Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 3D TV is "dead?"

This is topic 3D TV is "dead?" - Hollywood Reporter in forum The Afterlife at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000939

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-19-2011, 09:06 PM:

Is 3D for the Home Dead?
9:44 PM 2/17/2011 by Carolyn Giardina

A group of experts at a technology conference -- where the subject generated little enthusiasm -- seem to think so.

3D for the home is dead, according to a majority of attendees at the Hollywood Post Alliance Tech Retreat now taking place in Palm Springs.

When the subject of 3D came up at the confab, the audience of about 400 entertainment technology veterans were asked to indicate by a show of hands if they thought 3D for the home was dead -- and roughly 80% of the audience agreed with that proposition.

Jerry Pierce, who served as moderator, said: "The audience saw the trends at the [HPA] consumer electronics sessions, which cast doubt about 3D in the home -- with a follow-up punch by the broadcast panel, which didn't have interest in broadcasting 3D. The HPA attendees, using this and their other knowledge, felt 3D for the home was dead."

The broadcasting panel included representatives from ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox -- all of whom spent little time on the subject of 3D.

"When the industry comes up with a backward compatible system and an approach within ATSC standards [the U.S.' DTV standards], and we can produce content in an efficient manner, then you will hear about 3D from us," said panelist Jim DeFilippis of Fox.

On the consumer electronics side, industry pundit Mark Schubin shared some Nielsen research that suggested that consumer interest in 3D in the home actually decreased after survey participants were shown 3DTV. He reviewed additional research that demonstrated limited consumer interest.

Still, informal conversations proved that there was at least a segment of conference attendees who believes there are multiple opportunities for 3D to serve various niche markets in the home. Games, for instance, are viewed as a key opportunity.

3D-ready TVs began to roll out in 2010. The consumer electronics industry has sold 3.3 million 3D ready TVs worldwide, according to recent figures from Screen Digest.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 02-20-2011, 09:52 AM:

Must be true, Costco has a $700 discount at the register just to "move 'em out." Similar to price of regular TV. Louis

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 02-20-2011, 11:51 AM:

I don't think they're dead... they're just (as evidenced by the discounts just to get them out) badly overpriced.

The absolute cheapest I saw for 3D tv sets was one around 50-in and in the $800 range. Supposedly a couple companies are developing sets in the 32-36 inch range which'll be cheaper. Plus, with my apartment not being huge, I don't need a massive screen anyway.

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 02-20-2011, 12:05 PM:

For 3D you do need a big screen.

In 3D, objects appear smaller than they actually are. The largest stand alone flat panel 3D sets top out at 65" which in my opinion is too small for 3D.

Rear projection DLP sets are less expensive, larger (Up to 90"!) and DLP is the only technology that can promise absolutely zero crosstalk. DLPs Achilles heel, however is resolution. Most DLP rear projectors checkerboard the left and right images on adjacent pixels, while most front projectors are limited to 720p frame sequential. Further, the underlying synchronization technology, DLP-Link, cannot distinguish weather a frame is intended for the left or right eye. The viewer has to manually tell the projector what the L/R polarity is.

I've elected to go with a DLP front projector on my set up, and I am anxiously awaiting my 3d adapter and glasses (on backorder).

The average television buyer is understandably confused, and uninterested in 3D TV as a result.

Another huge misstep was making certain titles exclusive to certain tv manufactures. As an example, DreamWorks films are only available by purchasing Samsung hardware.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-20-2011, 12:31 PM:

I don't think 3D TV is dead, but the effort is definitely stuck in limbo. The prices of the TV sets might be just a tad bit high (particularly the accessories like 3D glasses). The various technologies are confusing customers. The very worst problem is the extremely stupid practice of movie studios and electronics companies to exclusively bundle the most popular Blu-ray 3D movies with certain TV sets.

The 3D TV market is starved for content. The public isn't going to get enthusiastic about 3D movies in the home unless there is a lot of content available, particular the very best stuff.

As long as Blu-ray 3D movies like Avatar are locked in stupid exclusive TV bundles very few people will want to buy into the system.

