TBF they had been wanting to do that console since the 90s, the timing for when they were able to achieve it somewhat effectively was able to co-incide with the general 3D craze
Other people have said it, but Nintendo was the OG in 3D. And to be fair, if they did a HD version of that tech, I think it would sell a lot better than what they ended up going with. Glasses free 3D is the only way this concept could become popular.
3D could have been amazing AND the next big thing, but all the companies making cheap 2D to 3D conversions and the theaters not having the required brighter bulbs killed off interest. I will never forgive them for this. Watching Avengers (2012) in 3D in the theater was a wonderful experience and I'm glad I was able to see it that way.
Wasn't the bulbs. I worked at a theater when it went through DLP integration. 3D movies required a literal silver screen instead of the standard white in order increase the reflectivity of the image. Admittedly, this made regular movies look even better.
I don't know the technicals behind it but I used to love 3d movies like 10 years ago and didn't watch one since. Watched the new spiderman in 3d and it was garbage
Linus forgot to mention one of the major killers of 3D was the proprietary format wars with TVs. Companies had different formats for how they did 3d movies in the beginning, they then either bought or already owned the rights to specific movies which they released as exclusives only in their specific format. This meant that not everyone could watch their favorite movies on their device.
There is a solitary reason why a single format wasn't standardized early in the life of at-home-3D. The Adult Film Industry didn't invest in the equipment needed for a single format to be chosen. From Technicolor, to VHS, to Blu-Ray, and recently the at-home-VR standard format; they always decided what the winning format (both mechanical & encryption wise) was going to be.
I did my cornerstone paper on formats in 2008. I said Blu-ray and HD-TV and their licensing fees will accelerate the decline of home media sales as technology will render the need for physical discs obsolete.
tv's had a converter that would convert 2d video to 3d. regardless of what the 3d format was. the way the tv's converted to 3d produced more of a depth effect versus a pop out effect but it was still badass
@@jamesbyrd3740 By driving sales. I don't think they're the #1 reason, but pron sites have contributed a lot to the evolution of the modern web space. Like even the google search "N results found for your query" was taken from pronhub if I remember correctly.
As someone who used to do 3D mapping, we wore a set of active 3D goggles 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. Having that experience, I can point out a few other issues with the set up for repeated long time wear. The biggest one.... build quality of the 3D goggles/glasses, especially for active systems. 1: The nose piece. It always seemed whomever made and designed the plastic of the nose piece, had never worn glasses in their life. Tapered and nice soft and just the right kind of material is what you see on prescription glasses. This material and these edges make contact with your sensitive bridge of the nose every waking moment. They need to be comfortable. Whoever designed the 3D goggles, and the subsequent glasses models, used a hard plastic, with sharp edges.... This alone could bring on a headache, want to see how it feels, press your fingernail into the bridge of your nose for 25 min, see how you feel. I wanted to have some very strong words with that materials expert for the sets we had. 2: Weight. Our goggles used large medical batteries, think 0.75in in diameter, 1/8 in thick. Added into the frame of the goggles, the emitter receiver... we're up to almost 1 lb... That is heavy for hanging on your face, ineffective ear pieces wrapped around your head.... also made out of the cheepest plastic. They barely stay on. Got a slippery nose? good luck. Long hair getting into the ear pieces.... add on that weight.... never enjoyable past 30 min. You start to feel the weight on your nose and ears, your whole head feels extra heavy... then you realize a gap in the plastic is tugging on your hair, now you need to get your hair untangled while the entire thing falls off your face with the weight of a box of crackers. Try taping a box of crackers to your face, then use some extra tape and Popsicle sticks to hold it on.... that's what it feels like. Why didn't they just hire the people who make real glasses dammit! 3: Over glasses retrofits: I wear glasses.... so take every issue from number 1-2, and then multiply it. Just watching this video, I could only imagine the discomfort our glasses wearing host was experiencing. There was a reason we got a 15 min break every hour at that office... so we could avoid wearing a brick over glasses. Even the passive systems never fit over glasses.... and there are so many points of failure that a paralax can encounter. One biggie is how the glasses and individual lenses sit in front of your eye or added glasses lenses. Like a fighter pilot can have multiple axis, yaw roll pitch.... there are multiple axis for those lenses over your eye and/or glasses. If your own prescription pair is out of wack, it hurts... but factor in the build quality of the 3D set, and have one lens 1mm too close and the other 1mm too far... or up and down, or front to back... tilted as well... No fun... I spent an entire 3D movie once just testing out 20 different pairs of passive 3D glasses to see how they fit.. and only 1 set really even came close to tolerable. 4: Low power When that battery or internal power supply goes on an active set.... it hurts, your eyes start to feel overwhelmed... you don't notice it right away either, it sneaks up on you. And you better hope you have a good supply of batteries if they are battery powered. 5: Power switch. Some genius, decided to put the power switch in the temple piece. Idea was.. you can't leave them on.. so let's have a power switch. But I bet people will forget... so let's make it part of an automatic.. or semi-automatic process. People will take off the goggles, then fold up the ear pieces.... great, they turn off with a little switch that is physically moved with the temple piece. But.. let's make it out of cheap plastic, and since it's technically a moving part activated by a moving part... it'll hold up for.... oh about 55 days.... and slowly get more and more loose and twisted. Suddenly, your glasses won't be active... then they are... then not... as that damn switch now is a wobbling mess. Replacement = a full new set of goggles..... great.... 50ish days. It's to the point now... if you want me to look into a paralax on an active or passive 3D... you better be paying me an hourly wage and full vision and health coverage.
One of the big things for me that absolutely makes or breaks 3D is: Was it shot/rendered in actual 3D, or was it post-processed 3D? Because the latter always causes an extremely noticeable cardboard cutout effect for me and I hate it with a passion. But some things, like Ton Legacy, it's amazing because it was shot and rendered, and also because they use the 3D as a way to help separate the real and digital worlds.
Also sucks for someone I know who has only one eye. A kinda rare condition, but regardless, most of the time, 3D completely fails to work for them and actually looks much worse than a regular flat image. lol
Exactly there were too many...bad tacked on 3d titles which just did not work properly, which also made people think the 3d was awful. While Linus might hate Avatar, its 3d is amazing. They needed to film them in 3d. ( do not get me wron there are a few tacked on 3d titles which are okay)
Just from my own experience, Tron: Legacy's 3D wasn't so much about giving a pop-out 3D experience, but rather depth to everything. In some of the establishing shots, The Grid stretches for miles and miles on that flat screen. Also, my favorite 3D experience was Up, where a actually jumped out of the way of one of the "Dog"-fighters. And yes I was embarrassed by it.
Agreed. Tron Legacy in 3D basically gave you a window into the world. The depth was amazing and fare more satisfying than anything that popped out of the screen.
Agreed. Depth based 3D in the home is much better than pop out. Pop out works in Cinemax theaters where they control the environment. Not so much the house.
You are correct, and make points on VR as well. 3d is about immersion. When you give it to a bunch of boomers who can't tell the difference between 480p and 4k, it doesn't impress them. VR succeeds because it has an extra pinch of immersion this 3d tech doesn't.
You mentioned the only two 3D films I actually felt enhanced my experience. Tron: Legacy using 3D to give depth (rather than pop out for gimmics) was a thing of beauty, especially in how alive it made the virtual world feel vs the flat real world. It became an integral part of the story rather than a visual add-on.
@Bold One This already applies to every smartphone in the world, so I wouldn't be surprised. But my 3DS was never hooked to the Internet anyway (I have it jailbroken) so they can heck off haha.
The movie which had the best use of 3D for me was Dredd. Filmmakers clearly thought about 3D as part of the way they shot the film, and the SloMo drug sequences are incredible. Nothing is 'WOW LOOK AT THIS FLYING OUT AT YOU', it's all properly there for a cinematographic reason. The focal plane stuff Linus talks about is used with that, and it's an absolutely gorgeous experience. Seriously made me consider sticking with my old 3D TV just for that film. Seriously, was so bummed LTT didn't have that as one of the films they tried, particularly when they even scrolled past it at the end...!
When I worked in Sony's tech support, I recall that Active 3D glasses were a real pain to troubleshoot. It went to the point where if anyone asked about what TV to get with 3D, I would recommend one with passive glasses instead.
Sony did make a few passive 3D models (with 4k panel), those are sought after like the LG OLED's. Though I think they are LCD, so the best 3D can look with a 4k LCD panel in passive. Their other models were mostly active glasses with LCD panel. Vizio TV's also used passive, I think they got out of 3D right before 4k panels became available. So they never had a 4k passive 3D tv like LG did, just the 1080P Full HD, with 540P per eye.
The New 3DS fixed many of the OG 3DS' pitfalls. Not the resolution problem, but the head tracking is quite good on the New 3DS, which fixed the viewing angle issue.
@@austematicthatragic4352 Nah, the new3DS actually had slightly upgraded specs to let it do real-time facetracking adjust the 3D focus while playing games. Made enjoying the stereoscopic 3D effect much more enjoyable, but obviously still had issues for certain people (such as those who wore glasses). The somewhat low resolution didn't help matters but it was still pretty impressive given that the massive library of 3DS games (and what a great library it was) almost always had 3D effects to them.
@@austematicthatragic4352 Actually I've been playing a lot of my 3DS backlog through my limited new3DS (non XL, the one with the changable faceplates) and have been enjoying the library quite a bit with the 3D at full blast. While almost all titles have 3D some titles use it in more subtle ways. Been trying to finish up Fire Emblem Echoes and it's really nice seeing those units attack turn animations, like watching a little battle diorama.
You could do the simulview thing with LG passive tv’s too but with any console or hdmi source. there was a button on the remotes that would split the screen and put one half of the image on top of the other. Then you had to pop the lenses out of two pairs of glasses and swap them. So one pair had two left lenses and the other had two right lenses. As it was a tv based function it worked on every split screen game not just the ones that supported simulview
@@SC-zf6dn well you had to pop the lenses out of the glass and make two pairs with the same polarising filter I don’t think it was ever an intended feature
I've had one of those TVs, but never used this function because the image becomes stretched and ugly. In the end of the day my friends and I just enjoyed the regular split-screen view.
@@0prisonpriest0 LG had suitable glasses available separately. I dont remember their name anymore tho :) My second PC has a decade old LG 3D TV as a monitor, with a suitable .INF file it works with games too but resolution sucks (540p). I remember testing Crysis long time ago.
I think it's kinda sad that 3D died, considering that we have high refresh, high resolution displays everywhere now. I would at least like having the option to play my favorite games in 3D. And as a game developer, I would also love it if the engine I'm using had a stereoscopic viewport.
And you had to buy a satelite dish if your house didn't have one don't know if it was then but sky also needed a special lnb because they encrypt things differently to freesat
I bought a 70” passive 3D tv back in 2013 (still have it and use as our main TV). I invited a bunch of friends over and had a handed out whole box of glasses I had saved from the theater. We watched all of the best scenes from pretty much every 3D movie that was available at the time (Avatar, Top Gun, Jurassic Park, Pacific Rim, etc), but when we got to Finding Nemo… the 3D effect was just so good we ended up forgetting to change the movie and watched the whole thing 😂
I had a 3D monitor back in 2012 or so (still do in my closet lol) . I am incredibly disappointed the tech didn't stay around. Some games in 3D were unmatched, like the Metro series, Alien Isolation, and Crysis.
@@syrozzz I do, had a vive. Was cool but for a bit but there is not the the same caliber of games available in VR as there was in 3D Vision. Many games could be played in either mode, nowhere near as many VR games can do that.
@@Taylorek2011 VR's come a long way, and the experiences it offers now are so different to regular gaming it's worth getting back into IMO. I still enjoy regular games, but sometimes actually physically holding a gun stick and peeking corners is more fun to me. (Made a gun stock out of PVC for Onward and it made the experience a lot better)
@@sirspamalot4014 meh. My roommate has an index, I've tried it here and there. It's just not for me I think. Even he barely touches it after a few months.
I just revisited this video after seeing Avatar 2 in Dolby 3D, and am now convinced that 3D should be a thing again. The confusing standards, display options, and poor content really destroyed 3D's chances before. But give me a modern TV with the new Dolby tech and I'd buy it in a heartbeat. The movie looked absolutely gorgeous in theaters!
Glad to see this comment. I hope this movie breaks some kind of record and we see 3D support again. Haven’t tried a 3DTV but just got Spiderverse in 3D since I heard it’s a great watch
At the very least the big TV brands could just offer one model that offers 3D. Doesn't have to be all of them. Boggles the mind as to why they all dropped it at once.
@@Guitar387 It depends on the projector itself. Could've been that the cinema you went to had an old 2k projector that wasn't optimized for 3D. I rewatched it 3D in a local cinema after watching it in IMAX® with Laser, and motion was indeed blurry with the picture itself being very dim at times
I still have 3d tv and ps3 to watch 3d blu rays. Problem is as linus said its lazy implementation cause most of blokbusters didnt shot in 3d and its just thin 3d layer you forget about while watching. Also bad 3d blu rays. Avatar is worse 3d home blu ray ever. But its still got moments like that 3d cartoon with jim carrey about christmas , cgi cartoon about owls etc. Malificent is one of the best 3d blu rays
I love my Sony 72' LED 1080P 3D TV. I don't want all content in 3D, just when watching a blockbuster when I'm not going to be doing anything else. It's not my main TV anymore, but still have a massive 3D Bluray library.
After having a VR headset and rewatching some older movies in 3D, man do I want 3D content to come back and be done properly. Especially with things like the Playstation splitscreen, even though they might be niche, not only is it cool but could actually be useful. Movie theaters rn could really utilize that 3D splitscreen to play a 2D movie, but with/without captions at the same time, so everyone can watch in whichever way they prefer.
BTW You can easily "convert" any modern game to 3D format with ReShade and Depth3D shader for it. It works really good with a VR headset and should work with any passive 3D TV. I even managed to get "cross-eye 3D" gaming experience which is a bit crazy but still cool :D
Doe sit work on 'render to texture' games? I got some nvidia shutter glasses and a 144hz screen. Tried Planet Coaster. Discovered the whole thing as just rendered to a polygon in front of the camera. Yeah, I saw 3D, a rectangle with another scene (flat) rendered on to it. Some games are just built wrong to work. Does it fix games like that?
I thought it was great for gaming. I remember playing COD on PS3 on my 3D TV and a couple years back I played BOTW in 3D with the Emulator. Superb experience IMHO
Agree. I never really liked 3d movies or games on a flat screen. But in a VR headset it's a good experience imo. I actually kinda wish 3d movies would make a comeback now that VR is quite accessible.
As someone with a passive 3D TV, I love it. It's a shame it never really took off. I will be super sad when my 3D TV stops working and I have to hunt down a used one...because I love it.
i had a plasma passive 3d tv from panasonic, "UT50", with the best panel a plasma ever had. the 3d was absolutely gorgeous. sad the tv died and since then my new tv's were 2d. very, very sad!
One of my favorite ways to watch 3D movies is actually In VR. There are a few VRChat movie worlds that use material shaders to define which display per eye gets each camera angle. In turn allowing for a clear watching experience and not dealing with having polarized filters in front of your eyes. It does take a minuet for your eyes to adjust to it, of course, but after that its really good.
VR kinda sucks for that though. You can't see where your food or drinks are if you want to eat during the movie, you can't sit back and relax because your head has to be pointed straight ahead in a limited range, and the low resolution + limited FOV makes you feel like you are watching it through cheap binoculars. VR is good for games because they can change your entire surroundings, and we don't really have movies that do that. Passive 3D TVs or IMAX theaters are a lot better for movies.
