or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Content › Best 3d Bluray Movie so far????3d effects
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best 3d Bluray Movie so far????3d effects - Page 44

post #1291 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitusTroy View Post

James Cameron is the guy who 're-invented' 3D and not for pop-out but for depth so there is no doubt he got it right

James Cameron himself has said that if he was making Avatar today, he'd push the depth a little more. He was conservative precisely because he was "re-introducing" 3D to the audience and didn't want to press it too much.
post #1292 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

James Cameron himself has said that if he was making Avatar today, he'd push the depth a little more. He was conservative precisely because he was "re-introducing" 3D to the audience and didn't want to press it too much.

Thanks Josh. smile.gif Good to know I am not crazy, my equip is not faulty and there is validity to what I am seeing and beeing in the "minority".
post #1293 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

James Cameron himself has said that if he was making Avatar today, he'd push the depth a little more. He was conservative precisely because he was "re-introducing" 3D to the audience and didn't want to press it too much.

I would like to see the article where he stated this...I find it very hard to believe that he would state that he was overly conservative with Avatar's 3D...plus taking it out of context could have a different meaning...he could have meant that he was pushing 3D in general to such a high point compared to what consumers are used to seeing that it was only natural to want to pull back a bit
post #1294 of 1877
Avatar is no slouch, but watch Ghosts of the Abyss for Cameron's version of strong native depth. There's a noticeable difference in parallax.
post #1295 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitusTroy View Post

I would like to see the article where he stated this...I find it very hard to believe that he would state that he was overly conservative with Avatar's 3D...plus taking it out of context could have a different meaning...he could have meant that he was pushing 3D in general to such a high point compared to what consumers are used to seeing that it was only natural to want to pull back a bit
Josh is right. I've read Cameron's comments about that before too. He was worried about eye strain.

http://hollywoodinhidef.com/2011/09/cameron-avatar-needs-more-3d-depth/
post #1296 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedOrange11 View Post

Josh is right. I've read Cameron's comments about that before too. He was worried about eye strain.

http://hollywoodinhidef.com/2011/09/cameron-avatar-needs-more-3d-depth/

but that's taking what he said out of context...he's not saying that Avatar's 3D did not have a lot of depth or even that it's not a reference 3D movie...he's making a general statement about 3D...yes he was cautious about the 3D but to take that to mean Avatar did not have tons of depth is not accurate...if he could have added even more depth then yes he could have but that doesn't diminish or detract from what the movie actually was and how it compares to most other 3D movies on the market
post #1297 of 1877
It's not out of context. Avatar is great, but it's not the absolute pinnacle of strong depth in 3D movies. Did you watch the video? He makes a specific statement about Avatar. He literally says, "If I had Avatar to do over, the one thing I would change is I would push the depth a little bit more..." and goes on to explain about his worry of eye strain in a 2.5 hour movie and their lack of data and how he took a "slightly conservative path" and "only pushed it here and there" for that reason.
Edited by BleedOrange11 - 8/15/13 at 5:14pm
post #1298 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedOrange11 View Post

It's not out of context. Avatar is great, but it's not the absolute pinnacle of strong depth in 3D movies. Did you watch the video? He makes a specific statement about Avatar. He literally says, "If I had Avatar to do over, the one thing I would change is I would push the depth a little bit more..." and goes on to explain about his worry of eye strain in a 2.5 hour movie and their lack of data and how he took a "slightly conservative path" and "only pushed it here and there" for that reason.


That was my impression watching the video as well and just reaffirms my personal experience with this film as I have visited and revisited it over the last few years and compared with the better and best titles out there. I absolutely agree with JC that more aggressive depth would have benefited the 3d experience. Don't get me wrong as Avatar is certainly not bad for depth, it is just not reference IMO and there are quite a few titles that get noticeably more aggressive in this area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedOrange11 View Post

Avatar is no slouch, but watch Ghosts of the Abyss for Cameron's version of strong native depth. There's a noticeable difference in parallax.