Further, not enough is being done to promote 3D gaming. I don't know what games for the Playstation 3 will work in 3D mode. I only know the PS3 has been firmware updated to allow 3D gaming to work.

BTW, recent discounts on 3D TV sets don't really mean anything in terms of the format going down the tubes. Every January deep discounts are made on all kinds of TV sets in advance of the Super Bowl. It's typically the best time of year to buy a new TV set.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 02-20-2011, 01:56 PM:

quote: Mike Olpin
For 3D you do need a big screen.

In 3D, objects appear smaller than they actually are. The largest stand alone flat panel 3D sets top out at 65" which in my opinion is too small for 3D.

IMO, viewing distance still has to come in play before you conclude that you absolutely need something on the order of 90".

There's also a huge variety of how good the 3D looks between different manufacturers and so you can have some people thinking home 3D sets are useless because they saw a couple on display that were underwhelming.

quote: Bobby Henderson
As long as Blu-ray 3D movies like Avatar are locked in stupid exclusive TV bundles very few people will want to buy into the system.

The movies unavailable outside the bundle? Retarded.

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 02-20-2011, 02:17 PM:

For 3D to really work right, you should shoot for about a 35-50 degree field of view, so I guess a 30" set is fine as long as you don't mind sitting about 3-5 feet away from it [Smile]

Not trying to be argumentative, but I think that small screens are a contributing factor (one of many) in why 3D doesn't demo well in stores.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 02-20-2011, 02:25 PM:

quote:
For 3D to really work right, you should shoot for about a 35-50 degree field of view, so I guess a 30" set is fine as long as you don't mind sitting about 3-5 feet away from i

Small living rooms are small. As are some of our budgets when things like school and the growing student loan come into play.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-20-2011, 08:11 PM:

I also wonder if advertising doesn't come into play. People see those ads which show stuff flying all around the room (not just in the frame of the TV) and are disappointed when that doesn't happen in the store.

I can totally see the size being underwhelming in a store too.

Posted by Bruce Hansen (Member # 281) on 02-21-2011, 07:54 PM:

At CES (Consumer Electronics Show) 3D was ignored. At your local store, no one bothers to put on the glasses to look a 3DTV. People complaining about having to ware the glasses, is just a symptom of the real problem, 3D does not work very well, and even gives some people head aches. Most 3D movies are nothing more than a bunch of goofy 3D effects strung together, with no real story line, they are nothing more than effects demos.

Right now, the TV manufactures are the ones financing the ESPN 3D games. It is VERY expensive to produce these games. They require 2 EXTRA set-up days (beyound what a 2D game takes). They require extra people, and each camera is actually TWO cameras $$$$$$$$$. You cannot use one eye of a 3D game as a 2D game. A 3D show is cut MUCH slower than a 2D show, so that people aren't throwing up in their living rooms. So ESPN does both a 3D show and a 2D show, that's right TWO TRUCKS with two crews doing the same game. When the TV manufactues figure out that no one is buying 3D, they will stop throwing away their money on 3D production, and no one else will step foward with that kind of money to catch so few eyeballs.

History has shown us that 3D ALWAYS fails, it is just a gimic, and not a very good one. We all know the old saying: those who don't learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.

And don't forget that right before HD-DVD was abandoned, there were big discunts on the players.

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 02-21-2011, 08:03 PM:

quote: Bruce Hansen
History has shown us that 3D ALWAYS fails, it is just a gimic, and not a very good one. We all know the old saying: those who don't learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.

Exactly. But we all know how intelligent the studios are. [Roll Eyes]

quote:
And don't forget that right before HD-DVD was abandoned, there were big discunts on the players.

