Originally Posted by peter0328
Avatar 3D was framed and edited in 16:9. The 2D version was created in 2.35:1.
I disagree with everything you said about Avatar lol I hated that movie.
I'm happy that you are a person who actually cares about flawless projection at the movies. I only go to Rave Motion Pictures now after having been to Regal and a couple AMC theaters and finding everything there to be basically crap.
Heh - well, movie preference is subjective, si? Just curious, what is your favorite of all time?
I'm also glad you care about image quality! So many people just put up with worthless fuzz. Have you been to an XD theater?
One of my life-changing moments was a trip to see "2001" at Miami Beach in a huge Cinemascope theater when I was 7 years old. That pretty much started my love for science. I recall the movie looked sharper than real life!
Thanks for the hint about aspect ratio. I found this in another forum post, attributed to Cameron:
For Avatar we're shooting in a 16:9 ratio, we're extracting a cinemascope ratio from that for 2D theatrical exhibition, and for 3D theatrical exhibition we will do, in the theaters that can, we'll be in the 16:9 format and the theaters that can't we'll be in the scope format. Because I actually think that the extra screen height really works well in 3D. It really pulls you through the screen. So I'm actually going back on years of kind of eschewing the kind of 1.85 format, now saying 1.85 - or actually, it's 1.78:1 - actually works really well in 3D. But only in 3D. I still like the scope ratio compositionally for flat projection.
BTW, I just got back from seeing Avatar for the 8th time. This was the first time I watched it non-XD (not counting at home) It was on one of the small screens at the local Tinseltown, seats 110. There was a disappointingly high level of motion blur compared to my previous 7 viewings in the XD theater, the most recent last week on opening night. The blur really bugged me! It was very noticeable compared to the XD showing, and the motion blur took away a lot of the pleasure of the movie. It was there even if I covered one eye. For example, it made it nearly impossible to see facial expressions of the characters when they were moving fast across the screen. Even so, I still teared-up when Tsu-tey died, and got plenty of leg-thrills during the flying scenes.
The theater had a flat screen with AR 16:9, silver. At first I sat in the left-right center, but below the vertical center, because I wanted to simulate the same apparent width of the screen compared to the XD theater. My reference for apparent angle is to sit at the spot where the left and right edges of the screen are just barely within the overlapping view of both of my eyes looking through my eyeglasses. However, for the first time ever at a RealD 3D showing, I experienced eyestrain and mild headache.
I realized it was the result of my eyes being unable to focus on moving images, because of the motion blur.
About halfway through the flick I got up and moved back, to the spot on a line normal to the exact center of the screen. The motion blur did not go away, of course, but my eyes were not having to move through as great an angle while they tried in vain to focus on something that could not be focused on. My mild headache went away after 20 minutes.
After the movie I spoke to the projectionist, and he reported that the XD theater still has a Barco DP-3000 with 2K resolution (my previous post was wrong - he said they foolishly show the Christie add prior to the movies, all screens at this Tinseltown use Barco). The small theater I went to today has a brand-new Barco DP2K-20c, less than a month old. (My previous post was wrong). The XD theater will be upgraded this month to the new flagship Barco DP2K-32B, with the 4K DMD module. He said the Barco rep was there on Friday talking about the upgrade. Should be nice!
So, can anyone explain why there was virtually no motion blur in the XD theater with the DP-3000, but horrible blur with the DP2K-20c? The projectionist said that in both theaters, they use a single project0r, 144Hz overflash with a RealD "splitter" feed to the input of the Barco. The movie was bright, and sharp, just not quite as crisp as the XD. I use things like ear-fuzz as a reference standard. Is the old DP-3000 just better than the newer Dp2K-20c? Why would one be sharper (not just lacking motion-blur) than the other?
Again, all comments welcome - including derision of my love for a movie that spouts an anti-capitalist philosophy that I disagree with!