I hope that doesn't mean The Hobbit will look garish is 2D.
He'll probably have to utilise yet another technical procedure to tone down the abundance of colour which will then mean we 2D viewers are not seeing the film as filmed anyway.
I'm extremely unfussed about 3D - usually I prefer 2D. However, all the talk over 30% less brightness does seem to have a really really simple solution - make the projector bulbs 30% brighter. For 2D material, operate at reduced power, equivalent to the current level.
I'm extremely unfussed about 3D - usually I prefer 2D. However, all the talk over 30% less brightness does seem to have a really really simple solution - make the projector bulbs 30% brighter. For 2D material, operate at reduced power, equivalent to the current level.
????
Didn't some director recently instruct cinemas to do just that....or similar?
Seems a bit daft though, like buying a chair with a short leg and using folded card to level it out.
I enjoyed Fright Night 3D but Lee Evans in 3D was a bit disappointing.
Some of the free 3D programmes on the Virgin On Demand service are very good .
But its only an occasional thing and not designed for regular use.
I'm hoping to get Harry Potter 7 and 8 on Bluray 3D if I can get them for a decent price but there's rarely any discount so the 2D Blurays are always much cheaper making the 3D version a ripoff.
3D was made for gaming which is where it comes into its own.
I'm not a gamer but my son is and I have to say the best 3D I've seen is on games where it really takes you into the experience - more than any movie does.
apparently Cinemas are considering bringing the 3D price down,the only downside is that 2D tickets will be rising to the same price as 3D tickets so there wont be any difference in price
i will see the Avengers in 2D. the annoying thing at my local cinema is that the times for the film screenings in 2D are fewer than the 3D showings so i find it hard to fit in a convenient time to see a film.
I was in John Lewis and saw an example of this 3D and didn't like it.
I don't think the human brain can cope with this kind of imagery and 2D is more natural . Don't get confused with 3D in real life and 3D on a screen.
Your totally right, 3D images on TV are not like 3D images in really life and the brain does not interpret them the same way either, hence the health issues many people have watching 3D.
I enjoyed 3D during Avatar and for a bit afterwards but then when nearly every single movie started to be released in 3D, I got bored of it. The high price was a factor too.
I won't ever watch 3D at the cinema. It's awful (unless it's IMAX, but there isn't one local to me). However I have invested in a 3D blu-ray player, and I have to say, the quality is amazing when compared to the cinema. Hugo was an absolute joy to watch at home in 3D.
you go to the cinema to see the film on the big screen then you put on silly glasses that have the effect of reducing your field of vision. never again.
3D is nothing but a gimmick. It's also dangerous because it will eventually destroy the quality of films if it's not stopped or phased out.
What I mean is that it will destroy the quality of the script writing because the film makers will be so obsessed with how the 3D will look. It will take precedent over the script writing which in turn will lead to an era of basically shit films.
As long as 3D is around we will never have an era of films which will stand the test of time.
Films like Halloween which were made on a low budget but still very creepy. No special effects, no 3D. Yet it still stands the test of time. No amount of special effects or 3D will make a film stand the test of time. The only thing that will is good quality script writing and acting.
I'm looking forward to Prometheus and The Hobbit. Hopefully they will be good films. It's just another aspect of the film. I won't go to a movie just because it's 3D. You can't make a bad film good by making it 3D. I notice some the critics who put down 3D wet themselves over The Artist. Some gimmicks are better than others it seems!
I'm looking forward to Prometheus and The Hobbit. Hopefully they will be good films. It's just another aspect of the film. I won't go to a movie just because it's 3D. You can't make a bad film good by making it 3D. I notice some the critics who put down 3D wet themselves over The Artist. Some gimmicks are better than others it seems!
People dont say classical music is a gimmicks, The same goes for original movie presentation if it be silent movies or black & white.
Its just the 3D gen that hate it cuz its not visual, like a bright stick of candy.
I only watch 3D if it was filmed in 3D, although even some of those are terrible, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, was supposedly filmed in 3D but it was horrible to watch in 3D.
So a new rule I have added is if I think the film is set mainly at night or in dark places, I will give the 3D version a miss, since darkness and 3D doesn't seem to work at all.
I will be watching Avengers in 2D, I don't think I have watched a 3D film all year, I might be misremembering but I am sure out of all the films I have seen this year they have all been 2D.
Fake 3D that is not a retro film makes my blood boil. They should be more upfront about them. Where do you find out if it is native? Be handy to know.
3D is nothing but a gimmick. It's also dangerous because it will eventually destroy the quality of films if it's not stopped or phased out.
What I mean is that it will destroy the quality of the script writing because the film makers will be so obsessed with how the 3D will look. It will take precedent over the script writing which in turn will lead to an era of basically shit films.
As long as 3D is around we will never have an era of films which will stand the test of time.
Films like Halloween which were made on a low budget but still very creepy. No special effects, no 3D. Yet it still stands the test of time. No amount of special effects or 3D will make a film stand the test of time. The only thing that will is good quality script writing and acting.
So much for Dial M For Murder and House of Wax then.
Both great movies and I've never seen either one in 3D
People dont say classical music is a gimmicks, The same goes for original movie presentation if it be silent movies or black & white.
Its just the 3D gen that hate it cuz its not visual, like a bright stick of candy.
Nope, "The Artist" was a total gimmick. A gimmick is a unique or quirky special feature that makes something stand out from it's contemporaries . I don't see many other movies made recently in black and white with no sound! Classical music isn't a gimmick as it was of it's time.
I'm extremely unfussed about 3D - usually I prefer 2D. However, all the talk over 30% less brightness does seem to have a really really simple solution - make the projector bulbs 30% brighter. For 2D material, operate at reduced power, equivalent to the current level.
That already happens. Instead of a percentage, it's measured by foot lamberts and the output increased appropriately. For standard 2D cinema the SMPTE standard is 16 FL, While the current specs for 3D vary depending on the feature, most say aim for about 4.5 FL while measuring through the glasses. As you can see, the 3D specs are way lower then normal resulting in dimmers pictures.
Comments
He'll probably have to utilise yet another technical procedure to tone down the abundance of colour which will then mean we 2D viewers are not seeing the film as filmed anyway.
????
Didn't some director recently instruct cinemas to do just that....or similar?
Seems a bit daft though, like buying a chair with a short leg and using folded card to level it out.
Some of the free 3D programmes on the Virgin On Demand service are very good .
But its only an occasional thing and not designed for regular use.
I'm hoping to get Harry Potter 7 and 8 on Bluray 3D if I can get them for a decent price but there's rarely any discount so the 2D Blurays are always much cheaper making the 3D version a ripoff.
3D was made for gaming which is where it comes into its own.
I'm not a gamer but my son is and I have to say the best 3D I've seen is on games where it really takes you into the experience - more than any movie does.
I don't think the human brain can cope with this kind of imagery and 2D is more natural . Don't get confused with 3D in real life and 3D on a screen.
Your totally right, 3D images on TV are not like 3D images in really life and the brain does not interpret them the same way either, hence the health issues many people have watching 3D.
What I mean is that it will destroy the quality of the script writing because the film makers will be so obsessed with how the 3D will look. It will take precedent over the script writing which in turn will lead to an era of basically shit films.
As long as 3D is around we will never have an era of films which will stand the test of time.
Films like Halloween which were made on a low budget but still very creepy. No special effects, no 3D. Yet it still stands the test of time. No amount of special effects or 3D will make a film stand the test of time. The only thing that will is good quality script writing and acting.
People dont say classical music is a gimmicks, The same goes for original movie presentation if it be silent movies or black & white.
Its just the 3D gen that hate it cuz its not visual, like a bright stick of candy.
Fake 3D that is not a retro film makes my blood boil. They should be more upfront about them. Where do you find out if it is native? Be handy to know.
PJ
So much for Dial M For Murder and House of Wax then.
Both great movies and I've never seen either one in 3D
Nope, "The Artist" was a total gimmick. A gimmick is a unique or quirky special feature that makes something stand out from it's contemporaries . I don't see many other movies made recently in black and white with no sound! Classical music isn't a gimmick as it was of it's time.
I use this website, it might not be truly accurate but it does help as a sort of guide.
Fake 3D is the most annoying aspect of 3D for me, so avoiding them does seem to make my enjoyment of 3D a better one than most.
That already happens. Instead of a percentage, it's measured by foot lamberts and the output increased appropriately. For standard 2D cinema the SMPTE standard is 16 FL, While the current specs for 3D vary depending on the feature, most say aim for about 4.5 FL while measuring through the glasses. As you can see, the 3D specs are way lower then normal resulting in dimmers pictures.
Seems like 48fps could be a bit of a stinker:
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1655450