@@Michael-zf1ko I've had almost none of those issues, watching VR in Bigscreen. Gives you the feeling of sitting in a theater, I sit my snack in my lap, have a bottled drink/flask next to me in my chair, and I usually just recline my chair and reset my orientation to handle the "relaxation" aspect.- Only downside is the disorientation when you get immersed, and then take the headset off to go to the bathroom. That sudden... "Oh shit, I'm still in my living room" feeling is something I've yet to get used to.
@@Michael-zf1ko Not at all. If you keep food/drinks at the same spot it won't be a problem, just be more cautious with your hands. You also aren't limited by any angle, you can sit/lay however you want. Unless you are not using some first generation VR gear/Cardboard the FoV and resolution is not a problem and the experience is really enjoyable. Plus you can watch it with many friends in apps like VRChat or Bigscreen
For content not designed for 3D, it sometimes helps to turn the depth settings down. For gaming you can create a double left and double right pair of glasses... or buy a L and R set. Dual screen is best for vs gaming.
my dad fell so hard for this. bought a rear-projection 83" 3DTV off one of those shopping channels and the 3D was so horrible. not only was it hard enough to find content you wanted to see, but the glasses it came with were HORRENDOUS. the only positive I remember was trying out Killzone 3 in 3D for the first time, that was rad for 20 minutes. in the end my brothers and I now had a gigantic TV for sleepovers, so I support 3D
@@sonicsnake44 Oh, it is pretty good. No gimmicks, just subtle added depth to the picture. But you'd want blu-ray quality for that, compressed HBO Max streaming will not be good enough.
It depends on what your preference is for 3D as well. For this you guys seem to love the pop off the screen 3D for me I really love the depth of 3D. Stuff like Titanic doesn't pop off the screen but it has some incredible depth that I just love and cinematically pulls me more into the story
Agreed, I didn't watch many 3D movies but my favorite theater 3D experience was Hugo - the use of depth in the clock tower scenes in particular was on point
It just depends upon the frame for me. If they're showing a close-up of an eye, it better be pocking my eye. If there's a helicopter, I expect it to be deep inside the screen.
I love how Linus’s final task for Taran after the toilet paper reveal was to have him “liberate” some 3D glasses from the movie theater. Only now, in the end, does he realize Taran’s true potential.
I mean, it's not really that hard. You don't have to throw RealD 3D glasses into the bin after the film. It was just a suggestion. Some theaters that used RealD even waved the 3D upcharge if you brought your own glasses.
I’m so glad they mentioned (and tried) simulview. I remember thinking that seemed almost more valuable than 3D for local multiplayer and the in store demo was incredible
you can achieve passive 3d with two projectors by aligning their screens perfectly and putting polarizing filters in front of the lenses offset by 90 degrees. looks pretty amazing too
Fun fact: you can watch 3D content in PSVR and it looks AMAZING. It's probably the best experience I've ever had viewing 3D content and it makes me frustrated that this function doesn't exist for polygonal games that aren't intended for VR. It's still immersive without inducing motion sickness.
I worked at Best Buy in TVs during the 3D craze and I actually loved it when it was implemented properly with Passsive tech. It was surprising to see how much money was thrown at that "fad" and it still failed. Honestly, seeing Avatar in 3D IMAX is still probably the best movie viewing experience of my life.
Avatar is the only movie I remember seeing in reald 3d. It was awesome but about halfway though it really made me motion sick. So I never watched 3d again
I feel like most of the money was thrown at marketing and not actually improving the tech OR filming native 3D films. A lot of films were originally 2D and lazily converted to "3D" 🫤
Seeing Avatar and Star wars the Force Awakens in Imax3D was so good. The part where KyloRen stops the blaster in mid air and the sound going around it gave me such giddiness. Still sad they don't do Imax3D anymore
@@qksilvr73 I saw the Dr strange sequel was showing at a nearby theater in Imax 3d. The first one had some pretty cool 3D fractal effects so I bet that is a pretty nice experience.
I remember when I was 18 my parents got a brand new Samsung 3D TV and I remember I used the 3D alot on Assassin's Creed Unity for the depth feature it had. It made the game world feel bigger/better IMO and I remember being more fun due the running and jumping look better because of it
I loved playing Killzone 3 and Motorstorm Apocalypse in 3D ! 3D Video games were absolutely amazing. Most movies were meh, even Avatar, IMO. Video games could push the depth MUCH further if you wanted. And that's where the real 3D lies, when you pushed what the general public who is not used to 3D held back the feature itself. I miss it. I had a 3d Vision kit as well but new computer screens can't handle it either of course, and it's a shame, because reexploring OLD games in 3D was mesmerizing. I played The Witcher games in 3D, and much older games like World of Warcraft, Titan Quest and sooo many others. It's a real shame that there are NO TV with 3D available today. I can't believe there is so much of an extra cost to do it nowadays.
I still play 3D games on my samsung active 3DTV every single weekend with Tridef. XCOM2, Space Marine and SpaceHulk Deathwing all look incredible in 3D
I actually still have a 3D 1080p TV in the media room of my house. I’m pretty sure I still have the glasses somewhere. Interestingly enough, my Blu-Ray copy of Guardians of the Galaxy could only view the IMAX aspect ratio with the 3D version. But hey, at least the IMAX version of the movie is available on Disney+ now. That said, I do hope someone revisits the idea of a 3D TV that shows two different screens for two different people at some point. It’s a great idea for split screen multiplayer.
@@Neoxon619 - my LG 3DTV came with “Dual View” passive glasses. One set had two “left” lenses, the other set had two “right” - a little ghosting playing dual view but totally playable
I still have my Sony 3D TV from 2010 Edit: Not a Sony Playstation 3D monitor, rather a 40 inch 1080p Bravia Smart TV. I bought a Chromecast with Google TV to replace it's Smart features after it stopped working with apps.
@@grumpysteelman That was also shown in the video, & it’s a shame that LG never tried it again. They actually got closer to the ideal version of the concept than most.
I just found out a few weeks back I could play Virtual Boy games on my passive 3D as RetroArch has a Side-By-Side output option for the Virtual Boy core. Playing Red Alarm in a comfy chair, with a modern controller, having freedom of movement, being able to see the rest of the room and play on a big screen is actually pretty amazing. With the original console, you had to sit at a table, couldn't move your head, and couldn't see the rest of the room.
I actually own a passive 3D OLED TV from around that time, though it was considerably cheaper and only supports 1080p. When I bought it, I did investigate the difference between active and passive 3D, but that was more about being informed than 3D mattering a lot to me. I chose this TV based on getting a good deal on a showroom model, which made OLED a more affordable option, and I'd basically fallen in love with OLED during my research. I only ever watched one or two movies in 3D on it. I never really missed the lost resolution, but it just didn't add a whole lot and the glasses are an extra hassle. Also, this video was playing on that TV, so when the "3d is now off" notice popped up on the screen, it took my brain a moment to understand it, as I wasn't near the remote and could not have pressed the 3d button by accident...
the reason I want avatar 2 to succeed is to bring back 3d tvs. we didn't have the hardware or bandwidth back then to make it a pleasant experience. but with qd oled, 4k/8k, h.265 encoding.... I feel like we can finally have 3d not suck
No doubt Avatar 2 will crush the box office and set new records but in my opinion 3D never really died but lives on in VR. I know it's not for everyone but when I watched Titanic, Gravity, Ready Player One & Avatar in a headset cinema it was way better than any TV experience.
There are still some LG 3D tv's available in the market. I have a 65" 4K LCD with passive 3D, and it honestly is amazing despite it being LCD. Because it's passive you don't get the dimming that you get with active glasses, and because it's 4K and all 3D movies are 1080P you don't lose any horizontal resolution because both the left and right image get the full 1920 rows of pixels. People who say 3D sucked either never properly tried it, or they cheaped out and bought active 3D tv's that have cheaper panels but the glasses are more expensive but have a worse experience. I can just use any 3D cinema glasses on my TV and the experience is perfect. I still miss 3D tv. edit: okay, so I typed all that before finishing the video and it turns out Linus basically mentioned everything I said.
I still own a 3D tv with passive glasses, I still enjoy getting out the occasional 3D movie to watch and still find it is more emersive than plain movies. I hope it comes back..
VR exists and is developing rapidly, and while I see that they are different use cases ultimately I think people who truly desire that immersive 3D experience will gravitate towards casual VR usage(as 3d viewing of movies and games is a niche), while I think TVs will continue to fill their current usage, of a 2D living room experience which focuses on resolution and display quality
I have a 65 inch 4k LG passive 3D OLED TV. I love it !! The picture is amazing, and there are some absolute mindblowing 3D content for it. For example many hours of 3D material from the second world war. The movie Legend of the guardians is beatiful. And I also used some 3D software for engineering and medical imaging. The doctor of my grandfather was stunned when I have put the 3D glasses on him and showed the colored up 3D scene of my grandfather's lung CT, MR and PET composite projection. The only problem is: LG stopped producing ANY spare parts for those. And there is no other technology available to replace it. With the passive glasses I can use my monitor normally and yet the 3D scene in its window appears in depth. It is very-very useful for some works as well. It is a shame that NOBODY continued that tech. They should have kept 1 or 2 lines where is is an OPTION. The only difference is the alternating polarization on the mask. everything else is the SAME. that adds less than 10 percent to production costs. The only real problem during manufacturing is that the polarizator needs to be positioned very precisely.
I still have a 2012 Samsung 3D Plasma. It's 55" 1080p smart TV that was cheaper than the non 3D non smart version because this was when 3Ds and Plasma were being phased out. I think I paid $600CAD. It is active 3D and can post convert a 2D source. The room should be a dark as possible (its in a basement so not a problem), and post converting leaves a static line of pixels at the bottom of the screen (but overall picture isn't bad). The glasses weren't bulky, but are not rechargeable and require a watch battery which doesn't last all that long, especially if you forget to turn off the glasses. I haven't used the 3D in a while but I think I'll give it a try again.
The split view does work well for passive 3D; our family got one because of that feature lol Instead of making you close one eye, they just gave you (or you could at least buy) a set of glasses where both the lenses are the same polarization!
My LG TV came with "gaming" glasses, that did just that, basically one pair had 2 'A' lenses and the other had 2 'B' Lenses, was great, used to play call of duty against my mate where you got the full screen and couldn't cheat to see where they were. Same for Gran Turismo.
XBox supported this at the time. You could play 2 player games full screen on the same TV. With our LG passive TV we just had to swap lens on cheap pairs of glasses.
I've only ever experienced 3D movies in Bigscreen VR, and I think it looks pretty good. With how VR works, you also don't need any additional equipment, it just works.
@@sqlevolicious no it isnt. Passive 4K 3D is still the best way to experience 3D. Modders have modded over a thousand prominent PC games to run in 3D. God Of War was the latest one. HelixMod Blogspot has a list of all of them. VR cant play those well but 3D Monitors and TVs still can.
The Nintendo 3DS was quite impressive with the "3d face animation" but that's the only implementation that i've seen in a consumer device in real life.
Yeah I was half expecting a throwaway mention in the video about how VR is another "resurgence" of 3D content. Except of course, in VR it just works. And it looks good, and it doesn't give most people a headache and the resolution is pretty good on modern headsets.
I was about to say this - my experience of 3D content in VR was "the 3D video looks more 3D than the rest of the VR environment". My guess was that it's due to shadows and lighting, which VR environments don't spend a lot of time/complexity on.
Im surprised VR was never mentioned. I feel like this was a natural progression of the technology. Like If you want a 3d experience just get a VR headset.
0:46 YES! Tron Legacy on Blu-Ray 3D will ALWAYS be a staple of what 3D truly was! I used to watch it all the time on my grandparents' Sony Bravia smart TV with Active 3D glasses on, my xbox one (the "VCR" one) running the show. Now I have an LG 3D TV as my main PC monitor, and a 3D TV when I want to watch 3D compatible movies while I wait for a download. My internet in this area is painfully slow.
My dad was hugely into the 3D craze, and I remember our TV had a feature in which a vertical split screen game could be forced into have a simul-view effect. So each side was polarised differently and then overlapped, it was great for playing games with siblings or friends.
that actually sounds super cool. or for something similar. parents watching the news with bone conducting headphones and the kids playing a game on the same tv.
3d movies through a VR headset are pretty cool since you're always sitting in the sweet spot. Still kinda grainy though until rez really increases and screens get better. Shouldn't be too long since we're gonna see micro oled and micro led vr soon.
On my Quest 2 with a good graphics card and air link you can turn up the anti-aliasing and it's just as good as a tv. Haven't tried actually putting the files on the Quest which might also work.
3D mapping world heavily depends on the active technology, especially when using Trimble UASmaster to create stereo images for data capture or for DAT/EM Summit Evolution 3D data capture with ArcGIS desktop ArcMap, this technology is a main element for this kind of mapping and 3D data production. Unfortunately this tech's support was discontinued, so we're back to 2D mapping with simple 2D displays and simple 2D images, I'm so happy that i had the privilege to work in a photogrammetry company that used this tech heavily, i so happy i had this experience because people definitely lack the understanding of stereo image and models, which is something very impressive and so awesome to experience with. Hope this tech returns someday.
Back in 2017, I realized the 3D TVs were starting to become rare and got myself a 65" LG E6 4K OLED that supported 3D. The quality of the 3D that TV produces on Bluray 3D discs is amazing! (I'm so glad I kept spending the extra money on getting the 3D versions instead of normal Bluray, despite the Panasonic plasma I had before was pretty shitty with its active 3D - the movies got new life when I upgraded to OLED.) My LG OLED is still the one sitting in my living room with a fairly large library of Bluray 3D movies.
I don't know if i got the E6 or not, but i bough an LG OLED 4K with passive 3d a couple of years ago. Do you guys find that the ghosting is worse with this 4k generation than with the older LG 1080p led passive 3d tv's? Or is it just my unit?
@@rBennich I have a 2016 LG E6 55" 4K OLED TV that I bought specifically because it was the last 3D capable model. I don't notice any ghosting on mine, and I just watched a dozen or so 3D Blu-rays in the past two weeks. From all accounts, the 2016 4K OLED LGs are the best 3D experience for the home, but were released after many producers of content and manufacturers had already given up, and most consumers had been soured on the lackluster experience with earlier 3D TVs.
And may it live forever for you amen... Almost had a heart attack when apparently the power board on my 3DTV got fried, but I was able to get a replacement *PHEW*. I am so sad there isn't some more good 3D content. I love it for watching my Jurassic Park movies, but I would like to find good natures documentaries with it. Been kind of hard to find.
I love 3D, used it whenever it was available. The biggest loss is knowing that Nvidia stopped working on 3D drivers so close to the rise of VR. Having a 3D cinema at home, including game use is an absolute game changer.
Agreed! I love 3D to date and I go around searching for 3D movies where ever I can. My Active 3D 46" Samsung ES7500 TV works great. It barely has any crosstalk between images and gives 1080P per eye vs a Passive TV of the time. The only thing beating this is the 4K passive TVs as noted by linux. Games like Tomb Raider or Batman look freakin amazing. Too bad nvidia stopped supporting the driver. Thankfully there are still games (like Tomb Raider) that give you the option of SBS 3D, its lower res but atleast its 3D. I wish this tech returns, and by that I don't mean as VR.
They used to have 3D shows on TV back in the 80's and you'd pickup the red and blue 3D glasses at 711 stores. The first 3D movie I saw in a theatre was Space Hunter : Adventures in the Forbidden Zone.
I saw Space Hunter as well in the theatre in 3d. That one did use polarized glasses and looked pretty good. Jaws 3d also came out around that time too.
Yes man, i remember those times. In my country, when a movie was going to be aired in 3d, they could start adding "free glasses" in magazines and the like a couple weeks prior being aired.
16:20 this is why if 3D comes back, we should bring light field cameras back. If anyone remembers the Lytro camera and how the whole image was in focus and had the image mapped depth wise. I can see that being something that will get revisited in the future when tv improvements plateau and they need to market something new. Light field videography and photography will probably come back.
