3D is NOT dead! - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 42Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 103 Old 08-05-2014, 08:32 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 130
Quote:
Believe me, 3D is only about the money.
I agree with that if you are talking about big time Hollywood producers and film companies. Business is all about money. But that is not true for all the creators of 3D content. Many if not most artists, the directors, cameramen, and editors, it's about the story and the art of telling the story. When I worked in the business, it was all about the money and the story supported that end goal. Today, I enjoy doing 3D to aid my story. I don't care about the cost, or the fact I will not be selling my work to make money. It's all about the fun of doing 3D of stories that haven't been done that way before.
Barry C likes this.


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


Don Landis
Don Landis is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 103 Old 08-05-2014, 08:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
thrang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 4,177
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by NSX1992 View Post
3D looks so much better on a passive 4K set as there is very little dimming and the picture is outstanding. My 4K 84" LG set looks better than the movie theaters. Wearing the light passive glasses should not be a problem as I am sure more than half the population wears glasses and the others don't object to wearing sunglasses.
True, but prescriptive glasses correct vision, and sunglasses reduce glare and fatigue. A forced dimensional effect is not the same.


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.
thrang is offline  
post #33 of 103 Old 08-05-2014, 08:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
NSX1992's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 505
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I have been wearing glasses since I was 10 years old without discomfort. Recently I had both cataracts removed so I did not have to wear glasses for distance but I wear my variable glasses since my wife thinks I look better with them. I don't understand the forced 3D effect since my eyes love the 3D without any strain and I look forward to viewing any new 3D content.
NSX1992 is offline  
post #34 of 103 Old 08-05-2014, 03:36 PM
Senior Member
 
SFMike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Angry Disney can't be botherd by bluray 3D for USA audiences.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
Hollywood studios (including the tiny indie companies) make all kinds of movies that never really get a wide release in the United States. 3D is not doing well except for major blockbusters, and there are still some tentpole filmmakers that dislike 3D -- Chris Nolan and Tarantino being high on that list.
And it appears Hollywood likes 3D mainly because 3D is big overseas. Disney for one has not released Frozen, Need For Speed or Malificent on 3D bluray even though they were shown and promoted as 3D releases in the theater. The rest of the world has these pictures released on 3D bluray so what does that say about their feelings about the 3D market in the USA.
SFMike is offline  
post #35 of 103 Old 08-06-2014, 07:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NickTheGreat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Posts: 1,699
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFMike View Post
And it appears Hollywood likes 3D mainly because 3D is big overseas. Disney for one has not released Frozen, Need For Speed or Malificent on 3D bluray even though they were shown and promoted as 3D releases in the theater. The rest of the world has these pictures released on 3D bluray so what does that say about their feelings about the 3D market in the USA.
There's a lot of rumor (especially about Frozen) that they will release it this fall. You know, after you've already purchased the 2D disc set, but in time to purchase the 3D disc set for Christmas!

Says a lot about how they respect their customers, but we already knew that . . .

------


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
NickTheGreat is offline  
post #36 of 103 Old 08-06-2014, 09:19 AM
Member
 
Gorilla Killa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 52
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Liked: 16
3D seems to somewhat polarize people. Most seem to love it or hate it. I think it will be quite sometime before Avatar is matched in terms of quality 3D. Some seem to be done and just don't work. For me Avatar,Hugo, Despicable Me, Pirates of the Carribean, and Gravity are well done, rest are so so.
Gorilla Killa is offline  
post #37 of 103 Old 08-06-2014, 12:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cajieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Space Coast, Florida
Posts: 4,399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorilla Killa View Post
3D seems to somewhat polarize people. Most seem to love it or hate it. I think it will be quite sometime before Avatar is matched in terms of quality 3D. Some seem to be done and just don't work. For me Avatar,Hugo, Despicable Me, Pirates of the Carribean, and Gravity are well done, rest are so so.
3D on most all animated films is a treat for me. I'd like to add Snow White to your list, which I saw at the IMAX 3D Theater.
cajieboy is online now  
post #38 of 103 Old 08-06-2014, 02:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cinema13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,655
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 94 Post(s)
Liked: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorilla Killa View Post
3D seems to somewhat polarize people. Most seem to love it or hate it. I think it will be quite sometime before Avatar is matched in terms of quality 3D. Some seem to be done and just don't work. For me Avatar,Hugo, Despicable Me, Pirates of the Carribean, and Gravity are well done, rest are so so.
I think there are quite a few more than that. I was particularly impressed with the DR WHO 3D...better than most major studio releases. I'd also add DRIVE ANGRY, HAROLD & KUMAR XMAS, CREATURE FROM BLACK LAGOON, MAN IN THE DARK, MY BLOODY VALENTINE, FINAL DESTINATION 5, and numerous others that escape me at the moment.
.

