3D

I find myself pondering a few things here—those aren't those old-school red-and-blue glasses, are they? And honestly, I have to wonder, does watching 3D actually strain your eyes? You see, my eyes tend to tire out quite rapidly and can start to ache if I'm not careful, so it would be rather silly of me to head out for errands only to realize I can't focus after just twenty minutes of watching Avatar, wouldn't it? It’s not as if I need glasses or anything, since my vision is perfectly fine without them.

Jose King37 said:I find myself pondering a few things here—those aren't those old-school red-and-blue glasses, are they? And honestly, I have to wonder, does watching 3D actually strain your eyes? You see, my eyes tend to tire out quite rapidly and can start to ache if I'm not careful, so it would be rather silly of me to head out for errands only to realize I can't focus after just twenty minutes of watching Avatar, wouldn't it? It’s not as if I need glasses or anything, since my vision is perfectly fine without them.

Don't sweat it. It doesn't really cause any extra eye strain.

Richard Hill10 said:Yeah, I seriously don't get this whole glasses thing. Like, am I supposed to be able to watch Avatar 3D without them? I haven't really dealt with this before so I have no clue... can someone just explain how this works?

thanks

Basically, the screen projects two different images at once. The glasses just act as a filter to separate them so each eye sees its own specific image.
Without the glasses, you won't be seeing Avatar in 3D at all.

hollowpuma762 said:Don't sweat it. It doesn't really cause any extra eye strain.

Basically, the screen projects two different images at once. The glasses just act as a filter to separate them so each eye sees its own specific image.
Without the glasses, you won't be seeing Avatar in 3D at all.

Hmm.
So I'm only seeing one of those two images, which means I won't see any 3D at all?
Come on, does anyone have a more actual answer for me?
Or is there anyone here who went to the theater, got an itch in one eye, started rubbing it, and ended up watching the movie with only one eye open in the process? 😁

shadowfox49 said:Hmm.
So I'm only seeing one of those two images, which means I won't see any 3D at all?
Come on, does anyone have a more actual answer for me?
Or is there anyone here who went to the theater, got an itch in one eye, started rubbing it, and ended up watching the movie with only one eye open in the process? 😁

I read an article in the New York Times where a reader asked if people with vision in only one eye could experience 3D. Well, I'm not sure about people with visual impairments, or those who can barely see out of one eye. I assume the intensity wouldn't be quite the same, even if you managed to catch the 3D effect.

thanks 🙂
I figured this might be the case. Clearly, there aren't any miracle 3D movies out there for me 😢

Anyone else here who’s just a "normal" person wearing contact lenses?

shadowfox49 said:Hmm.
So I'm only seeing one of those two images, which means I won't see any 3D at all?
Come on, does anyone have a more actual answer for me?
Or is there anyone here who went to the theater, got an itch in one eye, started rubbing it, and ended up watching the movie with only one eye open in the process? 😁

Look, think about it this way—even if 3D technically relies on two separate images, you aren't exactly losing anything by opting for the 3D version, other than $5.00. Besides, having slightly weaker vision might actually help create a sense of depth.

darkviper7 said:Anyone else here who’s just a "normal" person wearing contact lenses?

Same as everyone else.

So I caught *A Christmas Carol* and some 3D documentary recently, and honestly? I just can't wrap my head around people calling it this "ultimate" experience. Don't get me wrong, 3D is awesome when it hits—like those sweeping flying scenes—but the picture quality is just so washed out. It feels like you're trying to watch a movie through a pair of nylon stockings or something.

I’m telling you, because the contrast is so weak, all the fine details just get lost, which drove me absolutely nuts. You end up with this weird 3D effect paired with a crappy, muddy image. That’s actually why I decided to skip the 3D version and just watch Avatar in 3D at Movieplex in 2D instead.

PS
Just so there's no confusion here—my eyesight is perfect.

PlayStation 2
Both times, I was watching these 3D flicks at AMC Theatres.

I was at the theater yesterday and noticed a group wearing 3D glasses right over their prescription lenses... They were even claiming they could see perfectly fine, which sounds highly questionable to me. 😕

hiddentinker542 said:So I caught *A Christmas Carol* and some 3D documentary recently, and honestly? I just can't wrap my head around people calling it this "ultimate" experience. Don't get me wrong, 3D is awesome when it hits—like those sweeping flying scenes—but the picture quality is just so washed out. It feels like you're trying to watch a movie through a pair of nylon stockings or something.

I’m telling you, because the contrast is so weak, all the fine details just get lost, which drove me absolutely nuts. You end up with this weird 3D effect paired with a crappy, muddy image. That’s actually why I decided to skip the 3D version and just watch Avatar in 3D at Movieplex in 2D instead.

PS
Just so there's no confusion here—my eyesight is perfect.

PlayStation 2
Both times, I was watching these 3D flicks at AMC Theatres.

hiddentinker542 said:So I caught *A Christmas Carol* and some 3D documentary recently, and honestly? I just can't wrap my head around people calling it this "ultimate" experience. Don't get me wrong, 3D is awesome when it hits—like those sweeping flying scenes—but the picture quality is just so washed out. It feels like you're trying to watch a movie through a pair of nylon stockings or something.

I’m telling you, because the contrast is so weak, all the fine details just get lost, which drove me absolutely nuts. You end up with this weird 3D effect paired with a crappy, muddy image. That’s actually why I decided to skip the 3D version and just watch Avatar in 3D at Movieplex in 2D instead.

PS
Just so there's no confusion here—my eyesight is perfect.

PlayStation 2
Both times, I was watching these 3D flicks at AMC Theatres.

So, I'm finally sitting here, staring at Avatar in 3D at Movieplex. Just... yeah.

Edward Price6 said:You can buy a 3D plasma TV. Coraline, for example, has a 3D edition on Blu-ray, and it comes with four pairs of glasses.

Honestly, I don't think you should really fall for all that hype surrounding 3D TVs. I mean, the frequency difference compared to today's plasma or LCD sets is only about 20 Hz—supposedly you need 120 Hz to make it work, but I sat at home watching > on a 100 Hz plasma and it was totally fine, I guess. I haven't actually sat through > yet, but I'm pretty sure with the right glasses, it'll be just as good a watch as >.

What’s the deal with the 3D in this new Jeopardy! fever? I’m hearing the graphics are terrible and the screen is way too dark. Just another failed rebranding attempt...