Avatar 2, 3, 4 and Five! Glasses Free 3D the next phase? - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 16Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 81 Old 02-03-2017, 11:52 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 3,395
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 588
Avatar 2, 3, 4 and Five! Glasses Free 3D the next phase?

James Cameron's focus has been entirely on the Avatar Sequels 2-5 lately. It was reported he just finished writing the script for 5 so these are very much an arch or series like LOTR and the Hobbit. Avatar 2 will be released in 2018 (unless it gets pushed back again), with 3, 4 and 5 to follow over the next few years. This is something I miss lately. I haven't gone to the theater in awhile but back when The Hobbit movies were out it was nice to have one to go and see each year. Avatar 2-5 will be like that again.

Cameron is still optimistic about 3D and HFR, this was according to articles from late 2016 even indicating a desire to show them in glasses free 3D in the theater. So how will that happen? One promising article by MIT News is reporting a team of researchers have come up with something called "Cinema 3D" (yeah not exactly unique, would think they'd call it something that said it was glasses free) which uses a special array of lenses and mirrors to enable everyone in the theater to see the image in 3D. More on that at that link.

The question of course is when and will this happen in theaters? With 3D right now there are the complaints of a darker image and wearing the glasses and 3D manufacturers are dumping 3D for the home. But will it happen for Avatar 2? I can't see it happening that soon (2018). Cameron is very optimistic but to get theaters to upgrade to this just for 3D, especially with 3D interest waning, hard to see theaters upgrading just for Avatar.

However, Peter Jackson has been quote as saying that HFR and 3D would someday be the norm. I've had my doubts on HFR myself, especially for movies (and maybe I was right, I don't know, there certainly hasn't been much talk about it lately, other than Cameron and Ang Lee's movie). Mainly because you're so used to viewing movies with 24 fps anything else just looks odd, but the extra frames do improve the image so it's definitely a new experience. My rational thought is that if it was really that important, more directors would want it, but we've only seen one movie I think since The Hobbit. Avatar 2-5 could change that.

I think we're at the point with 4K resolution where they are going to need to look at other areas to increase picture quality and the overall "immersive effect". I don't see 8K as the next best thing or the natural progression from 4K. The fact is 4K is generally enough resolution to fill the average living room with what your eyes can distinguish.

3D has been around a long time, but it comes and goes for various reasons, usually technical shortcomings from displaying the images. But with the dawn of glasses free cinema, could this be the next phase? I don't just mean the next phase for 3D, I mean cinema in general? The majority of movies are shown flat with the exception of 3D films, but really, with conversion and glasses free, anything could be 3D. Right now, there are only commercial glasses free displays and no cinema glasses free theaters.

I'm predicting it here first, I know this is very speculative given the current state of 3D but glasses free 3D could be the next phase of flat panels. The idea of making the displays more immersive could only mean adding depth and that means 3D after you work out all the color improvements and black level improvements. What could be better than looking through an outside window and honestly not knowing it was actually your TV? To be fooled in ways you never thought possible? For whatever reasons you hate 3D, glasses free 3D solves all of those issues. Whether or not it will happen, no one knows or when. In 3 years? Five? 10?

The current phase of 3D is nearly over as it is right now. Manufacturers are abandoning 3D for home theater products and focusing on 4K and 2D. I still wouldn't call it dead until there is no more content to buy on Blu ray 3D or a cinema to see a 3D film which could linger on for years, who knows.