cinema13 is offline  
post #39 of 103 Old 08-06-2014, 04:25 PM
Member
 
Barry C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorilla Killa View Post
3D seems to somewhat polarize people. Most seem to love it or hate it. I think it will be quite sometime before Avatar is matched in terms of quality 3D. Some seem to be done and just don't work. For me Avatar,Hugo, Despicable Me, Pirates of the Carribean, and Gravity are well done, rest are so so.
Would like to ad Life of Pi to that list. Also there are many very good non feature length films out there. Some of the the underwater Cousteau Imax stuff is stellar, for instance.
Barry C is online now  
post #40 of 103 Old 08-06-2014, 07:09 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrang View Post
True, but prescriptive glasses correct vision, and sunglasses reduce glare and fatigue. A forced dimensional effect is not the same.
Most of my life I did not have to wear prescription glasses. I always wore sunglesses. Those never bothered me. Then along comes 3D and active glasses. Those don't bother me either, especially the passive kind as they are light and about as close to sunglasses as it can get. One day in my early 60's I decided to have a complete eye exam checkup, mainly because my wife got eye glasses insurance at work. While I don't need glasses, the doc said I can make a slight weakness in astigmatism, "perfect" He suggested progressives so I tried them. Talk about dimensional distorted effect! They were so bad I took them back and exchanged for a pair of shooting glasses for distance ( I target shoot as a hobby) and a pair of reading computer glasses. The doc said progressives distortion needs some getting used to. No Kidding!

So the idea that 3D is bad because it distorts flat image to 3 dimensions is somehow bad is confusing to me. Isn't that like saying color TV is bad because it takes the original Black and White TV and makes it have color?

For people who have never worn prescription glasses, got news for you. They aren't perfect. They have lots of dimensional distortion and you need to get used to them. If your vision is just slightly bad, the correction may not be comfortable. If very bad, the correction offered with the distorted dimension is the best of two evils but not perfect.


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


Don Landis
Don Landis is online now  
post #41 of 103 Old 08-06-2014, 08:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
thrang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 4,177
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post
Most of my life I did not have to wear prescription glasses. I always wore sunglesses. Those never bothered me. Then along comes 3D and active glasses. Those don't bother me either, especially the passive kind as they are light and about as close to sunglasses as it can get. One day in my early 60's I decided to have a complete eye exam checkup, mainly because my wife got eye glasses insurance at work. While I don't need glasses, the doc said I can make a slight weakness in astigmatism, "perfect" He suggested progressives so I tried them. Talk about dimensional distorted effect! They were so bad I took them back and exchanged for a pair of shooting glasses for distance ( I target shoot as a hobby) and a pair of reading computer glasses. The doc said progressives distortion needs some getting used to. No Kidding!

So the idea that 3D is bad because it distorts flat image to 3 dimensions is somehow bad is confusing to me. Isn't that like saying color TV is bad because it takes the original Black and White TV and makes it have color?

For people who have never worn prescription glasses, got news for you. They aren't perfect. They have lots of dimensional distortion and you need to get used to them. If your vision is just slightly bad, the correction may not be comfortable. If very bad, the correction offered with the distorted dimension is the best of two evils but not perfect.
3d is artifice; it is not what or how we see the real world. I surmise that any one of a number of manifestations of this fundamental difference may cause any level of discomfort or dislike of the experience. It might even be the dimensional equivalent of the uncanny valley for many.


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.
thrang is offline  
post #42 of 103 Old 08-06-2014, 08:31 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 130
thrang- 3D stereoscopic effected video/movies can work in more than one way. You can use the tool to create realism and/or use it to create special effects. for example, I know what the underwater reef life looks like as a scuba diver. The 3D amateur video work done by Barry C is so real you'd swear you were there. But in other films, the effect is more gimmick, a form of entertainment. Neither should make you feel discomfort unless there is something else going on with your eyesight.

