IMAX 3D to Dwindle in North America - Page 3 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 488Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 04:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
javanpohl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,000
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 695 Post(s)
Liked: 378
All this talk about how "post converted 3d sucks" reminds me of the inaccurate rumors about plasma that persisted until its death.
LDizzle, AlanAbby and benji888578 like this.
javanpohl is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 04:49 PM
Member
 
Stokestack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTHX View Post
Not that I've seen. Directors that have shot native 3D go to converted once they realize they can control the exact depth of an object in the frame. Why else do so many go through the expense of post conversion now?
Because the studio wouldn't pay to shoot in 3-D up front, for one thing.

And how is the director going to control the depth of an actor's nose in relation to his cheek? Or the complex topography of, say, a boulder in the foreground?

Come on.
Stokestack is offline  
post #63 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 05:09 PM
Newbie
 
sk2play's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Westminster CO USA
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 8
Send a message via Yahoo to sk2play
I don't buy BluRays unless it is 3D so the industry is losing my quan

Yamaha RX-A3070BL - Klipsch Ref II 5 1/4 with XW500d Sub 9.1 or 5.4.1 ATMOS - Samsung 1080p 75" UN75H6300AFXZA --Two Directv HR24/500 receivers via HDMI - LG UP970 4K Ultra-HD Blu-Ray Player via HDMI - HTPC - Amazon TV v2 via HDMI
sk2play is offline  
 
post #64 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 05:14 PM
Member
 
rvarneyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 28
No more IMAX 3D? No problem. I'll just go see the films in Real 3D.

*shrugs*
rvarneyy is offline  
post #65 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 05:21 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,011
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1295 Post(s)
Liked: 951
I saw Gravity in the theater in 3D, and Avatar at home on my TV in 3D, and both were neat (Gravity in the theater being the better experience) but not so special that I've been tempted to repeat the experience or seek out other 3D films.

For home viewing 4K UHD discs with HDR and WCG are more appealing to me than 3D. For movie theaters from what I understand 3D mutes the colors and contrast, so I'd rather have those at full-blast than 3D.

HT: Sony 940C, Oppo 203, Harman/Kardon DPR1001, Infinity Interlude IL40 x2, Infinity Interlude IL36C, Infinity MS-1 ii x2, Infinity MSW-1
Computer: Elac Uni-Fi UB5 x2, Elac Element EA101EQ integrated amp, SVS SB-12NSD
Dedicated 2-channel: Infinity Intermezzo 4.1t towers, Bluesound Node 2, Emotiva PT-100, Crown XLS 1502, Furman PL-8C
TuteTibiImperes is online now  
post #66 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 05:22 PM
Member
 
Pixel Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exist_To_Resist View Post
Same with Kong: Skull Island, but those are a few exceptions, not the rule.
Have you seen Ghost in the Shell in 3D? It is terrible.
Most post 3D conversions are bad and lack depth and have convergence issues.
I just watched Ghost in the Shell in 3D last night. My beloved Sony XBR-65X900A was beautiful as always.
Pixel Dude is offline  
post #67 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 05:37 PM
Advanced Member
 
pkeegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 701
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 98 Post(s)
Liked: 127
I'm not unhappy to see it go. I've never seen a movie where the 3D effects added to the enjoyment of the movie. In fact the last scenes of Avatar where the guy is fighting with a spear appeared hokey. In a couple of discs I purchased that included the 3D version it looked like some of the scenes in the standard blu-ray were slightly out of focus. Good riddance.

Sony XBR55A1E
pkeegan is offline  
post #68 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 05:42 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 185
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 69
I actually really like 3D at the movies. The problem in many of the theaters is the glasses. They are a royal pain in the ass. Even here in Los Angeles which has some of the best theaters, those same theaters are being very lazy about providing glasses that aren't heavy or impossible to clean..thus causing smearing while watching. They are using glasses from like years ago (The Grove, Arclight, etc). I'd rather use the disposable glasses that are so common in New Jersey when I visit my family. The only exception to this was when I went to the Hollywood IMAX this past weekend to see Valarian. The glasses were perfect and the 3D effect was great. The problem was the uncomfortable seats lol.
Keithian is offline  
post #69 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 05:47 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
6athome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,359
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 521 Post(s)
Liked: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by DDailey View Post
Was always a gimmick and no one wants to wear the goofy glasses. Good riddance 😁
OH!NO! VR is the next gimmick too go, really, really goofy looking eyewear!
6athome is offline  
post #70 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 06:05 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
PeterTHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,410
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 469 Post(s)
Liked: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stokestack View Post
Because the studio wouldn't pay to shoot in 3-D up front, for one thing.

