Gravity 2D/3D - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 263 Old 02-27-2014, 01:14 PM
Member
 
staindrocks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Also, have you considered that the trailer may just be artificially sharpened?

I guess anything is possible. But if it was, it wasn't sharpened very much because there aren't any kind of EE, haloing, or any other kind of artifacts that are typically introduced by over-sharpening. And then there's the grain structure present on the trailer, which is barely visible on the BD... i seriously doubt you could create that extra grain structure by any amount of artificial sharpening alone, not when it isn't there to begin with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Unless Alfonso Cuaron or his DP comes out and says "This Blu-ray looks like ass. That's not the movie I made," then people here are just pissing in the wind.

I guess you're referring to the one or two people who called this transer 'terrible' or 'garbage' or whatever. Except for a couple of people/posts, i haven't heard anybody say that this BD looks bad. For the most part, those who've commented about seeing the difference in the comparison screenshots are saying that although it looks a little less detailed and/or sharp, it still looks very good. So i don't think there are many here who think "This Blu-ray looks like ass", even if they believe it could've been a little bit better.
mo949 likes this.
staindrocks is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 263 Old 02-27-2014, 01:22 PM
Member
 
staindrocks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Another thing that many home theater enthusiasts fail to comprehend is that most filmmakers are not as obsessed with pixel-level micro-detail that people on forums like this are. In some cases, a softer image can be more aesthetically pleasing than a razor sharp one. Even with digital, projecting a movie through a theater's projector optics onto a large screen often sacrifices detail found in the source - never mind the significant generational loss inherent with 35mm distribution. Filmmakers are aware of this. They know what their movies will look like in a theater. Some softening is expected and not necessarily unwanted.

Everything your talking about could certainly be true, but to assume that's what happened here is no more likely than assuming the WB 2K trailer is an identical representation of the master and the loss of detail/sharpness took place during the transfer to BD... there's just no way to know for sure.
staindrocks is offline  
post #183 of 263 Old 02-27-2014, 01:59 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post



Unless Alfonso Cuaron or his DP comes out and says "This Blu-ray looks like ass. That's not the movie I made," then people here are just pissing in the wind.
Truth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Another thing that many home theater enthusiasts fail to comprehend is that most filmmakers are not as obsessed with pixel-level micro-detail that people on forums like this are.
Agreed.

I think much of it is the majority of filmmakers don't really care how the video on disks turn out.
They are not as critical because they believe movies should be seen in a commercial theater and not HTs.

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #184 of 263 Old 02-27-2014, 02:23 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Joseph Clark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 10,358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 99
I watched Gravity last night on my 110" HP screen and Epson 5030 at 10' away. I also watched about 10-15 minutes on my Samsung 64" 3D plasma at about 9' away. My first thought was that the film works a little better (in terms of depth) on my plasma. Contributing to this impression, I think, is the fact that the 3D is quite subtle compared to other films. A small "collapse" of depth was just enough to make the larger screen viewing feel less intimate. As always, though, the 3D helped pull me emotionally into the film. That will come as no surprise to anyone who knows what a 3D fan I am. smile.gif Perceptually, I found no problem with image quality on either screen. It seemed perfectly appropriate and acceptable to the subject matter.

I was really taken with some of the shots in this film. (Mini-spoiler ahead - avert eyes, please: there's a long shot in which the camera moves from "outside" Sandra Bullock's helmet and "passes through it" to an inside POV shot. Freakin' awesome!!!) That said, here's the part where I open myself up to all sorts of snipes. So be it. biggrin.gif For me, the 3D in Gravity elevates a mediocre film just to the level of "really good." Although I thought the FX shots and directing were amazing, the plot, dialogue, acting and pacing were nothing special (and arguable weak in several spots). I've seen both Clooney and Bullock perform better and deliver better lines in other films. I hope Gravity helps elevate 3D from the depths to which it seems to have fallen in the last couple of years, but for me it's no better written or acted than Avatar. I'll always be grateful to James Cameron for what his film did for 3D, but I never thought it Oscar worthy for the script. However, IMO its use of 3D made it even more emotionally engaging than Gravity. I plan to watch Gravity again in 2D and 3D, just to find out if my initial impressions hold up and aren't attributable to that burrito I had last night. I doubt, however, that I will re-watch it nearly as much as I have Avatar.

