RealD vs Dolby 3D? - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 91 Old 02-23-2009, 02:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,667
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Absolutely,

RearPro is the ideal way to go with 3D.

LL


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
CINERAMAX is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 91 Old 02-24-2009, 01:45 PM
Member
 
azgard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
A few comments on 3D in general.

GMX, your presentation of the technology was spot on.

CINERAMAX, I'm in hopes that AVITAR and others will do it right. If Cameron can do it like he did at Universal T2 probably the best presentation to date, then who knows?

I worked with Disney and IMAX on 3D technology presentations. I worked directly with Jim Henson on Muppet Vision 3d and IMAX in the development of the Dome shutter goggles.


I've come to a few conclusions over the years.

3D is best used for scientific requirements as in tela-presents or exhibition adventures like an amusement ride.

The real window effect, that we would all like to hope 3D would answer, is probably best served by the highest resolution, high-speed frame temporal rate 2D presentations. If done right can very nearly convey similar experience to 3D.

I say this because 3D can be tolerated for just so long, and a 20min high impact presentation is about limit. The discomfort of the glasses and as the Muppets say cheap 3D tricks

I really doubt 3D will ever make it as a consistent 90min -2hr presentation unless the glasses are removed from the procedure.

Everyone in and orderly fashion to the theater now, and no cheep 3D tricks. J
azgard is offline  
post #33 of 91 Old 05-01-2009, 12:41 AM
Member
 
mohaukachi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: eagle rock, ca
Posts: 62
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
first of thanks for the explanations you guys. very handy stuff to know. how are these technologies available for smaller applications, for instance, a screening room at a DI (digital intermediary) facility? im curious because i know some people looking in to this for their office in LA. what would be the type of projector you would need to do playback with passive glasses? thanks.
mohaukachi is online now  
post #34 of 91 Old 05-01-2009, 04:29 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,667
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 66
If you do not want to change the screen the best method is Dolby. A Barco Dp-1200, DP 1500 or dp-2000 unit will be required. The size of the screen and luminance required will determine the lamp power. If their DI is for DCI then you use a stock model, if you plan on doing DI for Blue Ray and HDTV then you should look at a contrast enhanced unit. Contrast enhancement does work against brightness on these projectors keep that in mind.

These are the glasses in my avatar:



To use Dolby 3-D these units will be adapted a $8k spinning filter color wheel mounted before the light engine (so as to not impact the optical path) and preserve the MTF and ansi contrast.

These Barco's have an advantage over some other DCI units in that they do triple flash 3-D144hz instead of just 120hz . Triple flash is artifact free on panning shots.

There is one outfit that IS the go to place for this type of engineering applications on the coast, I will take the liberty to PM you my contact name, they will call on your friends and help design the correct application. Their client list is impeccable, I know they have done the two screening rooms at the DGA for such exact same application.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #35 of 91 Old 05-11-2009, 09:35 AM
 
JBLsound4645's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bournemouth, Dorset, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I noticed the VUE at Leicester Square London was showing Coraline in 3D not sure which screen as Wolverine was playing in their only THX screen 7 which I saw I, heard, mean felt.

I picked up the free glasses as they had whole bin full of these strange and fascinating glasses. So is the technique the same as IMAX because I don't see any red and blue filter gels?

Allow my cat Sooty to demonstrate RealD.



I'm guessing RealD stands for Real Demission?

Have the artefacts but all been eliminated with RealD and Dolby 3D, like if you (role your head to side to side) because the IMAX 3D came undone it remained in 3D while turning your head or looking up and down.
LL
JBLsound4645 is offline  
post #36 of 91 Old 05-11-2009, 10:18 AM
 
JBLsound4645's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bournemouth, Dorset, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
You know something got me thinking last night while watching Sphere 1998) where a boarding crew of scientists discover an American space ship from the future. It has an impressive data video system that is projected holographic around the Dustin Hofmann and Sharon Stone.








Now this would look really neat if it can be integrated into 3D cinema as an added extension to expand or even distract. LOL

I first saw holographic projection at Disney World, Florida, in the Hunted House back around 1981.