So are you ready for Avatar 2 and will glasses free 3D be the next phase?
kwok lau, EVERRET, Barry C and 1 others like this.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 81 Old 02-03-2017, 03:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
kwok lau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: new jersey, usa
Posts: 959
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 257 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Great news. Looking forward to buy the Avatar 2 to 5 once come out for sale. Thank for sharing the news.
kwok lau is offline  
post #3 of 81 Old 02-04-2017, 08:37 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 2,549
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1140 Post(s)
Liked: 627
Tom, It seems Cameron created the latest 3D fad and then destroyed it by not delivering an Avatar every year as he promised--nine years for a sequel?. I think it's way too late to regenerate the home 3D market for sure. Theaters still will have 3D for a long time. To buy a 3D TV in 2016, I had to research which TVs had 3D. I couldn't find one at BB that had 3D on the info tag. I even asked a sales guy, and he didn't know either. He said to look it up on line. After research and reading these forums I finally found the LG passive 3D that I really like. I asked why they don't tag any TVs has having 3D, and he said it was a deal breaker for some people. People would avoid them thinking they would cause nothing but eyestrain even when not watching 3D as they've heard from their friends (that made me chuckle). He also said a lot of their returns were 3D TVs. When people got home and found out their new TVs had 3D on them, they would return them for ones that didn't have it--probably realizing they could save a few bucks. I have two close friends that bought 3D TVs three years ago, and both have watched 3D only a couple of times even though I tried to get them interested in it. They both have shutterglass TVs and could never seem to get the glasses to work right. And they hated recharging the glasses.

As for HFR, it's too much like soap opera effect to me, and that is a huge turn off when watching a movie. It makes you feel like you are watching actors in costumes on a stage vs. a movie--at least my opinion. If they could get glassless 3D to work, that would help, but probably way too expensive for all of the local 3D equipped theaters in any community. And to get it to work, it looks like the seats would have be defined in very specific patterns to match the viewing angles of the screen mirrors. If your left eye sees one image and the right another, what stops you from shifting your head slightly and suddenly seeing images in reverse by catching the right eye in your left and left eye in your right. They would have to have the images spaced exactly at 2.5" everywhere in the seating area, both close and far and left and right. The crosstalk would be horrendous I think as well. Well bring it on, lets keep the 3D ball rolling as long as we can.
EVERRET likes this.
3DBob is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 81 Old 02-04-2017, 09:50 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 3,395
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 588
I agree on HFR. But it's sort of a Catch-22. In order for the image to become more like-like you need faster frames since our eyes see much more than 24 fps, but that goes against what everyone is used to for movies. It seems like HFR never really had a chance. I know with The Hobbit, I didn't really care for it but it seems some directors aren't giving up on it. James Cameron said he still wants 3D and now HFR so what will happen with public resistance? I think he has to prove that it works. I didn't think The Hobbit really proved anything overall. There were a few scenes where it probably benefited. I say probably because I only saw the first two in HFR and only once. That scene in the first movie where they're in the Goblin cave, there's a lot of quick motion scenes, the 48 fps helps there letting you focus with less judder. That's just one scene that comes to mind. On the Blu ray it is a bit jarring because of the judder. But increasing fps becomes more life-like and that's what people don't want, they want it to look surreal. So it could just be for certain types of movies like Avatar, do you want your movies like a video game?

And then there's the home theater which likely won't support the same format. If he shoots at 60fps, UHD Blu ray is fine, but 3D he'd have to drop the resolution to 720p.

One point I was trying to make was that at some point, obviously not right now, but some day: all TV's will be 3D. It will be like color TV now. No one says they have a color TV, you just know it's color. The only way to make the screen more life-like is to add depth. Right now it's limited because of glasses and the glasses free is early. But they'll get it figured out over time, might be 50 or 100 years from now but by then it will be like looking out a window to discover it's really just your TV. You can't do that with any 2D display, I don't care how much resolution you put into it and color. Flat is flat.

I'll admit, Cameron seems very optimistic here wanting glasses free 3D with the next Avatar releases. I tend to think like you that it's too late for that even it would become the next best-selling movie of all time. And HFR. They tried it: people hated it. But again: Catch-22, if you want it too look like you're in the movie, you have to make improvements and changes and that means giving up what you're used to.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #5 of 81 Old 02-04-2017, 12:31 PM
Advanced Member
 
dew42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Saskatoon, Canada
Posts: 748
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 189 Post(s)
Liked: 179
I suspect the soap opera effect can be easily created with a digital camera at 24 FPS. That although HFR may contribute to the effect it is not the sole cause. That properly done 48 FPS can look the way people expect a movie to look.

Movie directors often push the image clarity, a little at a time so as not to be jarring. Take someone from the 1980s and show them what we would consider a good movie from 2016 and they would probably scream soap opera effect.