One device for 3D content that deserves more attention is VR. In a headset, you've already got separate images going to each eye, so with a high enough resolution it looks as good or better than a 3D tv, for significantly less. Oculus TV has some decent 3D videos, but it's unfortunate that now we've finally got the perfect display, very few people are taking advantage of the tech.
Me and my friends have been hopping on Bigscreen while I stream SBS/OU versions of older 3D movies. Yeah, a lot of them have really crummy 3D masters, but that jank is part of the fun. Considering we all already have VR headsets to hang out in VRChat or whatever we're playing, a free app to stream 3D content to all your friends is pretty nifty.
I found the most enjoyable content to watch on my 3DTV were documentaries that were filmed with IMAX 3D cameras, I think the latest BBC Blue Planet was 3D and a few others, I remember watching a deep sea one and the seaweed floating in the ocean water was absolutely amazing. Most of the gaming and content that was up converted to 3D was usually pretty lame, it worked, but it felt gimmicky and long duration 3D consumption was notorious for making you feel super bug eyed afterwards.
@@MegaMech I'm most upset with nvidia. The tech is awsome but they just stopped support. There is a niche community of 3d vision gamers that create mods to play modern games but there is a lot of tinkering involved along with biggest hurdle of hardware compatibility. New cards and new drivers along with new versions of windows makes it cumbersome. I'm just going to have a dedicated 3d gaming rig running windows 7. 65" 3d plasma and 3d vision monitor in dedicated 3d space.
2:54 fun fact; Sonic's only an alien in Sonic X/the movies. In the Archie comics, he's moreso a mutant, and we still have no idea what his deal is in the actual games
What’s funny is that I just fixed up an old 3D tv last week that I found in the trash and have been playing 3D games via PS3 and watching 3D movies on it; it’s been awesome so far
Theirs a lot more you can do with your TV. Theirs a lot of cool 3D videos on TH-cam. If you have a computer capable of playing modern PC games you can play GameCube & Wii games in 3D Using the Dolphin emulator. Hell you can even download any 2D TV show & Movie and watch them in a sort of 3D way using 3D video player.
@@JRockThumper Damn that's pretty cool wish my TV had a built in converter. Really interested to see what games would look like when run through the conversion process.
19:20 I must say Nintendo with the New Nintendo 3DS improved a lot 3D viewing angles thanks to a mode in the camera that allow it to rectify the image in real time as you change angles. The problem with it is, that the technology Nintendo used I don’t think would have been viable for more than one person to view the content
@@Xfade81 This calibration is probably only needed once. At least I myself have never had issues with it. The Superstable 3D of the "New 3DS" models works incredibly well compared to the old models that didn't have it.
I remember how well that worked! I missed my new 3ds 😭
2 ปีที่แล้ว +1
It would be cool if the 3DS changed the viewing angle of the image depending on where you are looking from. I remember there was one game like that on the DSi. It wasn't 3D off course but you could kind off look around the corner by looking at the console from a different angle. Since the New 3DS already has to track your eyes to adjust the 3D output it could totally do something like that technically.
@ Actually, I think there was a game or app (unfortunately I don't remember the name) that did exactly that on the 3DS! I have thought of the same thing before and went searching, but it was a while ago
I once had a 3D Sony laptop with active glasses. I think it must've been the 'Sony VAIO F Series 3D'. I must say it was pretty incredible. As it was running Windows, almost any game could be converted to run in 3D, and it was super immersive. I remember playing a WW2 tank game that just looked insane in 3D. All in all though, it lasted 9 months before the GPU overheated and was damaged as a result. I got an insurance payout and ended up with a Macbook... I needed something reliable at the end of the day. But the 3D gaming was amazing...
@@Bremend I moved onto a 2013 15" MBP. After installing bootcamp it was decent enough for games. I do miss the 3D laptop screen though, it was a very unique laptop
As I discovered the hard way that on cell phones you can actually get different levels of oled screen quality ranging from not good enough to good enough to overkill, I'd love to see you guys cover those differences and help consumers know the technical differences so we know what to look for when considering buying something with an oled screen.
4K is just simple, I feel like HDR and OLEDs are a bigger game changer than 4k. But the 4k hype is real, 8K just doesn't have that same hype so we'll probably wait a bit to see what new trendy thing gets the marketing craze
It's more about quality displays than "HDR". When you use the brightness of the HDR content most TV's are too dim to really enjoy it, also if you compare a good non HDR display to a HDR one with the same content there is not a huge difference. HDR is just another marketing gimmick in my opinion.
instead of closing one eye, could you pop out the lens of the passive glasses and swap one lens with another pair? Two left eye lens in one frame, etc? Assuming the lens still works if you flips them over so they fit the frame.
I worked in retail at a tech store back in 2013/14 and LG had glasses that did this that came in the box along with normal 3d glasses. They were colour coded so you knew which ones to wear. They were really banking on this being the next big thing in gaming and I remember the LG rep there said they even wanted to use it in cars so you could have a full screen sat-nav for the driver and video content for the passenger. I was always a big supporter of it but obviously it never quite got good or cheap enough to be mainstream tech
Hank Green actually sold 2D glasses for a little bit, with basically two left or right lenses, for people who got dragged to 3D movies or i guess lived with someone who had a 3D TV.
I made a custom pair of glasses for this purpose. 1 left eye only pair and a right eye only pair. Another cool thing with the simulview mode, is you can turn any split-screen game into a simulview game if you select top/down or left/right 3D as the 3D mode setting. I tested it out with Halo and some old Playstation 2 games and it worked great.
The only time that 3D had really, REALLY impressed me, was watching Pacific Rim in 3D in theaters. That convinced me that it had the potential to be great. But then I also saw Prince Caspian in 3D in theaters, and that was just 3 flat layer effects that looks incredibly cheap and added nothing to the experience, so yeah it's easy to mess up and hard to do right. But those rare times it was done great, were some fantastic experiences.
I saw a movie at the cinema, the other day, that said in the credits that their 3D rendering was done by some team or another. It's strange because the movie was only released in 2D. I can only guess it either came out in 3D elsewhere or perhaps it's going to have a home 3D release, but that would be a few years too late.
@@jublywubly Sometimes 3D is made spearately. All the CGI is a 3D scene on a computer, so it's easy. Then they take the rest of the scene and set distances of areas. Thus e.g. characters are properly in the 3D scene, but inside the area covered by the character it's flat (like a billboard).
14:07 subtitles should read "half of your vertical resolution for a 1080p 3D movie", not "half of your vertical resolution for a 10 ADP 3D movie" as they currently do
I’m happy to see all the love for 3D here and pray that LG or Sony release a 3D TV following the new Avatar. Even if it must be watched on Blu-Ray instead of 4K I would but it.
3D looks so much more sharp than 1080p, because it's twice the resolution AND the different perspectives actually help, and 4K is rarely sharp down to the pixel anyway so for my money 3D movies usually look just as sharp as 4K. At least on a good 3D TV like my LG E7 or the LG G6 in this video.
I actually have a passive 3D LG TV, and it's amazing. It also has a mode where it tries to convert a 2D signal into 3D. It's a bit funky but still cool to look at. It even plays whatever 3D video file you want off of a USB stick, and the video can be side by side, top and bottom, interlaced, whatever. Unfortunately, the display is damaged, otherwise I would continue to use it as my regular TV. I'm actually mad the tech died because it does add A LOT more to your content, and VR googles is really more of its own separate thing. Also, Linus pointed this out during his Looking Glass review: even though the screen resolution gets cut to display 3D, the PERCEIVED resolution to your eyes goes way up from seeing the 3D content. I also see 3D as something an 8K TV would be actually be useful for. You'd have all the excess pixels available to display some native 4K 3D goodness. Killing 3D seems like a waste, especially as a fan of animated films where making it 3D is dead simple.
@@JordanLong20 I have a 55LW 5600, which I only keep to play my 10 3D Blu-Rays. I haven't plugged it in in over a year. I also have a Sony PS "TV", and it is an unpleasant 3D experience.
Been a fan of 3D for a long time. After TV's stopped, I used my PSVR (and still do). I saw doc strange in IMAX 3D (which looked great!) and am currently shopping for a home theater projector that is 3D capable. Seems like they're dwindling but I'll get one while I can.
I never got to use one before they got discontinued it's a shame they give on tech like this instead of making them even better imagine a 8ktv with 3d support but much more enhanced with more features.
I feel the same way with plasma screens. A great tech killed off before its time. After cheap LCDs took over the market, everyone just stopped making plasmas right as they were getting good. Imagine how good they would be right now with another 8 years of refinement.
The active shutter glasses were amazing. In the early 2000's I used to go to IMAX for shows all the time because the 3D with shutter glasses was an incredible experience. Once they got rid of them and switched to non powered polarised glasses... I stopped going, the downgrade in the 3D effect killed 3D for me.
Active glasses are too heavy and end up getting sat on, at which point you've got no 3D anymore. Speaking from experience of having active 3D in my home back in the day. Also I imagine the experience is dreadful for people who have to double-up glasses because they have poor eyesight. Or maybe daily glasses-wearers are used to heavy things hanging off their nose ridge, making it less of a big deal. Any eyelets want to chime in?
The experience is pretty bad for glasses users from my experience, as I need mine for far distance. Firstly, you had to hope that the theaters had a 3D glasses set that was actually a size up from your everyday glasses, as that way they could sort of fit over them, but if they didn’t you were in a pickle. The thing with glasses is that if they are the same size, they occupy the same space on your face, especially width and depth wise. That’s why you need a larger size 3D vs regular glasses, because then your everyday pair would sort of fit inside the 3D ones. It was a big pain if the theater did not have enough or if there was no larger size.
@@SamTheEnglishTeacher passive was what sold me fully on my LG TV. Active was far more expensive and out of my budget because it required a panel with a 120-144Hz refresh rate and Bluetooth or IR shutter glasses. I picked my LG TV out of a bargain bin at Harvey Norman for around US$550 in 2011, there was a stock clearance sale going on. My only regret with the TV is its terrible input lag, which makes playing impulse trigger games like Star Strike HD difficult if not impossible.
I was going to the IMAX at the science museum in the 90s and they were passive and it was incredible even then. You’ve got to sit in the sweet spot which means booking those tickets.
They key to great 3D experience was to have a home projector supporting it. I remember playing Trine 2 (it had a special 3d mode) with my girlfriend and it was absolutely mindblowing.
@@mixedup5858 Oh I know, it's just quite rare to get a 4k high refresh projector that also does 3D. I'm biding my time, saving them pennies, then one day it'll happen & it'll be the greatest thing ever...for 6 days until I'm bored of it again 😝 My 3D film recommendation is Life of Pi in 3D.
Little known fact: Nvidia had a 3d technology with 3d drivers back in the CRT monitor times of 2007-2009. I still have the Edimensional shutter glasses that ran with those Nvidia drivers. What is more, today's 144hz cheap monitors have all the speed to support flawless shutter glasses-based gaming
I remember. There were several different modes. I would sometimes just for fun use the split view and crossed my eyes. Lol. I did use it with the yellow cyan glasses and it worked well. Last game I played with those on a CRT was that hotel zombie game. Second one I think. Honestly though the color issue wasn't something I could handle for long and the cross eyed thing was not something I was willing to do for too long. Edit - I know I could've just gotten the Google cardboard for like 10 bucks but losing half the screen wasn't something I was willing to do on a 19 inch CRT. Though imo it's the best looking of all. You lose no color, brightness or refresh but you do lose size and you have to keep your head in the same position.
@@CynHicks Google Cardboard does not work with CRTs. However, there was a project on the MTBS forums for making pism-like glasses out of a CD box and some clear vaseline. But honestly, a second hand 3dtv is a cheap deal nowadays and to me 3d is just more interesting than 4k. My living room TV is too far away from the couch and my space is limited to around 48 inch. So a 1080 resolution is just fine for me in my living room. If I had space for 60 inch TV, I would have probably gone for a 4k TV.
@@konstantinlozev2272 Google cardboard worked with any image that was separated left and right. Really. Edit - lenses and distance was a matter but CRT or otherwise was no matter...in fact they called it that. You needed a headset that separated the images.
I actually got to experience a 3D TV in person, I watched a little demo showing off what the TV could do, as well as parts of one of the Ice Age movies while I was in an electronics store back in the day. I remember it being amazing and extremely immersive, then all of a sudden the hype vanished along with 3D TV's and movies before I could ever buy some. I did get to own a 3DS well after the hype died, but the problems I most often ran into with it were the crappy viewing angles as well as the significant framerate loss while 3D was active in quite a few games
I had always wanted a 3D tv as I was in love with Avatar seen in 3D in the cinema, but you know, really expensive... The thing is I can now watch the film again in my Oculus Quest 2 and it looks awesome for a fraction of the price and is a "console" I already have. I'd like you guys to try it out and compare it to these tests you did in this video. Amazing work guys!
THANK YOU. Thank you for being sensitive to those with epilepsy with the warnings throughout the video. There's really not a lot of content that has that kind of forward thinking and care for the people watching. Was already a huge fan and addict to the LTT channel, even more so now knowing you all truly care. Job well done!
I still use the first Samsung 3d tv, 55". Also have 2 pairs of the battery powered glasses. If the media is made for 3d it works pretty good, if the tv "converted" the image to 3d, it wasn't great. Never use it now.. But I will say for the age of the tv, it surprisingly still has a great picture as a regular tv.
Yesss! I had a Samsung 3D TV. It was highly underrated imo. FPS games like Halo anniversary and Crysis 2 were completely different games in 3D. I wish they didn't abandon it. I think a lot of the apathy comes from the complete oversaturation of the market. Instead of making experiences for 3D or making thoughtfully curated for 3D experiences only, they made everything 3D and overcharged for it. Not a great way to have proof of concept.
@@justinvivian856 Mostly Blu-ray 3d movies, or PS3 games made for 3d. My TV also had demonstrations for 3d, not sure if they still work since the "smart" features are outdated and my TV is no longer plugged onto internet.
I really loved the how to train your dragon 2 3d, specifically because the director went out it tastefully, rather than a super flashy thing. It just ties the world together a bit and gives scale, without really feeling like a "visual effect"
My Dad still has his LG 3D TV and honestly we usually take real D 3D glasses from theaters cause it actually works. It's been years since I've seen a 3D TV ,but that one we have goes strong and it fucking awesome
My Parents still have the old passive 3D TV as the Bedroom TV now, we also used to try the Cinema glasses, but had to flip them upside down as they apparently worked with the eyes flipped :D
I only watched 3D once in my life and that was a couple of years ago in a cinema for one of the new Star Trek movies. It was so difficult to watch for me and i got a pretty bad headache after it. Some years later after a routine physical examination it was revealed that i actually suffer from a condition called stereoblindness, which does explain some things (like difficulties with 3D images and also VR). So 3D (and sadly also VR) went right past me.
The first modern 3D movie I remember seeing in theaters was actually Beowulf (2007). It was all CGI so the 3D was really well thought out, the way the "camera" moved through each scene really gave it depth I hadn't seen before.
I remember back in the day, we had a samsung 3D plasma tv, was playing CoD single player, there was a scene where the bullet comes at the screen in slow motion, but because of the depth it actually fulled me and my mate playing at the time and was blown away by the experience, don't think I had a moment like that since haha
2 of my favorite tech products were heavily marketed around 3D. The HTC Evo 3D was my favorite phone ever. Although I didn't use the 3D for more than 10 minutes the whole time I owned it. The Samsung 8000 (World's first 3D LED TV) that you showed for a second at the beginning of the video is still in use in my Bedroom and I love it. I have had 2 Samsung 4k TVs in my living room since I moved that one to the bed room and it is still my favorite TV in the house. It is only 1080p but at 46" it has amazing picture quality. I still can't put my finger on exactly what it is but it just looks amazing. I bought Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs on a 3D Blu Ray and watched maybe 30 minutes of it in 3D and that the only time it was ever used in 3D. 3D is a gimmick, but in my opinion it came out at a time when innovation was at its best and some of the products launched with it were amazing.
