Welcome to 3D

[acem77]

I welcome 3d.

I have been waiting for the day 3d gaming would make a comeback.
Since I got my hands on the 3d goggles for the sega master system.
The polarized shutter glasses work great back then.
I loved how some of the 8bit games looked. Hell I even enjoyed the vr boy.
I even bought some polarized goggles for the famicom.
Now almost 20 years later it's about to happen again I can't wait.

I always loved anything 3d related I have a handful of 3d cameras that you get your photos developed on special prints, I loved movies like Beowulf and Avatar. It just adds another layer of detail that Id rather have. If it's an option don’t complain.

I think most people get paranoid when new tech comes out cuz they don’t want to spend the money and feel left out if they don’t have it.
Vhs vs dvd, dvd vs blu-ray SD vs HD ect..

A lot of people acted this way when HD tv started to hit the market.

I could not wait and upgraded when the time was right.
I like to jump on the cool new tech that’s how I have always been.

My HD TV is not 3d ready but it's also 5 years when it dies I'll be sure the next set is 3d.

Fuji has a new 3d digital camera I plan to buy it takes 3d pictures and movies that will work on a 3d tv :)

[kupomogli]

Porn in 3d. It's like you're right in the action!

[JSoup]

Fuji has a new 3d digital camera I plan to buy it takes 3d pictures and movies that will work on a 3d tv :)


???

I'm confused. Cameras don't take pictures in three dimensions?

[acem77]

???

I'm confused. Cameras don't take pictures in three dimensions?

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/3d/camera/finepix_real3dw1/

[buzz_n64]

That is the shit! Really, really cool. My first question is how much, and my 2nd question is how long will it take for the price to go down?

[jb143]

I saw an old old 3D camera at goodwill once that I thought of getting but passed on it. It let you make your own viewmaster slides and things like that.

It's hardly anything new, but being digtal and having TV's now that can show 3D is certainly cool.

[acem77]

That is the shit! Really, really cool. My first question is how much, and my 2nd question is how long will it take for the price to go down?

$600, not soon enough. there are other cool tricks that can be done since its really 2 10MP
cameras in one shell.

[Ed Oscuro]

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/3d/camera/finepix_real3dw1/
I guess this is Fuji's revenge on people who didn't buy the S5 Pro for its high dynamic range. Yeah bitches, we just wasted it all on some gimmick! BOOYAH

(Admittedly, it sounds like it's great for a 3D camera with 1/2.3" sensors)

Sheesh, I've been hearing about all kinds of crazy photography stuff today. First it was this (http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2586751), now I hear there's been consumer 3D cameras for 25 years. MADNESS

[kedawa]

None of this 3D razzmatazz works on my eyes, so I couldn't care less.

[Ed Oscuro]

Yeah, 3D stuff hasn't been good to me either.

[retroman]

Hey there are a few of us on the planet. I too loved the VRBoy. Still play it today.

[NayusDante]

Does it bother anyone else how this "new 3D" is being talked about? There's a ton of technologies that have been called "3D" over the years, but in hindsight they're all very different things. Long ago, "3D" meant two different colored lenses used to watch a movie. Then, "3D" meant holograms. Next, "3D" meant hardware-processing of polygonal scenes. Now, "3D" means the glasses thing again, except now they're either gray or they flicker alternatively.

These are all VERY different things, but we call them all 3D. Is this just an English language hiccup, or is it that hard to come up with better terms?

[jb143]

By the way. Just a little history lesson. "Modern" polarized 3D glasses and movies have been around since the 1930's. Again, this is nothing new.

[whoisKeel]

I call meh.

I've seen a few of the new 3D movies in the theaters (Bolt, Up, Avatar). It was cool, maybe worth the 3 extra dollars for Avatar. But it is nowhere near perfected enough that I want to start watching TV or playing games all the time. Objects get blurry when the come out of the screen, and when they come too far out of the screen it feels like a gimmick (like guns and spears pointing out into the audience). Plus you have to wear those uncomfortable glasses.

I'm just not convinced it adds more to the experience than it takes away. Seems to me the industry doesn't know what to do, since everybody already bought HDTV's and every movie they care about on DVD.

Forget this ESPN 3D sports channel. I'm not getting together with a bunch of friends to drink beer and watch football, to be stuck wearing 3D glasses. Let's go to the bar and wear 3D glasses? What happens when you invite 4 friends over for the game and only have 3 glasses? One guy is stuck watching the game in blurryvision?

