AVS Forum banner

21 - 40 of 55 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,545 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
Deja Vu: I'm wondering if you can subjectively rank the 2D->3D conversion options you've personally tested (scaled 1-10 maybe?) and where does PowerDVD fit in? Thanks.
For me, right now PDVD15 is right up there near the top of the heap. It's not as refined as the Teranex but for 1/45th the price I don't think most will care. I just wish the Teranex included gamma correction. PowerDVD15 also has some built-in picture enhancement software that I think works well and helps with the overall image. It's a package, which IMO, is tough to beat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,037 Posts
I'm not looking for perfection. I'm looking for something that sucks me into a story and holds me there.
When characters always look like they're bending in a time warp, and objects are intruding on layers they shouldn't be in, it's a distraction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,596 Posts
The bottom up 2D-3D conversion has been around for years and it does cause a "bending in a time warp" look as the algorithm "thinks" that whatever is at the bottom is nearer to you than eye level, which is infinity, so you get the warp. That said, PDVD15 appears to use that algorithm as it did in earlier versions, but has also added the line convergence algorithm plus focus/contrast algorithm to it, where the sharpest objects with the most contrast are placed nearer and less sharp, low contrast are farther away. And the motion algorithm for left/right or right/left object movement. When objects move the algorithm can determine a gap between the right and left eye to create the exact location of the object in space. All together, these algorithms can produce a pretty decent image. What it can't do is supply the missing information that one sees with the right or left eye, so it tends to curve objects to supply that information-ala the warping effect. I assume the Tarenex refines all these algorithms like a super computer and adds more missing information interpolation.


I must say PDVD15 is much better than the VEFXi 3D-Bee, which I tried a couple years ago, and has been discussed over and over in another forum thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,965 Posts
I dismissed 2D to 3D conversion initially, but I came around later. Part of it was that there were no 3D movies in the first few months after the release of the first 3D TVs. That meant that if I wanted my 3D fix, it had to be with 2D to 3D conversion. That also meant using the converter built into my first Samsung 3D plasma. Fortunately, it did a pretty decent job, especially with some content. Since then I've tried many converters, some of which work quite well. For me, the conversion built into LG TVs can be very good, and generally it's a little better than Samsung TVs. I like the 3D-Bee, but it works best for aerial views of landscapes and cityscapes. For that type of content, it generally is effective about 95+% of the time! Once you get down to ground level, it's not nearly as effective (maybe 10% of the time), but those aerial shots look remarkably convincing. As someone who shoots 3D, a lot, I've done direct comparisons of 3D-Bee converted landscapes to the native 3D shot with my narrow interaxial 3D camcorder. In virtually 100% of distance shots (over 50 feet), the 3D-Bee not only looks good, it looks much better than native 3D. Except for those instances where I use a stereo base extender for my camcorders, using 2D to 3D conversion is a better solution in that particular shooting scenario.

2D to 3D conversion definitely has its place, and I enjoy it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3DBob

·
Registered
Joined
·
416 Posts
I'm really enjoying my Epson projectors and PDVD15's 2D to 3D conversion.

My Epson 5030 has a 2D-3D conversion built-in, which I think is only modestly successful. Have you compared Epson's real time conversion to PDVD15? I'd love to hear which you feel is superior.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,965 Posts
My Epson 5030 has a 2D-3D conversion built-in, which I think is only modestly successful. Have you compared Epson's real time conversion to PDVD15? I'd love to hear which you feel is superior.
No comparison. I have the 5030 and it doesn't have good 2D to 3D.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,545 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
What I really like about PDVD15 Ulta are the image enhancement controls called "True Theatre". IMO, not only does PDVD15 do a great real time conversion of 2D to 3D but you can manipulate the image to compensate for the loss of light using True Theatre.

