June 8, 2010 | 4 Comments

3D Babes: Wired Or Tired?

3D Babes: Wired Or Tired?Blame (or thank) James Cameron: suddenly, lad mags everywhere are hopping on the 3D bandwagon, presenting their babes in glorious anaglyph. First we had Playboy, and now Nuts and Zoo (and, of course, Front) are busting out the 3D glasses.

Is this the wave of the future? Is it another silly gimmick? Does the 3Dification help you appreciate babes even better—or is it just a distraction? We’re on the fence about all this, but we’re dying to know what you think…so be a dear and fill out our little poll, won’t you?


· See more babes in 3D at Nuts, Playboy, and Zoo (links via Nudography)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Author:Lux Alptraum

View all posts by Lux Alptraum →
  • Stevenson

    3d is a wave of the past come full circle because Cameron made the top-grossing film of all time using 3d technology he developed and is shoving down everyone’s throat. It will most likely die off in a few years after people get sick of headaches every 30 minutes.

  • Wolf68k

    James Cameron did not any kind of 3D technology. He, or rather 20th Century Fox, used the same 3D technology that you could have seen used in the movie Up or G-Force or My Bloody Valentine. The difference is that they used 3D cameras to film it instead of trying to add the 3D effect later. The 3D that uses the colored glasses are the ones that give a serious headache but the 3D used now isn’t as bad.

  • FrankN.Stein

    Even the new 3D technology is hard to bear for long – red-green pics are irritating, really!

  • Refused_is_fucking

    Sports Illustrated did this in the ’09 (?) Swimsuit Issue.