Exactly. Take your glasses off at various points in Avatar and notice how the separation is relatively conservative vs other titles in general. The general separation difference between Avatar and something like M v A for example is very noticeable which of course is reflected when you put the glasses on as well.
post #1299 of 1877
Part of the problem is big-screen vs. small-screen. The last thing you want is for the audience's eyes to diverge to focus on something (I can feel it instantly, it's extremely uncomfortable), so even on a mid-sized theater screen, the separation can't be very high. That results in very shallow depth on a home theater, only a few millimeters. Content that's made specifically for home viewing, that never saw a theatrical release, can afford much greater separation.

The point being, the bigger the movie, the bigger the screen, which has little choice but to result in shallower depth by comparison.
post #1300 of 1877
I'm tired of talking about Avatar...it's only good as a 2D/3D demo anyway and not much more then that...there are other titles that have surpassed it in both 2D and 3D quality...I'm looking forward to seeing more 3D as it looks to be slowing down in terms of profitability here in the USA...I wonder if the Avatar sequels announcement helped extend the life of 3D or if the market is moving on to other technology like 48 FPS, Dolby Atmos audio etc

the fact that 4 years after Avatar was released we are still getting mostly 2D-->3D conversions versus movies filmed natively in 3D...not a good sign
post #1301 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitusTroy View Post

I wonder if the Avatar sequels announcement helped extend the life of 3D or if the market is moving on to other technology like 48 FPS, Dolby Atmos audio etc

the fact that 4 years after Avatar was released we are still getting mostly 2D-->3D conversions versus movies filmed natively in 3D...not a good sign

I'd like to see Cameron go for it and release the 3D directors cut, first, then release the 20 minute shorter 2D version maybe 1-3 weeks later. That'd either make or break the 3D medium. There's tons of people who won't even give 3D the chance given a traditional option... I tend to think people who really dislike 3D either are locked in to what they've always done (perhaps I should capitalize the previous 4 words, but I don't want to yell), or have some issues with vision in one eye that makes stereoscopic viewing impractical (I have a friend who complained he went to a movie and the 3D didn't work, well, he's legally blind in one eye). If Cameron really goes for it and gets the look he really wants, it may change some minds when those who race to see movies the first weekend who normally race to the 2D version don't have that option. But then again, it's a huge risk to do so.
post #1302 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isnoreatmovies View Post

I'd like to see Cameron go for it and release the 3D directors cut, first, then release the 20 minute shorter 2D version maybe 1-3 weeks later. That'd either make or break the 3D medium. There's tons of people who won't even give 3D the chance given a traditional option... I tend to think people who really dislike 3D either are locked in to what they've always done (perhaps I should capitalize the previous 4 words, but I don't want to yell), or have some issues with vision in one eye that makes stereoscopic viewing impractical (I have a friend who complained he went to a movie and the 3D didn't work, well, he's legally blind in one eye). If Cameron really goes for it and gets the look he really wants, it may change some minds when those who race to see movies the first weekend who normally race to the 2D version don't have that option. But then again, it's a huge risk to do so.

I like 3D but I still prefer 2D...I don't have an issue with the glasses or the technology...whenever I watch a 3D movie I'm more focused on the pop-out effects and depth versus the story...it's a distraction...technology should be used to enhance the experience and 3D enhances it in an artificial way...with most movies I always watch the 2D version first to appreciate the story + video/audio...afterwards I watch it in 3D to see the effects

then again I have watched certain movies in 3D that I never would have watched otherwise (Yogi Bear being 1 example) just for the pop-out...I don't want to see 3D go away but I would like to see all 3D movies shot with 3D cameras and not converted...otherwise it's going to be even harder to sell the public because consumers know bad 3D when they see it and most are not technicially proficient enough to know which movies are native 3D...I'm not sure what the state of 3D is going to be in 2016 when Avatar 2 is released but the signs are not good
post #1303 of 1877
Hopefully, 3D done properly would enhance a story, rather than just being gimmicks and tricks for pop out effect. I recently watched an old blue/red glasses copy of Journey to the center of the earth... lots of yo-yo play and that type of stuff for effect rather than adding to the movie, it was kind of irritating. I think 3D has the potential to immerse one into the movie, not just be a funky spectacle. Directors have a choice, do they have the vision to make it work is the question.
post #1304 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitusTroy View Post

whenever I watch a 3D movie I'm more focused on the pop-out effects and depth versus the story...it's a distraction...technology should be used to enhance the experience and 3D enhances it in an artificial way...with most movies I always watch the 2D version first to appreciate the story + video/audio...afterwards I watch it in 3D to see the effects