[Gameguy]

Fuji has a new 3d digital camera I plan to buy it takes 3d pictures....
http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/4850/stereoscopeghost.jpg


Forget this ESPN 3D sports channel. I'm not getting together with a bunch of friends to drink beer and watch football, to be stuck wearing 3D glasses. Let's go to the bar and wear 3D glasses? What happens when you invite 4 friends over for the game and only have 3 glasses? One guy is stuck watching the game in blurryvision?
You still get together with friends in person? That's old fashioned. You're each supposed to watch the game in your own homes and communicate with each other using text messages. That's the modern way.

[kedawa]

Does it bother anyone else how this "new 3D" is being talked about? There's a ton of technologies that have been called "3D" over the years, but in hindsight they're all very different things. Long ago, "3D" meant two different colored lenses used to watch a movie. Then, "3D" meant holograms. Next, "3D" meant hardware-processing of polygonal scenes. Now, "3D" means the glasses thing again, except now they're either gray or they flicker alternatively.

These are all VERY different things, but we call them all 3D. Is this just an English language hiccup, or is it that hard to come up with better terms?
It doesn't bother me at all, because other than polygonal graphics, all those things are in fact the same thing: stereoscopic images viewed through glasses. Whether the specific technology is polarization, chromatic filtering, or alternating of shutters is not important.

[jb143]

It doesn't bother me at all, because other than polygonal graphics, all those things are in fact the same thing: stereoscopic images viewed through glasses. Whether the specific technology is polarization, chromatic filtering, or alternating of shutters is not important.

And holograms aren't really 3D either. It's an optical illusion just like the stereoscopic images. The only difference being that other angles are rocorded as well that change depending on what angle you view it from.

[acem77]

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/4850/stereoscopeghost.jpg


You still get together with friends in person? That's old fashioned. You're each supposed to watch the game in your own homes and communicate with each other using text messages. That's the modern way.

odd, you enjoy digital forums enough...
In the busy adult world meeting with friends in person to play video games is not the easiest thing to do.
life is busy, People move. the tech bridges the gap a bit.
when my friends are around and in town my basement is game heaven full of laughs and fun.
If I have 3d content ill try to have enough glasses or it can be shut off then.
What happens when you play multi player games and you don’t have enough controllers you improvise. You don’t blame the system.


I understand 3d works better for some people more than others.
If stereo 3d catches on let other enjoy the illusion.
It will always be an option, Everybody wins.
Maybe people fear it will raise the cost of development… then I guess it won’t be completely free.

Yes it has been around for while now. I have a handful of the old 3d cameras.
But I welcome the mix of the tech with newer modern digital devices.

[Trebuken]

The glasses are likely on their way out. They will likely be able to do 3D glasses free in theatres soon....we'll see.

Avatar was great in 3D, but the 3D was an after thought; it was not designed with 3D in mind from the beginning....the sequel will likely go to the next level.

I am concerned that one of the main forces behind 3D is piracy. Is this a tactic to combat piracy?

Also, I have read about older movies being upgraded to 3D. How? Will I need to repurchase my movies or can it be done in a similar fashion to upconverting DVD's?

[buzz_n64]

Does it bother anyone else how this "new 3D" is being talked about? There's a ton of technologies that have been called "3D" over the years, but in hindsight they're all very different things. Long ago, "3D" meant two different colored lenses used to watch a movie. Then, "3D" meant holograms. Next, "3D" meant hardware-processing of polygonal scenes. Now, "3D" means the glasses thing again, except now they're either gray or they flicker alternatively.

These are all VERY different things, but we call them all 3D. Is this just an English language hiccup, or is it that hard to come up with better terms?

Yeah, it does bother me that all of it is just "3d" We need more terms and words to distinguish these apart. I'm still waiting for REAL 3D to appear. A actual 3d projection inside living rooms. I'm guessing multiple cameras at different angles would be needed for this, but after this arrives... Holodeck technology baby!!! :cheers: Touch the objects being projected.

[acem77]

Yeah, it does bother me that all of it is just "3d" We need more terms and words to distinguish these apart. I'm still waiting for REAL 3D to appear. A actual 3d projection inside living rooms. I'm guessing multiple cameras at different angles would be needed for this, but after this arrives... Holodeck technology baby!!! :cheers: Touch the objects being projected.

We can dream!

[jb143]

The glasses are likely on their way out. They will likely be able to do 3D glasses free in theatres soon....we'll see.


I'm not too sure about that. At least not with the same tech they use for glasses-less 3D monitors. The viewing angles for a theater would be way too small.


I'm still waiting for REAL 3D to appear.

It already does exist, but you might have to get away from the TV and go outside to see it.


but after this arrives... Holodeck technology baby!!! :cheers: Touch the objects being projected.

http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=136188

It's not quite a holodeck (or quite a hologram) but it's still pretty cool and promising.

[RASK1904]

I'm not convinced. I gonna hold out for 4D!

