I had read somewhere that you could switch the 3D on and off. Seems kind of silly to me to pay extra for 3D and not use it, though, and it doesn't really solve the headache/vertigo problem any time the 3d is on - with or without glasses. Then again, that's why I avoid 3D movies in the theaters, too. Maybe related to the image-converging issues you mentioned? (((shrug))) Others seem to get a kick out of the 3D, though - enough to keep sales moving and prices up, so to each his/her own. Still feels gimmick-y to me ...

Others probably wouldn't have to endure a "DISNEY DID IT FIRST!" rant from my boy-o every time a 3D set was turned on, either LOL.

Some shows just have no added value in 3D, plus, it might not be practical to be running the set in 3D mode at the time; ie. watching something, but not planted in front of the TV when doing so because you might be working on something else at the time and just glancing at the TV periodically makes wearing the polarizing glasses impractical.

There are a few ways to create 3D images, but ultimately they all come down to working by presenting slightly different data on the perspective angles to each eye, and it's simply possible that you are one of the people who is hypersensitive to that. Sometimes there is really nothing we can do about it, it's just the way our eyes react and our brain processes the data.

I agree that some 3D is overdone and ridiculous. Why does every 3D movie have to have that obligatory moronic shot where some one thrusts or throws something right at the camera? Oooh, object jutting out of the screen, make me want to duck and spill my $9 64oz growler sized soda into my $17 dollar 5-gallon vat of artificial butter flavored popcorn while dropping my $11 baseball bat sized Kit-Kat bar, why? Just so that someone can remind us 'Hey, you're watching 3D... DUCK SUCKA!" Gee, thanks a lot asshole, I never would have noticed that without your help there dipstick...

Pretty sure that 3D movies have been around a lot longer than Disney.