My vote for misspelling of the year!! [Big Grin]

Posted by Bruce Hansen (Member # 281) on 02-22-2011, 07:10 PM:

Further proving that I am the worst spelller on the planet, but at least it was funny. [beer]

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-22-2011, 08:01 PM:

quote: Bruce Hansen
History has shown us that 3D ALWAYS fails

History has also shown us that 3D ALWAYS comes back.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 02-23-2011, 11:59 AM:

There was a 3D demo set up in Best Buy right around the holidays that was playing Avatar, and the glasses were in a fixed position so all you had to do was lean up to them to see the movie in 3D. I don't recall how big the TV was (maybe in the 50-55" range), but the effect was good, even in a well-lit store environment.

So the demo was good, but what does a potential buyer run into that impedes the sale?

The 3D-capable TV is much more expensive than the non-3D TV of similar size. I think this particular model was around $1300, where the non-3D TV's of that size were going for $900-$1000.

Exclusivity sucks. If you want Avatar in 3D, you have to buy Panasonic equipment. At the very least, a Panasonic Blu-ray player, but the bundles of the TV and the Blu-ray player together were being pushed. If you like Samsung or Sony, too bad for you. If you want a front projection setup, you're out of luck, because Panasonic didn't refresh its very popular AE-4000 LCD projector this year and they have no other 3D front projector (this was a major surprise from the CEDIA show in September).

As far as I know, the glasses are incompatible between systems. That makes it difficult to find glasses at a reasonable price, and it minimizes the chance that friends that have also bought into 3D are going to be able to bring their glasses over for movie night.

3D source material isn't guaranteed to work with your setup. In the front projection realm, the JVC RS40 ended up being a very popular entry-level 3D projector. While reports have been generally positive, there are some complaints about needing more brightness. However, many people were very disappointed to find out that they spent all that money for a projector, glasses, emitter, and new DirecTV box, only to find out that ESPN-3D on DirecTV is done in an optional format and that is not supported by JVC. DirecTV hasn't budged, and JVC says it can't support the optional format.

These and other issues can create quite a barrier to entry for even the most motivated enthusiast.

But the real kicker is, once you navigate those troubled waters, what else beside Avatar 3D are you going to watch? Certainly not the Super Bowl, which this year was the biggest TV event ever. In the history of TV.

I seriously considered whether I should upgrade to a 3D-capable projector when I replaced mine this Winter. Given the costs, the compatibility issues, and the lack of content, it just didn't make sense to me.

I decided that if 3D really hit big-time (which it hasn't so far), then I'll upgrade in three years or so. I'm betting that 3D will flame out before then.

Posted by Ron Funderburg (Member # 4561) on 03-17-2011, 01:52 PM:

I have a headache from all this 3D talk, can't we all just agree 2D is better. [Smile]

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-21-2011, 02:19 PM:

Hmmmm, let's see, the SMPTE just had its second annual three day technical convention focused on 3D -- 3DTV, 3D delivery to iPads, tablets, smart phones and personal everythings. Not to mention, LG just announced 3DTV set with light-weight PASSIVE glasses, ficker-free, bright image with wide viewing angle.

quote:
LG'S NEW CINEMA 3D TV REWRITES THE RULES FOR 3D
With World's First "Flicker Free" Certification, LG CINEMA 3D TV Offers the Ultimate in Smooth, Comfortable and Bright 3D Viewing

SEOUL, Feb. 16, 2011 – LG Electronics (LG) today announced the Korean release of its new CINEMA 3D TV, which boasts the first third-party endorsed "flicker free" 3D images, along with more comfortable glasses, a brighter picture and a wider viewing angle. Together, these features make it more comfortable than ever for viewers to enjoy 3D content in the company of family and friends.

"Having used our expertise in 3D to address consumer concerns about 3D, such as the sometime flickery picture and unwieldy glasses, today we're ready to unveil a real breakthrough in 3D with LG CINEMA 3D TV," said Havis Kwon, President and CEO of LG Electronics Home Entertainment Company. "LG CINEMA 3D TV will be a real game changer in 3D TV, pushing 3D viewing to new heights of excitement and taking 3D technology firmly into the mainstream of home entertainment worldwide."

CINEMA 3D TV's outstanding 3D viewing experience begins with its Film Patterned Retarder (FPR) technology, which optimizes the separation of images for the left and right eye. Those images are then matched up with CINEMA 3D glasses specially designed to receive each image, creating an outstandingly smooth 3D picture.

