TV & Home Theater

[grapesoda]

I like 3D as much as the next guy maybe even a little more.....

I have a 3D TV and enjoy it...

I constantly get asked why? blah blah..... I have tons of content and sports are getting better every day. 

If you don't like 3D fine by you but you don't have to go all apple fan boy style.

3D is here to stay people every manufacturer is making them, either buy one or stop your griping. 

[Jimmienomam]

It's now just another standard option. I like some 3d, but it was never a deciding factor for me. Kinda like how the TV speakers sound. It's a side note that I take into consideration but is not a weighing option.

My dad used to tell me when a manual transmission was standard and automatic was special order option. Same thing now. 3d is the standard option and non 3d TVs are special order.

So as you put it, get used to it people

[hereisjenna]

3D is great for me. I think a big part of the factor too is what the very first 3D TV experience is like for some people. If a person who absolutely was not suited for active 3D tries it then hates it, regardless if the next TV they try is passive, 3D won't be the best thing on the menu. 

My first 3D TV experience, Vizio 55"?(passive)

My current TV: LG LW6500 (passive)

[effingeveryone]

---

Jimmienomam wrote:
It's now just another standard option. I like some 3d, but it was never a deciding factor for me. Kinda like how the TV speakers sound. It's a side note that I take into consideration but is not a weighing option.

My dad used to tell me when a manual transmission was standard and automatic was special order option. Same thing now. 3d is the standard option and non 3d TVs are special order.

So as you put it, get used to it people

---

Hallelujah!

People not embracing new tech is fine...... 3D is main stream now a here to stay and just getting better.   Any one want to give up your smart phone for a rotary phone.

[NoNoBadDog]

The trouble is there is no compelling 3D content.  It is always the same old schtick...lots of stuff flying at the viewer...none of which contributes to enhancing the movie or contributing to the story.  There is not a 3D film in existence that would be any less enjoyable in 2D.  After you have seen a couple or three 3D movies, you've seen everything the technology is capable of.

But, it is the current marketing handle.  Every couple of years the TV manufacturers have to have something that generates interest in new TVs...even it it really brings nothing important to the table (like 3D), especially when there is no standard...active, passive, etc. 

[rwillen]

---

NoNoBadDog wrote:

The trouble is there is no compelling 3D content.  It is always the same old schtick...lots of stuff flying at the viewer...none of which contributes to enhancing the movie or contributing to the story.  There is not a 3D film in existence that would be any less enjoyable in 2D.  After you have seen a couple or three 3D movies, you've seen everything the technology is capable of.

But, it is the current marketing handle.  Every couple of years the TV manufacturers have to have something that generates interest in new TVs...even it it really brings nothing important to the table (like 3D), especially when there is no standard...active, passive, etc. 

---

Yes and no. Some are horrible, nothing more than spit takea and flying weapons. Journey to the Center of the Earth and the 4th resident evil movie are like that. However, several of the 3D movies that we've purchased lately have used 3D properly, which is to add depth INSIDE the screen and not out of it. Hugo, Puss in Boots, and the upcoming Tintin are like this. It's like watching a movie through a viewmaster. I do agree that those movies are good enough that the 3D isn't necesarry, but because it's properly done it adds to the experience.

[SlimJim77]

To me, 3D is like leather seats in a high-end automobile. It's just part of the deal.

Definitely is not a selling point for me, though.

[Jimmienomam]

While I think the story stunk, Sanctum
Showed what depth can do in some of the shots.

[grapesoda]

Yeah I saw it in 3D it was not horrible the DP was good and the shots were cool. Specially with the chick dies in the giant cave (spolier but I mean who really cares). 3D has a lot of promise and brings so good stuff to the table....

I like the car analogy... You would not buy a viper with lawn chairs for seats..(unless maybe your a nascar fan)

[kellywiliams044]

If I try to access the entire game going on in the TV industry world, it is like these guys are trying to create tvs that will have limitations either in the apps, picture qualities, problem of contrast or coming up with separate tv parts that we must buy if we want to get some little satisfaction. Just imagine the issue of converting 2D to 3D as well as the issue of active and passive 3D TVs. I think that LG is trying somehow to resolve these little problems like giving out their 3D glasses almost for free and even the battery less technology has actually made the whole thing light and cozy. May be others are doing same as well but I’m certain with that of LG.