3D is finally reaching a large audience, but there’s a burning question: What are the long-term effects of watching 3D content for months or even years?
According to a recent NPD report, US customers have spent a whopping $55M on 3D televisions and related technology. That’s surprising, since the first models to offer convincing 3D (from Samsung, Sony, and Panasonic) and the first broadcast 3D content (from DirecTV and ESPN) just became available this summer.
Those who watched the recent World Cup matches, MLB All-Star game, or repeated viewings of Avatar can tell you: the experience is amazing and enjoyable, but there’s some concern about how much 3D we can stand over a long period.
Short-Term Exposure
To find out the short-term effects of 3D, we tested a Sony KDL-46H800 over a week, watching every imaginable show: World Cup matches, the MLB All-Star game, the Blu-Ray 3D version of Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, and several Major League Baseball games. The good news: we had no headaches or nausea, partly due to the crisp resolution of the 3D TV and highly accurate 3D goggles.
We did discover that, when watching 3D content, it’s important to take a break between shows. Mild fatigue can result because your eyes do have to work harder. And, it is even more important to sit within a 30- or 40-degree radius of the 3D TV. Sit too far to the side, or too far away, and a headache is more likely.
Long-Term exposure
Of course, watching for a week is one thing. The effects of watching for months, every day, and viewing many different kinds of 3D content are still unknown. Will everyone with a 3D set have bug-eyes and blurred vision in two or three years?
Fortunately, most experts agree that there are no known adverse effects. Dr. Roger Phelps, a 3D vision expert and a VSP Vision Care Optometrist, says there are some people who may have problems with binocular vision and focal abilities temporarily, and can find out how to treat the issue by meeting with a doctor.
“Watching 3D content on a regular basis has not been shown to pose any long-term risks to the viewer,” says Phelps. “However, whether you’re viewing 3D content for a few minutes or a few hours and you’re experiencing headaches, dizziness, nausea or other symptoms, it would be best to see your eye doctor to rule out problems.”
Phelps says one of the key improvements has to do with the goggles used for 3D. For example, Marchon3D goggles use circular polarization so the viewer can tilt his head or move side to side without spoiling the experience.
I don’t even like 3D movies. If I want to see things in 3D, I’ll go outside.
I don’t even have 2D TV 2 years ago :)
No Chris, you’re not the only one. It’s a total gimmick.
ZOMGOSH ITS THE ZE END OF ZE VVORLD
Am I the only one, health risk aside, who thinks 3D TV is just a bad idea in general?
Nice picture on page one. Can I get some glasses to see that in 3D?
"The True Health Risks of 3D TV"
"The effects of watching for months, every day, and viewing many different kinds of 3D content are still unknown."
This is really incredible journalism.
Next time do some research before posting nonsense like 3D theaters are reducing the number of pixels by half to do the 3d projection which is wrong.
The resolution is not halfed, but the framerate is up from the original 144 fps required for a 3d projection. Every eye still sees a full resolution 2k or 4k image (mostly 2k resolution is used) but only half as long as it would be the case for a normal 2d projection. That's why the brightness is lower with 3d movies than with 2d ones. This has nothing to do with resolution.
I was thinking the exact same thing. I just discovered this website today, and I had been on here looking at news for a few hours, then I spotted this nonsense about the resolution halfing and was thinking, what? I have researched 3d before, I even have a whole folder of anaglyph photos I have taken on facebook, and 14 years ago I was programming 3d demo type things in turbopascal. I would know if resolution was somehow halfed. But then the more I thought about this, if the theater is using shuttering in the glasses (which are very expensive, and requires sync with the film), you're right no loss in resolution. If they are polarizing the light there are two ways to do this.
One is the alternating method you mentioned, and understand, the other is to project both images on top of eachother which does actually half the resolution. So check out how Sony RealD XLS works and you will see what I am talking about.
I'm still not interested in upgrading to a 3D Television. Good Article None-The-Less.