Regular 3D the principles seem the same, image projected on to flat screen in front of the audience. How about taking this practice and going many steps further. I’m sure there is already on in existence somewhere in the world like vertical reality.

Sound for 3D is basically the same stage screen front sidewall and rear wall surrounds maybe height overhead surround. But what of below surround if a scene takes place under the ocean or midair or even outer space where sound can be a little more flexible at moving underneath the audience.

I’ve only seen but few handful of 3D films some cowboy and Indian film on TV years ago where an Indian moved towards the camera holding flaming touch.

Also seen Jaws 3D LOL I think that hand but a few reasonable 3D effects like the opening with the fish head.

Later 3D films like IMAX Haunted Castle, T-Rex, Ghosts of the Abyss, Cyber World, and Santa VS the snowman.

Isn’t the new TRON or is sequel going to be in 3D?
JBLsound4645 is offline  
post #37 of 91 Old 05-11-2009, 10:47 AM
 
JBLsound4645's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bournemouth, Dorset, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by GXM View Post

I see a lot of bad info about this, so I just wanted to post some fact and a little opinion. I will just give some technical details about the two systems. I have been involved with setups of both Real D and Dolby 3D so I don't want to get into a better/worse discussion.

Both systems use the identical projectors. As far as I know, all of the current installs are using NEC, Barco, or Christie projectors. All are 2K D-Cinema DLP projectors, and most are 6K lamp setups to get as much light as possible. I have been in at least two trying to get by on a 4.5K but it is not enough on the older projectors. There are some newer installs using the smaller DLP chip (1.7 inch vs 2.1 inch) that even though limited to a 4.5K lamp can put out as much 3D light as the older 6K's thanks to being able to use the entire chip in 3D mode which the larger chip projectors can't due to speed limitations. Both Real D and Dolby 3D alternate eyes at 3 times frame rate. The projector settings are basically identical in this regaurd. So in 1/24 of a second, you see left eye 3 times and right eye 3 times. This means the projector is actually showing 144 frames per second. Think of it as having a 3 blade shutter for each eye in film projectors. The newer small chips can do this frame rate for all 2 million pixels, the older projectors cannot. In effect, we get about 2/3 of the light in 3D mode because of this issue. TI is working to improve this though.

In Real D the image is projected through an active LCD "Z-Screen" that alternates between right hand and left hand circular polarization at the 144 hz rate following a sync signal from the projector. The Dolby system has the filter wheel mounted between the lamp and the integrater rod. The wheel has 1/2 filtering for left eye, and the other half filtering for right eye. It uses the same sync signal from the projector to drive it at the same 144 hz or 4320 rpm. The filters are a multi layer interference filter that splits all three primaries into narrower bands of red, green, and blue. The glasses have matching filters to separate the two images. The Real D glasses use the matching circular polarizers to split the two images. Since the Dolby system is using different colors, the screen can be white, where the Real D has to hold polarization which requires the silvered screen. The two systems are actually very close in light output. The filters in Dolby split the light in half, plus a little total loss, and the Z-screen also does about the same in that regaurd. Then you are also only showing each eye for a little less than 1/2 the time, as well as watching it through glasses. The high gain of the silver screen does give a peak brightness gain for Real D but at the cost of a little less light on the edges. There are actually some Dolby 3D sites that went with a lower gain silver screen to make enough light due to using a larger screen than recomend. Real D color corrects for the glasses and Z-Screen by shooting the colors through the glasses with a separate preset in the projector for 3D. The Dolby system is a bit more complex as the color shift of the two eyes is different so the colors are corrected in the server by shooting the colors through the glasses again, but for each eye separately.

I have seen both systems, but I will not state preference. I will state that the color wheel does not make for any artifact that is different than the alternating of eyes of any sequential frame 3D system. Even shutter glasses at the same 144 hz frame rate will have this same artifact. And most shutter glasses operate at only double frame rate, or 96 hz which gives a more noticeable jutter on pans. Unlike a single chip DLP projector with a color wheel, the projector is always giving all 3 primaries to one eye in all systems. The three only truely differ in how they are separated at the viewer. Real D and Dolby use passive glasses. Dolby and shutter glasses can use a white screen. Shutter glasses need batteries and electronics in them. There are differences in ghosting and such, but I will let others talk about that.