My benchmark for "involvement" in a 3D film is still my viewing of the Space Station in 3D at a Smithsonian Imax in 2003. I was front and center of an all-enveloping curved screen, with incredible surround sound. I have the Blu-ray 3D, but it doesn't do to me what that Imax experience did. That Imax viewing also pulled me in a lot more than Gravity did - pun intended. smile.gif

Joe Clark

Joseph Clark is offline  
post #185 of 263 Old 02-27-2014, 03:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Another thing that many home theater enthusiasts fail to comprehend is that most filmmakers are not as obsessed with pixel-level micro-detail that people on forums like this are. In some cases, a softer image can be more aesthetically pleasing than a razor sharp one. Even with digital, projecting a movie through a theater's projector optics onto a large screen often sacrifices detail found in the source - never mind the significant generational loss inherent with 35mm distribution. Filmmakers are aware of this. They know what their movies will look like in a theater. Some softening is expected and not necessarily unwanted.
Softness is one thing, but compression artifacts? I kind of doubt any filmmaker would find them aesthetically pleasing (unless that's the aesthetic of the film).
KMFDMvsEnya likes this.
42041 is offline  
post #186 of 263 Old 02-27-2014, 04:46 PM
Member
 
Barry C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 90
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Hi Joseph,
I watched Gravity last night too- 133" screen at 17'. I agree with you completely that the 3D was enjoyable but certainly a bit more subtle than I had expected. While watching it, I was thinking about how much 3D added to the overall feel of the movie. I would say that while it was a definite enhancement, and I'm glad I have it, it certainly was not as much of an enhancement to the viewing experience as other 3D films I have. The sound track certainly did kick ass, however. Lit up my subwoofers and surrounds like 4th of July.wink.gif
Barry C is offline  
post #187 of 263 Old 02-27-2014, 06:13 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 19,912
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Liked: 317
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

Softness is one thing, but compression artifacts? I kind of doubt any filmmaker would find them aesthetically pleasing (unless that's the aesthetic of the film).

Are you saying that the Gravity Blu-ray has compression artifacts? I don't see anyone else in this thread making that claim.

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 #188 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 12:18 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 814
FWIW, when I saw the IMAX 3D presentation I thought the 3D was subtle in a good sort of way.
It was the proper use of the effect (as Cameron did), in that it enhanced the viewing experience, rather than an end unto itself.

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #189 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 08:49 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 19,912
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Liked: 317
Quote:
Originally Posted by staindrocks View Post

I guess anything is possible. But if it was, it wasn't sharpened very much because there aren't any kind of EE, haloing, or any other kind of artifacts that are typically introduced by over-sharpening.

There are several filters available now that can enhance image detail without edge halos or traditional sharpening artifacts. The Darbee Darblet is a popular one for home theater use. The pro market has additional options.
Quote:
And then there's the grain structure present on the trailer, which is barely visible on the BD... i seriously doubt you could create that extra grain structure by any amount of artificial sharpening alone, not when it isn't there to begin with.

Sure you can. Do we know how this trailer was created? It could be based on a film-out from the digital source onto 35mm stock, which will introduce grain. If purely digital, it could have been assembled from a highly-compressed copy of the footage. Trailers are typically put together by the studio's marketing department. The marketing people may not have access to the best materials.

Is it even real grain? It could be an artificial grain effect that the filmmakers toyed with early on when the trailer was created, but then abandoned later.

Lots of possibilities here. Comparing the Blu-ray to the trailer isn't particularly instructive except as trivia. The only real question is whether the Blu-ray looks good or looks bad. Numerous people who've watched it have said that they think it looks good, bit rate be damned.

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 #190 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 09:51 AM
Member
 
staindrocks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Sure you can. Do we know how this trailer was created? It could be based on a film-out from the digital source onto 35mm stock, which will introduce grain. If purely digital, it could have been assembled from a highly-compressed copy of the footage. Trailers are typically put together by the studio's marketing department. The marketing people may not have access to the best materials.

Is it even real grain? It could be an artificial grain effect that the filmmakers toyed with early on when the trailer was created, but then abandoned later.

Lots of possibilities here. Comparing the Blu-ray to the trailer isn't particularly instructive except as trivia. The only real question is whether the Blu-ray looks good or looks bad. Numerous people who've watched it have said that they think it looks good, bit rate be damned.