People said the same thing about sound when "Talkies" were introduced. Then about color. Then CinemaScope. Then surround sound. With any new innovation, there's always an adjustment period where the novelty will seem distracting. Eventually, you get used to it and start taking it for granted.
post #1305 of 1877
Very true, especially in the case of color. During the late 1920s, in the very early talkie era, there were a lot of two color technicolor features (or movies that had two color technicolor sequences) and the critics were quite brutal, saying it was a distraction and caused headaches and eye strain. It wasn't until the improved three color technicolor process came into being that color really became accepted, and even then it took a couple of more decades until it became commonplace.
post #1306 of 1877
Just my opinion, but the studios rule the world and the cost of native 3D is too much unless you are going to be an absolute no-questions-asked blockbuster. That said, the 3D conversion process is about generation 5 of 10, and when they get it really right (say cost effective--even cheap), then 3D will thrive. The bad--the wasted cost of all the 3D cameras and related equipment that will be sitting in a dark room at the studio. The good--we will see more classics converted.
post #1307 of 1877
i have to agree that AVATAR gets propped up a little too high in terms of 3d IMHO. It's a beautiful transfer and has some good 3d, but i'm not sure I'd put it in my top 10. I'd use Cameron's TITANIC conversion as a demo before I would use AVATAR to show off 3d to someone...
Edited by oleus - 8/16/13 at 4:54pm
post #1308 of 1877
Joined this forum just to post to this thread! Recently got a new 55" Panasonic 3D plasma and am obsessed with everything 3D.

Already picked up Prometheus, Life of Pi, Avatar, Dredd, Coraline and Captain America. Still looking for good deals on The Avengers, Hugo and Alice in Wonderland, among others. Can't find any good (cheap) copies of Flying Swords of Dragon Gate.

I did have one question: has anyone heard about a 3D Blu ray release for Beowulf?
post #1309 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by MerchantPrince View Post

I did have one question: has anyone heard about a 3D Blu ray release for Beowulf?
No, but it is streaming on Netflix in 3D.
post #1310 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by MerchantPrince View Post

Can't find any good (cheap) copies of Flying Swords of Dragon Gate

I hear a lot of good things about the 3D in that movie...I don't want to blind buy it though without a way of seeing it first...I own Red Cliff on Blu-ray (International Version) and am wondering how the movie compares from a story standpoint...I rarely buy movies only for 3D or audio or video alone, it has to have an overall excellence with a good story

looking at some reviews online a lot of people complain that the only subtitle option available is the hearing impaired version which adds the sound effects to the subtitles...plus apparently the subtitles jump around all over the screen which can be distracting
Edited by TitusTroy - 8/16/13 at 8:48pm
post #1311 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedOrange11 View Post

No, but it is streaming on Netflix in 3D.

It's very frustrating. I reactivated my Netflix account the other day just to see if I could get 3D streaming to work, as my Internet provider is listed as a Netflix Open Connect partner for Super HD/3D. But I can't get it to work; everything is just HD with no option for 3D presenting itself.
post #1312 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by threed123 View Post

Just my opinion, but the studios rule the world and the cost of native 3D is too much unless you are going to be an absolute no-questions-asked blockbuster.
The facts beg to differ:

Hugo, Life of Pi, Great Gatsby - versus - Iron Man, Man of Steel, Avengers, etc
post #1313 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by MerchantPrince View Post

It's very frustrating. I reactivated my Netflix account the other day just to see if I could get 3D streaming to work, as my Internet provider is listed as a Netflix Open Connect partner for Super HD/3D. But I can't get it to work; everything is just HD with no option for 3D presenting itself.
That is frustrating. Hopefully, Netfilx can reach a more widespread agreement with internet providers.

