Quote:
Originally Posted by
ramicio 
I'd rather them focus on moving to higher framerates. 1080p is fine, we DO NOT need higher than that. If they went to say 1080p72 it would be 3x the amount of detail as a 1080p24 image, and would be clearer and more realistic motion. Screw 3D. I know I'm watching a movie and that's the point of it. I don't need 3D to be simulated. If they want things to be that realistic they should make a way to pump a movie into your brain as if you were living IN IT, like the Matrix, but just as a viewing party. They can record video at millions of frames per second now without needing a nuclear blast of light to illuminate the subject, so 72 FPS should be easily doable. Even 720p72 would be far superior of an image to 1080p24. 720p60 is already known to be a better picture than 1080p30.
Have you seen higher than 1080p? I've got a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor (IBM T221) - which can display "Quad HD" - it's not quite wide enough for the 4k standards, but since it's a 16:10 it's more than enough vertically. Anyway, at that resolution, things pop like you wouldn't believe! It does make a huge difference in what things look like. Kind of how "air" and "soundstage" make a difference with audio. It makes things almost look 3D by itself.
But I agree, faster frame rates should come first. I'd really like to see 120 Hz; it makes a huge difference over 85 Hz, 60 Hz, and even lower (I used to own a Sony GDM-FW900 that easily does 120 Hz, it might have gone even higher with a custom profile.). Of course, combine that with Quad HD/4k, and you've got a hella lot of bandwidth you're using.
My biggest beef with 3D is the shutter glasses (and the poor frame rate). I definitely get eyestrain from short periods with the glasses, and the motion blur is horrible from the halving of the frame rate. Beyond those issues, I think the need for the expensive (and ugly/unfashionable/anti-social) glasses will keep 3D using them from going mainstream. Polarized glasses in the theater are fine - you're there to watch the movie, and no eyestrain either. But I don't think until we get glassless 3D or at the very least polarized glasses 3D (individually polarized pixels on plasma, anyone?) that 3D will take off.