The resulting picture has earned CINEMA 3D TV "flicker free" certification from Intertek and TÜV, two world-renowned certification agencies based in Europe, making it the world's first 3D TV to receive the designation. With such a smooth picture, the Cinema 3D TV practically eliminates the feelings of dizziness or eye fatigue that could occur with previous 3D TVs, meaning viewers can enjoy 3D content for longer and in greater comfort.

The Cinema 3D TV also comes with comfortable and inexpensive 3D glasses. Tipping the scales at just 16 grams, the glasses have no electrical parts, so they are free of electromagnetic waves and never need to be recharged. And because the CINEMA 3D TV's glasses don't need to be synced or shuttered, they ensure CINEMA 3D stays entirely free of onscreen flicker.

Besides superb picture quality in 2D and 3D, CINEMA 3D TV boasts all the advantages of LG's Smart TV technology. With its simple Home Dashboard and Magic Motion Remote Control, LG CINEMA 3D TV makes it easy to access a full array of premium content via top global providers, the best in locally sourced shows, and the growing range of LG Apps designed specifically for use on its Smart TVs.

Following its Korean release, LG CINEMA 3D TV will be rolled out globally from March.

LW5700 Specifications:

- Light and Comfortable Glasses
- 3D Light Boost
- Wide Viewing Angle
- Smart TV
- DLNA/WiFi/DVR ready
- 2D to 3D conversion
- LED Plus
- Local Dimming
- TruMotion 120(100)Hz
- DivX Plus/HD
- Smart Energy Saving Plus

3D is far from dead -- the real question is why are the studios holding back their 3D product? You can count the number of 3D titles that you would want to watch much less own on one hand. Every Pixar and Disney release should be readily available on 3DBluRay by now. It is the 3D movie content that will drive home 3D. Passive glasses certainly will be a big boost. Some popular TV programs would easily lend themselves to 3DTV treatment -- V and FRINGE come easily to mind. The studios have to get decent abount of content out there if they want to keep it alive.

Anyone know when Cameron's wrong-minded idea (although I am SURE it was wildly lucrative) of giving Panasonic exclusive rights to AVATAR will end? Hasn't it been a year yet? Bet when that goes wide people may buy 3DTVs just to see it in 3D at home.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-23-2011, 09:53 AM:

"Its not dead, just SLEEPING!" (Monty Python)

The smpte conference just proves how dead it is. One of the reasons I dropped out of smpte is that their conferences always occured AFTER something was DEAD. Louis

Posted by Bruce Hansen (Member # 281) on 03-24-2011, 04:50 PM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
"Its not dead, just SLEEPING!" (Monty Python)

Sleeping for about the next 30 years. We will see 3D again in 2040. What's next? Smell-o-vision!

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 05-02-2011, 03:19 PM:

Saw a LG 3Dtv demo today. I was impressed. Glasses were small and not bulky at all. For $2499 the selling for.

Watched a IMAX 3D movie. It was pretty cool to see the IMAX Countdown

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 05-02-2011, 03:45 PM:

Well if this stupid industry wants 3D to make it, they'd better damn well snap-to and start releasing 3D product to play on those spanking new 3DTVs. My friend said he is roundly frustrated that the only things he was able to buy and now watch are the horiffic PIRRANA, ALICE IN WONDERLAND and a few of the IMAX 3D docs.

So why aren't the studios releasing ALL the Pixar, Disney 3D animateds -- how many are their now, 40 or so, and they keep them coming? And how come they are not releaseing all their 50s and 80s 3D titles -- all made in REAL, two-eye 3D, BTW? They'd better get on this bandwaggon before even those who bought 3DTVs just throw up their hand and give up on it, not to mention new sales will plummet if there is no serious amount of product forthcoming. This entire hardware industry of 3DTVs and the nitche 3D video projector market isn't going to be sustained by one movie -- AVATAR.

