It is currently Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:42 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

3-D
Poll ended at Wed Oct 17, 2012 3:38 pm
I have it and use it. 13%  13%  [ 18 ]
I have it and don't use it. 8%  8%  [ 11 ]
I don't have it but am interested in it. 22%  22%  [ 30 ]
I don't have it and am not interested in it. 58%  58%  [ 80 ]
Total votes : 139
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:30 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am
Thanks for that run down Dave. I may be buying the VW95 myself if I manage to find a bigger place soon (Dave M.'s review of the lower model sold me). How does Dial M look? On my plasma it has ghosting like no other film, and borders on unwatchable. Did you notice if it was particularly bad on the projector or worse than other films?


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 6:35 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:01 pm
Location: WellyYeller
I keep hearing (anecdotally) the 95 actually does not deliver as refined a picture as the 50! Although it has the automated VH lens shift and focus settings and the 50 only has manual, there is a perception it just isn't worth the extra 2 grand. Then again I think it has a marginally sharper/better lens, although for my money the 50 is as sharp as the equivalent JVC or Epson.

Some other things, I tried fooling around with the "Reality Creation" thing and settled for a while with bare minimum setting. But I have ultimately abandoned it altogether. Like the totally bogus hoodoo of the Darbee Darblett it is just a high frequency sharpening tool. It does simulate grain and "detail" (in fact noise) and can appear to make over scrubbed DVNR encodes look like the grain is back. But it aint. On lower res sources it looks terrible.

David Mackenzie really likes the cinema 24fps motion flow setting. I understand his point but I am extremely sensitive to flicker (this may be from having had Lasik eye surgery 20 years ago) so I tend to switch it off. But it is a great tool to have. Both 50 and 95 have it and RC of course.
3D: the color balance using the "Reference" preset is low for red with the Sony TDG PJ1 glasses but it looks far better color balanced and brighter with the Monstervision3dMax glasses. If you can get some of these I would recommend them over the Sony glasses certainly for spares, despite needing a USB power souce to run the RF/IR unit.

Nearly forgot. DIal M is lovely and bright in 2D but the 3D is REALLY dark. I think Warner is frankly not on top of their 3D encoding yet. The whole picture looks like a different experience in terms of low contrast and a generally dark image. It's not the same thing as the obvious loss of brightness you get with any 3D disc when putting on the glasses but it's the darkest re-adjustment I've seen. Apart from that the 3D certainly is an integral part of Hitchcock's mise en scene.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Fri Jul 05, 2013 9:19 am 

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:31 am
Location: Somerset, England
BBC suspends 3-D programming indefinitely due to "lack of public appetite"...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Fri Jul 05, 2013 12:29 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK
That's a shock because I would have thought that after Christmas dinner the thing that everyone in the family would most want would be to stick a pair of glasses on, settle down in front of the television and watch the Queen's face jutting into their living room in the manner of a giant evil holographic overlord from the beginning of a Tron-style sci-fi film.

"It's like she's in the room with us!"
"Don't worry dear, she can't actually see you, unless you have one of those new internet connected televisions with the always on web cams"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 1:34 am 

Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 11:45 pm
Is there a list of films made before 2000 that are available in 3-D?
I love watching Hugo and Pina but I'm wanting the forthcoming House of Wax and such!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 1:56 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_3D_films_pre-2005

A full list of all pre-digital 3-D features and shorts.

Off the top of my head I can only think of Dial M and Creature, and the upcoming Amityville 3-D and House of Wax, as ones available on Blu-ray.

I believe Bob Furmanek has been working on both The Bubble and Dragonfly Squadron, and is hoping both will be ready for release next year.

Twilight Time have confirmed they will be releasing a 3-D Blu-ray at some point, most are thinking The Mad Magician, but it could be Miss Sadie Thompson.

There's also DCPs available of Jaws 3-D and Comin' At Ya!, so Blu-rays could be possible.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 12:05 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:03 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD
flyonthewall2983 wrote:
I may very well be the minority on this, but it would be nice if the Academy created an award for 3D. The format is going to be around for awhile, why not hand one out every year and get more films that use the technology so well like this out there?
A good idea. They used to have separate cinematography awards for color vs. B&W.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 11:22 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am
flyonthewall2983 wrote:
The format is going to be around for awhile, why not hand one out every year and get more films that use the technology so well like this out there?


I don't know how it is in the US, but in Europe, it seems to me that the peak of 3D movies / showings is already behind us and that the ongoing trend is a downward one.