I streamed the 3D version via the app on my PS3 with Cox internet in Nebraska (although I've just moved and will have to see if it still works in my new city).
post #1314 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitusTroy View Post

I hear a lot of good things about the 3D in that movie...I don't want to blind buy it though without a way of seeing it first...I own Red Cliff on Blu-ray (International Version) and am wondering how the movie compares from a story standpoint...I rarely buy movies only for 3D or audio or video alone, it has to have an overall excellence with a good story

looking at some reviews online a lot of people complain that the only subtitle option available is the hearing impaired version which adds the sound effects to the subtitles...plus apparently the subtitles jump around all over the screen which can be distracting
I just watched it again. The story is complicated as I had a hard remembering which Chines are the good ones and which are the bad. The swordfighting is very quick and lots of flying around. The 3D is outstanding with lots of popout. My copy had no problems with the subtitles, no xtra sound. Highly recommended.
post #1315 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitusTroy View Post

I hear a lot of good things about the 3D in that movie...I don't want to blind buy it though without a way of seeing it first...I own Red Cliff on Blu-ray (International Version) and am wondering how the movie compares from a story standpoint...I rarely buy movies only for 3D or audio or video alone, it has to have an overall excellence with a good story

looking at some reviews online a lot of people complain that the only subtitle option available is the hearing impaired version which adds the sound effects to the subtitles...plus apparently the subtitles jump around all over the screen which can be distracting

I'm pretty sure its available for rental on Vudu; if you are not a subscriber, sign up and you'll get a $5 credit so the film should only cost a couple of bucks more to rent.

I blind bought it a few months back and didn't care for it at all. I'm not a fan of those types of films and this one did nothing to change that. The plot was convoluted, the dubbing typically mediocre. The action is your typical kung-fu action flick with lots of invisible wire work and improbable stunts. The 3D was good though the 2.40:1 aspect ratio yielded a significant letterbox which compromised the 3D experience on my 1.78:1 TV. I ended up selling it a few days later.
post #1316 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by MerchantPrince View Post

Joined this forum just to post to this thread! Recently got a new 55" Panasonic 3D plasma and am obsessed with everything 3D.

Already picked up Prometheus, Life of Pi, Avatar, Dredd, Coraline and Captain America. Still looking for good deals on The Avengers, Hugo and Alice in Wonderland, among others. Can't find any good (cheap) copies of Flying Swords of Dragon Gate.

I did have one question: has anyone heard about a 3D Blu ray release for Beowulf?

Flying Swords is $20 on Amazon.
post #1317 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitusTroy View Post

I hear a lot of good things about the 3D in that movie...I don't want to blind buy it though without a way of seeing it first...I own Red Cliff on Blu-ray (International Version) and am wondering how the movie compares from a story standpoint...I rarely buy movies only for 3D or audio or video alone, it has to have an overall excellence with a good story

looking at some reviews online a lot of people complain that the only subtitle option available is the hearing impaired version which adds the sound effects to the subtitles...plus apparently the subtitles jump around all over the screen which can be distracting


FWIW, I did not really care for the film much, but the 3d is excellent IMO. This would be a great rental if we had a nice cheap way to do that (Netflix).
post #1318 of 1877
thanks for all the reviews...I think I'll hold off on Flying Swords of Dragon Gate...I loved the Chinese historical epic 'Red Cliff' so I was hoping for something similar to that story-wise but looks like it only has the reference 3D going for it
post #1319 of 1877
What do you think are the best kids movies with popout? Don't really care if they are good, just want nice popout to show the kid and get him interested. He is 4 1/2. I believe I read madagascar 3 had good pop out in this thread somewhere. Are there any others? Planes was a major letdown for my son as his first 3d movie.
post #1320 of 1877
Quote:
Originally Posted by robl45 View Post

What do you think are the best kids movies with popout? Don't really care if they are good, just want nice popout to show the kid and get him interested. He is 4 1/2. I believe I read madagascar 3 had good pop out in this thread somewhere. Are there any others? Planes was a major letdown for my son as his first 3d movie.

A Turtle's Tale - available on VuDu is the BEST.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: 3D Content
AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Content › Best 3d Bluray Movie so far????3d effects