And how is the director going to control the depth of an actor's nose in relation to his cheek? Or the complex topography of, say, a boulder in the foreground?

Come on.


Really? You don't know how 3D conversion works?
Here's some older articles - the process is even easier now that computing power has increased dramatically.
http://www.postmagazine.com/Publicat...-convert-.aspx
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...e-to-3d-anyway


As I said, most directors are now opting to shoot 2D and convert. They feel the quality is better.

My opinions do not reflect the policies of my company
PeterTHX is offline  
post #71 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 06:13 PM
Member
 
rvarneyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6athome View Post
OH!NO! VR is the next gimmick too go, really, really goofy looking eyewear!
3D comes and goes. We're on a down-cycle right now. The "gimmick" will return again. :P
Pixel Dude and King Richard like this.
rvarneyy is offline  
post #72 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 06:29 PM
Senior Member
 
michaellsv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 216
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 170
Thank god they are dwindling it! My eyes hurt to watch it, and superman movie in IMAX 3D have me huge migraine due to very fast change of scene shots.
&
None 3D IMAX in NYC is now total $27 which includes convenience charge of $3 when bought online in advance. $55 for a couple to see a movie? Too much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
michaellsv is offline  
post #73 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 06:31 PM
Member
 
denslayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 20
never bright enough
denslayer is offline  
post #74 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 06:33 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
chitchatjf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lawrence MA
Posts: 3,396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Liked: 34
pity as I like 3D
i hope star wars will stay 3D
King Richard likes this.
chitchatjf is offline  
post #75 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 06:36 PM
Member
 
Pixel Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Cool 3D is here to stay as long as most humans still have two eyes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox1966 View Post
I think that 3D is being killed, rather than dying. Do you notice how every time there is something negative about 3D, writers on A/V websites jump on the news quickly and spread it quickly with big strong headlines, such as this one (no offense, Scott). However, when there is something positive about 3D or a 3D movie, you don’t hear about it unless you stumble on it by accident.

For example, people who own Ghost in the Shell are reporting that the 3D version is far superior to the 4K version. I have both versions, and I agree with this wholeheartedly – the 3D version completely blows away the 4K UHD version on my OLED sets. A few days ago (I haven’t checked today) the 3D version of that movie was #8 seller on Amazon.com, the 4K UHD version was #25. Nobody reports this – you don’t hear instances of when 3D outsells 4K, but you darn sure hear it if 4K outsells 3D. It seems that there is a spin put on the news in regard to 3D, and you won’t hear the good news, but you won’t be able to avoid the bad news. (Kong: Skull Island is another new release where the 3D version is superior to the 4K version –compare them side by side if you haven’t on an OLED or top of the line LCD).

I found it amusing also when over 15,000 people signed the petition to LG, begging them to keep at least one 3D model in their lineup moving forward. I was in communication with the creator of that petition and he had to really work and beg authors of A/V sites to cover any news about the petition. And when they did, most of them put a negative stance on it instead of reporting on the thousands and thousands of positive comments that people were leaving on the petition in support of 3D. These comments were coming from directors, museums that use 3D televisions in displays, schools, and of course thousands upon thousands of regular folks who just happened to be 3D fans. Now, the thing is, with so little publicity no one really knew about the petition unless they happened to be someone who heard about it from a friend or who happened to read one of the few web stories about it. So, it is likely that for every 1 person that signed it, there are many more that would have supported it, had they known what was happening.

In contrast, when the petition to LG to support Dolby Atmos appeared, A/V sites and authors jumped on it like it was the most important thing in the world. Already “over 1000 people” have signed it! Now, that petition still hasn’t met 2,000 signatures but not terribly long ago I had a story pushed to my phone about it, making it seem like it was the most important thing in the world for Dolby Atmos to be added, and encouraging everyone to support the petition. I never had a story pushed to my phone about the 3D petition! Yet, almost 15 times as many people were in support of the 3D petition as opposed to the Dolby Atmos position.

It is just my opinion (and we all have one), but I just don’t see how anyone thinks that a 2D 4K HDR image can beat the immersive factor of a good 3D image, even a 1080P 3D image. I’ve compared almost every release that has come out so far in both 3D and 4K on my LG OLED, and the 3D wins every time. Every single person I’ve demoed 3D and 4K to agree as well, the 3D image is more realistic, more immersive, and draws you into the movie like a flat image simply cannot do.

