As a student, I had
been seeing things visually. And as an everyday person, I had seen how 2D and
3D images are like. There are a couple of people who had their eyes hurt when
they saw the 3D. Wondering how it did. Some people even made something that can
be 3D-like just by wearing a glasses, something we’re actually familiar with.
And in this essay,
we’re going to see the relations of how the 2D images differ to the ones that
are 3D, and how human’s eyesight can actually be affected because of the
brightness or contrast, that might affect the use of glasses in real life.
The first thing that
should be kept in mind is how those images worked from a “stay-still” until to
the point that they can actually move, just like in the movies. 2D and 3D
aren’t entirely different things, 3D is the upgraded 2D where the two screens
are “combined” into one. But if that’s the case, how can people see things
differently with just being “combined”? It’s not enough to say that the screen
did the trick because humans can be tricked when it came to their eyes,
therefore, people must also notice what other things that might happen if they
watched 3D, especially for children.
And people might
notice this, but if the movie’s in 3D, why would we need to use an object
called 3D glasses? What are the possible side effects if a 3D viewing isn’t
3D is can be stated
as dangerous if it’s not maintained in eye level, not to mention people are
being “treated” differently by it, so we need to know what would happen if 3D
image is shown.
Words count: 287
aren’t only for students but also for other everyday people, of course, either
watching action movies, horror, romance, and much more. And there’s no doubt
that screens might be, sooner or later, affect our eyes, and watching cinemas
aren’t something as an exception. In fact, most people like us had actually
experienced it ourselves, the one thing that might be different is that which
definition and dimension of the movie that we were in.
There’s no shame in
admitting how we felt after watching a cinema, either it’s 2D and 3D. Besides,
watching something like a 3D might be a good thing because we can distinguish
the back and the front of certain objects the easy way, but do you have what it
takes to handle what to come next after that? Some people said that watching 3D
movies made their eyes hurt, could be true due to the objects we watched in the
cinema screen aren’t anything like in reality, as cinema had a radiation and
most obviously, brightness, something we should be more than familiar with
whenever we thought of a screen.
Overview of the cinema screen
The one thing that
most people should have known is that there’ll be no such thing as a cinema
screen without an “equipment” called the projector. Projector had actually been
used almost everywhere, in school or conference for presentation for the other
people, ‘home-made’ movie where people might be coming for free to watch, but
cinema screen isn’t small, even in a very common theater.
The thing is, cinema
screen that came from projector did produce visible light, but we must also
notice the infrared as well – not to mention this readers’ digest version of
We must also be
familiar by now about ultraviolet, which has different frequencies than light
and infrared, but the reason why it’s not there is that, it IS there, but was
filtered by the lens, leaving out the other two. We can also feel the heat of
the infrared if we touched the lens of the projector.
And since it’s
produced in certain types of radiation, notice why cinemas always start with
the all lights off (except for the projector) whenever a certain movie had
started? And to be added, we needed to know the difference of time to watch
outdoors, such as “Layar Tancap” as the outdoor theater was held at night –
reason for not being held at noon was due to that no matter how bright the
cinema screen (or projector) is, there’ll always at least be one of any kind in
terms ambient light that will wash away the one thing we’re going to see on the
screen, which is why the theater is usually indoors or have the show at night
time for more detailed view on the screen.
In the cinema, the
projector must be very far away from the space/board that will display the
screen, because cinema’s projector isn’t as big as a television, especially the
current one we’re having right about now, and if it’s to be put in the very
short distance, there’ll be a very small screen where most of the people
wouldn’t actually bother seeing. And one thing to add, is that people who worked
as the projectionist didn’t simply put it far away for the screening – it had
to be measured in order to map them out, and certain distance required specific
amount of light too, just like how the flashlight wouldn’t work if it can’t
‘light up’ things that aren’t even reachable.
the emissions such as visible light and infrared (filtering UV light), and they
aren’t something that’ll simply go through, so instead, we must keep in mind
that they can be reflected, especially visible light, just like the flashlight
and mirror. And note that projector won’t work with things that aren’t
flat-surfaced, as the light will scatter and became unbalanced, causing
‘disruption’ on the moving images.
Chapter 2: Two
dimensions (predecessor of 3D)
Edison company, back
in 1891, demonstrated the prototype of Kinetoscope that enabled the viewing of
moving images, one person at a time, in which was first presented to the
Lumiere brothers in 1895, Paris.
There’s also historic
animation which was found firsthand at the year of 1908, which started with the
black and white stick figure of which produced 700 images for making the moving
image of 2D, also known as 2D animations.
The year 1914 was
also the time for film industries to be established, such as Europe, Russia,
and Scandinavia, as well as America, too. With more people seeing those movies
(with payment), thus establishing large studios and special cinemas. However,
Europe’s film industry was the First World War, while the American industry’s
studious grew due to the relative importance.
The first 3D was
first found in the 1890s in England, and the system was implementing two films
being projected side by side. When people see the two films through the
stereoscope, the two films united. But this wasn’t suited as it was too
obtrusive and impractical for an entire cinema. By this time, d’Almeida’s
method which was using two different colored lenses was pretty much just the
backbone for making projecting the 3D movie. Ducos du Hauron produced the two
color version (on the anaglyph system) with red and blue colors (with glasses
using the perspective color lens).
In 1897, The patent
of the 3D movie process was filed by William Friese Greene. With Green’s
anaglyph method, two films were projected simultaneously side by side with
stereoscope set of glasses to make the two images “combined” into one. A few
years later, Frederick Eugene Ives patented the same 3D anaglyph stereo camera
rig with a single, two lens camera into one.