Dual projector 3D is superior than any single projector setup. I have seen polarized systems and Dolby Infitec filtering with dual projectors and the results are stunning. You don't get double the light, you get over triple, and you get both eyes showing the new frame in sync, so it makes for a much smoother image on fast motion. This is true for any form of splitting the two eyes. In most cases, the cost of two projectors is considered prohibitive. When using the older large chip projectors though, it also has the huge advantage of using the whole chip, as well as having the 6K lamps. Light output is no longer a problem. I think 3D should be dual projectors for this reason.

I also agree that this coming year will really show if 3D is here to stay this time. I watched some of "Hondo" in Dolby 3D. This was shot in the early 50's. This actually had some of the most pleasing 3D I have seen. It was more like just watching a real scene out in front of you. The depth was natural and the big sky outdoor shots looked amazing. 3D is not new, it has just become a bit more friendly to show thanks to digital. Dual film polarized 3D looked great a long time ago. That is how IMAX did it for a long time, but now even IMAX is going digital for the ease and reduced cost, even using dual projectors it is a huge savings over the dual strip film.

I don't think 3D will ever be the only way to make a movie, but if enough good movies can be made in 3D it just may work it's way out of being a gimick this time. On the other hand, if the movies are not good, this coming year could kill 3D yet again. It is up to the content as usual. As we have seen over and over, you can make a great movie with a 1.33 aspect black and white picture and mono sound. Great image quality, effects, and sound can all enhance a good movie, but they can't make a bad movie good. The same goes for 3D. If a movie is bad, throwing 3D at it won't fix it. In the 20's, sound was a gimick. In the 30's, color was a gimick, in the 50's/60's 3D and widescreens where both gimicks. Widescreens caught on, 3D didn't. We still have two aspect ratios though, 1.85 and 2.39. So maybe 3D will be the Cinemascope of the future?? Who knows just yet.

Impressive read it also reminds me of the different sound formats which one will the audience favour at the end of the day?

Also the print cost for IMAX as well as the ware and tear of the film, but if cinemas are going to run these silly 2 week runs rather than long run engagements I don't see the point in expensive hardware.

Next time I visit London I'll try and catch a RealD flick if it sounds like awesome title. No animated features I want to see live action as I'm familiar like we all are with real world happenings.

Hmm, this coloured wheel DLP. Is this technology going to be implemented into the home cinema with an affordable package that isn't just aimed at the (super rich but all people of all types) at competitive low price under £1000.00 or lower

It would be real kick in the teeth if it backfires on the studios.

Sensurround was gimmick that got my attention! Three times with Earthquake!

Smello-vision (stretch now) LOL
JBLsound4645 is offline  
post #38 of 91 Old 05-11-2009, 02:50 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Tron 2.0 does not appear to be a 3D film:

http://3dmovieslist.blogspot.com/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1104001/

As far as what RealD stands for . . . you got me!

http://www.reald.com/
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #39 of 91 Old 05-11-2009, 03:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dizzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 5,251
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
But what of below surround if a scene takes place under the ocean or midair or even outer space where sound can be a little more flexible at moving underneath the audience.

not to nitpick, but sound localization underwater sucks! it carries really far, but it is very hard to hear where it is coming from since the sound travels so much more efficiently through water than air. it hits you from all sides at once. so you start looking around like an idiot trying to find who is banging their tank... or where that motor boat is

But of course, reality and produced sound/vision have nothing to do with each other.

Proud Daddy to
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
Born October 26 2005.

Ob was the delivery doc.

Since i cannot rant on a soapbox in the town square...

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Dizzman is offline  
post #40 of 91 Old 05-12-2009, 03:38 AM
 
JBLsound4645's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bournemouth, Dorset, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dizzman View Post

not to nitpick, but sound localization underwater sucks! it carries really far, but it is very hard to hear where it is coming from since the sound travels so much more efficiently through water than air. it hits you from all sides at once. so you start looking around like an idiot trying to find who is banging their tank... or where that motor boat is

But of course, reality and produced sound/vision have nothing to do with each other.