[Gameguy]

odd, you enjoy digital forums enough...
In the busy adult world meeting with friends in person to play video games is not the easiest thing to do.
life is busy, People move. the tech bridges the gap a bit.
when my friends are around and in town my basement is game heaven full of laughs and fun.
If I have 3d content ill try to have enough glasses or it can be shut off then.
What happens when you play multi player games and you don’t have enough controllers you improvise. You don’t blame the system.


I understand 3d works better for some people more than others.
If stereo 3d catches on let other enjoy the illusion.
It will always be an option, Everybody wins.
Maybe people fear it will raise the cost of development… then I guess it won’t be completely free.

Yes it has been around for while now. I have a handful of the old 3d cameras.
But I welcome the mix of the tech with newer modern digital devices.
I just didn't like how the new stuff is always being presented as groundbreaking when it's just an updated version of technology that's already been around for well over a century. I remember when Space Jam was coming out to theaters, there were segments on the news about it and they mentioned that it was the first movie that had live people mixed with cartoons and they were excited about the new achievement. Of course I remembered Who Framed Roger Rabbit and even the segments from Disney movies like Marry Poppins which did the same thing decades earlier so I knew better.

I really don't play games with other people, but it seems to me most people spend more time interacting with friends online than they do in real life which is why I made the joke. It's just easier to do things at home now, you don't even have to leave the house to buy anything or even groceries if you don't want to. I do use email and obviously forums, but only regularly in the last five years. I'm not that quick to update to new technology.


Also, I have read about older movies being upgraded to 3D. How? Will I need to repurchase my movies or can it be done in a similar fashion to upconverting DVD's?
I've heard about Toy Story being re-released in 3D, but from what I heard it was originally made in 3D. Most theaters at the time of it's release wouldn't be capable of displaying it in 3D so they converted it to 2D for it's first release. That's the only movie I've heard of that got re-released in 3D, were there others too?

[RASK1904]

In the 90's at my local indy theater i saw a 70's porn in 3D! Seriously.



Big hairy bush all up in yo face!!!

[jb143]

I've heard about Toy Story being re-released in 3D, but from what I heard it was originally made in 3D. Most theaters at the time of it's release wouldn't be capable of displaying it in 3D so they converted it to 2D for it's first release. That's the only movie I've heard of that got re-released in 3D, were there others too?

With Toy Story, or any other CGI movie, they could just re-render another camera angle...assuming they keep their files.

Other than that, I heard that George Lucas is planning to have ILM work it's magic to make the Star Wars movies 3D to milk them even more. That's the only pre-existing live action movie I've heard of...if they can even pull it off.

[acem77]

the 1st matrix in 3d would be cool.
i love to see more beyond the minds eye like cgi videos in 3d.

[Zthun]

Porn in 3d. It's like you're right in the action!

You know what's funny? I had a similar conversation with my gf about this; if they had to the point where you felt like you were actually IN the movie (like the mmo in .hack), then the porn industry would skyrocket.

Anyway, I just saw Avatar in Xtreme digital 3d today, and while the movie rocked, having to wear those 3d glasses every time I wanted to watch a movie or play a game would be a real inconvenience. It would be better if they had it like the virtual boy where you can just wear something over your head and watch the movie or play the game anywhere (not on a TV). It would also be VERY preferable if it didn't give you headaches as well. Just food for thought...

[SPAZ-12]

Ugh, I was hoping that the current 3D craze would die quickly, but I'm beginning to wonder if it is here to stay. I don't have to much of a problem with some films being 3D in theaters, if only because it might make more people go and see movies in theaters, for the 3D experience. However, I hate the idea of 3D TV. TV is the sort of medium where I should be able to walk into a room with a TV, sit down, and watch TV. If I'm in the kitchen cooking, I should be able to glance over at the TV every once and awhile. I should not have to wear some stupid glasses just to prevent me from seeing double. And the thing is, glasses-free 3D technology isn't really ready yet, and I doubt that it will be ready for some time; I don't see glasses-free technology being able to accommodate an arbitrary number of people from a variety of viewing angles.

I am the sort of person who is inclined to resist change, but then again change--or "progress"--is not always for the better. For instance, the switch from analog to digital TV broadcasts was (is) ridiculous. The beauty of analog broadcasts is that if the signal degrades, it is still watchable, but just lower quality. Watching the digital broadcasts at my grandparent's house was unbearable, with stuttering and freezing that would make a belt-sanded DVD jealous.

People get too wrapped up in the new technologies that become available, and so they seem to forget that it's not the medium that makes the entertainment, it's the content. Would Get Smart be funnier in 3D? No. Would Die Hard be more bad-ass in 3D? No. Or even, is Star Trek more brilliant when remastered and the Enterprise replaced by a polygon model? NO! I want my visual entertainment medium to stay in a format that is as easy to access and watch alone as it is with friends, whether I'm wearing stupid glasses or wearing nothing at all, night or day, from the couch or from the kitchen!