I thought The Hobbit in 48 FPS 3D was amazing. Like I remembered for the first time to wear my contact lenses at the theater. I didn't feel that I was watching actors on a stage rather the effect pulled me into the movie - like it was a bit more real.

HFR just needs some fine tuning. It would be a shame to kill it because of one movie.

Last edited by dew42; 02-04-2017 at 12:40 PM.
dew42 is offline  
post #6 of 81 Old 02-04-2017, 01:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 2,549
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1140 Post(s)
Liked: 627
As for the soap opera effect, I really like it for personal 3D video work. Most new 3D 4K TVs have motion control (or motion extrapolation--whatever you want to call it--it basically doubles or more the fps) as I have on my LG, and it just makes the judder go away. And I love the realism for home shot 3D videos. It's very real and immersive. But for movies, it just looks like a bunch of stage actors doing a rehearsal. I don't know why, but that's what it does for me.
3DBob is online now  
post #7 of 81 Old 02-06-2017, 07:44 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NorthJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 3,509
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 576 Post(s)
Liked: 246
i'm curious on the release of the Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk 4k bluray will play when it's released? it's supposed to be at 60fps on disc, I'm also curious if we will need to modify the trumotion settings on our sets, to get the director's best intentions of the movie, on our TV

NorthJersey is offline  
post #8 of 81 Old 02-06-2017, 08:14 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 3,395
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 588
Setting Trumotion will only double the frames on the disc not the native 120 fps, so it will look funky like everything else. UHD Blu ray is already obsolete and I've never viewed a single UHD disc. Time for UHD 2.0 4k with 120 fps and add 4K 3D.
Don Landis likes this.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #9 of 81 Old 02-06-2017, 08:27 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Barry C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,457
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Obviously in the minority here, but I like the realism of HFR and liked it in the Hobbit. 24fps is a relic that the general public has gotten used to, but my hope is there will be more HFR movies in years to come. It's easy to show a 24fps in one theater and a 48 in another the way they did with the Hobbit. Nice to have choices Most movies these days have too much action and too little good storyline IMO. If that's the way it's going to be, I'd sure rather see smoother action than choppy 24fps.
dew42 likes this.
Barry C is offline  
post #10 of 81 Old 04-01-2017, 06:30 PM
Member
 
rdarcy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 64
http://www.goldderby.com/article/201...ews-135790864/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
rdarcy is offline  
post #11 of 81 Old 04-10-2017, 08:08 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Deja Vu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: great white north
Posts: 5,542
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1011 Post(s)
Liked: 1063
The closest to a "looking through a window" experience I've come across is with 3D on the LG OLED T.V.s. HDR/DV are a bust for me -- I prefer 3D and I too think glassless 3D will be the next legitimate big thing. It's coming but will probably take longer than I would hope for.
Deja Vu is offline  
post #12 of 81 Old 06-02-2018, 08:43 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 3,395
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 588
Production is underway, filming won't be finished until sometime next year. Some new details from Cameron on the sequels, claims will push 3D forward like never before.

https://movieweb.com/avatar-2-3d-tec...james-cameron/

James Cameron recently spoke at the Vivid light festival in Sydney, Australia and spoke a bit about the advancements he's going to be making on his upcoming sequels. "I guarantee one thing. Avatar 2, 3, 4, and 5 are all going to be in 3D and they will look sumptuous," he said. He also says that "Hollywood has done 3D a disservice by embracing post-conversion," with the technology having stalled out a few years ago.

No word on frame rate yet, but announced among the cameras used they will be using Sony's Venice block system which can shoot up to 90 fps in 4K and 60 fps in 6k.
rdarcy likes this.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #13 of 81 Old 06-02-2018, 09:44 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 12,971
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1528 Post(s)
Liked: 458
HFR- is great for home 3D videos. Agree with you on that Bob. I'm not so excited for fiction movies. I will add it is great for nature and other documentaries, travel videos too.

High resolution is really good all the way around. All genres.

3D is not convenient as it requires glasses, but I haven't seen any 3D glasses free technology that I would like to replace glasses 3D. I like the convenience of a camera screen being glasses free but not a TV set for watching stories. The depth range on these has been quite limited.

