If the Hobbit was shot in 3D, how come so much of it looks like flat on flat? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 10 Old 03-09-2014, 02:53 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,070
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Liked: 637

Seriously, I just saw The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey on 3D blu-ray last night, and I was immediately shocked.  This was a film actually shot in 3D, but so very much of it looked like a flat picture of an object hovering over another flat picture.  Like overly quick cut-out conversions.

 

Not all of it.  But a great deal of it was.  INCLUDING THE CGI.  I'm not even convinced the actual shot footage (actors) was always 3D.

 

Why, and how can this be?

 

What on middleearth is going here?


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 10 Old 03-10-2014, 06:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
tory40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 749
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Looked like just about any other 3D movie in my opinion, pretty bland in the 3D dept. One thing i now do that helps for movies is pump up the separation in the TV settings. However this is using a 46" 3DTV, sitting pretty close so if you use a projector with a 184" screen or something that might not work. Max separation shouldn't go beyond anyone's IPD of course. Its not perfect, but its closer to a "being there" feeling.
tory40 is offline  
post #3 of 10 Old 03-11-2014, 05:45 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,070
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Liked: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by tory40 View Post

Looked like just about any other 3D movie in my opinion, pretty bland in the 3D dept. One thing i now do that helps for movies is pump up the separation in the TV settings. However this is using a 46" 3DTV, sitting pretty close so if you use a projector with a 184" screen or something that might not work. Max separation shouldn't go beyond anyone's IPD of course. Its not perfect, but its closer to a "being there" feeling.

 

This is beyond any separation/convergence help after the fact.  It's in the source.  I'm very discerning when it comes to 3D, and this was terrible.  I'll have to have some people over to compare.  It looks nothing like the other 3D films I've seen on this....very much like super flat backgrounds (not the normal flattening you get with distance....even "closer up" backgrounds), or items that look like flat cutouts lifted up.

 

I can't blame the separation either because it doesn't seem to affect most (or all?) of the faces.  Nor did it affect anything in the opening scenes.  But suddenly after that......2D cutouts lifted up in very many places.

 

I'm really not sure what's going on here.  Same TV.  Multiple movies just fine.  And this one is a disaster.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #4 of 10 Old 03-11-2014, 06:18 AM
Advanced Member
 
tory40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 749
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
I've always assumed that movies made with IMAX in mind would end up with less separation in the home versions since just must shorten the amount of separation to account for the huge stretch of the IMAX screen. Not to mention this movie has a high likelihood of kids coming, making it very important to reign in the max amount of separation.

That said, you say other movies aren't so bad, which makes me wonder if they actually do adjust the separation separately for blu-ray versions but didn't for this one. Just one of many possibilities.

Maybe i misunderstood you, but the amount of perceived depth should increase with distance, you can easily see this effect with the video paused when and backing up and moving in.
tory40 is offline  
post #5 of 10 Old 03-11-2014, 06:49 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,070
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Liked: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by tory40 View Post

I've always assumed that movies made with IMAX in mind would end up with less separation in the home versions since just must shorten the amount of separation to account for the huge stretch of the IMAX screen. Not to mention this movie has a high likelihood of kids coming, making it very important to reign in the max amount of separation.

That said, you say other movies aren't so bad, which makes me wonder if they actually do adjust the separation separately for blu-ray versions but didn't for this one. Just one of many possibilities.

Maybe i misunderstood you, but the amount of perceived depth should increase with distance, you can easily see this effect with the video paused when and backing up and moving in.

 

No, in real life (and as captured by the camera) when you backup you see a compression of perspective.  Actually, you can see a related effect entirely with one eye or a 2D camera as well for slightly different reasons---the differences in object size for the same delta-Z drop to zero.  But keeping the discussion to 3D, the few inches separation of your eyes produces nearly identical L/R information at larger distances: the moon looks like a disk, not a ball, and the starry sky will always look like a flat backdrop with dots.

