[kyleb350]

OK, so I remember the days where you could just buy a movie DVD in 3D that came with 3D glasses without having to have a 3D compatible movie player as well as a 3D TV.

What is the difference with the newer 3D technology?

[jlstyle]

I never watched old 3d movies as you are referring to but after having 3 different 3d tv's (sammy plasmas and LED), I must tell you I rarely watch 3d on my tv.
I mean i have top of the line tv from samsung and yes, 3d qaulity is cool and all but it is so damn dizzy no matter what setting I watch in.
And 3d content is not there to enjoy.
They only have FEW movies out and they are expensive to buy. And free 3d contents from cable is garbage.
But it's definately cool to watch my friends drooling over it.

[timmahh]

Originally Posted by kyleb350

OK, so I remember the days where you could just buy a movie DVD in 3D that came with 3D glasses without having to have a 3D compatible movie player as well as a 3D TV.

What is the difference with the newer 3D technology?

"Anaglyph Glasses - these are the older colour filter 3D glasses that were seen in children's books and early cinemas. Usually red and cyan filters are placed over each eye to allow two images to be formed from a single source. The stereo image doesn't retain the original colours and is generally considered an inferior method of stereo viewing."


Old 3d Glasses: (vomit)



Old 3d Images: (vomit)




Newer 3D stuff uses black lenses, some of which have active shutters vs passive [like at a movie theatre].

http://www.3d-forums.com/active-vs-p...asses-t81.html


Old & New



So the main improvement from what I see, is that you don't have a hideous red and blue shitmess infront of you; and you get fantastic color recreation because the 3d isn't based on filtering out primary colors.

[JayKay335i]

As said, the difference is using anaglyph vs vector technology, when you are in the theaters. The home TVs use LCD glasses which block each eye independently and presents a different image to each eye which have a slight horizontal disparity which creates the illusion of depth. The glasses work at a higher temporal frequency than our brains can process so you dont actually see the darkening of each eye, much like old tube TVs.

[Maestro]

Here is how 3D works today. The show has to be shot/recorded with a new special camera it actually has two lens on it, the lens offset from one another by a few degrees so they are recording the image at slightly different angles. Both streams of information is sent to the TV, then the TV shows the image from one lens and then alternate to the second lens image and goes back and forth between the two lens images. Now the glasses are actually an LCD and the LCD will turn on and off with the switch of each image displayed on the TV. You do not see it but when the LCD is on it actually turns black and block that eye from seeing the image and alternate between the eyes.

One eye only sees the images from the first lens and the other eye only sees the image form the second lens.

It actually work well and looks good, and it better than the old style since they do not have things jumping out of the screen at your it is more natural.

The down side, if you have a 1080P TV the 3D content is only 720P since it interlacing the two images together. Today 3D content is not as clear as a 2D 1080P content.

Also, today LG announce a passive 3D glass which does not require power and I am not sure how that exactly works.

The other thing I notice is that 3D TV are not great at displaying HD 2D content, there is a trade off being made if you want 3D. You may not notice quality difference unless you want a 3D TV right next top a 2D showing the same content in 2D.

[JayKay335i]

Originally Posted by Maestro

Here is how 3D works today. The show has to be shot/recorded with a new special camera it actually has two lens on it, the lens offset from one another by a few degrees so they are recording the image at slightly different angles. Both streams of information is sent to the TV, then the TV shows the image from one lens and then alternate to the second lens image and goes back and forth between the two lens images. Now the glasses are actually an LCD and the LCD will turn on and off with the switch of each image displayed on the TV. You do not see it but when the LCD is on it actually turns black and block that eye from seeing the image and alternate between the eyes.

One eye only sees the images from the first lens and the other eye only sees the image form the second lens.

It actually work well and looks good, and it better than the old style since they do not have things jumping out of the screen at your it is more natural.

The down side, if you have a 1080P TV the 3D content is only 720P since it interlacing the two images together. Today 3D content is not as clear as a 2D 1080P content.

Also, today LG announce a passive 3D glass which does not require power and I am not sure how that exactly works.

The other thing I notice is that 3D TV are not great at displaying HD 2D content, there is a trade off being made if you want 3D. You may not notice quality difference unless you want a 3D TV right next top a 2D showing the same content in 2D.

Passive glasses would work by using old vector technology of polarized lenses. One vertical, one horizontal, and at a high frame rate and on a specific type of TV it would work similar to the current LCD glasses.

[Comet]

one thing they need to fix is the fact that movies get a lot darker when watching them in 3D
am I the only one who notices that?

[JayKay335i]

Originally Posted by Comet

one thing they need to fix is the fact that movies get a lot darker when watching them in 3D
am I the only one who notices that?

Has to do with the way your brain combines the images between the two eyes while not seeing the image at exactly the same time.

Also, do you ever have any problems with the 3D not looking very 3D? Kinda flat? While everybody else is saying its popping out?

[ScotyH]

I would've thought it's because the glasses appear kinda tinted.

[Freakazoid]

Originally Posted by JayKay335i

Has to do with the way your brain combines the images between the two eyes while not seeing the image at exactly the same time.

Also, do you ever have any problems with the 3D not looking very 3D? Kinda flat? While everybody else is saying its popping out?

I do notice this myself....3D isn't 3d to me, just looks a little different.

For what its worth, the old 3d (like universal studios, muppets, etc) all were REALLY popping out back in the day.

[JayKay335i]

Originally Posted by Freakazoid

I do notice this myself....3D isn't 3d to me, just looks a little different.