And the weird thing is, the product is there but for some inexplicable reason, they are not selling it to the public. If everyone knew that the hot 3D releases like RIO were going to be available on 3D BluRay within approximately the same release window as 2D films are made available, that would keep the demand for hardware quite high; all those little tikes demanding to get to see their favorite film at home in 3D....over and over, as kids do.

It's not happening; something is really fishy here.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 05-02-2011, 03:56 PM:

TRON Legacy 3D is available.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 05-04-2011, 12:36 AM:

OK, Tom, yes there is TRON-3D, but you get my point? That's one out of how many? This 3D production started 5 years ago and their is a substantial library of 3D titles, yet NOTHING is being released.

And then there are the 50s and 80s libraries which each studio has in the vaults. Those are ready to be sold -- they are money in the back. They require no production costs at all other than remastering them on 3DBluRay. It's almost pure profit, yet no a single title has been market as "classic" 3D releases. Where is THE HOUSE OF WAY, KISS ME KATE, IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE, DIAL M FOR MURDER, etc? And from the 80s, well, nothing you'd really want to see in any dimension from that bunch of caca, but you get my point. They are sitting on product without which the 3D hardware market is going to die on the vine and with it an entire ancillary 3DBluRay market for their current 3D titles. Makes no sense to me.

And just like I said the 3D hardware industry can't survive on one film AVATAR; neither can it survive on two releases -- AVATAR and TRON-3D.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 05-04-2011, 05:20 AM:

Frank, I hear what your saying. But producers want you to buy their movie first in regular version, then extended, then 3D etc etc.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 05-04-2011, 06:17 AM:

16 ft lamberts: has to do with your eyes. It is NOT a technical standard for film. except by extension.

Too bad d=tv did not use the accepted physiological standard. Eye strain would then be the same. Louis

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 05-04-2011, 04:15 PM:

A friend of mine has a 3D TV and while the image quality is far better than any 3D cinema is capable of displaying (it's much brighter), it gets old really fast, just like 3D in movies. Hell, even with my 3DS which offers glasses-free 3D, I turn the 3D gimmick off after a while. Initially it's a cool gimmick (and that is exactly what it is) but it doesn't offer any lasting power. Fools who think 3D is akin to color and sound in movies are complete idiots. The only reason to turn color off is if the color has been damaged and looks gross. The only reason to turn sound off is if you are watching a commercial. The reason to turn 3D off is to remove the glasses (in the case of everything BUT the 3DS) or concentrate on the game (3DS). Turning the 3D off actually makes it easier to play.

The coolest thing about the 3DS is taking 3D pictures which can also be viewed on 3D TVs. But you don't stare at pictures for over an hour.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-04-2011, 07:51 PM:

quote: Tom Petrov
But producers want you to buy their movie first in regular version, then extended, then 3D etc etc.

That's true, but the real problem is that 3D TV system manufacturers are in bed with certain film studios, so only that studio's output is available with that 3D TV system. It's beyond ridiculous. It's just like when 45RPM records were introduced -- you had to buy an RCA phonograph to play them on. I guess the studios and TV people can't learn from that past mistake because they were all born 50 years after it happened (and they don't think anything important happened before 1990).

Shouldn't be a surprise, I guess -- the same crap happened with Betamax vs VHS, and LD vs that RCA thing, and DTS/SDDS/SRD, and HD-DVD/BluRay, etc etc etc.

Posted by Hillary Charles (Member # 769) on 05-05-2011, 10:14 AM:

Mike, you remind me of the old NBC kinescopes which hearald under the peacock, "Brought to you in RCA compatible color." Long before this 3D or that 3D, there was the CBS color wheel system which couldn't be seen on any B&W sets, unless someone sprung for clumsy converters. The RCA system (renamed the NTSC system) allowed for that compatibility. But it took 12 years for the networks to go all color.

As much as I love 3D, had we gotten in on the ground floor, we'd be stuck with a system requiring expensive active glasses. LG has passive glasses now. Soon perhaps no glasses...? But should I get the Panasonic system for AVATAR or go with something else, because I really don't care for AVATAR?

