http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1309877

It's been out a while. Users seam to favor its 2D performance and motion handling over the new JVC's, but give the nod to the JVC's for 3D. The CR is also achieved with a dynamic iris, and its native is not on par with JVC.

The only Sony products I'll buy are Playstations.

Wouldn't even do that if other people made them.

I really want 3D to die a horrible, fiery death. Although I don't quite agree with the "it never will work crowd" there are just too many limitations. Here's the most convincing thing I've read on the subject:

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/01/post_4.html

I saw that letter yesterday.

I hate 3D because it looks so fake. I know what a 2D picture looks like, flat surfaces with texture are natural. But the faked depth information just looks bad.

The only reason I don't care if others continue to waste money on 3D movies, and gear (I will never spend another penny on 3D in it's current implementation) is that I'm hoping it will pave the way for true holography (I think that's hit on at the end of the letter too).

I have to say that I've given the latest 3D rage a fair shake as I've probably seen about five 3D films in the theatres. The best of which was Avatar, but that was at an IMAX screen, so it's not an apples-to-apples comparison in my mind. As for the rest, meh... underwhelming at best.

Never mind about getting acceptance of the marketplace for 3D at home. Give me a 4K image instead. Now that would be progress.

Has anyone else noticed that 3D TVs look like "backwards" 3D? By that I mean that you go to a movie theater, and images pop OFF the screen (3D imaging happens with the most distant object looking like it is at the screen, and the foreground material is in front of the screen).

You check out a 3D TV, and the images pop IN the screen (3D imaging happens with the most foreground item looking like it is at the screen and everything else is back behind it-IN the TV)

I like 3D, I live in a world that is 3D, I just don't think that the technology is there yet for home use, but yeah, I'd take good holographic stuff or 4K if either became affordable.

Did you have the wrong glasses? If the eyes are reversed you'll get the pop-in effect. Not every TV syncs the same way, the wrong glasses on the wrong set will blank the wrong eye at the wrong time...or something like that.

I turned my glasses upside down while bored in Avatar just for a change of pace.

The thing that bothers me with 3D is that only what pops up is detailed, the background is always blurry as opposed to 2D where everything is detailed.

I suggest you look again at 2D film. Maybe it's so natural you're not noticing it, but most movies make use of depth of field (DoF) to direct the eye. Where the background is out of focus, but the subject is sharp.

In the real world the eye auto focuses rapidly to what you're actually looking at. But the forced focus plus depth information in 3D films is totally wrong, and is more than likely what you're seeing. Ideally 3D films would be shot like the live action Speed Racer movie, with everything in sharp focus, then the director could direct the eyes using depth cues. That's how holographic movies will work.

I assume you are joking? I've seen 3 different demos. 1 at Sears, 1 at Best Buy, and 1 at Sam's Club. The Best Buy and Sam's Club demo TVs had glasses that were mounted as part of the display. No way they could be upside down, inside out, or from another 3D TV. The Sear's one, who knows. All 3 demos had a 3D "IN" effect. Maybe it is their demo material.

That's odd. The demo sets I've seen all popped out. But really, what you're describing is exactly what happens when the left eye info is shown to the right.