I believe that when manufacturers finally realized that 3D was a niche market, and that not EVERYONE wanted to watch EVERYTHING in 3D, they quickly came out with 4K HDR, leaving 3D specs out to try to move everyone to one format. That way, they could resell their entire catalog, yet again. Back off advertising of 3D, pull all 3D technology so that even discs you currently own cannot be played on future televisions, and force everyone into 4K – that way, they hope to push the fans that truly prefer 3D into 4K and resell to them yet again. Of course, by the time they kill 3D entirely and try to cram a not-very-well planned 4K HDR agenda down everyone’s throats, we can expect 8K to follow on its heels.

It’s a darn shame – there is plenty of room for both 3D and 4K in the market. At least I’ll be saving some money, because I bought almost every 3D release to date – I definitely will NOT be doing that for 4K.
Wow!!!! THIS a THOUSAND ******* times over!!!

I've been in love with my Sony 4K passive 3D XBR-65X900A ever since I got it three years ago. It retailed for $7K, I got it on clearance at BB for $3K, and in the past two years I've seen resellers asking for as much as $15K to $20K because the 3D lovers know how crazy good it is. Just about everyone who has come over for movie night has had their jaws drop to the ground in amazement. It is B E A U T I F U L .

The anti-3D headlines bring about mixed emotions. On one hand, I just want to put my fist through my computer monitor because once again it feels like I'm being subjected to the fickle whims of the masses, which never feels good, although I genuinely feel bad for people who can't see what I see regardless of their often vicious irrational hatred of something that doesn't work for them that the 3D fans LOVE so damn freaking much. On the other hand, I summon the patience to calm down and continue to buy 3D blu-rays as I have done for several years even before I owned my own awesome 3D TV. Despite all the endlessly spun doomsaying pushing someone else's narrative, in the past few months I have still bought 3D blu-rays from Amazon, Best Buy, Amazon UK, and even Target (Star Wars Rogue One).

My TV does not do HDR, but I have bought about twenty 4K UHD discs, and the experience has been a blend of fool's gold and Charlie Brown and the football. Very few titles are "real" 4K, with most being upscaled or containing blended camera and CGI elements of different and inconsistent source resolutions. Heck, some of them, like Underworld Blood Wars, are so dark that they are actually unwatchable (yes, I've fiddled endlessly with settings), but the 3D version of that film is gorgeous and kept me nicely entertained at home as I had been in the theater last December. The one title I've seen so far in 4K that merits the 4K UHD logo on the cover is Lucy, so I know it's not my TV / BDP / AVR / AQ cables that are the problem. So far 4K UHD discs have otherwise been a bust for me, presumably because I don't have an HDR TV, but there is absolutely ZERO chance I will replace my gorgeous 3D TV for a non-3D one (until it breaks obviously, shudder the thought).

There is such a devoted fanbase for 3D that it seems ridiculous that it can't easily co-exist with 2D. Sometimes I really do wonder if the studio executives making these crazy decisions are in the percentage of the population who can't see in 3D correctly or otherwise have vision / perceptual difficulties.

As for post-production 3D, I noticed around 2012 with Star Trek Into Darkness the quality got really good and even offered some advantages over native 3D, which is no guarantee of success when done wrong. Ideally, everything would look like Avatar 3D quality, but until that day arrives, the post production 3D quality I've seen over the past few years generally has been quite satisfactory.

Sometimes I've joked about moving to China because if the studios take away their 3D, there could literally be riots. Yes, there are more important issues in life, but I can still relate to that level of passion of having something seemingly inexplicably taken away from you that you so deeply appreciate.

The industry needs to figure out how to keep 3D alive and kicking for a long time to come, as anything less is a societally malignant abandonment of a vastly superior and immersive entertainment experience.

Last edited by Pixel Dude; 07-28-2017 at 06:42 PM. Reason: typo
Pixel Dude is offline  
post #76 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 06:38 PM
Senior Member
 
EVERRET's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: California
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 74
Lightbulb recent quote:

Greg Foster, the CEO of IMAX Entertainment addressed the company's excitement about the upcoming 3D release of Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2next month and extensive use of IMAX technology throughout the film. He quoted Guardians director James Gunn, who stated:


Those who have followed me a while know that IMAX is the optimal way to view a Guardians movie. I personally oversee the 3D, crafting every shot, and only in IMAX do we shift aspect ratios during big scenes so that you get nearly 30% more screen size than anywhere else.
Unlike many other films today where screen size shifts and 3D are afterthoughts, we plan our aspect ratios during the script stage, and every single shot is tailored for 3D as we shoot it. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 is designed to be a fully immersive experience to be seen IN theaters. I'm glad that we've been able to partner up with IMAX from the moment of its conception.