I'm going to run a few tests to see what I can discover.
JBLsound4645 is offline  
post #41 of 91 Old 05-12-2009, 03:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Glimmie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 7,954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 153 Post(s)
Liked: 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Tron 2.0 does not appear to be a 3D film:

http://3dmovieslist.blogspot.com/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1104001/

As far as what RealD stands for . . . you got me!

http://www.reald.com/

It is being done in 3D. Currently shooting.

Glimmie's HT Page
Being redone - comming soon!

Glimmie is online now  
post #42 of 91 Old 05-21-2009, 04:05 PM
Newbie
 
mr mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have now tried IMAX 3D, RealD and dolby 3D and I must say that I was impressed with Dolby's system.

What is in your mind the best 3D cinema (I would asume in the US) that you have seen? Largest screen, best sound, State of the art projection and not a poorly paid student pressing a button...

I want to plan for AVATAR later this year! Must be seen in the best possible way!!

Any thoughts guys?
mr mac is offline  
post #43 of 91 Old 05-21-2009, 07:14 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,667
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 66
The DGA theater would be the best place to see avatar in with dual projector dp-2000's and the Dolby 3-D system. But it is not open to the public.



The advantage of the Dolby system is that the optical component sits in between the lamp and the light engine so it does not reduce contrast, sharpness, brightness, MTF.

The Imax film system is a ghost machine and the process has really bad contrast so in my opinion the Dolby Kills Large Format Imax 3-D.

Reald has been a mixed bag, the Alien Versus Monsters being a notable exception. Excellent ghost reduction and the Windows process Of framing the 3-D image.But for a videophile Dolby wins.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #44 of 91 Old 05-22-2009, 12:47 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
^^^^

Peter:

How can you claim IMAX 3D has bad contrast? We are talking about two projectors each with a 15 KW Xenon light source showing through 70mm film on a silver screen?

Did you make this determination seeing IMAX 3D in a theater that has a white screen instead? I have seen both and yes the contrast drops measurably if there is no silver screen.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #45 of 91 Old 05-22-2009, 06:05 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,667
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 66
I saw Under the sea ( a wonderful film) and Monsters vs aliens at the Ft Lauderdale Imax which is like 77 feet tall right? The black levels were really high on both of those, and the IMPACT (the ansi cr appeared lesser than a DCI dlp), and also there was ghosting noticeable with the active glasses. By comparison both REALD digital cinemas (the Dolphin and Sunset) had extraordinary presentations of Monsters Vs Aliens ( already lost count how many times I've seen this jewel ). I have seen Demontrations of the Dolby System including one with dual Barco's. Those were phenomenal.

Now I imagine what could be achievable in a room like Prometheus (13 foot wide Torus with a 3kw lamp house, maximum possible contrast mods and new Light engine for the DP1500 with the enhanced convergence), and you have another good case to help exemplify why Imax digitization program has actually many visual benefits that the general public is missing.

Of course the large Imax does not show any pixel gaps while the new Imax does, but id done right DCI pixels gaps can take a backdrop function to the presentation, enough where the DCI 3-D can be better than the Imax-i feel.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #46 of 91 Old 05-22-2009, 07:06 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post

I saw Under the sea ( a wonderful film) and Monsters vs aliens at the Ft Lauderdale Imax which is like 77 feet tall right? The black levels were really high on both of those, and the IMPACT (the ansi cr appeared lesser than a DCI dlp), and also there was ghosting noticeable with the active glasses. By comparison both REALD digital cinemas (the Dolphin and Sunset) had extraordinary presentations of Monsters Vs Aliens ( already lost count how many times I've seen this jewel ). I have seen Demontrations of the Dolby System including one with dual Barco's. Those were phenomenal.

Quote:
The 300-seat AutoNation IMAX Theater located in downtown Ft Lauderdale features a 60-ft. x 80-ft. screen

http://www.mods.org/IMAX/index.html

I have seen well over 50 different IMAX 3D films at this theater. And not once have I ever walked out with a thought that there was something wrong with the contrast ratio.

