I'll leave those technical jargon's aside and speak as a normal audience member. I went in with minimal expectations for the movie and came out rather amazed by what was done with it. Sure the loss of true colours were evident, but what counted was the experience that Cameron wanted to show us. He wanted to lead us into an unknown world of Pandora and make sure we notice the detailing he had done in creating that world.
There was not a single point in the entire movie, that I felt left I was out of that world. The level of involvement was present and also happens to be one the things which is crucial in a 3D environment. I did crib about the poor colours, dull contrast, some blurry parts etc. in the beginning, but all of that went away when we are introduced to the Na'vi's location. It was gorgeous. If you have seen the movie in 3D, then you can't deny how beautiful it was, albeit all these abysmal faults you mentioned.
If you are referring to watching this movie in 2D HD, then I would rather not. For the very simple reason being, it is meant to be experienced in 3D, and 3D only. I don't care if India doesn't have XYZ technology to give the ultimate experience. To me, the experience was flawless. I wouldn't even bother watching it in a 2D cinema, leave alone 2D Blu-Ray.
The point rhitwick was trying to make, I believe, was about the level of involvement in the action part, which to me didn't feel like an appropriate response. Hence my question to him.