Which way is "better" for 3d video?

[zekesdad]

My TV does a pretty amazing job changing games/sports/live tv to 3d and ive never purchased a 3d movie, but i was wondering if it would be "better" in any real sense of the word. The drawback would be that it would only play on my 3d tv and not the other 4 hdtvs that are in my house. Anyway, just wondering what the thoughts on this were. Thanks.

[fritzi93]

What model TV? Just curious.

My LG 65LW6500 does a creditable job of 2D -> 3D conversion, but it's not anywhere close to a real 3D movie. It just gives the illusion of some added depth (adjustable on my TV). And occasionally you get some weird effects, like something pushed in the background, when it should be in the foreground. Really, if you'd ever seen, say, Hugo in 3D (not converted), you wouldn't ask that question. Not anywhere close.

Personally, I don't want to watch 3D all the time. It can get to be fatiguing to the eyes, even with a passive 3D TV. But when I do want to watch a 3D movie, well, you know the rest. I hardly ever use the 2D -> 3D conversion any more.

For 3D Blu-rays, you need a 3D player, of course. They're not expensive any more; you can get one for well under $100. Most 3D Blu-Rays are sets including a 2D Blu-ray, DVD, maybe a digital copy as well, for about $30.

Welcome to the forum.