http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/ Engadget Comments for 3D: is this the resurgence that counts? http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
There are still segments of the market that will demand regular viewing and will not watch the content in 3D. Those who feel uncomfortable with the equipment (glasses) and those who become nauseated. Hopefully the new technologies are mentioned in the article will come up to speed fast. They won't make it for the crop of 2009 movies that have already been made though.]]>Jan 23rd 2009 2:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
You can then get 3D Drivers (Nvidia supply their own but you need Vista, or you can grab iZ3D for any Windows OS/system) and play almost any game on the market in 3D.

Its not true full colour, but its definately an incredible experience all the same. I'm a huge 3D fan (got lenticular posters up in my room) and for the price of free, its definately worth sampling if you've never tried 3D before - you'll see what the hype's about.

I'm saving buying an HDTV for our living room (got one in my bedroom) until decent 3D-ready ones are available at the size I'd prefer. But I'd definately get one, just with the hope that 3D programming may become mainstream at some point in the not-too-distant future.

Then again... I bought an HD DVD player. I have been wrong before!]]>Jan 24th 2009 7:44AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
While auto-stereoscopic 3D is a plus, glasses are not a deterrent to gamers and Blu-Ray viewers. This is according to 2D gamers who don't yet own 3D equipment, and experienced 3D gamers are much more forgiving:

http://www.mtbs3d.com/cgi-bin/press.cgi?press_id=28

These results are 100% based on customers, not industry.

Regards,
Neil]]>Jan 23rd 2009 2:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 23rd 2009 3:00PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 23rd 2009 4:03PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 23rd 2009 11:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
I have been to the cinema and seen movies in 3D. I even went, as a young teenager, to see Jaws 3D. It was a gimmick, it still is.]]>Jan 23rd 2009 3:57PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 23rd 2009 4:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
Jaws 3D used exactly the same polarized lenses (as did the handful of other movies out in the early 80s like SpaceHunter 3D) that are leading the 3D resurgence in the late naughties. I hear so many people saying how 3D is now so much better than the red/blue lenses we used to have to put up with, but the only stuff I've ever seen/heard about using red/blue lenses was in comic books or some visual stuff back in the 60s (or 50s?). The only real difference today is the advent of digital cinema that can deliver the stuff more crisply, and the true technological advances of stereoscopic screens - which as the article points out, aren't particulalry practical at the moment. I can only think that the primary driver this generation is the electronic manufacturers who need to keep driving consumer demand for newer/better products: B&W TVs, color TVs, video, DVD, widescreen TVs, Hi Def video/TVs, giant TVs and now 3D. I'm sure the next step will be wider 2.85:1 aspect ratio TVs just to keep demand going. If there are some real, significant advances in 3D cinematic technology that I'm missing this generation, I'd appreciate it if someone could point them out to me.]]>Jan 24th 2009 1:22AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
And like my other respondee, I have never seen red/blue glasses. Jaws 3D was in colour, which kind of precludes the red/blue glasses trick of the 1950s. Every 3D movie I have seen used polarization. And every single 3D movie I've seen sucked.
]]>Jan 25th 2009 7:49PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 23rd 2009 4:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
Sure, the movie wasn't the greatest, but the sense of presence is impressive. I hope all new movies include this. Really, it's something that needs to be experienced and not described. I recommended about 10 people today to go see it.

My only gripes are A) glasses get annoying after a while (I wear contacts normally because of this), and B) because of the polarization, some of the light is lost giving a darker image.]]>Jan 23rd 2009 4:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 23rd 2009 4:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 23rd 2009 5:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 23rd 2009 4:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 24th 2009 1:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
]]>Jan 23rd 2009 5:46PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 23rd 2009 5:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
first: it's at Epcot, not Universal Studios and it's called Captain EO
second: it's spelled "touch", not "tough"]]>Jan 23rd 2009 11:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 23rd 2009 6:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
However, if your regular glasses are polarized sunglasses, you're screwed :)

http://www.ENLIGHTEN3D.com]]>Jan 26th 2009 4:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/This is something Apple hopefully gets involved in. They'll make sure for one thing that image ghosting simply doesn't occur which is a problem in all the glasses based system I have seen.

]]>Jan 23rd 2009 7:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
There is currently NO commercial system out there (not even NVIDIA's) who can honestly claim no ghosting. What's needed in the industry is UNBIASED standards and benchmarks (Jon Peddie, how about you???) so that consumers can better understand what they're buying. If this doesn't happen, and the quality doesn't vastly improve, this round of 3D will be yet another flash in the pan.]]>Jan 30th 2009 9:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 23rd 2009 7:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Would be great to see "Creature from the Black Lagoon" at home in 3D.
If the studios are smart, they'll add 3D capabilities to all their Blu Ray discs, and you could watch it in 2D or 3D -viewers choice.]]>Jan 23rd 2009 7:20PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 24th 2009 12:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 25th 2009 11:00AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 24th 2009 8:08AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
When will people reporting items concerning the renewed interest in 3D going to get their facts straight. If someone feels that a subject is worth writing about they should at least do some basic research. An article called, "NVIDIA Takes Video Games Into 3D" states: "This approach is called stereoscopic because the computer sends separate images to each eye. Objects in the two images are slightly offset from each other—a gap the brain interprets as depth, resulting in a compelling 3D illusion." The 3D image is NOT an illusion. An illusion is an erroneous perception of reality. A misleading visual image. When you observe something, the parallax difference between the left eye image and the right eye image enables the brain to construct the stereoscopic image. When you observe a 3D image through some kind of visual aid you are experiencing that same difference in parallax, which means it is a real image and not an illusion.