3D stereo is being used in product design labs now for a more realistic final design view. If it was so distorted and artificial, designers and engineers would not be clamoring to use it. A few educational surgeons are using 3D stereo to aid in teaching surgical technique. Forensic video has made good use of the tool as well. This is not to say ALL 3D is dimensionally accurate. The advantage is it doesn't have to be. But if you get discomfort from it then 3D may not be your thing. Doesn't mean others aren't enjoying the tool for what it can do.
cajieboy likes this.


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


Don Landis
Don Landis is online now  
post #43 of 103 Old 08-06-2014, 10:44 PM
Member
 
Barry C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrang View Post
3d is artifice; it is not what or how we see the real world. I surmise that any one of a number of manifestations of this fundamental difference may cause any level of discomfort or dislike of the experience. It might even be the dimensional equivalent of the uncanny valley for many.
Regarding your premise that "3d is an artifice, it is not what or how we see the real world," I would disagree with that as a blanket statement. While in some instances, this could be correct, there are many others where it is much more like what we see in the real world- which is seen in 3d- than a 2d film of the same subject matter could ever be.
cajieboy, kimg1453 and cinema13 like this.
Barry C is online now  
post #44 of 103 Old 08-06-2014, 11:02 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northridge, CA
Posts: 452
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFMike View Post
And it appears Hollywood likes 3D mainly because 3D is big overseas. Disney for one has not released Frozen, Need For Speed or Malificent on 3D bluray even though they were shown and promoted as 3D releases in the theater. The rest of the world has these pictures released on 3D bluray so what does that say about their feelings about the 3D market in the USA.
Very true. And if I'm not mistaken, Vizio dropped 3D on all their 2014 displays. I think it's fair to say that it's not a growing trend for the home video marketplace.

Interestingly, 3D theatrical films are doing spectacularly well in China, so there are parts of the world where it's making a lot of dough. I know a couple of people involved in the 3D conversion market, and I honestly hope the market does well enough that everybody can at least make a living. Note that even films shot in 3D need certain parts converted, especially for VFX.
Marc Wielage is online now  
post #45 of 103 Old 08-06-2014, 11:36 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 0
3D have a long life for me
Chirst Linch is offline  
post #46 of 103 Old 08-07-2014, 07:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Deja Vu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: great white north
Posts: 4,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)
Liked: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrang View Post
3d is artifice; it is not what or how we see the real world. I surmise that any one of a number of manifestations of this fundamental difference may cause any level of discomfort or dislike of the experience. It might even be the dimensional equivalent of the uncanny valley for many.
To some extent I would agree; however, for storytelling I feel it works. Many 2D films are shot in a way and with CGI that often gives me pause and I would have to say the image isn't what I see in the real world either but again, for storytelling it often works -- when we listen to a story we use our imaginations and when we "watch" a story the visuals aid our imaginations and take us (if done successfully) to where we want to be -- lost in the story. Interestingly I've been using a real time 2D to 3D converter that produces a 3D image from a 2D source that appears to me to be much more realistic and true-to-life 3D than studio 3D. I prefer the studio 3D because it is less realistic and more artistic, however, the converted 3D I'm experiencing is preferable, IMO, to 2D since it takes me further down the rabbit hole.

Last edited by Deja Vu; 08-07-2014 at 07:51 AM.
Deja Vu is online now  
post #47 of 103 Old 08-07-2014, 05:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cinema13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,655
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 94 Post(s)
Liked: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
Very true. And if I'm not mistaken, Vizio dropped 3D on all their 2014 displays. I think it's fair to say that it's not a growing trend for the home video marketplace.

Interestingly, 3D theatrical films are doing spectacularly well in China, so there are parts of the world where it's making a lot of dough.
Vizio changed their panel supplier...and that manufacturer does not (and never has) make 3D panels. That's why it won't be on future sets.

3D here is a growing market, with more 3D sets being sold yearly (i.e. a set where 3D is one of numerous features, such as on the UHD sets). But as penetration and sales grow, a company like Disney does all it can to keep it out of the hands of domestic consumers. Even to the point of making discs region-locked where before they were not! (the biggest comment I hear from new 3D TV owners is...where's the content????) How some of these marketing/home video execs keep their jobs is a mystery to me.

cinema13 is offline  
post #48 of 103 Old 08-07-2014, 10:51 PM
Member
 
EVERRET's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 62
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Red face Real World

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry C View Post
Regarding your premise that "3d is an artifice, it is not what or how we see the real world," I would disagree with that as a blanket statement. While in some instances, this could be correct, there are many others where it is much more like what we see in the real world- which is seen in 3d- than a 2d film of the same subject matter could ever be.
I agree ... Unless your "real world" is spending the day watching 2D movies on flat screens or looking at flat 2D computer screens or Looking at 2D Pictures on flat Paper books or magazines .......... but Is that really more "real world" ?