3.2 How 3D
movies developed as time went by3
Modern 3D films
didn’t use red and blue light as they couldn’t make full use of their colour.
Instead, it used polarised light wave on only one plane. The light being
produced by the sun is unpolarised this way, which means that the light waves
vibrated in many ways, on different planes. But it has a filter that can
polarise the light effect.
Polarized 3D glasses
don’t actually need to rely on the color lenses to get the 3D effect, as they
worked more like the anaglyph glasses, with more of yellow-brown tint instead
of red and blue. The polarization process was both vertical and horizontal,
with each lens letting only one image of the certain side of the image, causing
each of our eyes to see the 2D image just like in real life. The two images
were merged by the brain into one, producing the 3D image quality.
Cinema goers’ glasses
used this kind of polarising filters to separate the two images in order to
give a slightly different perspective out of the two part of images.
to see a “three dimensional image”
What our eyes see are
the objects that can be seen from different angles. Reason for this is because
our brain learned to construct the 3D
image of reality. In fact, our eyes each saw 2D images, but our eyes aren’t
exactly in the same position, therefore creating stereo image.
But stereo image
depended on the monocular clues. Despite seeing 2D, we already know the
structures of the three dimension, especially when watching on the flat screen
due to factors such as perspective and general knowledge of reality over the
years we spent our time seeing things with our eyes in real life. (103)
3.4 What humans
This kind of answer
actually depends on what we’re trying to find out. If we’re talking about one
and only right (or left, obviously) eye, it’s obviously going to be 2D because
our retina is made up to see only two-dimensional image.
But if we’re trying
to find out from two eyes, then the short answer is 3D, but that’s not enough
as it can obviously be varied from various distances – long and short. Let’s
not forget that our eyes are a few mm apart, and in order for us to be able to see
the real thing clearly, our eyes managed to converge themselves, as the brain
could “figure out” the angle needed for its convergence.
We don’t need a
measurement tool – we can already find out the distance depending on how
converged or crossed our eyes are, even without binocular visions, as eyes
accommodate the visions, in which we change the focus on each lens and make
those focuses on the retinas.
3.5 Do people
see them all the same way?5
This is the part
where the “obvious” answer can’t be used, yet. In fact, there might be some
people with certain issues. Especially for people with binocular vision
problems, as they’re very important to adjust the lens and focus on the eyes
(retinas, more specifically), that might be one of the (very good) reason for
However, the effect
for viewing 3D images (or movies) have no long-term effects in terms of
eyesight, but even for people with normal vision, some people were not
comfortable when they were watching stereoscopic images, because watching
3D is equivalent to watching two 2D
screens with just a few distance in terms of frames and caused higher chance of
eyestrain (if 2D alone can do that, too). To make things worse, the watchers
with visual motion hypersensitivity (VMH) can have dizziness due to having
motion sickness (motion can only be detected by eyes).
3.6 Watching 3D
movies without glasses (especially when it’s
One of the broad
details whenever we want to talk about the effects of watching where we needed
glasses, but we DIDN’T, is that the two images can be seen so separated, and
might as well be a bit blurry. 3D glasses are made with two lenses together,
which can produce the stereoscopic effect and protected our eyes from the
stimulation of the screen. In other words, watching in a situation where you
didn’t wear it (in the moment you had to) will only hurt your vision, causing
restrain on the vision.
However, just because
it might cause restrain on the eyes, didn’t really mean much. In fact, one of
the examples had been shown in real life, where someone was not wearing the
glasses during the 3D movie, and nothing happened to his eyes. Also, long-term
cause (or even permanent cause) had never been found in the research yet, but
it’s safe to say that watching 3D movies without glasses might cause temporary
eye strain. But it can also depend on how many times to watch movies too.
Chapter 4: 2D
In terms of choosing
whether to watch 2D or 3D movies, it would be 2D for safety reasons – such how
the eyes could become less in terms of productivity with 3D (due to the
combination of two images could become more complex).
Despite being able to
watch 3D with the experience of 2D images combined together just like looking
in real life, it’s also very likely for some people to have a hard time
focusing on most objects appearing, especially if the object looked complex in
both the cinema and real life (which can be a short-term cause of a headache
and even gut feeling, indirectly).
Result of the research
In terms of secondary
research, having to watch 3D movies are going to make a stronger
psychophysiological response, due to the variety of 3D effects that seemed
‘realistic’ and might be able to feel like we’re in that situation, but that’s
about it for differing that with the 2D. It also stated that it’s better to
watch the 2D due to how dizziness can be caused by 3D ‘realistically’.
From my primary
research, most of my friends would choose 2D in order to avoid dizziness as
well, and to be added, it has a bigger chance of losing focus on every single
thing that’s happening in 3D as there’s ‘front and back’ just like what we see
in real life.
movies, in general, won’t give us any
kind of long-term effects, yet. However, this situation can be proved wrong
depending on the more certain details of people’s conditions such as the
problem with their eyes, or something else that might indirectly lead them to
dizziness when viewing certain movies.
It can also depend on
the range of people watching that kind of movies. If we want to talk about a
very limited amount of time, it’s for sure that people won’t be affected way
too much, no matter if it’s 2D, or 3D, even without glasses (aside from the
temporary effect of eye strain and possible dizziness caused by visual).
If we’re talking
about conditions where people have normal vision, it’s more than enough to say
that people will not get into trouble with their eyesights, as long as they can
limit their time of viewing certain movies (2D or 3D), because even normal vision
can be “destroyed” if not being used wisely.
Also, it’ll be much
better to watch 2D for avoiding short-term effect such as a headache, according
to what I asked my friends about it, also more comfortable.