 

With a 3D TV, when you backup you're not actually seeing an increase in depth, you're seeing the effect of your brain not seeing the depth compress (it stays the same---the L/R information remains static) as the overall image recedes in to the distance.  Lacking this critical cue, as a result, you have no choice but to see this as an unnaturally larger depth for the distance you traveled back.  Had you done this in real life, the L/R information would have been less and less different.  It's not all about separation.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #6 of 10 Old 03-11-2014, 07:41 AM
Advanced Member
 
tory40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 749
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Im not clear on what your talking about. Im only talking about 3D. I fully understand that the image/s have remained static when changing your distance and so has the proportion of minimum and maximum parallax. Two things ARE changing when backing up, anything that under your IPD will cause your eyes to diverge more outward and tell your brain that it is further away. Also the field of view of everything gets smaller, also telling your brain that it is also further away. Both increasing the perceived deepness while having very little perceived effect on objects up close. 3D perception has so many variables that i wouldn't be surprised to learn that things are very different on a larger home screen, but for 46" that the reality for me, that the perceived distance of far away objects increases much further than the nearest objects, thereby increasing total perceived depth.
tory40 is offline  
post #7 of 10 Old 03-11-2014, 08:14 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,070
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Liked: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by tory40 View Post

Im not clear on what your talking about. Im only talking about 3D. I fully understand that the image/s have remained static when changing your distance and so has the proportion of minimum and maximum parallax. Two things ARE changing when backing up, anything that under your IPD will cause your eyes to diverge more outward and tell your brain that it is further away. Also the field of view of everything gets smaller, also telling your brain that it is also further away. Both increasing the perceived deepness while having very little perceived effect on objects up close. 3D perception has so many variables that i wouldn't be surprised to learn that things are very different on a larger home screen, but for 46" that the reality for me, that the perceived distance of far away objects increases much further than the nearest objects, thereby increasing total perceived depth.

 

We've slipped OT from what I'm seeing in the Hobbit.

 

But yes, it'll *seem* as if the perspective depth is increasing, but it's actually remaining static when your brains cues are expecting it to compress.

 

Imagine a child's cube with the letter A on the left and B on the adjoining face to the right.  Hold that corner close to you.  Your left and right eye are getting dramatically different information.  Push the cube far into the distance.  The left and right eyes have different information but dramatically less so.  It is (naturally) flattening.

 

Convert that to a 3D image (using convergent cameras) of a close up of the corner of that cube.  Dramatically different L/R information on the screen.  Walk backwards from the screen.  The screen L/R information is smaller, yes, but remain dramatically different from each other when your brain says that they should be looking more the same.  The only way this could happen in real life with the cube moving to a distance is if that cube was not a cube but distorted and had that corner stretching closer and closer to your face.  This is an increase in perspective (depth) and what you see happening as you step backward.

 

The perspective seems to increase, but it's your brain making sense of the fact that for some reason the perspective didn't collapse.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #8 of 10 Old 03-11-2014, 08:29 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,070
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Liked: 637

Back to the Hobbit.

 

What I'm seeing is not fixable with display-configured separation anyway.  What I'm seeing are a lot of cases where there's a flat object cut out and hovering over another flat object.  The 3D is there between the objects, so they are properly separated, (just no 3D within the borders of each one).  Again, if it were 2D cutouts that were then made to hover over each other.

 

Like a crummy 3D conversion would look if they didn't go the extra mile to map the image it to a new 3D mesh.  Not everything, but an awful lot of it.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #9 of 10 Old 03-11-2014, 09:13 AM
Advanced Member
 
tory40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 749
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Off topic cont:

You might have a point with that extreme example, at those distances, but that is not often seen in movies (if ever?). I have a lot of experience with close objects in 3D though, as i usually have a weapon practically on my shoulder as a correctly shouldered weapon. Bottom line. I pause a game (or stop moving usually), back away from the screen, the objects under my IPD in separation shoot quickly back into the screen while objects in the front remain about where they are, drastically increasing the perceived depth.

"But yes, it'll *seem* as if the perspective depth is increasing" I don't know about you, but thats all i care about is the perception. (and thats all im referring to)

and...on topic...(hopefully)
tory40 is offline  
post #10 of 10 Old 03-11-2014, 11:01 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,070
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Liked: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by tory40 View Post

You might have a point with that extreme example, at those distances, but that is not often seen in movies (if ever?).
No, no, no, the OT business had to do with why perspective seems to increase when walking backwards from a display.  You'll never see it in movies unless you're running around the theater.
 
Quote:
I don't know about you, but thats all i care about is the perception

Sure, ok.  Fair enough.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is offline  
Reply 3D Displays

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