If i have a choice i always watch movies in 3D , when they say your not watching the movie your "in the movie" ......... that's so true for me.
old corps, Barry C and LDizzle like this.
EVERRET is offline  
post #49 of 103 Old 08-10-2014, 10:50 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northridge, CA
Posts: 452
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinema13 View Post
3D here is a growing market, with more 3D sets being sold yearly (i.e. a set where 3D is one of numerous features, such as on the UHD sets).
"Here" as in the U.S.? I don't see 3D as a growing feature being promoted anymore in 2014. They are promoting 4K/UHD, but in truth that's a lotta hype and hocus-pocus, too.

Quote:
But as penetration and sales grow, a company like Disney does all it can to keep it out of the hands of domestic consumers. Even to the point of making discs region-locked where before they were not! (the biggest comment I hear from new 3D TV owners is...where's the content????) How some of these marketing/home video execs keep their jobs is a mystery to me.
I think they're just looking at the numbers and trying to predict what's going to sell based on conversations with dealers, past sales figures, focus groups, and guesswork. In truth, the physical media market even for Blu-ray is collapsing much faster than anybody expected:

http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/So...ay-Sales.shtml

What gives me hope is that at least Apple is building extra content capability into iTunes downloads (similar to the extra material, outtakes, and interviews on DVD and Blu-ray). Now, if they can just reduce the compression, we might actually have a way to watch HD & 4K content at home with reasonable image quality.

But I don't see 3D for home use as a market that's going to come back.
Marc Wielage is online now  
post #50 of 103 Old 08-11-2014, 01:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cinema13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,655
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 94 Post(s)
Liked: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
"Here" as in the U.S.? I don't see 3D as a growing feature being promoted anymore in 2014. They are promoting 4K/UHD, but in truth that's a lotta hype and hocus-pocus, too.


I think they're just looking at the numbers and trying to predict what's going to sell based on conversations with dealers, past sales figures, focus groups, and guesswork. In truth, the physical media market even for Blu-ray is collapsing much faster than anybody expected:

http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/So...ay-Sales.shtml

What gives me hope is that at least Apple is building extra content capability into iTunes downloads (similar to the extra material, outtakes, and interviews on DVD and Blu-ray). Now, if they can just reduce the compression, we might actually have a way to watch HD & 4K content at home with reasonable image quality.

But I don't see 3D for home use as a market that's going to come back.
Except that it hasn't gone away. Amazon Best Seller list (among others) shows that. Yes, they are promoting UHD. And guess what? They are 3D-capable. And as more people buy sets that are, they'll be looking for content. While the industry may not be promoting it, they should be...as consumer penetration rises.

As for iTunes (or other streaming outfits)...to me, digital isn't really ownership. And I prefer better audio/video than I've seen from the two times I used it.
Hagenstein and LDizzle like this.

cinema13 is offline  
post #51 of 103 Old 08-11-2014, 02:17 AM
Advanced Member
 
CinemaAndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 525
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 322 Post(s)
Liked: 71
No 3D is a long way from being dead. What a lot of people overlook is that the studio backed 3$ or whatever fee, is no longer applied, if you are paying the fee to see a 3D feature film, the theater is keeping the money. And this is not common public knowledge for many reasons. Here are some good links on that,
http://timessquarecinema.net/?page_id=14
http://screenrant.com/steven-spielbe...-mikee-125010/

And here is a list of the 'anticapted' upcoming 3D releases. Nothing final, these numbers may, and always do change.
http://www.boxoffice.com/statistics/3d-release-calendar

Also some good reading,
http://www.deadline.com/2014/02/2014...ovies-analyst/
http://natoonline.org/initiatives/cinema-technologies/

Off subject, but as a projectionist i find this rant sad, but funny, AMC 16 Burbank.

"I just saw Lucy in 3D here in their remodeled "premium" theater where you pay $18.50 per reclining seat. The picture was out of focus for the entire movie.

When we complained afterwards, the customer service staff said we should have come out to complain in the middle of the movie. Further, they said that the projectionist -- the human being who knows how to fix the automatic projectors -- was not working on a Tuesday night.

A sixteen screen theater with no projectionist is like a plane with no pilot. AMC should be embarrassed."