I had, until recently, a 130" projector screen and a 3D capable projector from BenQ. Even though we only watched a 3D movie every couple months or so, I miss it now. Do not miss the uncomfortable shutter glasses though. Really wish they could have figured out glasses-free 3D that was affordable.....and teleportation....that would be cool.
IMO, if 3D had only one standard, it wouldn't have been this bad due to the fact that everyone adapting the standard, which would've driven down the price.
That was not the biggest problem. It was making content. In-camera 3D is either expensive or horrible, and limiting either way. Postprocessed 3D is cumbersome and often janky. Animated 3D is great, though, and far easier to pull off. Video Games are a nightmare, though, because so, SO much 3D rendering is done with pixel shaders, which don't natively work with two cameras. You can't just drop in support, and it takes a series rethinking of how stuff gets rendered. Ironically, the push towards raytraced effects and rendering might make this a lot easier to pull off... Now that nobody supports 3D rendering.
I agree, if every company would've just decided on Passive 3d, mainly because the glasses were cheaper. This probably would've been good enough to prolong 3D.
I had an htc Evo 3d and that was great. Minus the headache sometimes if the phone wasn't in the exactly right spot but it was definitely an interesting tech at the time.
It's so different how people experience this. I got myself a 3D TV back in 2010 and I've loved every minute of it. Even played Skyrim on my HTPC in 3D. I was so disappointed when I tried to find a new 4K TV with 3D. I had to search for a long time to get a used one since there was no new ones to be found. I'm not ready to give it up, I still think it's awesome.
When I was a kid, back in the dark ages, my grandpa had a 3D camera and projector. I think my brother inherited the camera. It used slide film and took two pictures through two lenses that were about eye width apart. The slides were mounted in a modified paper mount about eye width apart. The slide viewer was simply two viewers -- one for each eye. You just looked through the lenses. The 3D effect was really good. The projector was, again, two projectors mounted in the same case. One image was projected through a vertical polarizer, and the other through a horizontal polarizer. The viewers all wore the glasses. Alas, we only had a few glasses.
Just yesterday, I watched Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness in 3D, and I was pleasantly surprised at how much cooler the (already excellent) visuals became. Unfortunately, the lenses are so damn small that you have to position your head in some spot or you'll get a headache if your head rotates even just a little. As they point out here too, brightness is low.
Will 3D have a fourth shot to make it into the mainstream? Or is VR considered the future avenue of 3D? I hope not, I’d love to have 3D content in mainstream again.
VR would be the next big step after 3D, if we can't master it, VR will not turn out as well as people think. It's better for 3D to come back to mainstream and have all of it's flaws minimized, than going into VR directly without any sort of relatable experience.
many years ago they said glass free 3d TV is possible but it was too expensive for the mainstream. If they made it affordable to add as an afterthought like projectors have been for over a decade and still going I think it could see a resurgence but everyone just has a sour taste about it for home use and the insanely expensive glasses, I don't see many adults giving it a try.
VR is absolutely the next leap. AR looks cool too but i haven't seen in irl. I remember hologram games in the arcade back in the 80's and that stuff was pretty impressive back then without glasses so i'm sure AR can really make things pop but right now VR is looking like the future for 3D applications.
You can rent 3D movies in VR with BigScreen and watch them in virtual theaters with others online. I think the end goal for TVs in general are high quality, movable, and resizable virtual screens projected with AR.
Focus isn't a nightmare for 3D. The main approach is to keep the entire scene in focus, so that the 3D effect works on both distant and near objects. The scenario where you have 3D with blurry backgrounds usually means the video wasn't shot for 3D but rather for 2D and then upconverted, which is a disaster for 3D viewing. Keeping the full scene in focus means your gaze can wander around the depth of the space, using eye convergence as an additional depth cue. There is a small number of people who are incompatible with the 3D that has everything at the same focal depth (this is different from the image being crisp across scene depth, since the resulting images are still displayed flat), since that means when they change their eyes' angle of convergence, they aren't having to change their focus at the same time, and their body reacts to that unusual feeling with nausea. There's little we can do for this yet, since the tech that allows per-pixel focus differences is still in development. But for the rest of us (the majority), the current 3D tech is fine. The real reason 3D video failed is that a huge subset of the content was the 2D upconversions. These were also billed as "3D" but gradually trained moviegoers that 3D films were usually disappointing, since most "3D" films were 2D upconversions. There were also some issues around brightness of projection, since each image for 3D needs the full brightness, so you need twice as much light at the screen itself, and there's generally more light lost at the projector for polarization (which affects Real3D and polarization tech, but does not affect 3D tech using 6-color bands, which using a single image for the 3D and color filters in the glasses). 3D itself is still amazing, but because of the idiocy of studies shooting themselves in the foot and lying to the public about much of the content, 3D is now mostly a VR-specific phenomenon. NVIDIA has made this problem worse, too, by both discontinuing the consumer (GeForce) 3D support you mention (though it's still downloadable in the older drivers) and making it virtually impossible to get them to tell you what to use in the current day to view the 3D output they do still support on their professional Quadro series.
Saw it in the cinema. I could so easily spot the 3 or 4 flat layers at different depths that images seemed to be projected upon. It didn't look natural, yet Avatar is frequently held up as a good example of 3D. For me it was like "well, if that is good, then I want nothing to do it".
I remember the best 3D experience being Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs. The entire theatre audience was gasping and genuinely involved as the film played. They seemed to have made the film with 3D in mind and went out of their way to make things fly out at you. No other experience came remotely close. So glad I got to experience that amazing 3D.
Funny how Linus dissed the 3D conversion in post at the end of the video even though Titanic, Shrek and most of the Tron Legacy movie was 3D converted. I actually worked on their conversion back in the day :)
We just watched Gravity in 3D on our Epson 100inch LS500. So, so incredible. I'm all about the experience and 3D is almost always a great experience in the right conditions.
@@curtisbme I need to get around to watching Gravity then. I've had it for years but never put it on, I haven't got the 3D tell and Blu-ray player though, must take it next time I visit my friend with the equipment
@@kanedaku Would recommended it before the friend upgrades and loses 3D. It is a pretty great movie regardless (as are all Alfonso Cauron movies) but it is a ride and it being shot with 3d in mind really heightens the experience.
We bought a 3D tv in 2012, and we still have it. We honestly still really like it, we also usually turn on the 3D effect when watching regular shows and movies because while it doesn’t make anything pop out of the TV, it does make every image feel deeper.
I had a 65” LG that had a “Dual View” mode. The tv was Passive 3D 1080p lc/ed . You could game with any split screen game and some Xbox games supported it. The Xbox would basically have the split screen two full screens, basically a native mode. The tv came with 4 regular passive glasses and 1 player 1(glasses with left lens) and 1 player 2 (right lens) .. was fun back then.
My first HD TV ever was a Samsung 40" bought in 2014 and was an active 3D TV. I was highly sceptical after the craze started with Avatar but films like Gravity made me warm to the format. I really really hate that the PS5 and PSVR2 completely ditch 3D support because there's still so many discs to watch.
I had active 3D with CRT monitor (ELSA revelator) in the 90s and loved it (although some FPS suffered an issue with the crosshairs at zero distance being useless). Especially for racing games this was awesome and I bought a 120Hz monitor to get rid of the flickering. I was really sad it did not stay and just recently rediscovered 3D in games with VR.
I had this as well! The first time I played Half-Life was in 3D, and the first time I encountered a headcrab, I had no idea what it would do. When it leapt out of the monitor at my face, I flailed backwards losing both my headphones and glasses. I will never forget that moment!
I really enjoyed 3D movies. It's a whole different level of experience. I remember watching Avatar and Life of Pi and was amazed by the visual effects. I hope 3D will be popular again.
I work at a theater. I find one of the big reasons 3D sucks now is because the movies aren't made with it in mind at all. The color correction always seems off, the depth is barely noticeable. The 3D effects from things like HTTYD with the ash practically coming out of the screen, just aren't done in modern movies. It's an afterthought.
I own an LG 60" 3DTV i got from Best Buy around 2012 with a bunch of gift cards I saved up. Total cost was $1299 I believe. It's got a few issues now but it worked awesomely and I plan on getting it repaired when I can. Watching bluray films like Tron Legacy, The Wizard of Oz, and Titanic were some of my favorite highlights.
The hype machine for 3D was so strong that it made Nintendo create a whole console based off of it which is wild.
TBF they had been wanting to do that console since the 90s, the timing for when they were able to achieve it somewhat effectively was able to co-incide with the general 3D craze
It worked really well, too, not needing glasses and with a decent viewing angle.
@@watchm4ker the problem is that because of it you were stuck with 240p
At least it created a deluge of 3D content that US future people can now comfortably enjoy on our VR headsets. 3D virtual desktop gaming FTW.
Other people have said it, but Nintendo was the OG in 3D.
And to be fair, if they did a HD version of that tech, I think it would sell a lot better than what they ended up going with. Glasses free 3D is the only way this concept could become popular.
3D could have been amazing AND the next big thing, but all the companies making cheap 2D to 3D conversions and the theaters not having the required brighter bulbs killed off interest. I will never forgive them for this. Watching Avengers (2012) in 3D in the theater was a wonderful experience and I'm glad I was able to see it that way.
Exactly....the cheap 3d killed it more than anything else.
Yeah. i saw how to Trainn Your Dragon as a kid when it first released, in 3D I believe, and it was fucking awesome.
@@chriscowey7464 which 3d movie you didn't like because it was made 3d digital?
Wasn't the bulbs. I worked at a theater when it went through DLP integration. 3D movies required a literal silver screen instead of the standard white in order increase the reflectivity of the image. Admittedly, this made regular movies look even better.
I don't know the technicals behind it but I used to love 3d movies like 10 years ago and didn't watch one since. Watched the new spiderman in 3d and it was garbage
Linus forgot to mention one of the major killers of 3D was the proprietary format wars with TVs. Companies had different formats for how they did 3d movies in the beginning, they then either bought or already owned the rights to specific movies which they released as exclusives only in their specific format. This meant that not everyone could watch their favorite movies on their device.
There is a solitary reason why a single format wasn't standardized early in the life of at-home-3D. The Adult Film Industry didn't invest in the equipment needed for a single format to be chosen.
From Technicolor, to VHS, to Blu-Ray, and recently the at-home-VR standard format; they always decided what the winning format (both mechanical & encryption wise) was going to be.
@@thorodinson3597 how did they choose. sounds like bs
I did my cornerstone paper on formats in 2008. I said Blu-ray and HD-TV and their licensing fees will accelerate the decline of home media sales as technology will render the need for physical discs obsolete.
tv's had a converter that would convert 2d video to 3d. regardless of what the 3d format was. the way the tv's converted to 3d produced more of a depth effect versus a pop out effect but it was still badass
@@jamesbyrd3740 By driving sales. I don't think they're the #1 reason, but pron sites have contributed a lot to the evolution of the modern web space. Like even the google search "N results found for your query" was taken from pronhub if I remember correctly.
As someone who used to do 3D mapping, we wore a set of active 3D goggles 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. Having that experience, I can point out a few other issues with the set up for repeated long time wear. The biggest one.... build quality of the 3D goggles/glasses, especially for active systems.
1: The nose piece. It always seemed whomever made and designed the plastic of the nose piece, had never worn glasses in their life. Tapered and nice soft and just the right kind of material is what you see on prescription glasses. This material and these edges make contact with your sensitive bridge of the nose every waking moment. They need to be comfortable. Whoever designed the 3D goggles, and the subsequent glasses models, used a hard plastic, with sharp edges.... This alone could bring on a headache, want to see how it feels, press your fingernail into the bridge of your nose for 25 min, see how you feel. I wanted to have some very strong words with that materials expert for the sets we had.
2: Weight. Our goggles used large medical batteries, think 0.75in in diameter, 1/8 in thick. Added into the frame of the goggles, the emitter receiver... we're up to almost 1 lb... That is heavy for hanging on your face, ineffective ear pieces wrapped around your head.... also made out of the cheepest plastic. They barely stay on. Got a slippery nose? good luck. Long hair getting into the ear pieces.... add on that weight.... never enjoyable past 30 min. You start to feel the weight on your nose and ears, your whole head feels extra heavy... then you realize a gap in the plastic is tugging on your hair, now you need to get your hair untangled while the entire thing falls off your face with the weight of a box of crackers. Try taping a box of crackers to your face, then use some extra tape and Popsicle sticks to hold it on.... that's what it feels like. Why didn't they just hire the people who make real glasses dammit!
3: Over glasses retrofits: I wear glasses.... so take every issue from number 1-2, and then multiply it. Just watching this video, I could only imagine the discomfort our glasses wearing host was experiencing. There was a reason we got a 15 min break every hour at that office... so we could avoid wearing a brick over glasses.
Even the passive systems never fit over glasses.... and there are so many points of failure that a paralax can encounter. One biggie is how the glasses and individual lenses sit in front of your eye or added glasses lenses. Like a fighter pilot can have multiple axis, yaw roll pitch.... there are multiple axis for those lenses over your eye and/or glasses. If your own prescription pair is out of wack, it hurts... but factor in the build quality of the 3D set, and have one lens 1mm too close and the other 1mm too far... or up and down, or front to back... tilted as well... No fun... I spent an entire 3D movie once just testing out 20 different pairs of passive 3D glasses to see how they fit.. and only 1 set really even came close to tolerable.
4: Low power When that battery or internal power supply goes on an active set.... it hurts, your eyes start to feel overwhelmed... you don't notice it right away either, it sneaks up on you. And you better hope you have a good supply of batteries if they are battery powered.
5: Power switch. Some genius, decided to put the power switch in the temple piece. Idea was.. you can't leave them on.. so let's have a power switch. But I bet people will forget... so let's make it part of an automatic.. or semi-automatic process. People will take off the goggles, then fold up the ear pieces.... great, they turn off with a little switch that is physically moved with the temple piece. But.. let's make it out of cheap plastic, and since it's technically a moving part activated by a moving part... it'll hold up for.... oh about 55 days.... and slowly get more and more loose and twisted. Suddenly, your glasses won't be active... then they are... then not... as that damn switch now is a wobbling mess. Replacement = a full new set of goggles..... great.... 50ish days.
It's to the point now... if you want me to look into a paralax on an active or passive 3D... you better be paying me an hourly wage and full vision and health coverage.
tldr
One of the big things for me that absolutely makes or breaks 3D is: Was it shot/rendered in actual 3D, or was it post-processed 3D? Because the latter always causes an extremely noticeable cardboard cutout effect for me and I hate it with a passion. But some things, like Ton Legacy, it's amazing because it was shot and rendered, and also because they use the 3D as a way to help separate the real and digital worlds.
Also sucks for someone I know who has only one eye. A kinda rare condition, but regardless, most of the time, 3D completely fails to work for them and actually looks much worse than a regular flat image. lol
Exactly there were too many...bad tacked on 3d titles which just did not work properly, which also made people think the 3d was awful. While Linus might hate Avatar, its 3d is amazing. They needed to film them in 3d. ( do not get me wron there are a few tacked on 3d titles which are okay)
@@arnox4554 Nope. They can try a VR HMD and it looks just as real thanks to fresnel lens and tricky vision sciences.
@@arnox4554 people with 1 eye dont have depth perception for 3d to begin with,
Yea yep
Just from my own experience, Tron: Legacy's 3D wasn't so much about giving a pop-out 3D experience, but rather depth to everything. In some of the establishing shots, The Grid stretches for miles and miles on that flat screen.