One of my guilty pleasures is a 3D movie called Priest. I have it in 3D and 2D. I've now compared the converted image to the studio 3D and I'm very happy with what PDVD15 can do with the conversion and True Theatre. I like it so much that I'm not particularly worried about the health of studio 3D. My hat is off to the people at Cyberlink for giving us a great and inexpensive product and I hope they keep improving PDVD15 (especially the 2D to 3D conversion) and maybe they can find a way to add some negative parallax (user controlled) to the conversion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,037 Posts
I like it so much that I'm not particularly worried about the health of studio 3D.
After testing Power DVD 15 with half a dozen movies, I would be worried if studios stopped producing 3D. Power DVD 15's realtime 2D>3D conversion is worse than even the notoriously bad Clash of the Titans postconversion.

As a reminder, here's how bad Clash looked:


Just like Power DVD, there were weird stretch marks on the edges of people's heads and the 3D was way too subtle. But at least the artists knew what was in front, mid and back- Power DVD and all other realtime conversions guess wrong on the order, it's almost a coin toss.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
ya i definitely agree with the pacific rim movie. I don't understand how the 3d effects are so awesome and it wasn't shot in 3d. I think Hercules was a pretty good 3d movie too for being a 2d to 3d. I found this site that lists all the true 3d movies shot in 3d.

Long live 3d tv's i get scared when I keep hearing all these people say 3d tvs are going to die off :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,545 Posts
Discussion Starter #31 (Edited)
After testing Power DVD 15 with half a dozen movies, I would be worried if studios stopped producing 3D. Power DVD 15's realtime 2D>3D conversion is worse than even the notoriously bad Clash of the Titans postconversion.

As a reminder, here's how bad Clash looked:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SczqgrYCOYI

Just like Power DVD, there were weird stretch marks on the edges of people's heads and the 3D was way too subtle. But at least the artists knew what was in front, mid and back- Power DVD and all other realtime conversions guess wrong on the order, it's almost a coin toss.
I don't find the 3D subtle at all.

Everyone reading all these posts on this thread should remember that they are just opinions. I would recommend that you see for yourself -- who knows it just might enhance the experience for you.

Also, Cakefoo claimed only a few years ago that post-conversion could never be as good as natively shot 3D. Well, so much for that claim. Pacific Rim is a great example of really good post-conversion; however, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, IMO, tops it and is better than just about anything I've seen shot in native 3D and its post-conversion. Never say never. :)

Here's a review of TMNT:

http://www.soundandvision.com/content/teenage-mutant-ninja-turtles

And yes, two companies are fighting over patents for the conversion process:

http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/04/24/3d-conversion-patents-hollywood-visual-effects-case/id=57047/

When you read about the patent dispute you'll get an idea just how much the post-conversion companies are involved in all 3D films.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,543 Posts
And yes, two companies are fighting over patents for the conversion process:

http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/04/24/3d-conversion-patents-hollywood-visual-effects-case/id=57047/

When you read about the patent dispute you'll get an idea just how much the post-conversion companies are involved in all 3D films.
VERY interesting link, thanks for sharing it. So I understand that the Cameron Pace Group mostly or only provides real 3D recordings.

Would be interesting to see an overview list of all the various 2D > 3D conversion companies and films they converted to evaluate their individual performances.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,037 Posts
I don't find the 3D subtle at all..
There's no arguing the facts. At 25% strength, the onscreen parallax is only maybe 1/2 that of a standard Hollywood movie. Turn the strength up, and it starts to become even more painfully obvious the converter is guessing wrong on which shapes to be making. Which to me, makes no sense why anyone would want to dial it back down if they know it's not making anywhere NEAR the right choices to begin with. It's like, confusion for the eyes. We as humans know already where objects should be in a scene, where they should be relative to each other, etc. And when they're not where they're supposed to be, which is the case with autoconversion more than 75% of the time, it looks like ugly warping.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,545 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
There's no arguing the facts. At 25% strength, the onscreen parallax is only maybe 1/2 that of a standard Hollywood movie. Turn the strength up, and it starts to become even more painfully obvious the converter is guessing wrong on which shapes to be making. Which to me, makes no sense why anyone would want to dial it back down if they know it's not making anywhere NEAR the right choices to begin with. It's like, confusion for the eyes. We as humans know already where objects should be in a scene, where they should be relative to each other, etc. And when they're not where they're supposed to be, which is the case with autoconversion more than 75% of the time, it looks like ugly warping.
It's not about making sense to you -- luckily you don't get to makes choices for me. Supposedly I have free will and can make my own choices just like everyone else here. You don't seem to understand that -- what might be right for you isn't necessarily right for me. You might find a particular women to be beautiful and I might find all kinds of cosmetic fault with her. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