And that would be different than 'artificial sharpening alone'. I guess the only way to know for sure is to go back and watch it in the theater again, paying special attention to the grain structure present. If i were to guess, i'd be willing to bet money that the grain structure looks identical to what is on that 2k trailer... technical coulda-woulda-shoulda jargon be damned. smile.gif
staindrocks is offline  
post #191 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 10:32 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by staindrocks View Post

i'd be willing to bet money that the grain structure looks identical to what is on that 2k trailer...
It isn't always the case.
I have seen many trailers that don't look like the BDs.

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #192 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 11:37 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Mark Booth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Beautiful California
Posts: 1,503
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinema13 View Post

Wow...saw a commercial for the video release and it omits ANY mention and indication of the 3D. Just to get it ",,,on BluRay and Digital Download." They really are trying to keep 3D from consumer awareness.

3D isn't quite dead, but it's on life support and the funeral home is preparing to accept the body.

Mark
Mark Booth is offline  
post #193 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 11:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cinema13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,531
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Booth View Post

3D isn't quite dead, but it's on life support and the funeral home is preparing to accept the body.

Mark

More like it is being murdered.

cinema13 is offline  
post #194 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 11:43 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Mark Booth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Beautiful California
Posts: 1,503
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinema13 View Post

More like it is being murdered.

If you invested in 3D technology for your home, I understand your frustration.

Mark
Mark Booth is offline  
post #195 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 11:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cinema13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,531
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Booth View Post

If you invested in 3D technology for your home, I understand your frustration.

Mark

No big investment...the player was less than $100. And plenty more 3D discs on the way (and OnDemand). Just dislike watching some try to kill it.

cinema13 is offline  
post #196 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 12:14 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Booth View Post

3D isn't quite dead, but it's on life support and the funeral home is preparing to accept the body.

Mark
What REALLY is needed is inexpensive glasses-free 3D TVs.
When that happens, 3D will take-off IMO.

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #197 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 12:23 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Mark Booth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Beautiful California
Posts: 1,503
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

What REALLY is needed is inexpensive glasses-free 3D TVs.
When that happens, 3D will take-off IMO.

Yes, we'll get those about the same time we get affordable flying cars! smile.gif

Mark
Mark Booth is offline  
post #198 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 01:04 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 19,912
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Liked: 317
Quote:
Originally Posted by staindrocks View Post

And that would be different than 'artificial sharpening alone'. I guess the only way to know for sure is to go back and watch it in the theater again, paying special attention to the grain structure present. If i were to guess, i'd be willing to bet money that the grain structure looks identical to what is on that 2k trailer... technical coulda-woulda-shoulda jargon be damned. smile.gif

The movie shouldn't have much if any grain. The majority of footage is CGI, and the live action portions (mostly just the actor's faces composited into the frame) were shot with digital cameras on a light-controlled studio soundstage in front of a green screen. If there's a lot of grain in the movie, it would have to be added artificially in post production.

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 #199 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 01:32 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,895
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

What REALLY is needed is inexpensive glasses-free 3D TVs.
When that happens, 3D will take-off IMO.

You mean "GOOD" glasses free TV smile.gif

From what I've read in terms of people checking out the glasses free 3D TVs at the last CES, almost every one sucked in some way, and almost every one had a gritty or "lenticular" distortion. Yuck.
(One company's display apparently looked pretty good, I forget which one).

Anyway, I see glasses-free 3D TV as ever more unlikely. 3D in the home has clearly been a disappointment all around for consumers (who rarely use it) and manufacturers (who didn't get the bang of it they'd hoped). Apparently 3D this year was no longer touted much because 4K is the new technology manufacturers are going to push. With 3D enthusiasm so low...actually, with a portion of consumers who flat out say they don't like it...I can't imagine Manufacturers are driven to put a lot of effort into glasses free 3D. "Hey, remember 3D? We've got it for you again? Want it this time?"

(And I say all this as someone who very much enjoys 3D, both at home on my projection set up and in the theaters).
R Harkness is offline  
post #200 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 02:10 PM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 12,958
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by staindrocks View Post

And that would be different than 'artificial sharpening alone'. I guess the only way to know for sure is to go back and watch it in the theater again, paying special attention to the grain structure present. If i were to guess, i'd be willing to bet money that the grain structure looks identical to what is on that 2k trailer... technical coulda-woulda-shoulda jargon be damned. smile.gif


I would be willing to bet on what Josh is saying actually. Just like an audio mix for most (all?) trailers is noticeably different vs the actual movie mix (FilmMixer has talked about this before with bass/surrounds commonly getting a massive boost on the trailer vs the actual mix), I can see this same type of thing happening with the video as well for all the reasons Josh has mentioned.