Post conversion today is really the best option but it is labor intensive. Shooting twin cameras for the movies in 3D is a real inconvenience and limits the placement of the camera due to the size. I have no complaints with post conversion quality. It is actually less prone to ghosting and eye fatigue than using a compromise twin camera system. Unfortunately, for amateur production, we are stuck with twin camera systems and a compromise in 3D effect.

For realistic experience, the use of 360VR 3D and ambisonic sound is where it's at. Here you are never limited by viewing the action "through a window" You are in the location with the action taking place around you. Yet this latest technology lacks true resolution the eye can resolve. We can shoot it but when it is expanded to 360, there is no technology yet to display it. Therefore 360VR 3D is limited to the look of 360 x 360 pixels. That's a long way from UHD 3840x2160. Some day we may get panels that can present the viewer with 360VR 3D in 4K per eye. Also, 360VR 3D is not meant to be used for movies. Movies are meant to be seen as a screen in front of you.

My 3D and 360VR videos and more
Don Landis HT System: Projector Sony VPL VW665ES Players: Samsung UBD K8500 OPPO BD93 Sony BDP S6200 All Regions Player Denon AVR S940, 7.1; JBL Professional series and Klipsch PS3, XBOX360, TIVO Edge OTA; Apple TV 4K. Edit Suite:Adobe Premiere, Edius7.53, Vegas Pro v13, Power Director16, i9-7980XE/GTX1080Ti, LG 3D TV DM2752
Don Landis is offline  
post #14 of 81 Old 06-03-2018, 04:47 AM
Senior Member
 
Seilerbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Orlando Florida
Posts: 305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 207 Post(s)
Liked: 220
Glasses free 3D does not interest me in the least. I have a C6P and about 100 3D discs. I have been wearing contacts and glasses all my adult life. I wear clip on sun glasses every time I am outside in the daytime. To watch 3D I put a pair of clip on 3D glasses. I don't even know they are there. Since I am used to wearing a pair of glasses with a clip on it is no big deal to wear a pair of glasses with a clip on to watch TV, especially since the image is the best I have ever seen anywhere.

LG OLED55C6P
Sony STRDH770, Sony UBP-X800, Sony PS3 160
2 - Polk TSi300, 1 - Polk CS10, 4 - Polk T15, 1 - Polk PSW125
Seilerbird is offline  
post #15 of 81 Old 06-03-2018, 06:46 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 2,549
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1140 Post(s)
Liked: 627
As "amazing" as Cameron has promised Avatar to be, we have to remember that it will almost all be character adapted cgi, resulting in computer generated 3D, which in a sense will be very close to conversion. I know that sounds like an oxymoron, but even if they use two cameras, the cgi 3D in both cameras has to be generated by computer, and that will negate most of the twin camera work. Think of it as what is being done with all the Marvel conversions. Cgi is the main 3D content with x, y, z coordinates and therefore the computer generates a complete 3D conversion based on those coordinates, with super-imposed actors. In Avatar those characters are super-imposed by the twin cameras and converted to cgi based on cgi coordinates-otherwise they would be out of sync with the depth ques based on computer generated coordinates. Only the shots using real-life sets will benefit from twin cameras, and I bet they will result in less than 1/4th of the movies. IMO
wildbill722 and Don Landis like this.
3DBob is online now  
post #16 of 81 Old 06-03-2018, 08:50 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 12,971
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1528 Post(s)
Liked: 458
That's right Bob but for clarity I would suggest you use the term "virtual cameras" so people not familiar with how CGI is rendered will know when we are talking twin real cameras and a CGI camera(s).

What I love about post 3D conversions now that they can do better 3D than real twin cameras, is any 2D film can be released in 3D if there is a budget. The director and producers do not have to risk the added expense on 3D production complexity and cost if the story line is not accepted by the public.


Seilerbird- I'm with you on the glasses. When I edit anything I'm wearing vision corrective glasses made for viewing my two computer screens. Farther away than reading and not distant either. Then when doing 3D editing, I just use the clip on polar. For my Home Theater I have active projector and I don't need glasses because the screen is 10 or more feet away. But my wife needs them so I made a pair of custom active clip on's to her vision corrective glasses.

