How did we go from video, through DVD all the way into Blu-Ray and 3D imaging so fast?

Is it just another commercial gimmick, tempting consumers into buying something they don't really need?

Let us explore the issue from the good and the bad side.

What is 3D useful for?

There is one area in which 3D imaging is most likely to thrive always and that is the work place.

When an architectural project is rendered in 3D, for example, it is much more alive, realistic and will leave a more lasting impression on clients' minds.

Chris Mizon, product expert at Simplifydigital.com, said:

"3D is perfect for those of us with limited imagination, it not only grabs our attention but the content can parade itself in front of our eyes in our living room or local cinema.

"3D can also add substance to a film or presentation that is otherwise lacking substance.

"We have seen 3D technology used in some pretty lousy films yet these films still do well at the box office, the same 3D technology can also be applied to presentations at work to give it that 'wow factor', perfect if you're bluffing."

3D is a more constructive format in things like city planning, public presentations and any other venture which involves bringing an invention to life.

Of course, the most well-known implementation of 3D imaging has been in the electronics industry, ranging from 3D cinema, TV and games to 3D phones, laptops and basically anything else that has a screen on it.

Naysayers

As promising as 3D imaging sounds, it has a long way to go until it firmly grabs hold of its customer audience.

Naysayers of the industry bring up issues, like the special glasses being too uncomfortable, most TV sets being incompatible with the 3D format and there not being enough content to make switching to 3D plausible.

These issues are similar to those brought up whenever newer formats take over older ones, like when DVDs replaced video cassette players, so it is mostly a matter of time until 3D manufacturers catch up with the market demand. What about the more enduring problems?

Even though the health risks of watching 3D imaging are not clear yet, tech giants such as Samsung address the possible side effects of viewing 3D in their guidelines: "motion sickness, perceptual after effects, disorientation, eye strain and decreased postural stability".

Whatever the dangers may be, watching 3D TV can hardly be any less harmful than normal TV and we are all aware of those risks by now.

Conclusion

Amongst all these pro and con arguments, one cannot forget that watching anything in 3D is an eventful experience and should be treated like one.

David Attenborough, who recently brought Flying Monsters to the 3D movie market, illustrates this point perfectly when he says:

"I think 3D TV is going to be event TV. It can be an international football match or it can also be an important programme.

"But I don't think 3D is going to be much good on trivia," he remarked.

"It's for programmes that really mean something. It does require your attention."

If you have an expensive camera specifically made for filming sceneries and wide-screen shots, you wouldn't take it to your sister's birthday party, will you?

So let us not make 3D into something it is not by accepting it for every possible electronic device and save it for things that will be truly enhanced through its format.