The same question applies to most reporter's erroneous belief that the 3D movies of the fifties were anaglyphic and presented through red and blue pieces of cellophane. I cannot think of one first run 3D feature film of the fifties that was presented that way. They were all presented with a two projector system through polarizing filters shown on a silverized screen so as not to depolarize the images. The glasses were also polarizing filters that separated the left and right image. And, when the projectionist did his job properly (which seldom was the case) the 3D image was superb. Cardboard red and blue cellophane filters were usually reserved for cheap 3D ads and comic books. And, it saddens my heart that there are greedy fools around now, ready to present that anaglyphic garbage to young people today who are not familiar with 3D, and suggest that this is what 3D on television is all about. This kind of greedy stupidity will set 3D back several years in the minds of those who are unfamiliar with sterescopic principles. This is what happened in the fifties. Email me and I'll tell you that story.

Lastly I would like to correct the following quote: "In recent years several companies have developed 3D computer displays, with results ranging from disappointing to, literally, nauseating. Graphics specialist Nvidia (NVDA) has a new approach that promises to take computing into the third dimension." This is certainly NOT a new approach. The field-sequential system that utilizes shutter glasses has been around for years. It is probably true that NVIDIA has a quality system that I am sure is state of the art. But then, so is the price. Not only for the system, but the cost of a brand new extra expensive TV set. I have a system I spent less that $100.00 on and the only drawback is that it can only be used on a CRT (cathode ray tube) TV set. But right now, that's what most poor people have anyway.

Speaking of people. In today's world most people wear glasses. If for nothing else, to shut out the sun's glare. Is it so inconceivable that they would wear glasses to view a film in the way most of them actually see the world. If one is fortunate enough to have binocular vision, isn't viewing still and moving pictures on a flat surface that mushes everything together rather antiquated? When we view a regular image, the only way we can get any feeling of depth is through perspective and relative size. Can this truly be enough?

Christopher R. Mohr Sr.

]]>Jan 24th 2009 10:30AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
A large part of the problem is that the industry is full of folks who either are new at stereo, or have been around a long time perpetrating myths. They, in turn, are informing the authors of these articles. People who actually know what they're talking about are few and far between, and the authors don't realize this, because they hear the same BS from pretty much every 3D fanatic they talk to. (I still think that there's no excuse for the use of the same verbiage, over and over, to describe the experience... That's just bad journalism.)

In order to create a stereo-3D system that delivers truly compelling stereo imagery, people need to start thinking outside the box--and listening to people like you, Christopher, who actually know what they're talking about. Thank you for your years of work and your experience!]]>Jan 30th 2009 9:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Mar 28th 2009 9:58AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
Only way to really tell is to sample the tech as it will be when they've finalized it for television.

Also, going to a movie theater sporting the latest tech is also a good idea. And for the person talking about how the theaters are just trying to get you back there. Yeah, they are obviously trying to do that. Because up until 10-15 years ago, the theater experience was something you couldn't get anywhere else.

Now, the average home theater gives an experience that is close enough for most people. 3-D is the next logical step to get people back to the theaters. And if the 3-D is spectacular, it will only take one viewing to realize that you'd rather watch 3-D than 2-D. ]]>Jan 24th 2009 2:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/I will be waiting for a 3D HD projector at the $2000 price point. As wall as a player. If possible one that uses SD Cards. So perhaps a 3D standard is required for this type of media too.

(I here star wars is likley to be converted to 3D, I would prefer that it was completely re-made using camera shots that would make better use of 3D effects). ]]>Jan 25th 2009 1:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 25th 2009 1:10AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
These fundamental problems for the viewer are not going away.
]]>Jan 26th 2009 12:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
Initially you needed a registry hack and specific drivers, later I think they got incorporated into the nvidia driver. They worked in conjunction with DirectX to render two viewpoints from the 3D-accelerated image. The sequential images were then sent to each eye with the graphics card flipping the LCD shutters . You had to have a very high refresh monitor to not get very bad flicker, but the IIyama I had could just about do 120Hz in 800x600 mode. Quake3 and Unreal Tournament were pretty awesome, but you could only play for about 10 minutes before the flicker would give you a headache :-(

I sold the computer with the wired glasses, with instructions I'd buy the card back one day as a kit as it's fairly rare. I kept the Elsa card and glasses because they were pretty neat. The monitor's been given away too. I'm now on a decent LCD panel, so of course there's no chance to use the 3D glasses.

The best 3D experience I had was seeing The Polar Express in Imax3D, which was stunning (at Arizona Science Centre Imax). I've see a number of other Imax3D movies, more the National Geographic type, but they didn't work so well. I think the Polar Express, being animated, meant they could get much better control of the stereo imagery.

I would *love* to have a dual-projector with polarised goggle 3D system at home. As a previous poster said, when set up properly it is excellent. It would be good for feature films and video games, especially with surround sound.

There was a time when people thought surround sound was a gimmick, and I guess it was until it could be done properly at a fair price. 3D probably falls into this category!]]>Jan 27th 2009 2:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/
The really big win with today's systems is that the digital projection systems can use a single projector using frame sequential images at high frame rates, this means the two eyes see both images registered correctly and the projected image is pretty stable and potentially flicker free. For me they need more than 2K resolution which they currently use.

Personally if the images suffer any kind of problem I usually start getting headaches. This includes shifting focus depths across cuts. Given this bias I still think that 3D will have a wider appeal this time, although I believe that it may only be 10-20% of movies. For me the real success will be other 'events' (live or otherwise) e.g. sports, concerts, etc that will really work.]]>Jan 27th 2009 8:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 27th 2009 8:11AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Jan 28th 2009 2:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Feb 4th 2009 2:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/23/3d-is-this-the-resurgence-that-counts/Feb 6th 2009 6:29PM