And that was a very recent quote,

it's ironic (or predictable) with a couple of 2D movies coming out he pushes 2D

EVERRET is offline  
post #77 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 06:46 PM
Member
 
oldred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 26
While I have to admit. I do have an extensive 3D collection. I have noticed that newer 3D movies just don't seem to cut it.
What I mean is.......the main character is in 3D in focus....but the foreground and back round images are not focus. The 3D glasses never really bothered me....even though I had to wear them over my other glasses....I guess it was nice while it lasted.


G.E.M.

Living​​​ room 7.1 Sunfire TGA 7201, Anthem AVM60, Klipsch Chorus II, Klipsch Academy, Klipsch RB35, Klipsch Fort'e II, PSA V1800 Oppo BDP-103, Panasonic TC-P65VT50, Intel NUC
Family room 5.1 Adcom GFA 7605, Integra DHC 80.3, Klipsch Chorus II, Klipsch RC35, Klipsch Fort'e, Definitive Technology Pro Sub 60 X 2 Oppo BDP-203, Sony XBR65X850C, Intel NUC .....2 Channel Technics SL-1900,Yamaha C-70,Yamaha MX-800
oldred is offline  
post #78 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 06:58 PM
Member
 
rvarneyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaellsv View Post
Thank god they are dwindling it! My eyes hurt to watch it, and superman movie in IMAX 3D have me huge migraine due to very fast change of scene shots.
&
None 3D IMAX in NYC is now total $27 which includes convenience charge of $3 when bought online in advance. $55 for a couple to see a movie? Too much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Very happy for you. You have your IMAX 2D, and we have our Real 3D.

Real 3D gains new customers...IMAX loses customers.

Good luck with lower ticket prices.
AlanAbby likes this.
rvarneyy is offline  
post #79 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 07:21 PM
Senior Member
 
SilverBlade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 321
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked: 27
People probably wouldn't mind 3D in the theaters if it was priced the same as 2D showings.

And NO, I don't mean 'Raise the price of 2D screenings to be the same' I mean 'have 3D and 2D screenings the same price without an increase'

No one wants 3D in the home, and it all because of the glasses. Passive 3D is too dim, active 3D is too expensive (like $100/pair). A family of four? That's a large expense. Forget that.
SilverBlade is offline  
post #80 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 07:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTHX View Post
Not that I've seen. Directors that have shot native 3D go to converted once they realize they can control the exact depth of an object in the frame. Why else do so many go through the expense of post conversion now?
Who are these directors? There were only a handful that bothered to shoot native 3D to begin with. From the movies that are given 3D it's really a studio choice. 3D is added in post which tacks on an additional 10-15 million in production cost. If they spent half that on dual camera systems and a handful of stereographers the results would be far superior. Since most 3D titles coming out are full of CGI they would rather streamline the process and take care of 3D and CGI in one step.
MLXXX and King Richard like this.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #81 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 08:21 PM
Member
 
Pixel Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBlade View Post
No one wants 3D in the home, and it all because of the glasses. Passive 3D is too dim, active 3D is too expensive (like $100/pair). A family of four? That's a large expense. Forget that.
I am really sorry to hear your experience has been different, but "No one wants 3D in the home"? Have you read the posts in this thread?

3D in the home is fantastic for my family of four. Passive 3D on a good TV is not at all too dim. The glasses are super cheap, like $2 each on Amazon. I have a box of about 15 pairs of passive glasses in a clean plastic tub that I rotate out to guests as needed.

Sorry, but some people just aren't doing something right.
Pixel Dude is offline  
post #82 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 08:31 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,454
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1772 Post(s)
Liked: 1689
on a purely personal note, i'm happy about this, the lack of 2D options has been frustrating in the past.

on a more general note, what is wrong with CHOICE?!?!

the problem is not that they have 3D movies. the problem is that when a movie is shot in 3D they never show it in 2D except in the crappy theaters that don't even compare to home theaters from the early 2000's. there literally has not been a single atmos 2D presentation locally of anything worth watching. that doesn't mean 3D has to die, it just means they need to show 2D as a 'PREMIUM' presentation. locally, it seems like 3D is premium, and gets the 'good' theater and the premium audio and that's that. which has never made any sense to me. there's like 16 different theaters at the local multiplex, and at least 4 of them are equipped with atmos, there's no reason they can't do a 2D and 3D showing in atmos

second, i'm pretty sure it's the quality of the movies that determine box office sales. i'm pretty sure Dunkirk is doing well because people love the movie and recommend it to their friends, not because it's in 2D. there's a lot of 2D movies that nobody is paying attention to...

