or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Content › Is 3D about dead?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is 3D about dead? - Page 11

post #301 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apostate View Post

My son likes Doctor Who TV shows. I never thought the SFX were that special but then again it's a TV show with a TV show budget.

Is it a TV movie or an actual "cinema" movie? Maybe I'll check it out.

Actually, although broadcast in 2D on TV, it was transmitted to movie theaters in 3D on the day and did very well financially
post #302 of 324
It is a kids show in fact and yeah, the budget is a bit limited.
The 3D Day of the Doctor was a 50th anniversary 1 hour long special. Not a movie as such, more of a celebratory episode.
post #303 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcdesign View Post

It is a kids show in fact and yeah, the budget is a bit limited.
The 3D Day of the Doctor was a 50th anniversary 1 hour long special. Not a movie as such, more of a celebratory episode.

It was 75 mins long actually (without commercials). John Hurt co-starred. I should add that, altho I have yet to see the 3D version (but I will), those who haveseen it have praised the dimensionality as being better than most big-budget theatrical 3D releases.
Edited by cinema13 - 2/14/14 at 12:02pm
post #304 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinema13 View Post

It was 75 mins long actually (without commercials).

Oh right! Fair comment. Even better then.
post #305 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcdesign View Post

It is a kids show in fact and yeah, the budget is a bit limited.
The 3D Day of the Doctor was a 50th anniversary 1 hour long special. Not a movie as such, more of a celebratory episode.

Kids show? Thanks, I'm a fan at 59. I was also a fan of Monty Python. Do Brits consider that childish humor?
My Brain Hurts smile.gif
post #306 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferl View Post

Kids show? Thanks, I'm a fan at 59. I was also a fan of Monty Python. Do Brits consider that childish humor?
My Brain Hurts smile.gif

I'm a fan too and I am 49 but it is considered in the UK by the BBC who make it to be a kids show. See http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2013-05-17/of-course-doctor-who-is-a-childrens-show-says-steven-moffat---but-that-doesnt-mean-its-childish
post #307 of 324
That article makes some good points. Being appreciated on different levels is accurate. It's very well written at an adult level, but I can't see the attraction to kids even with the goofiness factor of the current doctors.

From a kids perspective, I wouldn't want to be the 8 year old going to bed at night after watching the angels. Hell, I even leave the lights on. That way I see if they're looking at me.

I think I'm going to buy the 3D version after reading this thread.
post #308 of 324
Hiding behind the sofa when Dr Who is on is one of the joys of being a Kid growing up in the UK. smile.gif
post #309 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcdesign View Post

Hiding behind the sofa when Dr Who is on is one of the joys of being a Kid growing up in the UK. smile.gif

I rest my case. Wink wink, nudge nudge.
Edited by ferl - 2/14/14 at 1:24pm
post #310 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by inefekt View Post

Not sure if this has been mentioned but I believe having these kinds of exclusive releases, where a 3D movie is only available to people who buy certain TV's or projectors or whatever, did more harm than good for the 3D market. Avatar was a massive hit in cinemas and was one of the big reasons that 3D became so popular but the 3DBD remained exclusive to people who purchased Panasonic products. So you had millions of people who wanted to re-experience this incredible visual spectacular at home but couldn't because they had a Sony 3DTV or a Mitsubishi 3D projector. Dumb move.

I am in complete agreement that AVATAR was a wonderful opportunity to promote 3D that was squandered by requiring purchases of Panasonic products. But we're now past that nonsense (which, to be fair, other suppliers such as Samsung engaged in as well with MONSTERS VS ALIENS et al.). The release of FROZEN originally was announced to be a Walmart exclusive, but at least it was not marketed as requiring some additional hardware purchase.

It is hard to imagine how home theater 3D could have been initially marketed more poorly. The only 3D demo that is still available in my neck of the woods is LG passive technology at Best Buy -- and one of the employees there told me last week that it was going to be removed soon.
post #311 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferl View Post

I rest my case. Wink wink, nudge nudge.

Monty Python! I was trying to figure out where I've heard that before. IIRC, my local PBS station used to have Monty Python when I was growing up. That show was definitely different.
post #312 of 324
post #313 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcdesign View Post

3D is going nowhere for several reasons in my opinion:-

1. Used properly 3D can be a very engaging movie going experience as Gravity has proved.
2. Its very popular in the far east and the population there is huge meaning big bucks for the studios.
3. The cost of equipping cinemas with 3D equipment need to be recouped.

It's slowed down that's for sure but largely because the suits in Hollywood made the idiotic mistake of trying to cash in on 3D with poor presentations and after thought conversions instead of allowing film makers who are comfortable with the format and can see how it can enhance their movies, to use it as they want too. Hopefully they will understand the lessons that the inappropriate use of 3D can teach before too long and we will get a greater number of "Gravity" type features and far fewer "Clash of the Titans".

OH, and I cannot agree that 3D at home is inferior to 3D at the theatre. In my experience its exactly the opposite in most instances. 3D at home is sharper, more colourful and more 3D. You just need a decent TV.
post #314 of 324
Thread Starter 
Original Poster here.

I wanted to think everyone that added something to this thread. It had a big impact on my decision. I haven't gotten thru all 11 pages yet to catch up. I had no idea this one would go on this long. The question whether 3D is Dead is certainly an interesting debate and I have to say for awhile I thought it was over even after Gravity. But even on new TVs now they're basically adding 3D as a feature so it's still there and will continue to be there.

