Hacker News Reader

Comment by givinguflac | Hacker News Reader

I've certainly seen movies where that was the case, but The Martian in 3D was amazing. I also thoroughly enjoyed Doctor Strange 3D, though that was on IMAX laser projectors, which are amazing by themselves.

View on HN

I saw Doctor Strange on IMAX 3D as well and I must say it was very impressive however there needs to be a good system for rating 3D movie experiences beforehand that way the consumer is not subject to wasting money on a horrible experience.

I've had luck with the "To 3D or Not To 3D" reviews at cinemablend.com.

Here's a recent example: http://www.cinemablend.com/news/1600740/to-3d-or-not-to-3d-b...

I find that I can often tell based on a baroque reading of the credits. Some of the 3D "upconversion" houses are better than others at their job. Some of the special effects houses have dedicated stereoscopic staff. Some of the studios themselves have dedicated stereoscopic departments. Obviously too, if there were stereoscopic cameras/film units involved in the main production crew of the film, that's usually a sign that the director cared about the stereoscopic output of the film.

I'm stereo-blind, so 3D movies annoy me more than anything. It always annoys me when people want to go see a movie in 3D and I have to decline since it will give me a headache 15 minutes in.

Hank Green, of vlogbrothers fame, came up with "2D" glasses. http://www.2d-glasses.com/

Instead of different polarisation in each lens, like normal 3D glasses, it just uses identical polarisation in both lenses.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com