Why 3D doesn't work and never will (2011)

I'm reminded of Clarke's first law: "When a distinguished but elderly [engineer] states that something is possible, they are almost certainly right. When they state that something is impossible, they are very probably wrong." I am sad to Ebert go, his reviews defined the industry, but towards the end of his career he became increasingly hostile toward anything that wasn't "classic" cinema as defined by films which he reviewed during the peak of his career. By his definition, films were…

Actually, the convergence problem is theoretically solvable with a light-field projection system. That is, instead of having 2 images that are simply "fed" into each eye but projected onto a flat screen that is not converged with the 3d disparity "information" contained in the images, you have a system where the screen emits a light field that your eyes can focus on at any depth. We already have consumer level light field cameras and attachments. the displays are tricker, but…

I think he is perfectly on point. While some movies were enjoyable to see in 3D and the tech came a long way, the focus problem is probably the most glaring issue. Maybe some day with eye tracking and cameras which can eliminate depth of field to a sufficient degree for conventional movies. On the other hand VR doesn't have that problem and it still isn't too successful yet.

magic leap would beg to differ