I decided to go ahead with a 3D camcorder. For awhile I was thinking about getting into 4K but decided against it for several reasons. Cost number one. Camera, plus a fast enough machine with 4k gpu, with at least one 4k display and a 4k TV, I just bought a 3DTV just 2 years ago so not ready to buy a 4k tv. Really the only benefit of 4k is for larger displays anyway. I'll get into 4k at some point, when the price is lower and more affordable.

But what is affordable right now?

3D. Just purchased a Panasonic AG-3DA1 for a fairly reasonable price. Also got the 0.6 wide angle lens kit for it for very cheap. 3D has been out for a few years. I've taken some advice from what I've read here. I was a little worried about getting a camera that's 3 years old but really the tech hasn't changed that much with 3D and HD altogether so not worried about getting older camera. 2D cameras aren't updated that much either. Canon hasn't updated their pro cameras since 2011.

I've had some time to play around with the 3DA1 today and wow! this thing is awesome. It's just weird creating your own 3D like I need to put the Blu ray back in the case when I'm done. Already I see a few problems with this one, some I already knew beforehand but not much I can do about it. Not sure why they would make a pro camera with 384 kb dolby digital audio instead of LPCM. The focal range is also pretty bad. 1.8-2.4, already knew both of these issues before I got it, but the wide angle lens will help with the focal range up close.

I'm also getting the HDC Z10k.
This one I might use to solve the audio problem on the 3DA1, and use the Z10K for audio. Also has better focal range 1.5-2.7. Plus 2D. Looking to do some projects here soon when it gets green outside still the 3DA1 looked amazing outside in the drab, colorless yard. I've got 2 big projects I want to do this summer and put on 3D Blu ray.

So from what I understand the 3DA1 compresses each frame left/right at 21 mbps avg 24 max each while the Z10k compresses both frames together at 28? Meaning the 3DA1 is compressed at a much higher overall rate? Overall, I really like the 3DA1 so far, I will say it feels a little too plastic, then again, it would weigh a ton if it were of stronger material. The plastic looks and feels strong, but I wouldn't want to drop it and find out. The push buttons could also be different, they're a little hard to press. The manual focus and manual zoom rings are really nice and easy to adjust, but you have to be careful not to bump them. An easier auto mode would be nice instead of manual everything. But because 3D is mostly a specific recording medium, it won't be difficult to set up each shot specifically to its needs. Also no anti shake, but it's about 6 lbs so it doesn't move around that much even when hand held. Overall, I like it, it has a few faults, but it captures amazing 3D pictures.
post #315 of 324
The Z10k 5.1 mic suffers quite a bit with wind chatter. I resolved that problem with a wind suppressor fur. You can buy these and they just stick on the mic with double stick tape. I leave mine on all the time and the wind chatter is gone.
post #316 of 324

Don, have you ever created any "cross eye" 3D video (for viewing on 2D displays)?  You could use that to show examples of the various techniques you've discovered, or when you're trying to explain a mistake that you've learned from.  Would be fascinating!

 

You'll see cross-eye 3D every now and then on youtube.

 

post #317 of 324
Thread Starter 
Ok, I'll put one on it right away. I plan on using external mics for most stuff anyway.
post #318 of 324
I never played with creating the cross eye method because it is not easy to force your vision that unnatural way and it causes too much eye strain for most people. It's in that category of something that works but not ever going to be a real method to view stereoscopic 3D programming.
post #319 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtastic View Post

Ok, I'll put one on it right away. I plan on using external mics for most stuff anyway.

This is similar to what I used:

http://www.amazon.com/WindCutter-Microphone-Windscreen-Camcorder-Panasonic/dp/B0066DOPPG
post #320 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

I never played with creating the cross eye method because it is not easy to force your vision that unnatural way and it causes too much eye strain for most people. It's in that category of something that works but not ever going to be a real method to view stereoscopic 3D programming.

 

I have no problems with it at all if the images are small.

 

I'm not advocating starting a content service based upon it; I was advocating you using it to explain pitfalls or successes you had with various techniques of yours.  Forum conversations only.  Such as "As a novice I ended up making a classic mistake, look at the rock on the right...."  (etc.).  It would go a long way further than trying to explain your front-line experience with mere words.

post #321 of 324
Cross Eyed 3D Great for some, a nightmare for others. I am lucky and it looks very good to me but I couldn't watch anything like that for very long!
post #322 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcdesign View Post

Cross Eyed 3D Great for some, a nightmare for others. I am lucky and it looks very good to me but I couldn't watch anything like that for very long!

 

Again, I was only suggesting it as an occasional explanation vehicle.  No feature length distribution.  A moving picture is worth 1,000 images which is worth 1,000,000 words.

post #323 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

A moving picture is worth 1,000 images...

1,000 images? That's not even a minute of a moving picture. tongue.gif
post #324 of 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apostate View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

A moving picture is worth 1,000 images...

1,000 images? That's not even a minute of a moving picture. tongue.gif

 

LOL.  I extended the aphorism "a picture is worth a thousand words."

 

Besides: I was talking about him using it as film technique examples, (both good and bad).  Cross-eye is hardly a comfortable technique for long multi-minute segments.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: 3D Content
AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Content › Is 3D about dead?