lastly, the reason i don't go to the imax theater is that it doesn't add anything to the experience. except it's got the worst location and after my 20 mins walk from wherever i might be able to find a parking spot, there's a pretty decent chance a window will be smashed by the time i get back to it...
King Richard likes this.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC(Enby), PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One

Last edited by fierce_gt; 07-28-2017 at 09:15 PM.
fierce_gt is offline  
post #83 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 08:32 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
VideoGrabber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: SW Michigan
Posts: 2,653
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 219 Post(s)
Liked: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
I double dip on every single movie that's available in UHD and 3D and in almost all cases, end up preferring the 3D version for the sense of immersion it provides on many of these titles.
Knowing that, might it not make more sense to just pick up the 3D version instead? It would certainly seem to stretch the entertainment dollar a lot further!
VideoGrabber is online now  
post #84 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 08:44 PM
Newbie
 
MisterLeadfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
I love 3D no matter who says they don't. If its an option I will always see a movie in 3D for the first showing and I very much need to buy it on BD in 3D otherwise I'm pretty unhappy. Sad people don't like it but whatever. Is it just me or does the announcement feel like more of a push for IMAX product on creators than anything else?
MisterLeadfoot is offline  
post #85 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 09:48 PM
Newbie
 
justforthesound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 0
3D is the only reason to go to a theater. It needs a large screen and a totally black room to make it work. Otherwise, things attract my attention and I lose focus. Being an audio type. It has to be stunning to keep my attention. If not, I'll read while listening to the show. Wife hates that.but I remember more of the story than she.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
justforthesound is offline  
post #86 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 10:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
teckademic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: san jose, ca
Posts: 2,006
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 107 Post(s)
Liked: 114
this thread made me go watch something in 3d and to me, 3d gets me everytime. I find myself much more immerssed in 3d than i do watching 4k. I don't get how 3d is so popular everywhere else, but here in the U.S.
dew42, Fox1966, rvarneyy and 5 others like this.
teckademic is offline  
post #87 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 10:22 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
PeterTHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,410
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 469 Post(s)
Liked: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtastic View Post
Who are these directors?

More like who did not.


Quote:
There were only a handful that bothered to shoot native 3D to begin with. From the movies that are given 3D it's really a studio choice. 3D is added in post which tacks on an additional 10-15 million in production cost. If they spent half that on dual camera systems and a handful of stereographers the results would be far superior.

Again - not really.

My opinions do not reflect the policies of my company
PeterTHX is offline  
post #88 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 10:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
PeterTHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,410
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 469 Post(s)
Liked: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBlade View Post
People probably wouldn't mind 3D in the theaters if it was priced the same as 2D showings.


Seeing as it was more expensive all around to show 3D you're expecting exhibitors to absorb the extra cost?
King Richard likes this.

My opinions do not reflect the policies of my company
PeterTHX is offline  
post #89 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 11:10 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Wilkinson View Post
IMAX 3D is slated to dwindle, and movies not shot on IMAX cameras will get shorter runs in IMAX theaters in an effort to boost sagging revenues.

http://www.avsforum.com/imax-3d-dwindle-north-america/
3D is not dead in the home far from it, thank you. it's only 2017 sets that don't feature 3D there are far more sets in homes that do have 3D than 2017 sets that don't. The anti 3D bias is getting annoying.
As for IMAX it's been on the way out for many years. Here in the midwest it's a hour and a half to see a real IMAX screen 10 mintues to see 3D screen. There are a few faux IMAX screens where the theater buys the right to use the name but the screen is no bigger and still is a widescreen where real IMAX is more 4:3 but haters gonna hate, their logic I hate 3D so everyone should hate 3D as for Dolby Vision one screen two hours away, Atmos one screen if a block buster is coming out better see the movie you want because the new film will be on that one screen next week, so you have each movie in Atmos for one week. Scott love ya but you live in that Southern California bubble, I envy you. Most blockbusters this year are in 3D and I have ordered them on Blu-ray in 3D can't say that for IMAX for many years now.
AlanAbby is offline  
post #90 of 303 Old 07-28-2017, 11:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTHX View Post
More like who did not.





Again - not really.
??? Care to elaborate or just disagree with no facts?

You claim many directors moved to post conversion which isn't the case. I can only think of one director right off where that would be the case where the director had shot a film in 3D and then shot a sequel or other project in 2D and then used conversion. Resident Evil comes to mind. And if you've seen the new film, the 3D is not nearly as defined as the previous two.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply 3D Content

Tags
imax , imax 3d

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