3D in the real world is subtle -- it's not like Hollywood 3D, which I find to be very exaggerated and often in your face. Most people like this and complain when the 3D looks more natural. Just look at a particular object and then close one eye and continue looking at the object as you open and close that eye -- it's subtle going from 2D (one eye) to 3D (both eyes). There are still lots of depth cues when using only one eye and that's why people who only have sight in one eye are still allowed to drive cars -- without any depth perception they'd be rear ending everyone else.

I guess 2D to 3D conversion is like junk food -- it's easy to find fault with it but it still doesn't stop a lot of people from enjoying it. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,037 Posts
It's not about making sense to you -- luckily you don't get to makes choices for me. Supposedly I have free will and can make my own choices just like everyone else here. You don't seem to understand that -- what might be right for you isn't necessarily right for me. You might find a particular women to be beautiful and I might find all kinds of cosmetic fault with her. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

3D in the real world is subtle -- it's not like Hollywood 3D, which I find to be very exaggerated and often in your face. Most people like this and complain when the 3D looks more natural. Just look at a particular object and then close one eye and continue looking at the object as you open and close that eye -- it's subtle going from 2D (one eye) to 3D (both eyes). There are still lots of depth cues when using only one eye and that's why people who only have sight in one eye are still allowed to drive cars -- without any depth perception they'd be rear ending everyone else.

I guess 2D to 3D conversion is like junk food -- it's easy to find fault with it but it still doesn't stop a lot of people from enjoying it. :D
3D in the real world is actually pretty strong, our eyes have a 2.5" interaxial. What PowerDVD does is similar to what I've seen from camcorders with less than a one inch interaxial.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
This thread is right. It's amazing.

I just watched Tron Legacy on a 300inch projection Epson 3700/6700.

After that I tried the original 1982 Tron using 2D-3D in PowerDvD.

Blew me away, (don't know if it's because of the way Tron 1982 was shot (polygons, computer vertices, etc.)) but the 3D effect was amazing. It was much more pronounced than using the Epson's built in 2D to 3D conversion mode. (Which also works)

I was blown away that the guy who made it in 1982 would probably have never imagined a guy in 2017 watching his movie in perfect 3D on a 300 inch screen, in his living room.

Blew-me-away.

We now legitimately can watch (almost) any old movie in 3D. Apart from the fact that almost all new movies are available in 3D anyway.

And don't get me started on gaming. 3rd person games with lifesize characters with 3d depth. You're in it. And that's for all games ever made. We finally have a real life holodeck in our living rooms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,037 Posts
This thread is right. It's amazing.

I just watched Tron Legacy on a 300inch projection Epson 3700/6700.

After that I tried the original 1982 Tron using 2D-3D in PowerDvD.

Blew me away, (don't know if it's because of the way Tron 1982 was shot (polygons, computer vertices, etc.)) but the 3D effect was amazing. It was much more pronounced than using the Epson's built in 2D to 3D conversion mode. (Which also works)

I was blown away that the guy who made it in 1982 would probably have never imagined a guy in 2017 watching his movie in perfect 3D on a 300 inch screen, in his living room.

Blew-me-away.

We now legitimately can watch (almost) any old movie in 3D. Apart from the fact that almost all new movies are available in 3D anyway.