My 3D and 360VR videos and more
Don Landis HT System: Projector Sony VPL VW665ES Players: Samsung UBD K8500 OPPO BD93 Sony BDP S6200 All Regions Player Denon AVR S940, 7.1; JBL Professional series and Klipsch PS3, XBOX360, TIVO Edge OTA; Apple TV 4K. Edit Suite:Adobe Premiere, Edius7.53, Vegas Pro v13, Power Director16, i9-7980XE/GTX1080Ti, LG 3D TV DM2752
Don Landis is offline  
post #17 of 81 Old 06-03-2018, 09:06 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 3,395
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seilerbird View Post
Glasses free 3D does not interest me in the least. I have a C6P and about 100 3D discs. I have been wearing contacts and glasses all my adult life. I wear clip on sun glasses every time I am outside in the daytime. To watch 3D I put a pair of clip on 3D glasses. I don't even know they are there. Since I am used to wearing a pair of glasses with a clip on it is no big deal to wear a pair of glasses with a clip on to watch TV, especially since the image is the best I have ever seen anywhere.
When I sit down to view something in 3D, I'm ready for it so glasses make little difference to me either since I already wear glasses or contacts anyway. But I think for home viewing casual-use 3D it will be a breakthrough. Just being able to put something on in the background in 3D like you can with 2D and everyone can see it without having to hand out the glasses or even ask them if they want glasses and go thru the 3D explanation. You could also divide your attention between the screen and what's going on in the room, conversation etc. without having to take the glasses off. It doesn't mean it would go down in my theater room but in a living room where your up and down, using mobile devices, it would be great.

For movie theaters, I can see where glasses-free would have its appeal to average viewers but it wouldn't entice me to the theater because of the lack of glasses. As long as the 3D looks good and the movie is entertaining, I'm fine with or without glasses. But I do think that some glasses are better than others. I really dislike the Xpand system, glasses are quite uncomfortable after a time. Will be checking out the RealD theaters next.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #18 of 81 Old 06-03-2018, 09:38 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 3,395
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3DBob View Post
As "amazing" as Cameron has promised Avatar to be, we have to remember that it will almost all be character adapted cgi, resulting in computer generated 3D, which in a sense will be very close to conversion. I know that sounds like an oxymoron, but even if they use two cameras, the cgi 3D in both cameras has to be generated by computer, and that will negate most of the twin camera work. Think of it as what is being done with all the Marvel conversions. Cgi is the main 3D content with x, y, z coordinates and therefore the computer generates a complete 3D conversion based on those coordinates, with super-imposed actors. In Avatar those characters are super-imposed by the twin cameras and converted to cgi based on cgi coordinates-otherwise they would be out of sync with the depth ques based on computer generated coordinates. Only the shots using real-life sets will benefit from twin cameras, and I bet they will result in less than 1/4th of the movies. IMO
Digital 3D is considered real 3D, not conversion. Since they're filming actors in the special suits in 3D, this will be a step ahead of rendered 3D into twin camera shots. They will have the background and foregrounds in the shots in 3D and the characters movements in the 3D space, only the added 3D rendered layers of the characters will be artificial.

Of course what interests me now is what comes next for home 3D? 3D tech has stalled. How will we view the Avatar sequels if they're shot for 60fps or better? We'll currently only get the 1080p24 Blu ray 3D that the format offers. Our hardware is already outdated. We need an updated Blu ray format for 3D and hardware that can view it. With UHD discs it would be possible to view in 4K half 3D up to 60fps in a single frame top/bottom format, but it would only work on passive 4K screens, not projectors and I assume not active 4K screens either so it's not a universal format like Blu ray 3D was when launched in '09. An update to the UHD disc is necessary at this point for any future advancement for 3D.