I know there is nothing that I can do to stop the movement of technology to more and more gimmicky and flashy patterns, but that doesn't mean that I like it. If TV goes 3D, then I hope that there is at least an option for every channel to remain 2D. I'm sure that if 3D TV becomes the norm, that within 10 years I'll have adapted, but I hope that I don't have to do this. I can't help my pessimism about the movement of technology, because I just can't stand the trend of moving away from streamlined function and towards streamlined form. I only have to look at my grandparent's TV, with its lack of any buttons--even a power button--to be reminded of the society I live in. (Speaking of that TV, it kinda makes the old joke--"You're so lazy that you'll spend an hour looking for the remote so that you don't have to get off the couch!"--obsolete. I guess the new joke should be something along the lines of "You're so lazy that rather than look for the remote control, you rewired the TV to include a power button!")

Now let the angry technophiles rush forth.

[crazyjackcsa]

I'll pass on the 3D as well. Current Technology can't actually create a real 3d image, just an approximation of one. Sitting in a different spot in the room doesn't give you a different prespective. If I pause the image, I can't get up and walk around it to see it from all different angles. So to me, it's not really 3D.

[kedawa]

I don't think there's any danger of 3D gimmicks becoming mandatory. It will always be possible to just discard every other frame and show one POV or the other, and then there's the simple fact that the effect doesn't work for a large segment of the population.

[NayusDante]

I am the sort of person who is inclined to resist change, but then again change--or "progress"--is not always for the better. For instance, the switch from analog to digital TV broadcasts was (is) ridiculous. The beauty of analog broadcasts is that if the signal degrades, it is still watchable, but just lower quality. Watching the digital broadcasts at my grandparent's house was unbearable, with stuttering and freezing that would make a belt-sanded DVD jealous.

Quoted for truth. Static is preferable to the entire signal cutting out for seconds at a time. With a basic antenna, my digital reception is laughable, but thankfully my cable company is sending the networks in ClearQAM so I can still record HD networks, but even that signal cuts out a lot. I can imagine 3D broadcasts being unwatchable with the current state of things.

[Greg2600]

I got a new PC a month ago, and it has an NVidia card that can do 3D gaming. I believe it works with some older games. However, I simple have no interest in PC gaming to even get something to try. I did try out some of the test videos, and they work nice, but they use the old style analglyph glasses (red/blue). Looking through those glasses strains my eyes too much, no fun.

[SegaAges]

I am waiting to see if this will be a gimmick like how virtual reality was, or if it actually sticks.

[MASTERWEEDO]

I've heard about Toy Story being re-released in 3D, but from what I heard it was originally made in 3D. Most theaters at the time of it's release wouldn't be capable of displaying it in 3D so they converted it to 2D for it's first release. That's the only movie I've heard of that got re-released in 3D, were there others too?


The Nightmare Before Christmas comes to mind.

[NayusDante]

Toy Stoy has actually been re-rendered at least once. The original render took weeks, and the re-render (10th anniversary I believe) took 2 days or so. If they can re-render it, I'm assuming they have the original source files. Given that info, it's not a stretch to say that Pixar could re-render all their films in 3D.

$99 Pixar-nVidia Movie Collection and Glasses pack, anyone?

Actually, I'm waiting for a demoscene-style release of Toy Story that runs on modern PCs. Toy Story rendered in real-time. Because we can.

[Gameguy]

With Toy Story, or any other CGI movie, they could just re-render another camera angle...assuming they keep their files.

Other than that, I heard that George Lucas is planning to have ILM work it's magic to make the Star Wars movies 3D to milk them even more. That's the only pre-existing live action movie I've heard of...if they can even pull it off.Well with George Lucas he could just replace all the live people and backgrounds with CGI, it is George Lucas after all.


The Nightmare Before Christmas comes to mind.
I forgot that it was redone in 3D, I don't really remember too many movies being released in 3D as I never really paid attention to that type of news. I remember that one of the Friday the 13th movies was made in 3D, I can't remember which one but an eyeball is supposed to fly out at you(or something like that).

I don't see 3D technology really catching on in a big way, it's a bit of a novelty but that's about it. Every so often people will go to 3D because it's something different, but people will get bored again and go back to 2D.


The dangers of 3D technology.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIkF_qLWu7I

[RASK1904]

Friday the 13th part 3.

[SegaAges]

Shrek got re-released on DVD as 3D

[acem77]

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/pictures-story/139-USC-3D-TV.html

good read on whats out and whats coming out for 3d tech.