And the payoff is never certain: Some observers contend that a generation has already been trained to be content with the small screen.
CinemaAndy is offline  
post #52 of 103 Old 08-11-2014, 06:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cajieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Space Coast, Florida
Posts: 4,399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinema13 View Post
Except that it hasn't gone away. Amazon Best Seller list (among others) shows that. Yes, they are promoting UHD. And guess what? They are 3D-capable. And as more people buy sets that are, they'll be looking for content. While the industry may not be promoting it, they should be...as consumer penetration rises.

As for iTunes (or other streaming outfits)...to me, digital isn't really ownership. And I prefer better audio/video than I've seen from the two times I used it.
Even if 3D doesn't get the huge marketing push it once experienced, it will still remain a growing audience. For home viewing, 3D benefits greatly from 4K HDTV's, and will offer even more possibilities for technological advancement.
old corps and LDizzle like this.
cajieboy is online now  
post #53 of 103 Old 08-11-2014, 10:52 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northridge, CA
Posts: 452
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 118
There's a famous principle in marketing philosophy called Choice-Supportive Bias. I think many people in this thread are no longer objective because they're desperately trying to support something they've already paid for:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice-supportive_bias

I've been guilty of the same thing over the years, but after a few decades, you learn to step back a bit and try to look at all sides of a very complex problem.

I don't have a problem with consumer displays that support 3D, because in some ways, the 3D feature helped improve regular performance. But I do think there are far more important factors in whether to buy a new set than whether it's 3D or not. And I think 3D is widely regarded as a big failure, judging by the last couple of CES conventions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post
I agree with that if you are talking about big time Hollywood producers and film companies. Business is all about money. But that is not true for all the creators of 3D content. Many if not most artists, the directors, cameramen, and editors, it's about the story and the art of telling the story.
All of the major DPs I've had the privilege to meet and work with over the last few years have detested 3D, with few exceptions (including Chivo Lubezki of Gravity). The compromises in projected brightness and color are a huge reason why.

If and when they can solve those technical limitations and create normal P3 color at normal SMPTE brightness levels, it might be a different story.
Marc Wielage is online now  
post #54 of 103 Old 08-12-2014, 07:53 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 130
Marc- Your theory that many people in this thread may only support a technology because they got suckered into buying something may apply to a few, but others like me, have had a passion and fascination for the medium of 3D stereoscopy for a long, long, long time.
It began for me when I was just 5, well over 60 years ago. I was digging through my grandparents attic and discovered a box of post cards with double pictures and a stereoscope viewer. I would sit for hours looking at those old stereo pictures. I wanted one so bad my parents bought me a "modern day" version called a viewmaster. Many years alter I saw 3D in the theaters and then at Disney World. I hoped one day I would be able to see those 3D movies in my home. Today, I not only can do that, but I can create my stories in 3D with my own 3D stereo production operation.

The fact that 3D stereo imaging has been here since the 1800's in one form or another and has never gone away, only became more or less popular from time to time does not mean it is a complete failure. Judging by the last couple of CES conventions, it has gotten even bigger as the ability to display 3D has been incorporated into more and more TV's, more 3D BD players, and even more development work in passive 3D projectors. There is always the newest innovative technology to highlight each CES and last year it was 4K and UHD. While prior 2 years we had lots of new 3D camcorders being introduced, 2014 only has one new one. If you had asked, "What's next?" in the evolution of camcorders, you would have been told, 3D 4K camcorders, once these 2D 4K systems are standard.
Quote:
All of the major DPs I've had the privilege to meet and work with over the last few years have detested 3D, with few exceptions (including Chivo Lubezki of Gravity). The compromises in projected brightness and color are a huge reason why.
Most of my peers in this profession are admittedly lazy and not innovative DP's. Few like the idea of having to learn a new tool. They have their comfort zone in the old and traditional ways. They are not artists, they are technicians. Likely most of your connections with this profession were with DP technicians. Your description sure says that. This is best described by the guys at RED when they talk about the early days of getting acceptance of digital cinema from the DP's who refused to consider digital because it was so radical from traditional film. Soon, however, many saw the advantages of digital cinema for what it offered, not for what it could not do like film. I smile when I recall all the reasons sited why digital cinema will never catch on and will be a huge failure.
Most 3D enthusiasts, like me, do not claim that everything must be in 3D or we refuse to watch it. Heck I don't even use 2D to 3D conversion. We are just pleased to see the tools available and being used more and more as appropriate.