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP
Toe is online now  
post #201 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 02:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Booth View Post

Yes, we'll get those about the same time we get affordable flying cars! smile.gif

Mark
What?
You don't have one yet?tongue.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

You mean "GOOD" glasses free TV smile.gif
Yeah, that's what I meant.

Quote:
From what I've read in terms of people checking out the glasses free 3D TVs at the last CES, almost every one sucked in some way, and almost every one had a gritty or "lenticular" distortion. Yuck.
(One company's display apparently looked pretty good, I forget which oneAnyway, I see glasses-free 3D TV as ever more unlikely. 3D in the home has clearly been a disappointment all around for consumers (who rarely use it) and manufacturers (who didn't get the bang of it they'd hoped). Apparently 3D this year was no longer touted much because 4K is the new technology manufacturers are going to push. With 3D enthusiasm so low...actually, with a portion of consumers who flat out say they don't like it...I can't imagine Manufacturers are driven to put a lot of effort into glasses free 3D. "Hey, remember 3D? We've got it for you again? Want it this time?"

(And I say all this as someone who very much enjoys 3D, both at home on my projection set up and in the theaters).
I know a lot of R&D has gone into glassless 3D.
I haven't really been keeping up with its current status.

If 3D isn't working out commercially, are we SURE 4K will?wink.gif

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #202 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 03:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cinema13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,531
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

What?
You don't have one yet?tongue.gif
Yeah, that's what I meant.
I know a lot of R&D has gone into glassless 3D.
I haven't really been keeping up with its current status.

If 3D isn't working out commercially, are we SURE 4K will?wink.gif

No we aren't. Target has already officially stated that they will not be carrying any 4K sets. (however, they continue to carry 3D.) And there still are no BDs! At least 3D had software and other outlets to watch. ...4K has nothing but a Sony Media Player....yours for just an additional $500 - $600!!! Y'know, the CE Industry has to take the crown for the most incompetent marketing for the past 40 years. Going all the way back to laserdisc, they seem to think that if something doesn't hit mass penetration in one year, it's a failure and they pull support. If 4K fails, it couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch.

By the way, even the one glasses-free 3D demo at CES that was mentioned as being okay...wasn't there yet. From what I understand, depth was okay (well, compared to the other glasses-free displays) but it was unable to replicate the "pop-out" "reach-out-and-touch" that 3D with glasses can often provide.

cinema13 is offline  
post #203 of 263 Old 02-28-2014, 04:38 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinema13 View Post

No we aren't. Target has already officially stated that they will not be carrying any 4K sets. (however, they continue to carry 3D.)
I'm sure they won't....until they can make money at it.wink.gif

Quote:
And there still are no BDs!
IIRC, the BD Association has agreed on a format recently.

Quote:
At least 3D had software and other outlets to watch. ...
True.

Quote:
4K has nothing but a Sony Media Player....yours for just an additional $500 - $600!!!
NO WAY will I buy it.

If doesn't come to me in a disk, I will not go 4K.
The only other possible reason would be for great upconversion (if it exists).

Quote:
Y'know, the CE Industry has to take the crown for the most incompetent marketing for the past 40 years. Going all the way back to laserdisc, they seem to think that if something doesn't hit mass penetration in one year, it's a failure and they pull support. If 4K fails, it couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch.
I couldn't agree MORE.
The ineptitude and lack of leadership, with its backroom stabbing and competing technologies, is breath-taking.mad.gifrolleyes.gif
Scott Simonian and AaronMK like this.

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #204 of 263 Old 03-01-2014, 02:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tractng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Watched the movie last night on a 120" screen. Picture frames were rattling at the house with the JL sub tongue.gif.

At the end of the movie right before Sandra walked onto the beach, the middle of the screen had some water vapor/bubbles. What was the intention of that shot? Seemed like it was viewed from a space helmet or sunglasses/lens that had water covered over it.
tractng is offline  
post #205 of 263 Old 03-01-2014, 09:54 PM
Senior Member
 
Mike Butny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Orland Park, Il
Posts: 493
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 54
I thought the SQ was great on my 9.1 system but the PQ in some scenes in 2D looked flat and I noticed noise in several scenes. I was really disappointed in the PQ, a major let down.
rusky_g likes this.

