"I can watch BET in 3-D, But I still cant' pay my 'lectric bill!"
Posted on 04/23/2011 7:18:10 AM PDT by Clint Williams
Phoghat writes
"The entertainment and electronics industries keep trying to push 3D on consumers, even though a lot of smart people have caught on to the fact that it is a scam and not innovation as the industry would like you to believe. From the article: 'This is a bad experiment that the industry is forcing consumers to subsidize. And since they can’t create a better product, they’ve simply latched on to 3D as a marketing ploy that the entertainment and electronics industries can use to trick people into thinking that they are getting a superior experience. It’s only working because just enough people are falling for the scam to keep it alive.'"
I have an older 57” Toshiba 1080P DLP, back when I bought it the technology was sound, its still a RPTV and thus not a flat screen but was ideal for gaming, its only drawback was the lamp assembly that was poorly designed and required a replacement yearly.
Its my personal TV and the rest of the family uses a 50” Panasonic plasma which has awesome colors and brightness.
This year I am planning on upgrading to a 65” plasma since the prices are much more reasonable, and I have read a lot about the new 3-D Tv’s and players. For the last year all my movies bought have been Bluray, and will continue to be so for some time as I don’t think a better format will evolve anytime soon.
I have heard of LED Tv’s having problems so I’m not going to jump in on that yet, the plasma has that awesome high contrast factor and with a refresh rate of 240hz would be perfect for high speed images. So that is what I am going to buy, a non 3D high hertz plasma.
The one my wife and I went to see was Kiss Me Kate. It's a movie well worth watching on its own. Unlike most cheesy 3D movies, which use color separation, and blue red filters, this one used polarization separation, which is considerably more expensive. The glasses appear to be grey if you look through either one of them. If you place a pair of them against each other they are either grey or opaque, depending on how the lens are oriented.
If you watch the movie on television or in 2D there are alot of scenes that lose a lot of their appeal. In the opening scene, Ann Miller's character tap dances on a table in Cole Porter's apartment, framed by three hinged dressing mirrors at about a 60 degree angle from one another. Filmed from different angles and with cameras at various angles, the effect of 3D is dramatic, with the multiple reflected Ann Millers appearing at different depths. During the dance, she whips off various pieces of her ensemble (garters, for instance) and flirtatously tosses them in direction of various observers, the camera angle moving rapidly from the prespective the thrower, Ann Miller, to the target. The effect in 3D is dramatic, you really feel like she is tossing her lingerie at you.
There are other shots, like the fire eaters blowing directly into your face that need to be seen in 3D to be appreciated.
I would say that it was the only 3D movie where 3D actually added some value and was used ingeniously, that I have ever seen. Still, it was more a stunt than anything else, but a clever one. In point of fact, 3D vision breaks down at about the distance of your finger tips. Outfielders don't use 3D vision to track fly balls, seamtresses us it to thread a needle. I seriously doubt that I will ever invest in 3D home entertainment equipment.
I'd think Dr. Who would be a better candidate for 4-D.
"I can watch BET in 3-D, But I still cant' pay my 'lectric bill!"
Went to a 3D XXX flick in the late 60s. Some of the shots were rather interesting in 3D. LOL.
I am getting enough slaps from just reading this thread about “3D”, Thank You!
Keep laughing or you will cry!
None of the films mentioned so far can hold a candle to “Dr. Tongue’s 3-D House of Stewardesses”. Scarrrrrrryyyyyy!!!
I thought about Sensurround yesterday, when I saw the Charlton Heston movie “Earthquake” listed in our TV guide.
You got a bunch of leftist tripe along with your experience.
Me to. After one watching of the last three Star Wars pics I can’t watch them again. Proves that Lucas, very good as a producer and special effects, is a terrrible writer and director.
I’m holding out for “Hologram TV” so I can move around the picture!
I haven’t seen anything yet in modern 3D. But if a movie has been remastered in Blu-Ray, I really like it.
I am one of those who gets a headache and really doesn’t see the 3D effect all that well so I can happily not buy into it. If there is ever a true demand for it, the market will comply if allowed to.
oh, and 3D doesn’t work as well for those who are colorblind.
I tried to watch Avatar and just could not get past the first 30 minutes, It really was not that good of a picture.
Special effects were interesting but I could not get into those planet creatures.
John Candy was great. I also like Count Floyd and the guy Eugene Levy played. SCTV was a lot of fun.
I’m Canadian.
I have immunity from such propaganda.
I agree. The 3D technology is not very good and it will be better in the next generations to follow. I don’t think the extra cost is worth it.
Back in the 60’s, I distinctly recall a gigantic pair of boobs swinging my way. I ducked.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.