Disclaimer: ‘Viewing in 3D may cause disorientation for some viewers. Accordingly, DO NOT place your television near open stairwells, cables, balconies or other objects that can be tripped over, run into, knocked down, broken or fallen over.’
The world’s biggest electronics company has issued an extraordinary health warning about the dangers of watching 3D television. Pregnant women, the elderly, children and those suffering from serious medical conditions are among a wide range of people said to be at risk.
The alert extends to those who have been sleep deprived or drinking. It highlights alarming side effects such as confusion, nausea, convulsions, altered vision, light-headedness, dizziness, and involuntary movements such as eye or muscle twitching and cramps. Samsung says there are also concerns that those with epilepsy could be at risk of fits – as they are from strobe lighting and photographers’ flashes on normal television.
Watching 3D on TV, which involves wearing special glasses like those used for 3D movies, bombards the eyes and brain with a succession of flashing images that appear for a fraction of a second. It is a new way of seeing things and so puts unusual strain on the body. The warning has been posted on a Samsung website and appears designed to protect the manufacturer from any legal claims for compensation if people fall ill.
However, the language could seriously damage the launch of 3D, which is being pushed heavily by manufacturers and broadcasters as a breakthrough. One internet blogger wrote: ‘I’m happy… this will kill 3D-TV.’ However, one cynic responded saying: ‘I wonder if I should put a patch on one eye so I don’t see anything 3D.’
Reverse psychology… this will just make it MORE appealing, like the drug ads.
So do smiling babies and yappy dogs.
Regular TV gives me anal leakage and makes me want to smoke so I do not think I want to upgrade to 3D.
I would bet they can cause seizures in some people as well.
I think they should have just tried to move up to imax and waited on 3D. The thing is I think it’s easier to make a screen for 3D than Imax.
I have a monitor that has super high def and with a high resolution photograph the image often has a degree of 3D feel to it.
Wasn’t this warning only in Australia? Perhaps that is old news.
“..alarming side effects such as confusion, nausea, convulsions, altered vision..”
Reality TV gives me these symptoms.
Watched some of the US Open on a 3D TV. It was pretty cool but strangely artificial. It seems gimmicky to me and I don’t feel like I want one like when I first saw HDTV.
I can understand the recent surge in popularity of theater based 3D movies. The technology is definitely superior to the days of past.
This however backs my opinion that 3D on home televisions is just absurd. Now apparently it’s dangerous too!
Are the effects of 3DTV more like this???
Nothing worth spending the money and wearing the glasses for. I don’t even watch much TV and have cancelled my Satellite service. It just looks like another gimmick to get people to keep upgrqading.
I’m sure the Liability Lawyers are warming up their Litigation Engines for the flood of complaints and ready to launch a thousand lawsuits !!!
If it were true 3D (i.e. holographic projection technology) I might be interested (though it would have to be a lot better than anything I’ve seen demonstrated so far). But simulating 3D on a 2D screen? No thanks.
Not watching, “The Ring” in 3D. No way!
But tv simulates the moving world with static images. Too many educated people here posing as having an opinion that is worth reading==kinda like one dimensional personality simulating real people.
3D is gggreaaat! If you don’t like it, you probably would never use a transporter either. 50 years ago you found color distracting and 80 years ago sound robbed you of your use of imagination. Posers all.
Ha, ha. I can’t wait for 4-D coupled with smell – o – rama!
bobbo, why do you always use “==” or “===” whats up with that? O, and are you for or against 3D tv! huh?
tv==I am generally for things that I think are “gggreaat!” but I do see the ambiguity. To be clear: I am for whatever Animby is against. Its proven to be the wiser course, and its just the way I roll.
Writing is a combination of the subconscious, conscious, intentional, unintentional. My use of ==== multi non standard punctuation is mostly unconscious. It might be an indication of thinking, or pausing, or wanting a longer break than one designated by a mere hyphen. I wish Mr Mustard still posted here. Always learned a few things when he took me to task.
I’m totally for 3D. First saw it at the Worlds Fair in Vancouver==3D emmersive game called Perydactyl. I started saving my money to invest in my own Holodeck Computer system. Sure is taking a long time to get here.
I also dabble in 3D photography, so my interest in the subject is totally biased given I have actual experience with the media and the concept==what with hyper-3D, reverse or fake 3D, short focus and what not.