I'm not making the comparison to color on a qualitative basis, but merely on the "latest thing" basis. If 3DTV is still around in 12 years, it's unlikely there will be competing systems to worry about.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 05-05-2011, 07:41 PM:

What about communal viewing? Who is going to buy glasses for all of the possible guests at a Superbowl party?Not to mention that home viewing usually involves a lot of multi tasking. HOw does one multitask when wearing 3D glasses?

I saw a college game for 5 min in 3D at one of the stores and it looked pretty damn good, but I dont care to watch it for a long time.

Also, why cant the studios perfect 2D first?How about better HD on cable?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 05-06-2011, 12:44 AM:

Yeah, what if the left eye is severely compressed slightly differently than the right eye on the same frame? In other words, what if there is macro-blocking in part of the left eye where it isn't on the right, and vice-versa? I can't see 3D and compression co-existing too well with current 20th-century broadcasting standards.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 05-06-2011, 01:27 AM:

It's dead!?

I hadn't noticed that it was ever really alive...

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 05-10-2011, 07:24 AM:

quote:
Source: wired.com
The eye-popping spawn of Avatar reach critical mass this month when, for the first time, 3-D openings will outnumber wide-release 2-D movies at the box office.

I don't know....sounds pretty alive and robust to me.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 05-10-2011, 03:48 PM:

You do realize this thread is about TV, right?

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 05-10-2011, 10:05 PM:

Oh yah...you are right. Actually I did forget, but still, the point is, 3D movies are still as popular as ever and we are way past the 50s' watermark of 3 years foreray into 3D and certainly past the 80s time-frame which was even shorter. 3D movies keep being churned out. And as long as 3DTV sets can be used to bring those 3D movies into the home, even if 3D television per se isn't generated by the broadcast industry, there will always be a market for consumers to watch their favorite 3D BluRay movie on the 3DTV home theatre. So I'll speculate that whereas 3D broadcasting might be giving a death rattle, 3D DISPLAYS will be alive for decades.

SMPTE has its second conference on stereoscopic technology -- big thing happening is the progress on 3DTVs that display without glasses.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 05-11-2011, 05:21 AM:

quote: Frank Angel
big thing happening is the progress on 3DTVs that display without glasses.

if this is the case where I don't have to wear glasses then I will eventually get one. I can't stand wearing the glasses.

Global 3D TV Shipments Soar in 2011

Sales of 3D TVs are apparently taking off this year and reach a global shipment volume of 23.4 million units.

ZoomIHS iSuppli said that the growth is expected to end up at 463% this year and will drive the industry well beyond the 2010 shipment result of 4.2 million units.

"In a major recalibration effort, television brands are changing strategies this year following lukewarm response to 3-D in 2010 when consumers balked at the high price of sets and the lack of 3-D content," said Riddhi Patel, director for television systems and retail services at IHS. "In 2011, however, brands are marketing 3-D not as a must-have technology but as a desirable feature, similar to the approach they have taken with Internet connectivity."

Growth is expected to continue in the years to come: iSuppli expects growth of 132% in 2012 to 54.2 million units. In 2014, 3D TVs will sell more than 100 million units per year and hit 159.2 million in 2015 - if the market research firm is correct. One motivating factor for the purchase of 3D TVs are falling prices. Prices declined by 9% in March 2011 alone. However, consumers will have to accept active shutter glasses with their 3D TVs now. You will have to wait until passive 3D TVs will become mainstream and surpass shipments of active shutter glasses 3D TVs, iSuppli believes.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 05-11-2011, 04:20 PM:

I have a display that will play 3D video without glasses. Just don't move your head much. It's kind of funny because now home technology has once again exceeded the movie industry where you still need to wear those idiotic glasses.

Posted by Hillary Charles (Member # 769) on 05-12-2011, 07:33 PM:

...and then the whole point of using 3D to offer the public a unique theatrical experience goes down the drain.

Okay, except for idiots like me who go specifically to wear the glasses. [Wink]