Hardware would also need replacing, at least projectors since current models won't accept resolutions for 3D higher than HD. And all this while 3D support is waining in the home theater market. Right now I'm not sure if the Avatar sequels are too late to arrive or just in time. They will be arriving 11 years after the original. That might be about right for the next generation of 3D to emerge.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #19 of 81 Old 06-03-2018, 12:24 PM
Advanced Member
 
dew42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Saskatoon, Canada
Posts: 748
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 189 Post(s)
Liked: 179
One interesting advancement in glasses free hardware is from the guys that make the RED cameras.

The RED Hydrogen One - Android smartphone has a 5.7-inch display that they call holographic.

http://downloads.red.com/hydrogen.pdf

https://www.cnet.com/news/red-hydrog...hone-hands-on/
dew42 is offline  
post #20 of 81 Old 06-03-2018, 11:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Worf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,523
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 928 Post(s)
Liked: 662
You can get 60fps 3d today. You have to give up resolution though - but besides 1080p24, you also have 720p60 frame packing as a legitimate 3d mode.

It's the most compatible signal - it is required to support 720p50/60 as well if you support 3d. There have been a few Blu-rays that use it too.
Worf is offline  
post #21 of 81 Old 06-04-2018, 04:44 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtastic View Post
Production is underway, filming won't be finished until sometime next year. Some new details from Cameron on the sequels, claims will push 3D forward like never before.

https://movieweb.com/avatar-2-3d-tec...james-cameron/

James Cameron recently spoke at the Vivid light festival in Sydney, Australia and spoke a bit about the advancements he's going to be making on his upcoming sequels. "I guarantee one thing. Avatar 2, 3, 4, and 5 are all going to be in 3D and they will look sumptuous," he said. He also says that "Hollywood has done 3D a disservice by embracing post-conversion," with the technology having stalled out a few years ago.

No word on frame rate yet, but announced among the cameras used they will be using Sony's Venice block system which can shoot up to 90 fps in 4K and 60 fps in 6k.
Thanks for posting that, getting excited! 2.5 years away but still - IMAX has signed up a bunch of chains to have laser installed - so gives it time to get there.
rxp91 is offline  
post #22 of 81 Old 06-04-2018, 06:04 AM
Advanced Member
 
MLXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 214 Post(s)
Liked: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post
Post conversion today is really the best option but it is labor intensive. Shooting twin cameras for the movies in 3D is a real inconvenience and limits the placement of the camera due to the size. I have no complaints with post conversion quality. It is actually less prone to ghosting and eye fatigue than using a compromise twin camera system. Unfortunately, for amateur production, we are stuck with twin camera systems and a compromise in 3D effect.
Ghosting is a display device limitation. The contrast between the raw Left and Right views of twin 3D camera footage can indeed at times be too much for many displays to cope with.

Processing available in authoring software can reduce 3D contrast in parts of the frame and make ghosting less noticeable whether the Left and Right views are from twin actual cameras, twin virtual cameras, or from a 2D original camera view and a simulated second view.


Post-conversions

Personally, I'm generally happy with post conversion 3D for objects in the background and for foreground objects a reasonable distance from the camera.

However I'm not happy with post conversion for close-ups of human faces, and for complex chaotic real world content such as:
  • raindrops
  • water eddies
  • schools of small fish
  • flocks of small birds
  • light shining through vegetation
  • reflections visible in moving water
  • the effect of wind.


Compromise in using a simple 3D twin camera

When used for a variety of shooting distances there is a compromise in 3D effect with an amateur 3D camera as it will have a fixed interaxial distance, and no toe-in adjustment possible to assist close up shots. And unlike a professional studio where sophisticated software can be used to analyze and tweak the 3D of scenes shot with twin cameras, the amateur will have to make do with the raw Left and Right views (being limited to adjusting the horizontal displacement, and perhaps blurring parts of the frame).