On the other hand, I attended two different IMAX showings in Vegas at the Luxor hotel (one of the most unique IMAX theaters ever) - the first a 2D film then later in the day, a 3D film. And I definitely noticed a sever reduction in CR because they had used a white screen instead of a silver screen.

In my own theater I first used a 1.2 gain white (Stewart fixed. perforated 144" 16x9) then went to a Silver 400 (same specs) then finally settled on a Platinum 300 (again same specs) because of the issue of hot spotting. I used a Zenith Pro 900X FPTV.

Quote:
Now I imagine what could be achievable in a room like Prometheus (13 foot wide Torus with a 3kw lamp house, maximum possible contrast mods and new Light engine for the DP1500 with the enhanced convergence), and you have another good case to help exemplify why Imax digitization program has actually many visual benefits that the general public is missing.

Of course the large Imax does not show any pixel gaps while the new Imax does, but id done right DCI pixels gaps can take a backdrop function to the presentation, enough where the DCI 3-D can be better than the Imax-i feel.

IMO - these new digital IMAX theaters are a travesty. You like them - well good for you. I would never attend a showing. ie; part with my money.

It's like calling a Chevrolet Chevette . . . . . a Vette.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #47 of 91 Old 05-22-2009, 07:32 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,667
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 66
LOL. I see your point, and while I have not seen these new Imaxettes I can only imagine what a projector with a high contrast mod would look like on 3-D and it would be way more than the Autonation does. Perhaps I can convince you to take a look one day if that happens.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #48 of 91 Old 05-29-2009, 07:47 AM
Newbie
 
mr mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
[quote=CINERAMAX;16507254]The DGA theater would be the best place to see avatar in with dual projector dp-2000's and the Dolby 3-D system. But it is not open to the public.

So what is the alternative for us mortals? What is the best (largest, brightest) 3D public cinema in Los Angeles?

I'm psyched about UP!!
mr mac is offline  
post #49 of 91 Old 05-29-2009, 07:55 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,667
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 66
[quote=mr mac;16548100]
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post


I'm psyched about UP!!

98% TomatoMeter


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #50 of 91 Old 05-29-2009, 09:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dbuudo07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 110
I watched Coraline 3D(2008) in a RealD setup. It was good to me. Seemed to be tight and I didn't notice any ghosting. It was tight and smooth. The next time I get a chance to watch a 3D show at IMAX, I will. They use two IMAX projectors.and the grey tinted glasses that still use the red and blue hue on each lens. I hope that makes sense. I haven't experienced the powered glasses yet. Not sure where to go to do that.

David Budo
Dbuudo07 is offline  
post #51 of 91 Old 05-29-2009, 09:14 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,667
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Coraline was great, but not on the level of MVA from total absence of ghosting, also MVA used wINDOWING TECHNOLOGY TO IMPROVE THE PARALLAX CONTINUITY OF THE IMAGE AT THE SCREEN EDGES.

Film Based Imax mostly use shuttered glasses, it is a polarized system. You get ghosting from the glass technology and also from vibrations caused by wear and tear of the film medium.

A good digital 3-D will be more stable than Imax 70mm 3-D.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #52 of 91 Old 05-29-2009, 09:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,667
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Dolby 3-D Article


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #53 of 91 Old 05-29-2009, 09:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dbuudo07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 110
I saw MVA in IMAX 3D and it wasn't as good as the RealD Coraline to me. MVA was using film though.

David Budo
Dbuudo07 is offline  
post #54 of 91 Old 05-29-2009, 10:04 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,667
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Agreed MVA in Imax was not as good. I saw it 3 times 1 reald 4 th row, 1 Imax middle of room and 1 Reald 1oth row beginning of slope. The last one ruled. The colors in coraline were amazing, but the parallax coherency presentation in MVA is just game changing. And MVA is cinemascope to boot, which is very difficult to do right.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #55 of 91 Old 06-11-2009, 10:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dbuudo07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 110
After watching Up(2009) in 3D, I have to say I was underwhelmed by the use of the 3D potential. There were many moments that could have provided that real "WOW!" factor, but we are left with the plain side camera view. If 3D technology is going to take off, the directors/producers have to utilize the abilities more than they are now. In my review, I did not recommend the 3D option for this movie as it was under-utilized.
P.S. It was a RealD presentation, but that had no weight on my negative review of the 3D aspect of the film.

