Comments on: Is 3D TV dangerous?

By: Ross Dawson

Ross Dawson — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 15:50:05 +0000

Yes I think the real point is that proper studies need to be done on the technologies that are going to market.
Mark says that the results of the studies done in the 1990s were pretty alarming. Let’s find out more.

By: Simon Dufour

Simon Dufour — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 05:42:24 +0000

I agree though that we should make studies on this. I personally wouldn’t by a 3D TV just yet, not before we get some study on the possible dangers.
I’m sorry, those are indeed quotes.
I am not an expert. From my perspective, it seemed like 3D TV only added 1 new type of depth perception that is not on regular TV. Stereoscopy. However, with normal stereoscopy, if you move your head, the image changes accordingly so you can make more inferences. That is not true with 3D TV because the content of what you see will not change depending on your head position.
I might as well be wrong. 3D projection existed for years now and no health research have been done on that? That’s kind of sad.
BTW.. excuse me if my posts were rude. I only found the post a bit alarmist. I shouldn’t have reacted that hard.

By: Best HD TV

Best HD TV — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 22:08:05 +0000

Well i have heard this from many sources and i might be inclide to agree. The problem is we dont know for sure so wait and see is my opinion.

By: Ross Dawson

Ross Dawson — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 16:30:53 +0000

Hi Simon, what you are referring to are not my words but quotes.
However to the degree that I understand this, what you’re saying is not relevant. There are substantially different brain mechanisms involved in quasi-3D perception than those in flat screen viewing, and that is what Mark is referring to.

By: Simon Dufour

Simon Dufour — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 07:28:51 +0000

I said that motion parallax work with regular TV. You have to stay still however. Moving you head won’t work (though it can using specific motion sensing technology).
If you stay still and watch the screen, motion parallax will work with the movement of the camera.

By: Simon Dufour

Simon Dufour — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 07:19:47 +0000

I’d like to point out that you do give some false information here. If you actually read the Wikipedia article you pointed to, you’ll see that most depth perception can be done with only 1 eye and already work on regular TV. Motion Parallax already works on regular TV. I’ve been playing computer games for AGES and they use most of the techniques describe in the monocular cues to give their game a sense of depth.
3D TVs only add Stereopsis but keep all the others. Stuff like Peripheral Vision and Accomodation don’t work however but they also weren’t there on 2D screens. I agree however that we should study consequences of using faked Stereoscopy, especially since it’s currently pretty low in quality. I suppose that as technology continues to improve, quality will be better and effects will gradually disappear.
Anyway.. I do find your article was a bit misleading, don’t you think?