Last edited by MLXXX; 06-04-2018 at 06:31 AM.
MLXXX is offline  
post #23 of 81 Old 06-04-2018, 06:31 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 2,549
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1140 Post(s)
Liked: 627
Quote:
Originally Posted by rxp91 View Post
Thanks for posting that, getting excited! 2.5 years away but still - IMAX has signed up a bunch of chains to have laser installed - so gives it time to get there.
IMAX is phasing out 3D movies at it's theaters, so don't expect them to carry Avatar in 3D in 2.5 years from now. Speculation is that Avatar will be shown in glasses free theaters in several venues provided by Christie Digital in major cities only. The rest of us will get RealD, if they are still around then.

https://www.christiedigital.com/en-u...-with-Christie
https://qz.com/1039936/imax-says-no-...in-us-cinemas/ (Note the declining revenue impact of 3D)

This has been discussed previously, but the problem with Christie Digital is that their projectors for glasses-free viewing will be very expensive and require a special angular imprinted screen, which has not been fully developed yet. Probably why Cameron is taking his time on this. When developed, the infrastructure investment that cinemas would have to make is well out of range of any theater chains due to the decaying nature of 3D watching. Who is going to make hundreds of thousands investment for what people will be calling a passing novelty once again? They surely would have to charge a premium for 3D, and that is what people are yelping about today.

I hope I'm wrong, I really do
3DBob is online now  
post #24 of 81 Old 06-04-2018, 07:28 AM
Advanced Member
 
MLXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 214 Post(s)
Liked: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3DBob View Post
The rest of us will get RealD, if they are still around then.
In Australia the majority of the larger cinemas installed RealD projectors and compatible screens some years ago. 3D sessions are still being offered.

If a further instalment of Avatar comes out 2.5 years from now I will be very disappointed and somewhat surprised if it won't be possible to attend 3D screenings of it in cities and towns around Australia, at at least 24fps.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtastic View Post
...

Of course what interests me now is what comes next for home 3D? 3D tech has stalled. How will we view the Avatar sequels if they're shot for 60fps or better? We'll currently only get the 1080p24 Blu ray 3D that the format offers. Our hardware is already outdated. We need an updated Blu ray format for 3D and hardware that can view it. With UHD discs it would be possible to view in 4K half 3D up to 60fps in a single frame top/bottom format, but it would only work on passive 4K screens, not projectors and I assume not active 4K screens either so it's not a universal format like Blu ray 3D was when launched in '09. An update to the UHD disc is necessary at this point for any future advancement for 3D.

Hardware would also need replacing, at least projectors since current models won't accept resolutions for 3D higher than HD. And all this while 3D support is waining in the home theater market. Right now I'm not sure if the Avatar sequels are too late to arrive or just in time. They will be arriving 11 years after the original. That might be about right for the next generation of 3D to emerge.
I found the Hobbit in 3D at 48fps a big improvement over 3D at 24fps. Perhaps Avatar 2 will end up being released on Blu-ray in a special 60fps 3D format authored onto a UHD disc, using an updated UHD Blu-ray standard.

I recently experienced an Occulus Rift headset delivering a game with a wide stereoscopic view. I was impressed. The responsiveness to head movement was very good and the resolution although not crisp, was not horribly blurry. VR is a rapidly growing market and it wouldn't seem too much to expect that in a few years there will be headsets with at least Full HD resolution per eye at traditional cinema viewing angles.

Perhaps gamers will be able to see Avatar 2 in stereoscopic 3D at 60fps, even if cinemas generally won't show it at that rate.
MLXXX is offline  
post #25 of 81 Old 06-04-2018, 07:59 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 2,549
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1140 Post(s)
Liked: 627
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLXXX View Post
In Australia the majority of the larger cinemas installed RealD projectors and compatible screens some years ago. 3D sessions are still being offered.

If a further instalment of Avatar comes out 2.5 years from now I will be very disappointed and somewhat surprised if it won't be possible to attend 3D screenings of it in cities and towns around Australia, at at least 24fps.
RealD 3D here in Michigan has been scaled back to one, maybe two week showings, then removed and only left with 2D showings. Thanks to Marvel and Star Wars (Disney), 3D still shows up here, but sometimes there won't be any showings of 3D for months, and then only at specific theater chains. I get most of my 3D blurays from overseas now as half of them aren't produced for USA audiences now.
3DBob is online now  
post #26 of 81 Old 06-04-2018, 08:53 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 3,395
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Worf View Post
You can get 60fps 3d today. You have to give up resolution though - but besides 1080p24, you also have 720p60 frame packing as a legitimate 3d mode.