David Budo
Dbuudo07 is offline  
post #56 of 91 Old 06-12-2009, 03:34 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,667
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Dbuud.

Hi. I agree that the 3-D presentation in UP is weird. It seems to be tweaked to create only one effect: VERTIGO. That I believe, as a certified acrophobe , it does in spades:



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #57 of 91 Old 06-12-2009, 07:39 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbuudo07 View Post

After watching Up(2009) in 3D, I have to say I was underwhelmed by the use of the 3D potential. There were many moments that could have provided that real "WOW!" factor, but we are left with the plain side camera view. If 3D technology is going to take off, the directors/producers have to utilize the abilities more than they are now. In my review, I did not recommend the 3D option for this movie as it was under-utilized.
P.S. It was a RealD presentation, but that had no weight on my negative review of the 3D aspect of the film.

That was done intentionally:

Quote:
The heart-warming tale, which took four years to complete, is visually stunning, using 3D to make the screen like a window into the world of the film.

"We really tried to use depth in the same we use color and cinematography, and that is to further the emotion of the scene," said Docter of the philosophy behind the team's use of 3D in "Up."

The computer animated drama showcases the strength of the format to immerse viewers in the narrative -- especially when it is in the hands of talented storytellers.

Docter and Petersen steer clear of using 3D to create wow factor with the visual gags the format can provide. Lasseter agrees that 3D should be used as an aid to storytelling and not just for cheap visual thrills.

"3D has a tendency, especially when you do all that 'comin'-at-you' stuff, everybody laughs, but now they're out of the story, so we try to restrict that."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Movi.../cannes.3d.up/
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #58 of 91 Old 06-12-2009, 04:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dbuudo07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 110
I'm not saying to lose the story(which I really enjoyed by the way), just to use a few of the action moments to give the viewer more of an immersive feeling. For example, when the house rose into the air, the camera angle could have been above the balloons so they fly at you for a few seconds. Doesn't take away from the story, but adds a little bit more excitement for those experiencing the film in 3D. Again, I enjoyed the film, but I feel that the $3 surcharge isn't justified for the "window" effect. Maybe I'm alone in this.

David Budo
Dbuudo07 is offline  
post #59 of 91 Old 06-12-2009, 04:59 PM
Advanced Member
 
Sisyphus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 616
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbuudo07 View Post

I'm not saying to lose the story(which I really enjoyed by the way), just to use a few of the action moments to give the viewer more of an immersive feeling. For example, when the house rose into the air, the camera angle could have been above the balloons so they fly at you for a few seconds. Doesn't take away from the story, but adds a little bit more excitement for those experiencing the film in 3D. Again, I enjoyed the film, but I feel that the $3 surcharge isn't justified for the "window" effect. Maybe I'm alone in this.

You're not alone. I felt the same way. 3D is used more in the first part of the film than the last. Despite this being "Pixar's first 3D film" there is very little 3D. To make matters worse it seems the creators didn't research how poorly 3D does in low light scenes--which there are plenty of--so you end up with discomfort/stress/headache. I don't think this film was created with 3D in mind, but at some point they decided to retrofit it. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the film...but would recommend it in 2D.

MvA is still the best 3D presentation to date, and not just for the pop-out moments. If I remember there is an early scene in MvA when Susan Murphy/Ginormica is getting married and there are people around her, and you feel like you are right there, standing next to the guests.

Don't get scammed!

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Sisyphus is offline  
post #60 of 91 Old 06-12-2009, 05:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dbuudo07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 110
Sisyphus,
Agreed. I didn't feel the headache though. MVA was amazing. I remember the scene you are talking about, and it really added to the immersion of the film. That to me is a "Wow!" moment. Some of the previews I saw before watching Up looked promising.

David Budo
Dbuudo07 is offline  
Reply D-cinema Equipment and Theaters

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