You can make two pairs of "2D Glasses" with two pairs of 3D glasses anyway so it seems stupid to go and buy some.
Anyone else with 1 eye only? (3D related)
- Thread starter Pawnless Endgame
- Start date
You can make two pairs of "2D Glasses" with two pairs of 3D glasses anyway so it seems stupid to go and buy some.
To see what you are missing go and see Avatar at the BFI IMAX. It is an amazing experience.
Suffer from amblyopia myself - so i'm totally not into the whole 3D thing. You'd be surprised at how many people have trouble seeing it properly or at all. Read in quite a few places that between 10-12% of the population are affected.
http://www.eyecaretrust.org.uk/view.php?item_id=566
http://www.eyecaretrust.org.uk/view.php?item_id=566
As I have a bit of a squint, I have a left eye dominance thing going on. Thus I do not see any 3D effects as my eyes cannot focus on the same spot of both images. I find the glasses in 3D films annoying and uncomfortable (not to mention making the film look dark too). It is bloody annoying having to find 2D showings of movies as they tend not to be at the convenient times of the 3D ones. I can see the point in 3D at cinemas, especially IMAX where your vision is completely filled with the picture but not on a TV where really all you're doing is looking at an effect through a small window.
Oh and the effect is all too often poor, tacked on and done more as an afterthought on a lot of movies.
Oh and the effect is all too often poor, tacked on and done more as an afterthought on a lot of movies.
It's hard not to at the top range.
Even though I'm not impressed although films filmed in 3d do look good, it's still dark and makes my eyes feel odd(I think it's because the film chooses the focus point, rather than my head) but it's here to stay and will come standard. Over the next few years it'll work it's way down to the cheap models. Films are 3d, sky has a 3d service. So people who say it's a dead gimmick, IMO are very wrong indeed.
yes but one frame is shown so that it only passes though one lens, the one the frame the same. (in principal it's the same just that the complicated part is in the projector rather than the lens)
So basically for frame 1 the elft ey is seeing the picture the right eye is seeing black
frame two the right eye is seeing the picture the left eye black.
ok?
But if you only have a left eye you'll see
image black image black image black.
and it will look darker because you're seeing half the number of frames interspersed with black frames.
there are certain monitors that insert a black frame between every image to reduce ghosting etc and they too suffer from being a bit darker.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
I effectively have only 1 eye. Which, in addition to being excluded from the '3D' cinema world, I also can't catch to save my life 
. Stupid monocular distancing!
. Stupid monocular distancing!
Not going to happen.
The current crop of 3D is a fad; it's not going to take off. Already cinema owners are complaining to the film distributors that their customers don't want to watch 3D versions of films. Everyone I know actively seeks out the 2D version to watch.
The technology is an impressive gimmick and kinda cool to see - once. After that, I have no desire to pay more money to have to wear a stupid pair of specs to watch something that's constantly slightly unpleasant to watch and adds naff all to the experience.
What cinemas are complaining about is the terms. Cinemas. Are dictated by the film industry. If the film industry says they have to show twice as many showings in 3d than 2d. That's what they have to do. Want they want is more freedom to actually fill cinema seats how they want.
3d is big and. There's a huge difference between filmed in 3d which is pretty good and say pirates of the carabean which was transfer and shocking.
3d has already taken of. It's in all cinemas on pretty much every high end tv and is being support by broadcasters. So it's hear to stay.
3d is big and. There's a huge difference between filmed in 3d which is pretty good and say pirates of the carabean which was transfer and shocking.
3d has already taken of. It's in all cinemas on pretty much every high end tv and is being support by broadcasters. So it's hear to stay.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 4,360
How can you only have one eye?
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 1,268
- Location
- West Yorkshire
It may be here to stay, yes. I'm not saying it's going to completely disappear; what it's not going to do is replace 2D. I confidently predict that 2D will continue to be king for at least the next decade, and it will take a 3D technology way better than the current one to achieve replacement. It's just plain not good enough, and as a result a lot of people don't like it, and it doesn't add that much to the experience for everyone else.
Firstly, not all 3D projection systems alternate like you say.
Secondly, in an alternate systems both eyes are seeing frames interspersed with black frames, only using one eye won't make it seem any darker because that eye is still receiving as much light as it was before. If you don't believe me try it the next time you go to the cinema.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 May 2004
- Posts
- 1,402
- Location
- Belfast
Could use these www.2d-glasses.com
Associate
- Joined
- 11 Apr 2011
- Posts
- 710
- Location
- Somerset
Already posted.
Tombo said:
That's how he started off, then realised there was a market for it and had them made properly. Most of humanity prefers to buy things over making them. Hence the retail sector is quite large.
