>>291014>Also, if you had the same 3d glasses from the theater and watched the same movie on your own computer/tv monitor wouldnt it work the same way?Only if you have what's known as a "passive 3d tv".
All the cinema glasses do is block out the picture for the wrong eye. They're able to do this because there are two cinema projectors, and the light they put out is polarised in opposite ways. The polarised filters in the glasses each block one projector. You can get TVs where every other pixel is polarised in opposite ways, and the light cinema glasses work fine with these TVs.
But they're not the norm. Most TVs have no polarisation on them at all, and use active shutterglasses: glasses that completely black one eye then the other, alternating frames. The TV shows the picture for one eye, and beams an infrared signal to tell the glasses which eye it's for. Then it does the other eye. Then repeat.
You don't get these types of glasses in the cinema, unless it's a really small cinema. They take them back from you at the door, because they're worth $50 a pair, and they need to recharge them for the next screening.
Personally, I prefer active 3D. I saw Dredd in active 3D in a cinema, and holy shit. The active glasses completely obliterate the picture for the wrong eye, so when there's a bright object on a dark background, you don't get the two little copies of it to the sides. If you're thinking of getting a 3d TV, there's absolutely nothing wrong with getting one without passive 3d. The glasses aren't heavy, and the 3d is better. I guess it would add up if you were one of those reality show households with 34 kids though.