It's the most compatible signal - it is required to support 720p50/60 as well if you support 3d. There have been a few Blu-rays that use it too.
They won't use 720p60 output for studio movies, as was the case in "...Halftime Walk." They'll sacrifice frame rate before resolution.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #27 of 81 Old 06-04-2018, 09:07 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 3,395
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLXXX View Post
I found the Hobbit in 3D at 48fps a big improvement over 3D at 24fps. Perhaps Avatar 2 will end up being released on Blu-ray in a special 60fps 3D format authored onto a UHD disc, using an updated UHD Blu-ray standard.

Perhaps gamers will be able to see Avatar 2 in stereoscopic 3D at 60fps, even if cinemas generally won't show it at that rate.
In 2D yes, Halftime Walk was released in 60fps UHD, instead of the go-to 24fps. Gamers? No, they still need the content first.

One major benefit of filming with 4K cameras is that everything is progressive framing, no interlaced recording and the UHD era has phased that out completely. This negates some of the need for faster frame rate filming if you don't have UHD 60fps option, so 30fps is generally OK, given you adjust your display to compensate. One drawback I noticed on my 65" E6 is that there is a little distortion around objects that move by quickly, (I'm not sure what to call it) if you stare directly at that distortion, it seems odd. However, the improvement with 3840x2160/30fps source is greatly improved where fast movement is great.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #28 of 81 Old 06-04-2018, 10:43 AM
Advanced Member
 
MLXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 214 Post(s)
Liked: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3DBob View Post
... Thanks to Marvel and Star Wars (Disney), 3D still shows up here, but sometimes there won't be any showings of 3D for months, and then only at specific theater chains. I get most of my 3D blurays from overseas now as half of them aren't produced for USA audiences now.
The USA does seem to be missing out where 3D is concerned.
MLXXX is offline  
post #29 of 81 Old 06-04-2018, 11:07 AM
Advanced Member
 
MLXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 214 Post(s)
Liked: 97
@tomtastic , the visibility of interlaced scanning artefacts is a reason I had reservations about my Sony HDR-TD10 3D camera, but its 60i 3D at least allowed freedom to pan at a medium speed without the judder of 24p.

In practice 30p does seem a very useful step up from 24p for motion "integrity". However 30p is still not fast enough for my eyes for 3D. My eyes become more alert to movement when watching stereoscopic content.

Human eyes need to make very fast comparisons of the content of Left and Right views to create a continuous, up to date, "mental depth map".

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtastic View Post
One drawback I noticed on my 65" E6 is that there is a little distortion around objects that move by quickly, (I'm not sure what to call it) if you stare directly at that distortion, it seems odd.
I suspect that any noticeable disturbance to the 3D effect for human vision arising from capturing and viewing at only 30p would be less for 3D footage captured and shown at 60p.

[Another factor that cannot be ruled out as potentially having an adverse impact on the 3D effect, for video, is rolling shutter.]
MLXXX is offline  
post #30 of 81 Old 06-04-2018, 01:00 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 3,395
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 588
Anything I film at 60i is de-interlaced to 30p so I view at 1080p30 which was interlaced sourced but still preferable. I prefer progressive framing over interlaced, I'd rather have judder than interlacing on anything. Depending on display's refresh rate you have the option of adjusting the frame rate. For me it depends. On movies, I prefer the look of 24fps and leave the Tru Motion off, but documentaries, sports, fast movement faster frame rate looks better. Movies are about style and art too, not just about matching visual capabilities of our eyes.

The distortion I refer to with 30p with True Motion turned on, yes, if filmed in 60p would not be there because you have true frame information there and True Motion would be turned off, using native frames instead. Of course 60p isn't enough either, it still shows a considerable amount of judder in fast scenes.

Rolling shutter, still a problem with 2D as well. The average CMOS sensor is still cheapest and most efficient product for the time being. Global shutters are more expensive and only used in professional line of cameras which eliminate RS. We'll see them take over at some point like the shift from CCD to CMOS. Personally, I've yet to have a problem with rolling shutter and the AX100's were considered to have bad rolling shutter.

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

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