Also, my favorite 3D experience was Up, where a actually jumped out of the way of one of the "Dog"-fighters. And yes I was embarrassed by it.
Agreed. Tron Legacy in 3D basically gave you a window into the world. The depth was amazing and fare more satisfying than anything that popped out of the screen.
Agreed. Depth based 3D in the home is much better than pop out. Pop out works in Cinemax theaters where they control the environment. Not so much the house.
Agreed. I'm agreeing to something you said about Tron3D.
You are correct, and make points on VR as well. 3d is about immersion. When you give it to a bunch of boomers who can't tell the difference between 480p and 4k, it doesn't impress them.
VR succeeds because it has an extra pinch of immersion this 3d tech doesn't.
You mentioned the only two 3D films I actually felt enhanced my experience. Tron: Legacy using 3D to give depth (rather than pop out for gimmics) was a thing of beauty, especially in how alive it made the virtual world feel vs the flat real world. It became an integral part of the story rather than a visual add-on.
The face tracking 3D on the new Nintendo 3DS was actually pretty impressive.
When i switched from a base 3DS XL to a N3DS it blew me away yeah
@Bold One This already applies to every smartphone in the world, so I wouldn't be surprised. But my 3DS was never hooked to the Internet anyway (I have it jailbroken) so they can heck off haha.
It wasn't very impressive if you wore glasses.
It didn't face track, it just used tech that worked without glasses
@@C.I... The NEW Nintendo 3DS had a camera that could track your face and adjust the viewing angle. It worked well too (I have one).
The movie which had the best use of 3D for me was Dredd.
Filmmakers clearly thought about 3D as part of the way they shot the film, and the SloMo drug sequences are incredible. Nothing is 'WOW LOOK AT THIS FLYING OUT AT YOU', it's all properly there for a cinematographic reason. The focal plane stuff Linus talks about is used with that, and it's an absolutely gorgeous experience. Seriously made me consider sticking with my old 3D TV just for that film.
Seriously, was so bummed LTT didn't have that as one of the films they tried, particularly when they even scrolled past it at the end...!
I went out and bought animal kingdom in 3D for my TV. Shit is tight. Looks amazing. Like having an imax theater in ur house.
It was The Cave of Forgotten Dreams for me.
A TH-camr suggested to watch Judge Dredd in theatres, and I'm so glad I did. That movie was truly amazing in 3D.
Gotta spell it Slow Mo when Gavin Free is involved
one word. Gravity
When I worked in Sony's tech support, I recall that Active 3D glasses were a real pain to troubleshoot. It went to the point where if anyone asked about what TV to get with 3D, I would recommend one with passive glasses instead.
Sony did make a few passive 3D models (with 4k panel), those are sought after like the LG OLED's. Though I think they are LCD, so the best 3D can look with a 4k LCD panel in passive. Their other models were mostly active glasses with LCD panel. Vizio TV's also used passive, I think they got out of 3D right before 4k panels became available. So they never had a 4k passive 3D tv like LG did, just the 1080P Full HD, with 540P per eye.
@@marcusdamberger i doubt they are sought after like the LG OLEDs, those are arguably the best TVs on the market.
@@MaxIronsThird One can never go wrong with Oleds. My Vita is an Oled and it looks amazing.
The New 3DS fixed many of the OG 3DS' pitfalls. Not the resolution problem, but the head tracking is quite good on the New 3DS, which fixed the viewing angle issue.
New 3ds is poodoo you're crazy
@@austematicthatragic4352 Nah, the new3DS actually had slightly upgraded specs to let it do real-time facetracking adjust the 3D focus while playing games.
Made enjoying the stereoscopic 3D effect much more enjoyable, but obviously still had issues for certain people (such as those who wore glasses). The somewhat low resolution didn't help matters but it was still pretty impressive given that the massive library of 3DS games (and what a great library it was) almost always had 3D effects to them.
@@SiGeTVee I have a new 3DS and imo the 3d effect is somehow worse than the first 3DS, I think you just haven't used your new 3DS in awhile
@@austematicthatragic4352 Actually I've been playing a lot of my 3DS backlog through my limited new3DS (non XL, the one with the changable faceplates) and have been enjoying the library quite a bit with the 3D at full blast.
While almost all titles have 3D some titles use it in more subtle ways. Been trying to finish up Fire Emblem Echoes and it's really nice seeing those units attack turn animations, like watching a little battle diorama.
I believe the new 3DS had double the horizontal resolution on the top screen if my memory serves correctly
You could do the simulview thing with LG passive tv’s too but with any console or hdmi source. there was a button on the remotes that would split the screen and put one half of the image on top of the other. Then you had to pop the lenses out of two pairs of glasses and swap them. So one pair had two left lenses and the other had two right lenses. As it was a tv based function it worked on every split screen game not just the ones that supported simulview
I was gonna ask if this was possible, why isn’t this marketed better?
@@SC-zf6dn well you had to pop the lenses out of the glass and make two pairs with the same polarising filter I don’t think it was ever an intended feature
I've had one of those TVs, but never used this function because the image becomes stretched and ugly. In the end of the day my friends and I just enjoyed the regular split-screen view.
@@0prisonpriest0 LG had suitable glasses available separately. I dont remember their name anymore tho :) My second PC has a decade old LG 3D TV as a monitor, with a suitable .INF file it works with games too but resolution sucks (540p). I remember testing Crysis long time ago.
How about having images for all 4 lenses be displayed sultaneously?
I think it's kinda sad that 3D died, considering that we have high refresh, high resolution displays everywhere now. I would at least like having the option to play my favorite games in 3D. And as a game developer, I would also love it if the engine I'm using had a stereoscopic viewport.
unreal engine m8
out of curiosity, what are you working with?
Shake ya azz… show me whatchu workin with 😎
Pretty sure 3D will come back. And some movies are still released in 3D
remember when youtube had a 3d feature 😭i even got those crappy red blue glasses because of it
Here in the UK you had to buy the top Sky package to get 3D, which at the time, was just shy of £100 a month. So yeah, no-one bought it.
No.. It was HD package u needed.
damn i forgot about that!
yeah...no one had that lol
Sky is and always was a rip off Freeview FTW
@@oldtechnobodycaresabout 💯
And you had to buy a satelite dish if your house didn't have one don't know if it was then but sky also needed a special lnb because they encrypt things differently to freesat
I bought a 70” passive 3D tv back in 2013 (still have it and use as our main TV). I invited a bunch of friends over and had a handed out whole box of glasses I had saved from the theater. We watched all of the best scenes from pretty much every 3D movie that was available at the time (Avatar, Top Gun, Jurassic Park, Pacific Rim, etc), but when we got to Finding Nemo… the 3D effect was just so good we ended up forgetting to change the movie and watched the whole thing 😂
Yup, I watched Pacific rim on a friend's OLED in 3D. was amazing looking
Really? I always thought it was dumb AF
@@dougr8646 prob cause you couldn’t afford one.
@@dougr8646 The 3D effect on my TV at least is like way better than what I experience in a theatre
@@geoffchat I have a 77" C9 lol
I had a 3D monitor back in 2012 or so (still do in my closet lol) . I am incredibly disappointed the tech didn't stay around. Some games in 3D were unmatched, like the Metro series, Alien Isolation, and Crysis.
You know that VR exists, right?
I would absolutely love a 3D monitor using the tech of the 3DS!
@@syrozzz I do, had a vive. Was cool but for a bit but there is not the the same caliber of games available in VR as there was in 3D Vision. Many games could be played in either mode, nowhere near as many VR games can do that.
@@Taylorek2011 VR's come a long way, and the experiences it offers now are so different to regular gaming it's worth getting back into IMO. I still enjoy regular games, but sometimes actually physically holding a gun stick and peeking corners is more fun to me. (Made a gun stock out of PVC for Onward and it made the experience a lot better)
@@sirspamalot4014 meh. My roommate has an index, I've tried it here and there. It's just not for me I think. Even he barely touches it after a few months.
I just revisited this video after seeing Avatar 2 in Dolby 3D, and am now convinced that 3D should be a thing again. The confusing standards, display options, and poor content really destroyed 3D's chances before. But give me a modern TV with the new Dolby tech and I'd buy it in a heartbeat. The movie looked absolutely gorgeous in theaters!
Me too i watched avatar 2 on 3d yesterday and i am searching about 3d tvs i thought it is still a thing. Definitely going to win best picture
Glad to see this comment. I hope this movie breaks some kind of record and we see 3D support again. Haven’t tried a 3DTV but just got Spiderverse in 3D since I heard it’s a great watch
At the very least the big TV brands could just offer one model that offers 3D. Doesn't have to be all of them. Boggles the mind as to why they all dropped it at once.
I thought the motion was very blurry in Avatar 2 when watching in 3D. Wish I would of watched it in 2 D.
@@Guitar387 It depends on the projector itself. Could've been that the cinema you went to had an old 2k projector that wasn't optimized for 3D. I rewatched it 3D in a local cinema after watching it in IMAX® with Laser, and motion was indeed blurry with the picture itself being very dim at times
I personally like the 3d experience on my TV. For me the problem isnt the 3D, its the lack of 3D content thats the issue.
all blockbuster movies still come in 3D
Thats what i liked about LG while not the same you could just turn any 2d content into 3d
I still have 3d tv and ps3 to watch 3d blu rays. Problem is as linus said its lazy implementation cause most of blokbusters didnt shot in 3d and its just thin 3d layer you forget about while watching. Also bad 3d blu rays. Avatar is worse 3d home blu ray ever. But its still got moments like that 3d cartoon with jim carrey about christmas , cgi cartoon about owls etc. Malificent is one of the best 3d blu rays
Agreed, 3D video games were great back in the day
I love my Sony 72' LED 1080P 3D TV. I don't want all content in 3D, just when watching a blockbuster when I'm not going to be doing anything else. It's not my main TV anymore, but still have a massive 3D Bluray library.
After having a VR headset and rewatching some older movies in 3D, man do I want 3D content to come back and be done properly. Especially with things like the Playstation splitscreen, even though they might be niche, not only is it cool but could actually be useful.
Movie theaters rn could really utilize that 3D splitscreen to play a 2D movie, but with/without captions at the same time, so everyone can watch in whichever way they prefer.
Shadow of the tomb raider had an option of playing 3D, and lemme tell you it was amazing
Or theaters could play two movies at the same screen, thus increasing profitability for under occupied rooms.
@@lucasbiaggini and just keep the speaker systems the same 😂
Yes 100% agreed. VR and 3d movies are heaven🙌
I actually think 3D will have a resurgence because of VR/AR. But obviously not in TVs.
BTW You can easily "convert" any modern game to 3D format with ReShade and Depth3D shader for it. It works really good with a VR headset and should work with any passive 3D TV. I even managed to get "cross-eye 3D" gaming experience which is a bit crazy but still cool :D
@@retikulum yeah, that's right. Depth3D shader is more about 3D TV experience, other than VR.
Tridef 3D
Doe sit work on 'render to texture' games? I got some nvidia shutter glasses and a 144hz screen. Tried Planet Coaster. Discovered the whole thing as just rendered to a polygon in front of the camera. Yeah, I saw 3D, a rectangle with another scene (flat) rendered on to it.
Some games are just built wrong to work.
Does it fix games like that?
I thought it was great for gaming. I remember playing COD on PS3 on my 3D TV and a couple years back I played BOTW in 3D with the Emulator. Superb experience IMHO
Agree. I never really liked 3d movies or games on a flat screen. But in a VR headset it's a good experience imo. I actually kinda wish 3d movies would make a comeback now that VR is quite accessible.
As someone with a passive 3D TV, I love it. It's a shame it never really took off. I will be super sad when my 3D TV stops working and I have to hunt down a used one...because I love it.
Not to worry! They still make 3D projectors which is so much better.
i had a plasma passive 3d tv from panasonic, "UT50", with the best panel a plasma ever had. the 3d was absolutely gorgeous. sad the tv died and since then my new tv's were 2d. very, very sad!
just get a vr headset
@@CreepyMemes They are even more uncomfortable.
@@CreepyMemes completely different
One of my favorite ways to watch 3D movies is actually In VR. There are a few VRChat movie worlds that use material shaders to define which display per eye gets each camera angle. In turn allowing for a clear watching experience and not dealing with having polarized filters in front of your eyes. It does take a minuet for your eyes to adjust to it, of course, but after that its really good.
VR kinda sucks for that though. You can't see where your food or drinks are if you want to eat during the movie, you can't sit back and relax because your head has to be pointed straight ahead in a limited range, and the low resolution + limited FOV makes you feel like you are watching it through cheap binoculars. VR is good for games because they can change your entire surroundings, and we don't really have movies that do that. Passive 3D TVs or IMAX theaters are a lot better for movies.
That's awesome. I'm going to have to check that out
id much rather buy 3-5 Quest 2's for $1,500 and watch movies there than a single tv for $8k
@@Michael-zf1ko I've had almost none of those issues, watching VR in Bigscreen. Gives you the feeling of sitting in a theater, I sit my snack in my lap, have a bottled drink/flask next to me in my chair, and I usually just recline my chair and reset my orientation to handle the "relaxation" aspect.- Only downside is the disorientation when you get immersed, and then take the headset off to go to the bathroom. That sudden... "Oh shit, I'm still in my living room" feeling is something I've yet to get used to.
@@Michael-zf1ko Not at all. If you keep food/drinks at the same spot it won't be a problem, just be more cautious with your hands. You also aren't limited by any angle, you can sit/lay however you want. Unless you are not using some first generation VR gear/Cardboard the FoV and resolution is not a problem and the experience is really enjoyable. Plus you can watch it with many friends in apps like VRChat or Bigscreen
For content not designed for 3D, it sometimes helps to turn the depth settings down.
For gaming you can create a double left and double right pair of glasses... or buy a L and R set. Dual screen is best for vs gaming.
i can concur this
my dad fell so hard for this. bought a rear-projection 83" 3DTV off one of those shopping channels and the 3D was so horrible. not only was it hard enough to find content you wanted to see, but the glasses it came with were HORRENDOUS. the only positive I remember was trying out Killzone 3 in 3D for the first time, that was rad for 20 minutes.
in the end my brothers and I now had a gigantic TV for sleepovers, so I support 3D
There were also TVs that promised to convert regular TV into 3D which also sucked
@@horusreloaded6387 I haven't been able to try it myself but people who have those TVs that can convert 2D to 3D say its actually pretty good.
@@sonicsnake44 Oh, it is pretty good. No gimmicks, just subtle added depth to the picture. But you'd want blu-ray quality for that, compressed HBO Max streaming will not be good enough.
It depends on what your preference is for 3D as well. For this you guys seem to love the pop off the screen 3D for me I really love the depth of 3D. Stuff like Titanic doesn't pop off the screen but it has some incredible depth that I just love and cinematically pulls me more into the story
Agreed, I didn't watch many 3D movies but my favorite theater 3D experience was Hugo - the use of depth in the clock tower scenes in particular was on point
It just depends upon the frame for me. If they're showing a close-up of an eye, it better be pocking my eye. If there's a helicopter, I expect it to be deep inside the screen.
I love how Linus’s final task for Taran after the toilet paper reveal was to have him “liberate” some 3D glasses from the movie theater. Only now, in the end, does he realize Taran’s true potential.
I mean, it's not really that hard. You don't have to throw RealD 3D glasses into the bin after the film. It was just a suggestion. Some theaters that used RealD even waved the 3D upcharge if you brought your own glasses.
