glasses. It's not fantastic at all. If anything, it's confusing on the eye. It's not anything good, and like Nayr said, just a gimmick to sell more tickets.

I will not buy a ticket to see a 3D movie. I will not buy a 3D movie on DVD unless I have the option to watch it in 2D. (which I usually do.)

[Neerb]

I like the depth 3D can add to a movie if done right; granted, most movies do poor conversion instead of filming in 3D and the results are worse than 2D, and I don't appreciate the 50% increase in ticket price either, but when done right like in Avatar, I do prefer to see that 3D version. I don't really mind having to wear the glasses that much.

As for the 3DS, I say go for it. IGN has said time and again that it really works, and I think that if we really can get 3D without glasses, that's just awesome. Sure, we'll now see a lot of shovelware, but the good games will look even nicer now, and, unlike the movies, Iwata and the rest of Nintendo have said that 3D actually serves a purpose when playing games, which IGN confirmed upon playing some demos, as it becomes much easier to see depth and your character in relation to the environment. And of course, if you really just can't stand being able to see depth, you can always turn it off and just appreciate the new slide-pad "stick" and better graphics.

[The Riddler]

3D Movies make me sick.

That is all.

[Tupin]

It really doesn't even add that much to the movie, I can see its use in a video game, but not a movie.

[Mystic]

Am I the only one who enjoyed how intercourse ing awesome Toy Story 3 looked in 3D?

[SkyMyl]

I'm indifferent.

[JrDude]

Back when 3D was like once every 5 years, it was pretty cool because, you know, there were ACTUAL 3D MOMENTS. I've seen some movies in 3D recently and nothing really came out of the screen and popped out at you, it just makes it look like it has depth or something which movies don't need.

[…]

3D is fine though I don't really care for the moments where they just add in a jab at the screen, or something like it, just for that 3D effect because it kinda takes me out of itwhen it's really noticable.                                                         And on a different note, somewhere I have a 3D camera that had three lenses on the front and I believe it used regular film. Though I don't remember how the pictures looked or how it worked.

[The Riddler]

Oh, I should clarify. I don't mean sick as in "this poop sucks."
I mean physically sick. Since my eyes are intercourse ed as it is, I get dizzy watching 3D movies.

[Cornwad]

It can add a lot to the movie if it's done the right way, but most of the recent ones have done it wrong. The glasses are pretty disgusting.

[Homewrecker]

Technically 3DS and Avatar aren't 3D, it's simply a layering effect that gets implemented by the special glasses.

>3DS
>glasses

youjustwentfullretard.exe

Am I the only one who enjoyed how intercourse ing awesome Toy Story 3 looked in 3D?

3D makes the display darker, so it detracted from the colors.

[Mystic]

TS3 didn't look like such at all D: