After Avatar, will future BD of Cameron movies be 1.78 ? - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 148 Old 04-06-2010, 04:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,373
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbase1 View Post

I think 3D is good for some movies, but bad for others. This spike is due to avatar and avatar only. I recall as a kid (12) seeing a import marshall arts movie in 3D and I'm 50 years old. This is almost like dvd audio and sacd...here today and slowly gone tomorrow. IMHO

And like DVD-A and SACD, 3D will require a new playback system. It was this very fact that killed the HR audio formats as many people did not want to buy a new player just for a select few titles, even though (like 3D systems) the new players were backwards compatible.

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 148 Old 04-06-2010, 05:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,337
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by zax123 View Post

Another interesting thing to consider here is that BD is pretty much optimized for 16:9 and not for scope. When watching a movie in scope on BD, you aren't taking advantage of the full 1920x1080 resolution whereas in 16:9 you are (since BD doesn't have anamorphic).

I just want to say that I find this slightly misleading, because resolutions is too often equated to quality and/or detail. It's true 16:9 is more resolution, but it's no more quality or detail.

The statement above "aren't taking advantage of the full..." seems to imply the quality would be better with 16:9 which is not the case. Look at it specifically from the perspective of standard 16:9 setups, the detail/information/quality is the same between 16:9 and scope on BD, only the size is different.

Of course for those with CIH setups, it of course would have been optimal for the BDA to include anamorphic provisions to give us more information to use to begin with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zax123 View Post

Maybe it would change for standardization purposes? I'm just offering up ideas... Now that HD TVs are all 16:9 (and ushering in a new format of TV is really not going to happen in the near and not-so-near future), maybe studios, broadcasters, and movie-makers will move towards a standard format in order to simplify hardware setup, recording and editing equipment, cameras, etc...

Studios and movie-makers have a long history of intentionally making movies "non-standard", to differentiate from the home presentation. Films began in the "Academy Ratio" (roughly 4:3), they were like this for a long time. Then the TV came out, logically the same ratio as films were shot.

However not too long after TVs started to become commonplace, the film industry jumped to Cinemascope. Maybe a coincidence of technological advancement, but IMO the timing is to convenient and it sure seems to me that the uptake of Cinemascope was done in part (if not largely) to differentiate the cinema from home again.

As far as 3D and large formats go? Who knows what will happen this time, but they've been tried numerous times in the past, and they've faded quickly every time, yet the trusty Cinemascope format has continued on and only gained traction since it's introduction in 1953.

What's different this time? Digital projectors, but are they alone enough to overcome whatever problems have prevented large formats and 3D from taking off in the past?

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do, see movies the way they were meant to be seen
stanger89 is offline  
post #33 of 148 Old 04-06-2010, 05:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,337
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVX View Post

And like DVD-A and SACD, 3D will require a new playback system. It was this very fact that killed the HR audio formats as many people did not want to buy a new player just for a select few titles, even though (like 3D systems) the new players were backwards compatible.

DVD-A and SACD did have one more thing going against them that 3D doesn't. Their difference/impact was subtle at best. Even the averagest of average Joes can pop on a set of 3D glasses and ooh and aah at the 3D in a 3D setup, but most people just couldn't even tell a difference with HR audio.

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do, see movies the way they were meant to be seen
stanger89 is offline  
post #34 of 148 Old 04-07-2010, 04:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,373
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 42
These are not true SIDE BY SIDE, rather the "cross eyed" version. Notice that they are all Scope, not 1.78:1. have fun, just don't cause yourself an eye strain.

LL
LL
LL
LL
LL

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #35 of 148 Old 04-07-2010, 01:55 PM
Senior Member
 
zax123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

I just want to say that I find this slightly misleading, because resolutions is too often equated to quality and/or detail. It's true 16:9 is more resolution, but it's no more quality or detail.

The statement above "aren't taking advantage of the full..." seems to imply the quality would be better with 16:9 which is not the case. Look at it specifically from the perspective of standard 16:9 setups, the detail/information/quality is the same between 16:9 and scope on BD, only the size is different.

Of course for those with CIH setups, it of course would have been optimal for the BDA to include anamorphic provisions to give us more information to use to begin with.

I was pretty much referring to the CIH crowd when saying that an anamorphic specification for BD would have been optimal. But we can look at it another way. If a movie is filmed in scope, you'd want to take advantage of the full bandwidth of a BD to display the movie information. We all know that even though BDs are not compressed as much as DVDs, they are still compressed. Maybe when a BD is in scope format, the "black bars" above and below the scope format take very little bandwidth to compress and so the compression of the used video area is less and therefore the quality of the picture in that area is higher. This is PURE speculation as I don't know the intricacies of the BD format.
zax123 is offline  
post #36 of 148 Old 04-07-2010, 02:36 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,337
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by zax123 View Post

I was pretty much referring to the CIH crowd when saying that an anamorphic specification for BD would have been optimal.

Absolutely agree there.

Quote:


But we can look at it another way. If a movie is filmed in scope, you'd want to take advantage of the full bandwidth of a BD to display the movie information. We all know that even though BDs are not compressed as much as DVDs, they are still compressed. Maybe when a BD is in scope format, the "black bars" above and below the scope format take very little bandwidth to compress and so the compression of the used video area is less and therefore the quality of the picture in that area is higher.

Actually that's exactly right. A not insignificant portion of the compression algorithms used on BD is reduction in redundant information, and that's all bars are, redundant information.

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do, see movies the way they were meant to be seen
stanger89 is offline  
post #37 of 148 Old 04-07-2010, 03:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Though, with Clash of the Titans and probably almost every 3D live-action movie coming this year these are 2D to 3D conversions and not originally shot or envisioned for 3D. Who knows if the DP for CotT would have composed for scope or used 1.85:1 like Cameron if he/she was shooting with a 3D rig to begin with.

100% computer animated cartoons, like from Dreamworks and PIXAR, are a whole other kettle of fish, obviously, so I'm not really worried about those titles.

Is "fake" 3D about to take over just as "real" 3D was just getting started? This is worrisome to James Cameron, and he's stated this publicly. It could kill things off rather quickly as live action 3D conversions never look as good as the real thing; more like moving pop-up books.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #38 of 148 Old 04-07-2010, 10:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,373
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post


Is "fake" 3D about to take over just as "real" 3D was just getting started? This is worrisome to James Cameron, and he's stated this publicly. It could kill things off rather quickly as live action 3D conversions never look as good as the real thing; more like moving pop-up books.

And so he should be worried. In the end, comes down to cinemas having to outlay huge amounts to outfit their cinemas and therefore needing program to re-coupe that outlay.

I agree, a 2D conversion to 3D will never be as good as a true 3D capture.

If this is what it takes for the format to launch, then so be it. The paying public will have the final say by either going to see these films or not. If not, then chances are 3D will fail yet again.

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #39 of 148 Old 04-09-2010, 08:13 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,008
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Liked: 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

Is "fake" 3D about to take over just as "real" 3D was just getting started? This is worrisome to James Cameron, and he's stated this publicly.

And yet he's working to convert Titanic into 3-D.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #40 of 148 Old 04-09-2010, 08:25 PM
CIH USER
 
Franin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 17,216
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked: 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

And yet he's working to convert Titanic into 3-D.

He will do it properley but his concerns other movies which has nothing to do with him, Where the transfer won't be great because they rush it.

_________________________

Frank

Franin is offline  
post #41 of 148 Old 04-09-2010, 08:34 PM
 
floridapoolboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: florida
Posts: 3,482
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I just can't imagine anything funnier than the whole family gathered around some dinky 50" tv, everyone wearing their 3D glasses! How long before this latest incarnation of a bad idea fades away...?
floridapoolboy is offline  
post #42 of 148 Old 04-09-2010, 08:49 PM
CIH USER
 
Franin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 17,216
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked: 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridapoolboy View Post

I just can't imagine anything funnier than the whole family gathered around some dinky 50" tv, everyone wearing their 3D glasses! How long before this latest incarnation of a bad idea fades away...?

Depends how many are in the family also not everyone will be able to be immersed. Oh and you all have to sit close too. I can see some fights beginning to sit in the middle.

_________________________

Frank

Franin is offline  
post #43 of 148 Old 04-10-2010, 12:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,373
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Or worse, the "no glasses system" that requires viewers to sit at exacting angles in order to see 3D.

Kid 1: Move over, I am seeing a double image.
Kid 2: No you move!

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #44 of 148 Old 04-10-2010, 08:38 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 44
I just hope with all my heart that 3D isn't used instead of good scripts and stories.

Art

My HT


iRule rules my theater
 

"If she's amazing she won't be easy,if she's easy she won't be amazing"

 

Bob Marley

Art Sonneborn is offline  
post #45 of 148 Old 04-10-2010, 08:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tbase1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: medina Ohio
Posts: 2,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I would like to see it confined to sci-fi and some kids movies.

tony4k
tbase1 is offline  
post #46 of 148 Old 04-12-2010, 05:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,373
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

I just hope with all my heart that 3D isn't used instead of good scripts and stories.

Art

So you have seen Madeline in 3D then?

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #47 of 148 Old 04-12-2010, 10:30 AM
Senior Member
 
MoFoHo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVX View Post

So you have seen Madeline in 3D then?

Do you mean Coraline?
MoFoHo is offline  
post #48 of 148 Old 04-12-2010, 11:08 AM
 
LilGator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,823
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVX View Post

So you have seen Madeline in 3D then?

I agree, Coraline was a fantastic (1.85!) film in 2D, and I doubt if I'll even ever see it in 3D.

I can't decide whether I'd rather films be made well for 2D (quality scripts/stories and more) and then have subtle 3D tacked on like Coraline or Up, or have an "experience" unfold in front of you where the movie is built around 3D, but the script/story is lacking (like Avatar).
LilGator is offline  
post #49 of 148 Old 04-12-2010, 11:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

I just hope with all my heart that 3D isn't used instead of good scripts and stories.

Art

Too late.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #50 of 148 Old 04-12-2010, 11:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,472
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked: 321
Though, one could argue the case of whether or not Iron Man 2 will be of any quality whatsoever...

Jon Favreau chose to not shoot IM 2 in 3D and the film, so far, is not getting a 2D to 3D conversion.

Either he hasn't jumped aboard the "3D or Bust!" hype train like some have or he's, rightly, of the opinion that if a movie wasn't 3D to begin with, it shouldn't get some sort of ho-hum retrofit ala Alice In Wonderland or Clash of the Titans.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #51 of 148 Old 04-12-2010, 03:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,373
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoFoHo View Post

Do you mean Coraline?

Yes I did, sorry for wrong name.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LilGator View Post

I agree, Coraline was a fantastic (1.85!) film in 2D, and I doubt if I'll even ever see it in 3D.

Fantastic? Really? I only watched it in 2D as there is no way I would sit through whatever time it ran for with that horrid excuse for 3D that analygraph is. I was bored stupid with this film and it would not have been any better for me if it were Scope. The story lacked for me big time.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

he's, rightly, of the opinion that if a movie wasn't 3D to begin with, it shouldn't get some sort of ho-hum retrofit ala Alice In Wonderland or Clash of the Titans.

I agree. Either shoot for 3D or not. This pretend 3D is going to put more people off in the long run as bad 3D is just bad and if the story is already lacking because eye popping effects were supposed to lift it, then sorry it just doesn't work.

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #52 of 148 Old 04-14-2010, 05:18 AM
CIH USER
 
Franin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 17,216
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked: 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by LilGator View Post

I agree, Coraline was a fantastic (1.85!) film in 2D, and I doubt if I'll even ever see it in 3D.

I agree fantastic film!

_________________________

Frank

Franin is offline  
post #53 of 148 Old 04-14-2010, 06:03 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
JapanDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 99
I don't know why they just can't release two versions, one in 16.9 and the other in scope, then everyone can decide for themselves. I mean, how hard could it be?

My build thread

My 8 x RE XXX 18" Subwoofers, IB build
Couldn't pour water out of a boot with instructions on the heel.

Do you know what Nemesis means?

JapanDave is offline  
post #54 of 148 Old 04-14-2010, 06:22 AM
Advanced Member
 
ilsiu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 867
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanDave View Post

I don't know why they just can't release two versions, one in 16.9 and the other in scope, then everyone can decide for themselves. I mean, how hard could it be?

Remember when they used to release movies in both widescreen and full screen (4:3)? Do they still do that?
ilsiu is offline  
post #55 of 148 Old 04-14-2010, 08:20 AM
 
LilGator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,823
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanDave View Post

I don't know why they just can't release two versions, one in 16.9 and the other in scope, then everyone can decide for themselves. I mean, how hard could it be?

Two reasons; for one, there's already a minimum of three releases for this film. Now, later in Nov. with the extras, and later with 3D. Why are more needed?

And of course there's the simple fact that Cameron prefers 1.78 and 2.35 was a compromise ala "formatted to fit your screen" pan'n'scan for theaters incapable of showing a large 1.78 image.
LilGator is offline  
post #56 of 148 Old 04-14-2010, 10:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
owl1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Boston Area
Posts: 842
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by LilGator View Post

Two reasons; for one, there's already a minimum of three releases for this film. Now, later in Nov. with the extras, and later with 3D. Why are more needed?

And of course there's the simple fact that Cameron prefers 1.78 and 2.35 was a compromise ala "formatted to fit your screen" pan'n'scan for theaters incapable of showing a large 1.78 image.

I can't even say how disappointing this is to see that Avatar is being cropped. Will be skipping the purchase of this and going right to my rental queue. What gets me is that this release is not the version that I saw in the theater.
owl1 is offline  
post #57 of 148 Old 04-14-2010, 10:54 AM
Senior Member
 
zax123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Avatar isn't being cropped. It was filmed in 1.78:1, so you're actually getting MORE information watching it in 1.78:1 vs. 2.35:1...
zax123 is offline  
post #58 of 148 Old 04-14-2010, 11:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Erik Garci's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Durham, NC, USA
Posts: 4,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanDave View Post

I don't know why they just can't release two versions, one in 16.9 and the other in scope, then everyone can decide for themselves. I mean, how hard could it be?

Maybe they think there would not be enough profit to justify releasing another version in scope.
Erik Garci is offline  
post #59 of 148 Old 04-14-2010, 03:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,373
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by owl1 View Post

I can't even say how disappointing this is to see that Avatar is being cropped. Will be skipping the purchase of this and going right to my rental queue. What gets me is that this release is not the version that I saw in the theater.

Exactly

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #60 of 148 Old 04-14-2010, 07:27 PM
 
LilGator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,823
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVX View Post

Exactly

Exactly what? It would be disappointing to have to watch Avatar cropped.

Thankfully, we are getting the full 1.78 frame and not the one with 25% of the film chopped out (2.39).
LilGator is offline  
Closed Thread 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off