I’m so glad they mentioned (and tried) simulview. I remember thinking that seemed almost more valuable than 3D for local multiplayer and the in store demo was incredible
it was what made me buy the playstation display they showed over any other 3D display
you can achieve passive 3d with two projectors by aligning their screens perfectly and putting polarizing filters in front of the lenses offset by 90 degrees. looks pretty amazing too
Now if only those polarized filters and polarized screen were affordable
@@Lighthouse3D They're not that expensive. I think they go for $50 for a set.
@@DuyNguyen-yx2vd oh word? Where?
Is there any way to take a 3D signal and split it into two separate images for each eye?
how do you get the 2 different signals sent out to the 2 projectors from one blu-ray player?
Fun fact: you can watch 3D content in PSVR and it looks AMAZING. It's probably the best experience I've ever had viewing 3D content and it makes me frustrated that this function doesn't exist for polygonal games that aren't intended for VR. It's still immersive without inducing motion sickness.
Hi! What kind of content are you referring to? Movies?
@@thelongboarddude95 yes, movies. I don't know why I was so vague considering that's the only thing you can watch lol
Cool! But where do you stream it from in 2023?
@@thelongboarddude95 I used blu-rays
I worked at Best Buy in TVs during the 3D craze and I actually loved it when it was implemented properly with Passsive tech. It was surprising to see how much money was thrown at that "fad" and it still failed. Honestly, seeing Avatar in 3D IMAX is still probably the best movie viewing experience of my life.
Avatar is the only movie I remember seeing in reald 3d. It was awesome but about halfway though it really made me motion sick. So I never watched 3d again
Resident evil afterlife was great in 3d
I feel like most of the money was thrown at marketing and not actually improving the tech OR filming native 3D films. A lot of films were originally 2D and lazily converted to "3D" 🫤
Seeing Avatar and Star wars the Force Awakens in Imax3D was so good. The part where KyloRen stops the blaster in mid air and the sound going around it gave me such giddiness. Still sad they don't do Imax3D anymore
@@qksilvr73 I saw the Dr strange sequel was showing at a nearby theater in Imax 3d. The first one had some pretty cool 3D fractal effects so I bet that is a pretty nice experience.
I remember when I was 18 my parents got a brand new Samsung 3D TV and I remember I used the 3D alot on Assassin's Creed Unity for the depth feature it had. It made the game world feel bigger/better IMO and I remember being more fun due the running and jumping look better because of it
I loved playing Killzone 3 and Motorstorm Apocalypse in 3D !
3D Video games were absolutely amazing. Most movies were meh, even Avatar, IMO. Video games could push the depth MUCH further if you wanted. And that's where the real 3D lies, when you pushed what the general public who is not used to 3D held back the feature itself. I miss it. I had a 3d Vision kit as well but new computer screens can't handle it either of course, and it's a shame, because reexploring OLD games in 3D was mesmerizing. I played The Witcher games in 3D, and much older games like World of Warcraft, Titan Quest and sooo many others. It's a real shame that there are NO TV with 3D available today. I can't believe there is so much of an extra cost to do it nowadays.
I still play 3D games on my samsung active 3DTV every single weekend with Tridef. XCOM2, Space Marine and SpaceHulk Deathwing all look incredible in 3D
I actually still have a 3D 1080p TV in the media room of my house. I’m pretty sure I still have the glasses somewhere. Interestingly enough, my Blu-Ray copy of Guardians of the Galaxy could only view the IMAX aspect ratio with the 3D version. But hey, at least the IMAX version of the movie is available on Disney+ now.
That said, I do hope someone revisits the idea of a 3D TV that shows two different screens for two different people at some point. It’s a great idea for split screen multiplayer.
@@CallMeRabbitzUSVI I know about the PlayStation one, hence why I’m hoping for the idea to be revived in the future.
@@Neoxon619 - my LG 3DTV came with “Dual View” passive glasses. One set had two “left” lenses, the other set had two “right” - a little ghosting playing dual view but totally playable
I still have my Sony 3D TV from 2010
Edit: Not a Sony Playstation 3D monitor, rather a 40 inch 1080p Bravia Smart TV.
I bought a Chromecast with Google TV to replace it's Smart features after it stopped working with apps.
@@grumpysteelman That was also shown in the video, & it’s a shame that LG never tried it again. They actually got closer to the ideal version of the concept than most.
We'll be lucky if there's even any games left with split screen in a couple of years. Even racing games don't support it nowadays.
I just found out a few weeks back I could play Virtual Boy games on my passive 3D as RetroArch has a Side-By-Side output option for the Virtual Boy core. Playing Red Alarm in a comfy chair, with a modern controller, having freedom of movement, being able to see the rest of the room and play on a big screen is actually pretty amazing. With the original console, you had to sit at a table, couldn't move your head, and couldn't see the rest of the room.
any games you recommend? like my comment so i can see response haha
I actually own a passive 3D OLED TV from around that time, though it was considerably cheaper and only supports 1080p. When I bought it, I did investigate the difference between active and passive 3D, but that was more about being informed than 3D mattering a lot to me. I chose this TV based on getting a good deal on a showroom model, which made OLED a more affordable option, and I'd basically fallen in love with OLED during my research.
I only ever watched one or two movies in 3D on it. I never really missed the lost resolution, but it just didn't add a whole lot and the glasses are an extra hassle.
Also, this video was playing on that TV, so when the "3d is now off" notice popped up on the screen, it took my brain a moment to understand it, as I wasn't near the remote and could not have pressed the 3d button by accident...
the reason I want avatar 2 to succeed is to bring back 3d tvs. we didn't have the hardware or bandwidth back then to make it a pleasant experience. but with qd oled, 4k/8k, h.265 encoding.... I feel like we can finally have 3d not suck
Underrated comment
No doubt Avatar 2 will crush the box office and set new records but in my opinion 3D never really died but lives on in VR. I know it's not for everyone but when I watched Titanic, Gravity, Ready Player One & Avatar in a headset cinema it was way better than any TV experience.
There are still some LG 3D tv's available in the market. I have a 65" 4K LCD with passive 3D, and it honestly is amazing despite it being LCD. Because it's passive you don't get the dimming that you get with active glasses, and because it's 4K and all 3D movies are 1080P you don't lose any horizontal resolution because both the left and right image get the full 1920 rows of pixels. People who say 3D sucked either never properly tried it, or they cheaped out and bought active 3D tv's that have cheaper panels but the glasses are more expensive but have a worse experience. I can just use any 3D cinema glasses on my TV and the experience is perfect.
I still miss 3D tv.
edit: okay, so I typed all that before finishing the video and it turns out Linus basically mentioned everything I said.
Why? 3D is going to suck until holographic technology is refined.
@@seinfan9 because I like when a character throws something at the screen and it comes out towards you and you flinch a lil
I still own a 3D tv with passive glasses, I still enjoy getting out the occasional 3D movie to watch and still find it is more emersive than plain movies. I hope it comes back..
me too
VR exists and is developing rapidly, and while I see that they are different use cases ultimately I think people who truly desire that immersive 3D experience will gravitate towards casual VR usage(as 3d viewing of movies and games is a niche), while I think TVs will continue to fill their current usage, of a 2D living room experience which focuses on resolution and display quality
I have a 65 inch 4k LG passive 3D OLED TV. I love it !!
The picture is amazing, and there are some absolute mindblowing 3D content for it. For example many hours of 3D material from the second world war.
The movie Legend of the guardians is beatiful.
And I also used some 3D software for engineering and medical imaging. The doctor of my grandfather was stunned when I have put the 3D glasses on him and showed the colored up 3D scene of my grandfather's lung CT, MR and PET composite projection.
The only problem is: LG stopped producing ANY spare parts for those. And there is no other technology available to replace it.
With the passive glasses I can use my monitor normally and yet the 3D scene in its window appears in depth. It is very-very useful for some works as well.
It is a shame that NOBODY continued that tech. They should have kept 1 or 2 lines where is is an OPTION. The only difference is the alternating polarization on the mask. everything else is the SAME. that adds less than 10 percent to production costs. The only real problem during manufacturing is that the polarizator needs to be positioned very precisely.
Jurassic Park 3D on a passive 3d is the best way to watch the movie. the 3D in that bluray release was very well done.
Same, I miss it. It's also a shame because I think 3D games would be great on Xbox Series and PS5 these days too.
I still have a 2012 Samsung 3D Plasma. It's 55" 1080p smart TV that was cheaper than the non 3D non smart version because this was when 3Ds and Plasma were being phased out. I think I paid $600CAD. It is active 3D and can post convert a 2D source.
The room should be a dark as possible (its in a basement so not a problem), and post converting leaves a static line of pixels at the bottom of the screen (but overall picture isn't bad). The glasses weren't bulky, but are not rechargeable and require a watch battery which doesn't last all that long, especially if you forget to turn off the glasses.
I haven't used the 3D in a while but I think I'll give it a try again.
The split view does work well for passive 3D; our family got one because of that feature lol
Instead of making you close one eye, they just gave you (or you could at least buy) a set of glasses where both the lenses are the same polarization!
If theyre the cheap ones from cinemas you can take the left lense out of one pair and swap it with the right lense from another pair
My LG TV came with "gaming" glasses, that did just that, basically one pair had 2 'A' lenses and the other had 2 'B' Lenses, was great, used to play call of duty against my mate where you got the full screen and couldn't cheat to see where they were. Same for Gran Turismo.
So 2D glasses.
Or "P1" and "P2" glasses if you want good posture. (The "P" meaning both "player" and "polarization" 1/2. XD)
XBox supported this at the time. You could play 2 player games full screen on the same TV. With our LG passive TV we just had to swap lens on cheap pairs of glasses.
So what happens if 3 or more people wanted to play locally?
I've only ever experienced 3D movies in Bigscreen VR, and I think it looks pretty good. With how VR works, you also don't need any additional equipment, it just works.
Yup, VR is the best way to experience 3d entertainment.
@@sqlevolicious no it isnt. Passive 4K 3D is still the best way to experience 3D. Modders have modded over a thousand prominent PC games to run in 3D. God Of War was the latest one.
HelixMod Blogspot has a list of all of them. VR cant play those well but 3D Monitors and TVs still can.
The Nintendo 3DS was quite impressive with the "3d face animation" but that's the only implementation that i've seen in a consumer device in real life.
Yeah I was half expecting a throwaway mention in the video about how VR is another "resurgence" of 3D content.
Except of course, in VR it just works. And it looks good, and it doesn't give most people a headache and the resolution is pretty good on modern headsets.
I was about to say this - my experience of 3D content in VR was "the 3D video looks more 3D than the rest of the VR environment". My guess was that it's due to shadows and lighting, which VR environments don't spend a lot of time/complexity on.
Im surprised VR was never mentioned. I feel like this was a natural progression of the technology. Like If you want a 3d experience just get a VR headset.
They kinda mentioned it in the beginning
Except that VR is dead too
@@v1Broadcaster The Quest 2 sold over 8 million units in 2021. I wouldn't call that dead
But that's more of a personal experience if you want to watch with your family or friends it's not as good of an experience
@@v1Broadcaster VR is exactly the opposite of dead right now
0:46 YES! Tron Legacy on Blu-Ray 3D will ALWAYS be a staple of what 3D truly was! I used to watch it all the time on my grandparents' Sony Bravia smart TV with Active 3D glasses on, my xbox one (the "VCR" one) running the show. Now I have an LG 3D TV as my main PC monitor, and a 3D TV when I want to watch 3D compatible movies while I wait for a download. My internet in this area is painfully slow.
I've gotta say, I was underwhelmed with 3D when it hit the mainstream in like 2012 but seeing some old 3D content on a vr headset blew me away.
My dad was hugely into the 3D craze, and I remember our TV had a feature in which a vertical split screen game could be forced into have a simul-view effect. So each side was polarised differently and then overlapped, it was great for playing games with siblings or friends.
LG had DualPlay that did that. I used it in COD MW2 on PS3
The advanced anticheat. before it was software encoded.
that actually sounds super cool.
or for something similar. parents watching the news with bone conducting headphones and the kids playing a game on the same tv.
3d movies through a VR headset are pretty cool since you're always sitting in the sweet spot. Still kinda grainy though until rez really increases and screens get better. Shouldn't be too long since we're gonna see micro oled and micro led vr soon.
I'm already anticipating loading some 3D games up in VR. Seems like it isn't too difficult to do either.
I love watching 3d movies in vr it's so much better than anything I've done with active or passive
Pimax is great for res, but it's a bit bulky.
@@WedgeStratos Yeah you can play 3d games in a VR headset. Pretty sure Bigscreen will let you do it and so will DesktopPlus. Both are free.
On my Quest 2 with a good graphics card and air link you can turn up the anti-aliasing and it's just as good as a tv. Haven't tried actually putting the files on the Quest which might also work.
3D mapping world heavily depends on the active technology, especially when using Trimble UASmaster to create stereo images for data capture or for DAT/EM Summit Evolution 3D data capture with ArcGIS desktop ArcMap, this technology is a main element for this kind of mapping and 3D data production. Unfortunately this tech's support was discontinued, so we're back to 2D mapping with simple 2D displays and simple 2D images, I'm so happy that i had the privilege to work in a photogrammetry company that used this tech heavily, i so happy i had this experience because people definitely lack the understanding of stereo image and models, which is something very impressive and so awesome to experience with. Hope this tech returns someday.
Back in 2017, I realized the 3D TVs were starting to become rare and got myself a 65" LG E6 4K OLED that supported 3D. The quality of the 3D that TV produces on Bluray 3D discs is amazing! (I'm so glad I kept spending the extra money on getting the 3D versions instead of normal Bluray, despite the Panasonic plasma I had before was pretty shitty with its active 3D - the movies got new life when I upgraded to OLED.)
My LG OLED is still the one sitting in my living room with a fairly large library of Bluray 3D movies.
E6 owner here! I wanted to upgrade in 2019 and couldn’t find any new 3D tvs and managed to get a refurbished one and it’s absolutely mind blowing!!
I don't know if i got the E6 or not, but i bough an LG OLED 4K with passive 3d a couple of years ago. Do you guys find that the ghosting is worse with this 4k generation than with the older LG 1080p led passive 3d tv's? Or is it just my unit?
@@rBennich I have a 2016 LG E6 55" 4K OLED TV that I bought specifically because it was the last 3D capable model. I don't notice any ghosting on mine, and I just watched a dozen or so 3D Blu-rays in the past two weeks. From all accounts, the 2016 4K OLED LGs are the best 3D experience for the home, but were released after many producers of content and manufacturers had already given up, and most consumers had been soured on the lackluster experience with earlier 3D TVs.
How much for oled? Im not a millionaire. I stll had my lcd samsung 3d tv from 2014. Watching 3d blu rays on ps3
And may it live forever for you amen... Almost had a heart attack when apparently the power board on my 3DTV got fried, but I was able to get a replacement *PHEW*. I am so sad there isn't some more good 3D content. I love it for watching my Jurassic Park movies, but I would like to find good natures documentaries with it. Been kind of hard to find.
I love 3D, used it whenever it was available. The biggest loss is knowing that Nvidia stopped working on 3D drivers so close to the rise of VR. Having a 3D cinema at home, including game use is an absolute game changer.
Even when they were working on 3D drivers, they charged money to activate it. It was totally a greedy move that played into the demise of 3DTV.
Agreed! I love 3D to date and I go around searching for 3D movies where ever I can. My Active 3D 46" Samsung ES7500 TV works great. It barely has any crosstalk between images and gives 1080P per eye vs a Passive TV of the time. The only thing beating this is the 4K passive TVs as noted by linux.
Games like Tomb Raider or Batman look freakin amazing. Too bad nvidia stopped supporting the driver. Thankfully there are still games (like Tomb Raider) that give you the option of SBS 3D, its lower res but atleast its 3D.
I wish this tech returns, and by that I don't mean as VR.