And don't get me started on gaming. 3rd person games with lifesize characters with 3d depth. You're in it. And that's for all games ever made. We finally have a real life holodeck in our living rooms.
Perfect? Heh. So what's native 3D? Perfecter? And VR-- perfectest?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,360 Posts
I see no problem with this if it makes you happy......


I am on a 3D strike anyway untill hollywood gets over this "artistic intent, reality" garbage.


If i wat more realisticreality, I shut the movie off and go outside or to the destination on the screen. No matter the artistic intent, it will never replicate standinf at the foot of everest in real life with on screen.


I want a break from reality and thats why I watch a movie....to be entertained.


Go to a few 3D movies and sit in the back and watch the crowd.......negative parralax is what entertains people.......people move iteractivly to duck a out of screen object and they all chatter for a second, then back to a catatonic state for the realistic 3D in the rest of the movie.

Stand out the hall after the movie and ask them what they thought about the 3D experiance and most will give you a 3 word reply...."it looked good, it was nice....not too bad".........

Then ask them about the pop out objects and they go on a 10 paragraph rant about how they ducked, etc etc etc,.....pretty easy to see thats what entertains the masses and the masses is where the profit/viability of anything is.

Videophiles do little to keep a format alive, it is the masses and the masses like pop outs.......

Good entertainment sells...........when hollywood realizes no one cares that the artists think that it is a gimmick, the masses want it.......no wonder it has not taken off better. The creators of the content are to blame.............


They have taken what the biggest demographic wants and given them the least of it, they have taken the creators tastes which buy none of it and let it dictate what happens cotent wise. It is basic business 101 failure.........well done 3d looks spectactular.

But for the most part, the masses want stuff flying out at them.........untill that thirst is satiated, they will never develope a taste for realism.

If I had watched 30 different movies that had stuff flyin out of the screen for 80% of the movie, I might be ready to refine my tastes for a more realistic version..........

3D pop outs are like beer, mosrt people drink beer.......realistic 3D is like a wine taster, the slim minority.............but if they never drink, they unlikly to ever be wine taster.........overwhelm our thirst for 3D pop outs and maybe you can get the masses on board for some fine wine 3D realism.

Most people are luke warm on realistic 3D, but are red hot for pop outs. We are talking the masses here, not the 1% who enjoy a fine glass of realism.

I want to be overwhelmed with pop outs, soo much soo, that I have to hit pause and stand up and yell like Rick Flair...........a constant barrage of effects flyin at me.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
I see no problem with this if it makes you happy......


I am on a 3D strike anyway untill hollywood gets over this "artistic intent, reality" garbage.



They have taken what the biggest demographic wants and given them the least of it, they have taken the creators tastes which buy none of it and let it dictate what happens cotent wise. It is basic business 101 failure.........well done 3d looks spectactular.

3D literally adds a new dimension to what makes a movie for you. There's the story, the acting, the visuals and now the 3D application.

Yes, more directors use depth rather than have things fly out. But there is plenty of movies with stuff flying out. (Ghostbusters 2016, for example).

Having owned many movies in 3D I simply feel something is missing when I watch the 2D version.

But the topic was upscaling. It literally blows me away how good some movies look upscaled to 3D in PowerDvd. The original Tron for example (no 3D version available), upscaled to 3D looks exactly as good as the shot in 3D Tron legacy from 2010.

Even the old Top Gun movie, the 3d version, is amazing. Alice in Wonderland, Prometheus, Life of Pi, the Walk, all great 3D movies.

But even non 3D movies, the original Ghostbusters, Tron, you name it, they upscale great. Most require color and gamma calibration, but at this level you become something of a projectionist, with notes on the best settings for each.

Heck, even sports, you can even click 2D->3D in recorded Formula 1 races on PowerDvD and it looks like there are hyper realistic little 1:18 scale cars going around your room. (Barstool for scale)





 
21 - 40 of 55 Posts
Top