To Animby’s point about holograms, the 3D techniques that will bring the picture out of the plane of projection and into the room is darn close to a hologram. But I fear Animby is just caught up in being a hologram doc like that guy on Star Trek. So childish. We want porn serviles.
Uh-huh. 3D TV is “worse” because of “rapidly flashing images”.
3D via LCD shutter glasses has been around for about 20 years now. Whether you actually like 3D or not, we’re getting something out of it that should bode well for the future:
Faster refresh rates.
Thomas Edison’s experiments established 18 frames per second as the slowest rate that viewers would tolerate. The movie industry settled on 24 fps shortly afterwards and we’ve been stuck with it ever since. Even today, most television you see is 30 fps or less. 3D television runs at 120 fps (although only half of that to each eye), but that means the infrastructure is in place to deliver huge video bandwidth.
If you’ve ever been fortunate enough to see a demonstration of ShowScan– a 60-fps film system– you’ll know what I’m talking about. Moving away from Edison’s “slowest tolerable” speeds means a huge leap in the overall image quality: visual noise is averaged out, motion blur is greatly reduced, and your eyes don’t lose track of things that are moving quickly (a failing of IMAX DMR conversions).
A system that “can” deliver 3D television should also be able to deliver stunning 2D when it wants to.
I am for love, world peace, and chocolate bunnies.
I know what you are saying Animby:
Venereal Disease, Fascist Control, and cavities.
You aren’t fooling anyone.
#16
The fact that you realized you are stupidly using “====” and are justifying it constantly is moronic. But hey, anything to be different…and fcking annoying while feeling proud.
#20–T-1==I don’t think, and did not mean to say I was stupidly using ====, and I certainly did not justify it, and I’m not being intentionally different, and I don’t feel proud about it.
Now, annoying YOU is an entirely different matter. Heh, heh.
Focus on the issues, not the personalities. Breathe Deeply. Have fun.
#21
If that IS the case then stop using it lol. To continue using it IS what you’ve stated you are not. That and your pathetic use of your name and description. If it doesn’t shout “I’m a prick because I think I know it all” to you then orange must be the new red.
You’re no Emily Dickinson, give it up and rant “normally.”
One thing for sure: 3D is poison for your wallet.
I’m afraid I’m going to miss out on 3D television. Due to a quirk in my vision, I don’t have binocular vision due to a strong preference to see with my left eye.
It also made me a lousy athlete, that whole hand eye coordination thing. Anyt sport that uses a ball is bad news.
#24 Rick – you might still be able to use the 3D television since it rather forces your eyes to see the images alternately. But I bet you wouldn’t like it,.
#22 TheOne == are you aware that you’ve left a space out == between “The” and “One”? Quite annoying ==== as is you’re habit of going all capitals for ‘IS”. You’re right == Bobbo is NOT the new Emily == but === orange IS the new red.
#19 Bobbo – How dare you suggest I’m a dentist!
So finally, some part officialdom agrees with my gut hunch about excessive 3D use. You’ll be glad that iPads and iPhones, won’t become 3D anytime in the near future. Besides, the majority of what we think we’re seeing in 3D, in the natural world, we’re not. Beyond a certain range, our eyes just are far enough apart to notice a spacial difference. And these popular movies, are just going to push the limit of that, to make it more appealing. Until moviegoers finally rebel and declare enough is enough, with their wallets. The same will happen with Tvs. So why spend thousands of bucks for a 3D set today, that will be 3D useless in a decade. Apparently their last major Tv “breakthrough”, the HDTV, already is.
I rather spring for a new Tv, that simply delivered regular 2D programs that didn’t all suck, so much. But that’s not a technology problem. That’s a Tv network executive bureaucracy problem. Mediocrity rules the media.
It may be that Samsung’s warning gets them off the litigation hook. The same way the cancer warning gets the tobacco industry off that hook too. And you can bet that all other 3D Tv set and game console makers, will follow suit. But at least they hadn’t taken the Toyota policy, of covering the problem up. I for one, hope there will always be 2D versions of movies, either in cinemas or on DVDs. I’d rather my brain remained in control of my film watching experience. And not become the plaything of some weird ass Hollywood big shots.
Imagine the 3D battlin’ seizure robot show!