And IIRC they refused to support standard DisplayPort 3D
They used to have 3D shows on TV back in the 80's and you'd pickup the red and blue 3D glasses at 711 stores. The first 3D movie I saw in a theatre was Space Hunter : Adventures in the Forbidden Zone.
Elvira did a 3D epsiode with The Mad Magician and I believe with The Mask also!
I saw Space Hunter as well in the theatre in 3d. That one did use polarized glasses and looked pretty good. Jaws 3d also came out around that time too.
Yes man, i remember those times. In my country, when a movie was going to be aired in 3d, they could start adding "free glasses" in magazines and the like a couple weeks prior being aired.
They did this in the 90s too. I think it was ABC that did a whole week of 3d episodes like home improvement using anaglyph
I remember them doing this with Revenge of the Nerds and Friday thr 13th back in the early 90s.
16:20 this is why if 3D comes back, we should bring light field cameras back. If anyone remembers the Lytro camera and how the whole image was in focus and had the image mapped depth wise. I can see that being something that will get revisited in the future when tv improvements plateau and they need to market something new. Light field videography and photography will probably come back.
One device for 3D content that deserves more attention is VR. In a headset, you've already got separate images going to each eye, so with a high enough resolution it looks as good or better than a 3D tv, for significantly less. Oculus TV has some decent 3D videos, but it's unfortunate that now we've finally got the perfect display, very few people are taking advantage of the tech.
Netflix HAD 3d movies years ago.
You really can't compare VR to 3D. Also, the resolution in VR is worse than what you experience on a 3D TV.
Me and my friends have been hopping on Bigscreen while I stream SBS/OU versions of older 3D movies. Yeah, a lot of them have really crummy 3D masters, but that jank is part of the fun. Considering we all already have VR headsets to hang out in VRChat or whatever we're playing, a free app to stream 3D content to all your friends is pretty nifty.
I'm so glad you brought in the PS3 TV for this.
I found the most enjoyable content to watch on my 3DTV were documentaries that were filmed with IMAX 3D cameras, I think the latest BBC Blue Planet was 3D and a few others, I remember watching a deep sea one and the seaweed floating in the ocean water was absolutely amazing. Most of the gaming and content that was up converted to 3D was usually pretty lame, it worked, but it felt gimmicky and long duration 3D consumption was notorious for making you feel super bug eyed afterwards.
@@MegaMech agreed they were epic, playing them in 2d is just not the same. Also the batman games and one of favorites was trine 2 and 3. So sick.
@@MegaMech I'm most upset with nvidia. The tech is awsome but they just stopped support. There is a niche community of 3d vision gamers that create mods to play modern games but there is a lot of tinkering involved along with biggest hurdle of hardware compatibility. New cards and new drivers along with new versions of windows makes it cumbersome. I'm just going to have a dedicated 3d gaming rig running windows 7. 65" 3d plasma and 3d vision monitor in dedicated 3d space.
2:54 fun fact; Sonic's only an alien in Sonic X/the movies. In the Archie comics, he's moreso a mutant, and we still have no idea what his deal is in the actual games
What’s funny is that I just fixed up an old 3D tv last week that I found in the trash and have been playing 3D games via PS3 and watching 3D movies on it; it’s been awesome so far
KILLZONE 3 in 3d with the sharpshooter 👌👌👌
Heck the newest Dune movie is awesome in 3d!👏👏👏
Theirs a lot more you can do with your TV. Theirs a lot of cool 3D videos on TH-cam.
If you have a computer capable of playing modern PC games you can play GameCube & Wii games in 3D Using the Dolphin emulator.
Hell you can even download any 2D TV show & Movie and watch them in a sort of 3D way using 3D video player.
@@sonicsnake44 Yeah, my tv has a 2D to 3D converter that actually works decently xD
try some pc games with fixes. god of war remaster is pretty awsome for example
@@JRockThumper
Damn that's pretty cool wish my TV had a built in converter. Really interested to see what games would look like when run through the conversion process.
19:20 I must say Nintendo with the New Nintendo 3DS improved a lot 3D viewing angles thanks to a mode in the camera that allow it to rectify the image in real time as you change angles.
The problem with it is, that the technology Nintendo used I don’t think would have been viable for more than one person to view the content
The problem is, that it requires calibration. Your movement is limited.
@@Xfade81 This calibration is probably only needed once. At least I myself have never had issues with it. The Superstable 3D of the "New 3DS" models works incredibly well compared to the old models that didn't have it.
I remember how well that worked! I missed my new 3ds 😭
It would be cool if the 3DS changed the viewing angle of the image depending on where you are looking from. I remember there was one game like that on the DSi. It wasn't 3D off course but you could kind off look around the corner by looking at the console from a different angle. Since the New 3DS already has to track your eyes to adjust the 3D output it could totally do something like that technically.
@ Actually, I think there was a game or app (unfortunately I don't remember the name) that did exactly that on the 3DS! I have thought of the same thing before and went searching, but it was a while ago
I once had a 3D Sony laptop with active glasses. I think it must've been the 'Sony VAIO F Series 3D'. I must say it was pretty incredible. As it was running Windows, almost any game could be converted to run in 3D, and it was super immersive. I remember playing a WW2 tank game that just looked insane in 3D.
All in all though, it lasted 9 months before the GPU overheated and was damaged as a result. I got an insurance payout and ended up with a Macbook... I needed something reliable at the end of the day. But the 3D gaming was amazing...
A MacBook, so you quit gaming as well then...
@@Bremend lul
@@Bremend He loved 3D gaming so much that if he couldn't have games in 3D, he's not playing games.
@@Bremend I moved onto a 2013 15" MBP. After installing bootcamp it was decent enough for games.
I do miss the 3D laptop screen though, it was a very unique laptop
As I discovered the hard way that on cell phones you can actually get different levels of oled screen quality ranging from not good enough to good enough to overkill, I'd love to see you guys cover those differences and help consumers know the technical differences so we know what to look for when considering buying something with an oled screen.
Are you surprised? It just being oled doesn't immediately make it a good screen
Who would thought, that "Next new big thing" will not be another picture technology like 3D, but just more pixels like 4K
4K is just simple, I feel like HDR and OLEDs are a bigger game changer than 4k. But the 4k hype is real, 8K just doesn't have that same hype so we'll probably wait a bit to see what new trendy thing gets the marketing craze
HDR and wide colour gamut are the big thing changing atm, Flat screens are finally beating CRTs for colour
HDR was the next big thing not 4K.
It's more about quality displays than "HDR". When you use the brightness of the HDR content most TV's are too dim to really enjoy it, also if you compare a good non HDR display to a HDR one with the same content there is not a huge difference. HDR is just another marketing gimmick in my opinion.
@@khaledm.1476 yup OLED is what makes me want to upgrade more than 4K
instead of closing one eye, could you pop out the lens of the passive glasses and swap one lens with another pair? Two left eye lens in one frame, etc? Assuming the lens still works if you flips them over so they fit the frame.
I worked in retail at a tech store back in 2013/14 and LG had glasses that did this that came in the box along with normal 3d glasses. They were colour coded so you knew which ones to wear. They were really banking on this being the next big thing in gaming and I remember the LG rep there said they even wanted to use it in cars so you could have a full screen sat-nav for the driver and video content for the passenger. I was always a big supporter of it but obviously it never quite got good or cheap enough to be mainstream tech
Hank Green actually sold 2D glasses for a little bit, with basically two left or right lenses, for people who got dragged to 3D movies or i guess lived with someone who had a 3D TV.
I made a custom pair of glasses for this purpose. 1 left eye only pair and a right eye only pair. Another cool thing with the simulview mode, is you can turn any split-screen game into a simulview game if you select top/down or left/right 3D as the 3D mode setting. I tested it out with Halo and some old Playstation 2 games and it worked great.
The only time that 3D had really, REALLY impressed me, was watching Pacific Rim in 3D in theaters. That convinced me that it had the potential to be great. But then I also saw Prince Caspian in 3D in theaters, and that was just 3 flat layer effects that looks incredibly cheap and added nothing to the experience, so yeah it's easy to mess up and hard to do right. But those rare times it was done great, were some fantastic experiences.
Avatar 3d was good as well
Pacific Rim it's easily the best 3d movie in my library
I saw a movie at the cinema, the other day, that said in the credits that their 3D rendering was done by some team or another. It's strange because the movie was only released in 2D. I can only guess it either came out in 3D elsewhere or perhaps it's going to have a home 3D release, but that would be a few years too late.
Pacific Rim, an absolute banger of a movie. That's all I wanted to say.
@@jublywubly Sometimes 3D is made spearately. All the CGI is a 3D scene on a computer, so it's easy. Then they take the rest of the scene and set distances of areas. Thus e.g. characters are properly in the 3D scene, but inside the area covered by the character it's flat (like a billboard).
14:07 subtitles should read "half of your vertical resolution for a 1080p 3D movie", not "half of your vertical resolution for a 10 ADP 3D movie" as they currently do
I’m happy to see all the love for 3D here and pray that LG or Sony release a 3D TV following the new Avatar. Even if it must be watched on Blu-Ray instead of 4K I would but it.
3D looks so much more sharp than 1080p, because it's twice the resolution AND the different perspectives actually help, and 4K is rarely sharp down to the pixel anyway so for my money 3D movies usually look just as sharp as 4K. At least on a good 3D TV like my LG E7 or the LG G6 in this video.
I wish 4K Blu-ray discs get made. I would pay for stand-alone discs and I know I'm not alone in saying that.
@@antivanti Your 4K TV is upscaling those 3D images hence why 3D 1080p Blu-ray disc movies look amazing on a 4K OLED TV.
I actually have a passive 3D LG TV, and it's amazing. It also has a mode where it tries to convert a 2D signal into 3D. It's a bit funky but still cool to look at. It even plays whatever 3D video file you want off of a USB stick, and the video can be side by side, top and bottom, interlaced, whatever. Unfortunately, the display is damaged, otherwise I would continue to use it as my regular TV. I'm actually mad the tech died because it does add A LOT more to your content, and VR googles is really more of its own separate thing.
Also, Linus pointed this out during his Looking Glass review: even though the screen resolution gets cut to display 3D, the PERCEIVED resolution to your eyes goes way up from seeing the 3D content. I also see 3D as something an 8K TV would be actually be useful for. You'd have all the excess pixels available to display some native 4K 3D goodness.
Killing 3D seems like a waste, especially as a fan of animated films where making it 3D is dead simple.
I never saw anything in 3D that was worth the effort. It was a gimmick at best.
4K 3D Blu-ray movies are what I wish to have.
I freaking LOVE 3D!!! 😍😍😍
@michael which LG model?
@@jayhill2193 I have seen several 3D movies in theater, it doesn't add anything to the movie.
@@JordanLong20 I have a 55LW 5600, which I only keep to play my 10 3D Blu-Rays. I haven't plugged it in in over a year. I also have a Sony PS "TV", and it is an unpleasant 3D experience.
Been a fan of 3D for a long time. After TV's stopped, I used my PSVR (and still do). I saw doc strange in IMAX 3D (which looked great!) and am currently shopping for a home theater projector that is 3D capable. Seems like they're dwindling but I'll get one while I can.
Wait, in 2023 most new high end Samsung's QD-OLED an LG will be 3D starting next February 🤔so save your money
That sounds awesome, do you have a link you can share please.
@@PlsStpHakinMefamily Sources?
@@PlsStpHakinMefamily I hope this is true!
I never got to use one before they got discontinued it's a shame they give on tech like this instead of making them even better imagine a 8ktv with 3d support but much more enhanced with more features.
I feel the same way with plasma screens. A great tech killed off before its time. After cheap LCDs took over the market, everyone just stopped making plasmas right as they were getting good. Imagine how good they would be right now with another 8 years of refinement.
The active shutter glasses were amazing. In the early 2000's I used to go to IMAX for shows all the time because the 3D with shutter glasses was an incredible experience. Once they got rid of them and switched to non powered polarised glasses... I stopped going, the downgrade in the 3D effect killed 3D for me.
Active glasses are too heavy and end up getting sat on, at which point you've got no 3D anymore. Speaking from experience of having active 3D in my home back in the day. Also I imagine the experience is dreadful for people who have to double-up glasses because they have poor eyesight. Or maybe daily glasses-wearers are used to heavy things hanging off their nose ridge, making it less of a big deal. Any eyelets want to chime in?
The experience is pretty bad for glasses users from my experience, as I need mine for far distance. Firstly, you had to hope that the theaters had a 3D glasses set that was actually a size up from your everyday glasses, as that way they could sort of fit over them, but if they didn’t you were in a pickle. The thing with glasses is that if they are the same size, they occupy the same space on your face, especially width and depth wise. That’s why you need a larger size 3D vs regular glasses, because then your everyday pair would sort of fit inside the 3D ones. It was a big pain if the theater did not have enough or if there was no larger size.
As there is only so much retail space available on a person’s face.
@@SamTheEnglishTeacher passive was what sold me fully on my LG TV. Active was far more expensive and out of my budget because it required a panel with a 120-144Hz refresh rate and Bluetooth or IR shutter glasses. I picked my LG TV out of a bargain bin at Harvey Norman for around US$550 in 2011, there was a stock clearance sale going on.
My only regret with the TV is its terrible input lag, which makes playing impulse trigger games like Star Strike HD difficult if not impossible.
I was going to the IMAX at the science museum in the 90s and they were passive and it was incredible even then. You’ve got to sit in the sweet spot which means booking those tickets.
They key to great 3D experience was to have a home projector supporting it. I remember playing Trine 2 (it had a special 3d mode) with my girlfriend and it was absolutely mindblowing.
100% agree with this, for 3D you need a BIG screen. Bigger than a typical TV, like 85"+ kinda big.
Yeah the Trine games in 3D looks so good
i love my Epson 3020 projector. i have 130" of 3D on my living room wall.
@@HOkayson Many projector brand still make 3D as a feature
@@mixedup5858 Oh I know, it's just quite rare to get a 4k high refresh projector that also does 3D. I'm biding my time, saving them pennies, then one day it'll happen & it'll be the greatest thing ever...for 6 days until I'm bored of it again 😝
My 3D film recommendation is Life of Pi in 3D.
Little known fact: Nvidia had a 3d technology with 3d drivers back in the CRT monitor times of 2007-2009. I still have the Edimensional shutter glasses that ran with those Nvidia drivers. What is more, today's 144hz cheap monitors have all the speed to support flawless shutter glasses-based gaming
I have similiar active shutter glasses for CRT that I got from a computer fair back in the mid 90's.
@@TheXTruthAbout 10fps Super Mario Bros is great in 3d, yes 🤣🤣🤣
I remember. There were several different modes. I would sometimes just for fun use the split view and crossed my eyes. Lol.
I did use it with the yellow cyan glasses and it worked well. Last game I played with those on a CRT was that hotel zombie game. Second one I think. Honestly though the color issue wasn't something I could handle for long and the cross eyed thing was not something I was willing to do for too long.
Edit - I know I could've just gotten the Google cardboard for like 10 bucks but losing half the screen wasn't something I was willing to do on a 19 inch CRT. Though imo it's the best looking of all. You lose no color, brightness or refresh but you do lose size and you have to keep your head in the same position.
@@CynHicks Google Cardboard does not work with CRTs. However, there was a project on the MTBS forums for making pism-like glasses out of a CD box and some clear vaseline.
But honestly, a second hand 3dtv is a cheap deal nowadays and to me 3d is just more interesting than 4k. My living room TV is too far away from the couch and my space is limited to around 48 inch. So a 1080 resolution is just fine for me in my living room.
If I had space for 60 inch TV, I would have probably gone for a 4k TV.
@@konstantinlozev2272 Google cardboard worked with any image that was separated left and right. Really.
