3 ms·

> any benefits from 3D movies Ha, there are some benefits? For me, it is the latest snake powder intended to boost sells in movie and high-end electronic devi

by gbog 15y ago

> any benefits from 3D movies Ha, there are some benefits? For me, it is the latest snake powder intended to boost sells in movie and high-end electronic devices industry. I tried just once but, as far as I can tell, it has no benefit, except being able to say I have seen a part of a 3D movie. I hear someone saying "improved immersion". Well, immersion is not a function of some "more realistic" rendering. I never played Minecraft but apparently many people get deeply immersed in this low-fi world. I personally get easily immersed in any B&W Hitchcock movie. Our ancestors got so immersed at theater that the actor playing the bad guy had to be protected after the play. In Chinese opera, the full "ride a horse" movement is a very slight move of the right leg, and if done well all the spectators will stand up and shout 好！好！ So no, immersion is not improved with 3D, it is improved with good actors and story.

tallanvor 15y ago
Ok, I'm making some assumptions about 3D movies, admittedly. --I just figured that the only reason anyone liked Avatar was because the 3D effects made up for the horrible plot. At least, that's the only reason I can think of for why anyone would like it.
- dkersten 15y ago
  One of my eyes is a good bit stronger than the other and I've never been able to see those 3D holograms and don't have true depth perception. Interestingly enough, Avatar did work in 3D for me (though the effect did seem to depend on how close I was to the screen - closer worked better). Its the only 3D movie that has worked, but admittedly I have not went to many since I figured its a waste of time if I can't see the effects anyway. I tried a 3D TV last year and it didn't work for me at all. Avatar did though and while I don't know if the effects made the movie more immersive or anything, they were certainly interesting. It was really the simplest effects that had the most impact: sparks, rain drops, clouds - stuff like that. Making 2D movies into 3D seems completely pointless to me.

by gbog 15y ago

tallanvor 15y ago

Ok, I'm making some assumptions about 3D movies, admittedly. --I just figured that the only reason anyone liked Avatar was because the 3D effects made up for the horrible plot. At least, that's the only reason I can think of for why anyone would like it.

dkersten 15y ago
One of my eyes is a good bit stronger than the other and I've never been able to see those 3D holograms and don't have true depth perception. Interestingly enough, Avatar did work in 3D for me (though the effect did seem to depend on how close I was to the screen - closer worked better). Its the only 3D movie that has worked, but admittedly I have not went to many since I figured its a waste of time if I can't see the effects anyway. I tried a 3D TV last year and it didn't work for me at all. Avatar did though and while I don't know if the effects made the movie more immersive or anything, they were certainly interesting. It was really the simplest effects that had the most impact: sparks, rain drops, clouds - stuff like that. Making 2D movies into 3D seems completely pointless to me.