There may be a few like yourself who fit the picture of desperately trying to support something they've already paid for but I believe most of us HERE, are sincere in our enjoyment of the medium. And, look forward to budgeting for the next 3D innovation for our home theaters.
CINERAMAX, cajieboy and Hagenstein like this.


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


Don Landis
Don Landis is online now  
post #55 of 103 Old 08-12-2014, 08:04 AM
 
Apostate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 930
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
I don't have a problem with consumer displays that support 3D, because in some ways, the 3D feature helped improve regular performance. But I do think there are far more important factors in whether to buy a new set than whether it's 3D or not. And I think 3D is widely regarded as a big failure, judging by the last couple of CES conventions.
The most commonly cited reason for the failure of 3D in consumer market has been the glasses. With the advent of glasses-free 3D TV, don't you think consumer 3D market may enjoy a revival? Or do you think Joe Sixpack still won't care? Please don't misread the tone of my words, I am sincerely interested in your opinion.
Apostate is offline  
post #56 of 103 Old 08-12-2014, 08:06 AM
 
Apostate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 930
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post
There may be a few like yourself who fit the picture of desperately trying to support something they've already paid for but I believe most of us HERE, are sincere in our enjoyment of the medium. And, look forward to budgeting for the next 3D innovation for our home theaters.
Hear, hear! I, for one, am saving up for Ultra D glasses-free 3D TV (which I hope will become reality soon).
Apostate is offline  
post #57 of 103 Old 08-12-2014, 08:34 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 130
Been following Ultra D for several years. I think it has a huge place in display ads in retail and sports bars as it is eye catching. But for Home use FOR ME, the screens are too small. If you are used to the 50" screen size, then you will have fun with it. I might consider one for my edit suite. Sony has an auto stereo screen 24" broadcast monitor for editors. It's sweet, but very expensive. They show it at NAB, not CES.
BTW- when I asked Ultra D, I was not accommodated. I wanted to see their 4K claim using a res test chart but they would not show that. I suspect their 4K claim is not true 4K as to my eyes, it looks less than the 4K with active glasses, such as from Samsung. If you haven't done so, I suggest you get a live demo before buying.

I agree with you as the most negative public opinion for 3D TV is wearing glasses. Personally, I admit having to put up with that as seeing 3D at home more than makes up for having to put on glasses. Good productions can be adequately bright so dark glasses doesn't bother me. I don't see glasses free 3D 105" screens that roll up in my future. So I accept that need to wear glasses. It is not a high priority for me to be glasses free.


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


Don Landis
Don Landis is online now  
post #58 of 103 Old 08-12-2014, 08:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cakefoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
No 3D is a long way from being dead. What a lot of people overlook is that the studio backed 3$ or whatever fee, is no longer applied, if you are paying the fee to see a 3D feature film, the theater is keeping the money. And this is not common public knowledge for many reasons. Here are some good links on that,
http://timessquarecinema.net/?page_id=14
http://screenrant.com/steven-spielbe...-mikee-125010/
What in the name of logic are you talking about?


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

A movie with good 3D does not necessarily equal a good 3D movie!

cakefoo is offline  
post #59 of 103 Old 08-12-2014, 09:29 AM
 
Apostate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 930
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post
But for Home use FOR ME, the screens are too small. If you are used to the 50" screen size, then you will have fun with it. I might consider one for my edit suite.
.
.
BTW- when I asked Ultra D, I was not accommodated. I wanted to see their 4K claim using a res test chart but they would not show that. I suspect their 4K claim is not true 4K as to my eyes, it looks less than the 4K with active glasses, such as from Samsung. If you haven't done so, I suggest you get a live demo before buying.
The Ultra D TV is supposed to be available in 50 and 55 inch models with 65 and 42 inch models to come later. I have my eyes on the 65-incher which is plenty big for my needs.

You may be correct in your suspicion that the demo model was not 4K. I think that's all they have for now. I don't think they even have pre-production model yet which worries me about them meeting the end-of-the-year production and be-in-the-market goal. I really hope Ultra D isn't vaporware.
Apostate is offline  
post #60 of 103 Old 08-12-2014, 09:33 AM
 
Apostate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 930
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by cakefoo View Post
What in the name of logic are you talking about?
I think he's saying the extra dough one pays for 3D movie over regular movie goes to the theater owners. Therefore, it's in the theater owners' best interest to want 3D to continue existing.
Apostate is offline  
Reply 3D Content

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