Mike Butny is offline  
post #206 of 263 Old 03-01-2014, 10:33 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Joseph Clark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 10,358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 99
StreamTV insists that Ultra-D glasses-free 3D displays will be in US stores this year. According to several reports from CES (including our own Scott Wilkinson and a friend of mine who is also a 3D enthusiast), Ultra-D IS ready for prime time. Other glasses-free 3D tech was reviewed with less enthusiasm.

My experience with 3D has been the same since day one: if you want a demo, you have to aggressively seek it out in a store and hope they have glasses that work. Casual passersby are out of luck. Before we go writing 3D's epitaph, let's see what happens if seeing a 3D demo is as easy as seeing a 2D demo. When people don't have to expend any effort to see 3D (and don't have to wear glasses), I think the sad story may change.

By the way, Dish customers can see Gravity in 3D today if they have a compatible set top box. It's in VOD.

Joe Clark

Joseph Clark is offline  
post #207 of 263 Old 03-01-2014, 11:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 814
Thanx, Joe.

I have never heard of this tech before, but I googled it and came up with this interesting link:
http://www.zdnet.com/seecubics-ultra-d-system-provides-glasses-free-3d-tv-that-really-works-7000021926/

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #208 of 263 Old 03-02-2014, 12:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cinema13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,531
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

StreamTV insists that Ultra-D glasses-free 3D displays will be in US stores this year. According to several reports from CES (including our own Scott Wilkinson and a friend of mine who is also a 3D enthusiast), Ultra-D IS ready for prime time. Other glasses-free 3D tech was reviewed with less enthusiasm.

My experience with 3D has been the same since day one: if you want a demo, you have to aggressively seek it out in a store and hope they have glasses that work. Casual passersby are out of luck. Before we go writing 3D's epitaph, let's see what happens if seeing a 3D demo is as easy as seeing a 2D demo. When people don't have to expend any effort to see 3D (and don't have to wear glasses), I think the sad story may change.

By the way, Dish customers can see Gravity in 3D today if they have a compatible set top box. It's in VOD.

Ultra-D was what I was referring to and some were less impressed. In addition (and I may be wrong), it will appear on smaller (32") displays if it is seen this year at all. Also, for those considering GRAVITY via OnDemand, it is reportedly cropped.

cinema13 is offline  
post #209 of 263 Old 03-02-2014, 10:07 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Joseph Clark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 10,358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinema13 View Post

Ultra-D was what I was referring to and some were less impressed. In addition (and I may be wrong), it will appear on smaller (32") displays if it is seen this year at all. Also, for those considering GRAVITY via OnDemand, it is reportedly cropped.

I didn't watch it via VOD. I have the Blu-ray 3D, but I saw it in the Dish guide.

I've read one so-so/slightly negative review of Ultra-D and lots of positive ones, including this one by Scott Wilkinson and others by Mark Henninger (also of AVS). They're indicating sets will be in US stores by the second quarter of 2014. The ones at CES were 55" 4K prototypes, not production models. The first sets in stores should be 55" and 50", with a rumored 31" computer monitor. 65" sets are also planned. Apparently, the technology scales well from Smartphones to wall-size flat panel displays (no projection, unfortunately). The first sets will likely be from Chinese manufacturers (Hisense, etc.), but they're in talks with Toshiba, LG and Samsung. Obviously, 3D needs a big shot in the arm. Gravity has helped. So will the Avatar sequels. Auto-stereoscopic displays (if they're as effective as Scott and others seem to think they are) might just give 3D new life.

Joe Clark

Joseph Clark is offline  
post #210 of 263 Old 03-02-2014, 12:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cinema13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,531
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Mr. Roellen still mentions some issues. I did speak to a friend who was at CES and saw the Ultra-HD set and gave it good marks for depth but thumbs-down for pop-out, which he felt was better with glasses-3D. And of course, there is the software issue. Are the studios going to begin offering 4K, 3D discs? (Especially since there still isn't even one 4K 2D disc?) As Roellen mentioned, there isn't even a standard. And how much will those cost? And how will competing technologies fare? Right now, 4K sets aren't selling like hotcakes. So I feel pretty sure that glasses-free 3D that are as good as current 3D, and affordable, and with available software...is years (maybe even a decade) away for practical purposes. And that's assuming the industry will even support it that long if they don't get immediate results. But only time will tell. Whichever way things go, I do think 3D will certainly be around for some time. (particularly if discs come with the option to be 3D ready for both glasses and non-glasses formats.)

cinema13 is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Software

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