Edit - lenses and distance was a matter but CRT or otherwise was no matter...in fact they called it that. You needed a headset that separated the images.
I actually got to experience a 3D TV in person, I watched a little demo showing off what the TV could do, as well as parts of one of the Ice Age movies while I was in an electronics store back in the day. I remember it being amazing and extremely immersive, then all of a sudden the hype vanished along with 3D TV's and movies before I could ever buy some. I did get to own a 3DS well after the hype died, but the problems I most often ran into with it were the crappy viewing angles as well as the significant framerate loss while 3D was active in quite a few games
I had always wanted a 3D tv as I was in love with Avatar seen in 3D in the cinema, but you know, really expensive... The thing is I can now watch the film again in my Oculus Quest 2 and it looks awesome for a fraction of the price and is a "console" I already have. I'd like you guys to try it out and compare it to these tests you did in this video. Amazing work guys!
3D in VR is a game changer!
@@itsAustinGreen vr is inherently 3d lol
Isn't Quest 2 LCD instead of OLED??
If so, 3D on LCD = 🤮🤮🤮.
THANK YOU. Thank you for being sensitive to those with epilepsy with the warnings throughout the video. There's really not a lot of content that has that kind of forward thinking and care for the people watching. Was already a huge fan and addict to the LTT channel, even more so now knowing you all truly care. Job well done!
I still use the first Samsung 3d tv, 55". Also have 2 pairs of the battery powered glasses. If the media is made for 3d it works pretty good, if the tv "converted" the image to 3d, it wasn't great. Never use it now.. But I will say for the age of the tv, it surprisingly still has a great picture as a regular tv.
Yeah. Exactly the same. Samsung ue55h6270. The picture still looks great.
I also have one of those first gen’s. I use it to watch the news when I’m working in my garage haha
Yesss! I had a Samsung 3D TV. It was highly underrated imo. FPS games like Halo anniversary and Crysis 2 were completely different games in 3D.
I wish they didn't abandon it. I think a lot of the apathy comes from the complete oversaturation of the market. Instead of making experiences for 3D or making thoughtfully curated for 3D experiences only, they made everything 3D and overcharged for it. Not a great way to have proof of concept.
What's the best media for a 3D TV?
@@justinvivian856 Mostly Blu-ray 3d movies, or PS3 games made for 3d. My TV also had demonstrations for 3d, not sure if they still work since the "smart" features are outdated and my TV is no longer plugged onto internet.
I really loved the how to train your dragon 2 3d, specifically because the director went out it tastefully, rather than a super flashy thing. It just ties the world together a bit and gives scale, without really feeling like a "visual effect"
My Dad still has his LG 3D TV and honestly we usually take real D 3D glasses from theaters cause it actually works. It's been years since I've seen a 3D TV ,but that one we have goes strong and it fucking awesome
My Parents still have the old passive 3D TV as the Bedroom TV now, we also used to try the Cinema glasses, but had to flip them upside down as they apparently worked with the eyes flipped :D
I only watched 3D once in my life and that was a couple of years ago in a cinema for one of the new Star Trek movies. It was so difficult to watch for me and i got a pretty bad headache after it. Some years later after a routine physical examination it was revealed that i actually suffer from a condition called stereoblindness, which does explain some things (like difficulties with 3D images and also VR). So 3D (and sadly also VR) went right past me.
I just recently watched Ready Player One in 3D and I honestly found it to be super nice. Sad this tech went away before it fully matured.
I think it's bc it was pushed in on people's throat before being actually ready.
Nice to see another person who still has a 3d TV, I have Samsung one which uses the active shutter tech and RP1 was a very good on it
Oh god didn't even know Ready Player One is available in 3d, time to bust out my dusty 3d glass
The first modern 3D movie I remember seeing in theaters was actually Beowulf (2007). It was all CGI so the 3D was really well thought out, the way the "camera" moved through each scene really gave it depth I hadn't seen before.
I remember back in the day, we had a samsung 3D plasma tv, was playing CoD single player, there was a scene where the bullet comes at the screen in slow motion, but because of the depth it actually fulled me and my mate playing at the time and was blown away by the experience, don't think I had a moment like that since haha
True
@@TheTechwizGuy Very
2 of my favorite tech products were heavily marketed around 3D. The HTC Evo 3D was my favorite phone ever. Although I didn't use the 3D for more than 10 minutes the whole time I owned it. The Samsung 8000 (World's first 3D LED TV) that you showed for a second at the beginning of the video is still in use in my Bedroom and I love it. I have had 2 Samsung 4k TVs in my living room since I moved that one to the bed room and it is still my favorite TV in the house. It is only 1080p but at 46" it has amazing picture quality. I still can't put my finger on exactly what it is but it just looks amazing. I bought Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs on a 3D Blu Ray and watched maybe 30 minutes of it in 3D and that the only time it was ever used in 3D.
3D is a gimmick, but in my opinion it came out at a time when innovation was at its best and some of the products launched with it were amazing.
I had, until recently, a 130" projector screen and a 3D capable projector from BenQ. Even though we only watched a 3D movie every couple months or so, I miss it now. Do not miss the uncomfortable shutter glasses though. Really wish they could have figured out glasses-free 3D that was affordable.....and teleportation....that would be cool.
Oh man, I hate having to wear the glasses when I teleport.
I had a 3D BenQ monitor which used Tridef software.
It was epic at coverting photos into 3D and I miss that monitor.
It died a few years ago.
You guys need to do a video on how to MAKE a 3d tv, or sho us how we can watch our 3d content using modern equipment
IMO, if 3D had only one standard, it wouldn't have been this bad due to the fact that everyone adapting the standard, which would've driven down the price.
there was never 1 standard for anything. Betamax/VHS/Video 2000 or HD-DVD /Blu-Ray comes to mind.
That was not the biggest problem. It was making content. In-camera 3D is either expensive or horrible, and limiting either way. Postprocessed 3D is cumbersome and often janky. Animated 3D is great, though, and far easier to pull off.
Video Games are a nightmare, though, because so, SO much 3D rendering is done with pixel shaders, which don't natively work with two cameras. You can't just drop in support, and it takes a series rethinking of how stuff gets rendered. Ironically, the push towards raytraced effects and rendering might make this a lot easier to pull off... Now that nobody supports 3D rendering.
@@DJDocsVideos DVD
@@idkanymore3382 The lack of continued support says otherwise.
I agree, if every company would've just decided on Passive 3d, mainly because the glasses were cheaper. This probably would've been good enough to prolong 3D.
I had an htc Evo 3d and that was great. Minus the headache sometimes if the phone wasn't in the exactly right spot but it was definitely an interesting tech at the time.
It's so different how people experience this. I got myself a 3D TV back in 2010 and I've loved every minute of it. Even played Skyrim on my HTPC in 3D. I was so disappointed when I tried to find a new 4K TV with 3D. I had to search for a long time to get a used one since there was no new ones to be found. I'm not ready to give it up, I still think it's awesome.
They never stopped they're called projectors
@@jonathansabinvarietyfilms I know that, not an alternative where I live though. Won't be long until they don't support it either.
@@anakondase Short throw projectors they call laser TVs, and no they're not being phased out, strong as ever, 4K and HDR too
@@jonathansabinvarietyfilms Those work even less in my case. And I haven't seen any short throw projector with 3D.
I got lucky and bought a 3D TV from a friend at work last year and I've been having a blast with it ever since.
When I was a kid, back in the dark ages, my grandpa had a 3D camera and projector. I think my brother inherited the camera. It used slide film and took two pictures through two lenses that were about eye width apart.
The slides were mounted in a modified paper mount about eye width apart.
The slide viewer was simply two viewers -- one for each eye. You just looked through the lenses.
The 3D effect was really good.
The projector was, again, two projectors mounted in the same case. One image was projected through a vertical polarizer, and the other through a horizontal polarizer.
The viewers all wore the glasses.
Alas, we only had a few glasses.
Just yesterday, I watched Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness in 3D, and I was pleasantly surprised at how much cooler the (already excellent) visuals became. Unfortunately, the lenses are so damn small that you have to position your head in some spot or you'll get a headache if your head rotates even just a little. As they point out here too, brightness is low.
I saw that on IMAX 3D and they provided glasses that were a bit bigger than your Real3D glasses.
Will 3D have a fourth shot to make it into the mainstream? Or is VR considered the future avenue of 3D? I hope not, I’d love to have 3D content in mainstream again.
VR would be the next big step after 3D, if we can't master it, VR will not turn out as well as people think.
It's better for 3D to come back to mainstream and have all of it's flaws minimized, than going into VR directly without any sort of relatable experience.
many years ago they said glass free 3d TV is possible but it was too expensive for the mainstream. If they made it affordable to add as an afterthought like projectors have been for over a decade and still going I think it could see a resurgence but everyone just has a sour taste about it for home use and the insanely expensive glasses, I don't see many adults giving it a try.
@@Aquaplayer-yb1sz VR is the successor, and although it will not be adopted in the same way as 3D, it will stay with us forever, in its niche.
VR is absolutely the next leap. AR looks cool too but i haven't seen in irl. I remember hologram games in the arcade back in the 80's and that stuff was pretty impressive back then without glasses so i'm sure AR can really make things pop but right now VR is looking like the future for 3D applications.
You can rent 3D movies in VR with BigScreen and watch them in virtual theaters with others online. I think the end goal for TVs in general are high quality, movable, and resizable virtual screens projected with AR.
Focus isn't a nightmare for 3D. The main approach is to keep the entire scene in focus, so that the 3D effect works on both distant and near objects. The scenario where you have 3D with blurry backgrounds usually means the video wasn't shot for 3D but rather for 2D and then upconverted, which is a disaster for 3D viewing. Keeping the full scene in focus means your gaze can wander around the depth of the space, using eye convergence as an additional depth cue.
There is a small number of people who are incompatible with the 3D that has everything at the same focal depth (this is different from the image being crisp across scene depth, since the resulting images are still displayed flat), since that means when they change their eyes' angle of convergence, they aren't having to change their focus at the same time, and their body reacts to that unusual feeling with nausea. There's little we can do for this yet, since the tech that allows per-pixel focus differences is still in development. But for the rest of us (the majority), the current 3D tech is fine.
The real reason 3D video failed is that a huge subset of the content was the 2D upconversions. These were also billed as "3D" but gradually trained moviegoers that 3D films were usually disappointing, since most "3D" films were 2D upconversions. There were also some issues around brightness of projection, since each image for 3D needs the full brightness, so you need twice as much light at the screen itself, and there's generally more light lost at the projector for polarization (which affects Real3D and polarization tech, but does not affect 3D tech using 6-color bands, which using a single image for the 3D and color filters in the glasses).
3D itself is still amazing, but because of the idiocy of studies shooting themselves in the foot and lying to the public about much of the content, 3D is now mostly a VR-specific phenomenon. NVIDIA has made this problem worse, too, by both discontinuing the consumer (GeForce) 3D support you mention (though it's still downloadable in the older drivers) and making it virtually impossible to get them to tell you what to use in the current day to view the 3D output they do still support on their professional Quadro series.
I can't lie I saw Avatar in theaters for my first 3D experience. It was and is the most amazing movie experience I've ever had.
Ugly on 3d tv
Saw it in the cinema. I could so easily spot the 3 or 4 flat layers at different depths that images seemed to be projected upon. It didn't look natural, yet Avatar is frequently held up as a good example of 3D. For me it was like "well, if that is good, then I want nothing to do it".
Sadly the 3D blu-ray release was probably the worst 3D experience of any 3D Blu-Ray I've watched. They dropped the ball on that one.
@@shruikan64 something wrong with sentence. 3d blu ray is worse of any 3d blu ray
@@dzenacs2011 nothing is wrong, I'm referring to avatar, the original comment of the thread
I remember the best 3D experience being Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs. The entire theatre audience was gasping and genuinely involved as the film played. They seemed to have made the film with 3D in mind and went out of their way to make things fly out at you. No other experience came remotely close. So glad I got to experience that amazing 3D.
Oh yeahhhh!!!
Funny how Linus dissed the 3D conversion in post at the end of the video even though Titanic, Shrek and most of the Tron Legacy movie was 3D converted. I actually worked on their conversion back in the day :)
I own a 3D tv. It was cool for PS4 and the occasional movie but I probably used the feature a handful of times. Still have the TV though. Works great.
We just watched Gravity in 3D on our Epson 100inch LS500. So, so incredible. I'm all about the experience and 3D is almost always a great experience in the right conditions.
So many people haven't really seen Gravity (or others like Dr. Strange) because they haven't experienced them in 3D.
@@curtisbme I need to get around to watching Gravity then. I've had it for years but never put it on, I haven't got the 3D tell and Blu-ray player though, must take it next time I visit my friend with the equipment
@@kanedaku Would recommended it before the friend upgrades and loses 3D. It is a pretty great movie regardless (as are all Alfonso Cauron movies) but it is a ride and it being shot with 3d in mind really heightens the experience.
@@curtisbme So I've heard. Will take your recommendation and watch it within the next month!!
We bought a 3D tv in 2012, and we still have it. We honestly still really like it, we also usually turn on the 3D effect when watching regular shows and movies because while it doesn’t make anything pop out of the TV, it does make every image feel deeper.
True!
do you guys watch regular show in 3d?
@@abandonedchannel1010 not at all... But the tv is still ok!
I had a 65” LG that had a “Dual View” mode. The tv was Passive 3D 1080p lc/ed . You could game with any split screen game and some Xbox games supported it. The Xbox would basically have the split screen two full screens, basically a native mode. The tv came with 4 regular passive glasses and 1 player 1(glasses with left lens) and 1 player 2 (right lens) .. was fun back then.
I love that feature! My brother still has tv that supports that and it just makes split screening so much more fun. It almost feels like magic!
My first HD TV ever was a Samsung 40" bought in 2014 and was an active 3D TV. I was highly sceptical after the craze started with Avatar but films like Gravity made me warm to the format. I really really hate that the PS5 and PSVR2 completely ditch 3D support because there's still so many discs to watch.
VR is basically the successor to 3d! 3d movies still can be watched in VR!
I had active 3D with CRT monitor (ELSA revelator) in the 90s and loved it (although some FPS suffered an issue with the crosshairs at zero distance being useless). Especially for racing games this was awesome and I bought a 120Hz monitor to get rid of the flickering. I was really sad it did not stay and just recently rediscovered 3D in games with VR.
I think I just figured out why all the racists are so bent out of shape about CRT in schools, they are just confused.
I had this as well! The first time I played Half-Life was in 3D, and the first time I encountered a headcrab, I had no idea what it would do. When it leapt out of the monitor at my face, I flailed backwards losing both my headphones and glasses. I will never forget that moment!
I really enjoyed 3D movies. It's a whole different level of experience. I remember watching Avatar and Life of Pi and was amazed by the visual effects. I hope 3D will be popular again.
I imagine VR movies are the next step
@@CSKefka i doubt it. Most people don't like 3D because of the glasses.
@@arjeldemievirtudazo1213 the 3DS's 3D was actually pretty good, issue is implementing it for bigger displays
Saw the new avatar movie in 3d
I work at a theater. I find one of the big reasons 3D sucks now is because the movies aren't made with it in mind at all. The color correction always seems off, the depth is barely noticeable. The 3D effects from things like HTTYD with the ash practically coming out of the screen, just aren't done in modern movies. It's an afterthought.
11:21 That's a creative way to say stole
I own an LG 60" 3DTV i got from Best Buy around 2012 with a bunch of gift cards I saved up. Total cost was $1299 I believe. It's got a few issues now but it worked awesomely and I plan on getting it repaired when I can. Watching bluray films like Tron Legacy, The Wizard of Oz, and Titanic were some of my favorite highlights.
I hope 3D makes a comeback. I just finished watching Dr. Strange in 3D this weekend and it was great