For what its worth, the old 3d (like universal studios, muppets, etc) all were REALLY popping out back in the day.

Interrrrrrresting. Ever have an eye turn or "lazy eye" or whatever your optometrist would have wanted to call it? Amblyopia? Ever been to the eye doctor? Do you wear glasses and are the prescriptions in both eyes equal? 20/20 in both eyes or better in one?

Theres been a lot of discussion in the Optometry/Ophthalmology community lately regarding 3D content and early diagnosis of eye problems in children.

[Freakazoid]

Originally Posted by JayKay335i

Interrrrrrresting. Ever have an eye turn or "lazy eye" or whatever your optometrist would have wanted to call it? Amblyopia? Ever been to the eye doctor? Do you wear glasses and are the prescriptions in both eyes equal? 20/20 in both eyes or better in one?

Theres been a lot of discussion in the Optometry/Ophthalmology community lately regarding 3D content and early diagnosis of eye problems in children.

Never diagnosed by an eye doctor, but I fail the 'self tests' using your finger, etc. So I'm guessing I have some level of it, but I believe it only happens when I really 'focus'. Would this possibly the cause for my lack of 'seeing' 3D? Is there anything that can be done to combat this?

I have contacts, different prescriptions in both. (decently bad astigmatism in the one)

[jpsum]

it's darker because you are only seeing half (interlaced) of the screen at any one time.

[BimmerPod]

lol at tag: 'freakzoid can't see this'

[Freakazoid]

Originally Posted by BimmerPod

lol at tag: 'freakzoid can't see this'

lololololololol

[JayKay335i]

Originally Posted by Freakazoid

Never diagnosed by an eye doctor, but I fail the 'self tests' using your finger, etc. So I'm guessing I have some level of it, but I believe it only happens when I really 'focus'. Would this possibly the cause for my lack of 'seeing' 3D? Is there anything that can be done to combat this?

I have contacts, different prescriptions in both. (decently bad astigmatism in the one)

What are the two prescriptions. It would depend. When were you first put into glasses. When your visual system develops your two eyes basically fight each other for dominance. The stimulus from each of your eyes will cause the dendrites to grow in your visual system. If one eye were to have a much stronger stimulus than the other than the other than it would become extremely dominant and the neurons needed to have sharp clear vision in that other would never develop. Even if just one meridian is out of focus, those neurons will not grow. The condition is called amblyopia. There are many forms and it varies in severity. If its in just one meridian it would be called meridional amblyopia. You would notice problems with stereopsis and depth perception. The problem is that because of the lack of neurons one eye would be "suppressed" compared to the other and not receive a strong neural picture and not be able to sharply focus.

But without an exam or anything I cant diagnose you and if you aren't having functional problems theres nothing to really do once you are past your early years.

[Comet]

Originally Posted by JayKay335i

Also, do you ever have any problems with the 3D not looking very 3D? Kinda flat? While everybody else is saying its popping out?

I notice that the previews are all in actual popping 3D
then you go to watch said movie, and all that popping 3D is kinda of not there anymore

I notice that there is depth to the picture (compared to 2D movies).. but it isn't popping out

[JayKay335i]

Originally Posted by Comet

I notice that the previews are all in actual popping 3D
then you go to watch said movie, and all that popping 3D is kinda of not there anymore

I notice that there is depth to the picture (compared to 2D movies).. but it isn't popping out

Could be a symptom or it could be that it just doesnt have very much depth. Could be something like an eye turn that only turns out when you stop focusing intensely on what your watching.

Make sure to see your eye doctors

[escobar929]

not a fan of 3d, to me its all hype to make you spend more money

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by JayKay335i

What are the two prescriptions. It would depend. When were you first put into glasses. When your visual system develops your two eyes basically fight each other for dominance. The stimulus from each of your eyes will cause the dendrites to grow in your visual system. If one eye were to have a much stronger stimulus than the other than the other than it would become extremely dominant and the neurons needed to have sharp clear vision in that other would never develop. Even if just one meridian is out of focus, those neurons will not grow. The condition is called amblyopia. There are many forms and it varies in severity. If its in just one meridian it would be called meridional amblyopia. You would notice problems with stereopsis and depth perception. The problem is that because of the lack of neurons one eye would be "suppressed" compared to the other and not receive a strong neural picture and not be able to sharply focus.

But without an exam or anything I cant diagnose you and if you aren't having functional problems theres nothing to really do once you are past your early years.

I was diagnosed with ambliopia at the age of eight. The guy said that if they had found it when I was a toddler, they could have put a patch over my good right eye to force my left eye to develop the connections. Since it was too late, nothing was done.

Maybe 5 years ago (I am 49 years old now) I started wearing contact lenses because I have become far-sighted (+3.00 for left eye and +0.50 for right eye). Initially, the correction to my left eye did little to improve my vision in that eye. Although the image was sharp, it just wasn't "all there". Today, I have significant improvement and get more work from my weak eye than I ever did. It is a difference of being able to read some with my weak eye where even with correction, it used to have to be a very large font.

So, there may be hope for your weak eye even in later years.

[Comet]

Originally Posted by escobar929

not a fan of 3d, to me its all hype to make you spend more money

round these parts it is an extra 1$ per movie for 3D
and another 1$ for the glasses if you don't own a pair (which I do)

[NYCGP]

Originally Posted by Comet

...and another 1$ for the glasses if you don't own a pair (which I do)

You know how I know you're gay?