While it makes sense, I'm wondering about how long an award like this would last and, moreover, how many quality movies would be nominated for 3D achievements. If it can help to get more of them though, that would be nice, because currently, how many movies with a good use of 3D are release yearly ? 5 ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 11:54 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm
And how many are actually shot with 3D cameras instead of being post-converted? Wouldn't be a scandal for something post-converted to win over something shot with 3D cameras? Like a colorized black-and-white film winning for cinematography over a Technicolor production.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 12:13 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT
It's already kind of a joke that there is a best animated film category, in which basically every animated release with enough marketing push behind it is more or less guaranteed a nomination (and let's not forget that the year they introduced the category, they failed to nominate Waking Life, but I digress). How many 3D films have there been in the past five years where the 3D element is crucial to the experience and where you walk out saying "That was so good it deserves an award"? One? Two?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 12:49 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:11 pm
Though I don't doubt that the dividing line would eventually be blurred, I'd be much more supportive of a "Best Use of 3D in Film" award as opposed to a "Best 3d Film" award


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 2:56 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm
I don't know, from there it only seems a short step to a whole slew of basically meaningless awards:

- Best use of a tracking shot in a film
- Best use of puppies in a film (this award would singlehandedly boost the Oscars' ratings by 10%)
- Best use of the Wilhelm Scream in a film
- Best use of gaffer tape in a film


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 3:05 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:11 pm
Yeah, you got a point. I guess what I meant to say is that I'd hope a 3D award, if it did happen, would be a technical award, closer to sound mixing or visual effects, rather than a subgenre like best foreign film or best animated film.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 3:13 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 12:16 pm
Matt wrote:
And how many are actually shot with 3D cameras instead of being post-converted? Wouldn't be a scandal for something post-converted to win over something shot with 3D cameras? Like a colorized black-and-white film winning for cinematography over a Technicolor production.
The old distinction between production and post is kind of meaningless in the digital age. Look at Gravity, where nearly every shot is a VFX shot. It's also got amazing 3D -- probably the best so far in a fiction feature -- yet was always conceived as a post conversion. And even the films that shoot with 3D cameras now are still so VFX heavy and also so reliant on post-production adjustments to the depth of the images that they can hardy be compared to films originated in 3D decades ago, which were locked into the depth cues created on set.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 6:30 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:13 pm
Here's an interesting question:

How does the modern 3D technology (polarized?) compare to the old red/blue glasses (Anaglyph 3D)? And will the new technology faithfully reproduce the red/blue experience? So, will the Creature from the Black Lagoon 3D blu reproduce a similar experience to the anaglyph experience? (yeah, I know you're missing the red/blue coloring, but other than that, what differences arise?)

I ask this, since I recently watched the Anaglyph 3D Friday the 13th Part 3D at my house. I was rather amazed that the effects actually worked on my screen (probably the first occasion where I've seen it work, though I think my only other experience was that crappy film in the Monsters Crash the Pajama Party set). It just now makes me wish that companies would rather offer the Anaglyph 3D rather than having to purchase glasses, a new television and bluray player (and as one Best Buy in-store handout suggested, "3D capable audio" :P ). It seems like it would be far cheaper, a more accurate experience and perhaps more fun to just use the red/blue, versus the new technology (since I'll most likely never own a 3D television, and by the sounds of it, they won't be around much longer anyway). I'm not interested in 3D other than when it existed for classic films on their original run (House of Wax, Creature, etc); the post-convert crap can go to hell.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 8:27 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:59 am
Anaglyph is a giant step backward.

Polarized 3-D dates back to the 1930's and the first public showing with a 3-D film was in 1936 at the New York Museum of Science and Industry.

The fifty English-language "Golden Age" features were originally shown with polaroid glasses, as were the 1980's titles.

See 3-D Myth #1: http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/home/top-10-3-d-myths


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 8:40 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:13 pm
Bob Furmanek wrote:

Well, alright, I was mistaken on my terms (didn't feel like spending an hour searching for the exact name for both of the different technologies). My original question still remains though (with perhaps different key terms): 1. How does the modern 3DTV technology compare to the classic 50s&80s technology and is the modern technology accurately replicating the original theatrical experience?; and 2. are all the studios in cahoots with the tv companies to try and upsell expensive devices (obviously)? Why can't everyone just do the same thing that was done with the Friday the 13th Bluray (or some other trick that can work on a 2-D screen)? I wouldn't want to sit around watching 3D versions of films all day, but I'm not going to shell out several thousand dollars for a cheap gimmick (and apparently nobody else is either, thus 3D is tanking).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 11:01 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:59 am
Quote:
is the modern technology accurately replicating the original theatrical experience?

Yes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:53 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
The great advantage of anaglyph 3-D is that you don't need special equipment - I used to play Creature from the Black Lagoon and It Came From Outer Space in 35mm double-bills in the early 1990s. They were practically the only 3-D films that we could run (I'm not sure any other anaglyphic prints were in British distribution), but they were very popular.

And of course the same applies to home setups - in fact, I still have a Super 8 print of Creature somewhere.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Thu Oct 10, 2013 8:17 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am
It does of course make it a lot simpler, but you can't have it both ways. If replication of the original 50s/80s exhibition is important to Minkin, then the more expensive polarised method is only the way to go. I personally found it very disappointing that Friday the 13th 3D was reissued on Blu-ray this year, but once again only in its anaglyph form.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 10:03 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 1:25 pm
EddieLarkin wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_3D_films_pre-2005
Twilight Time have confirmed they will be releasing a 3-D Blu-ray at some point, most are thinking The Mad Magician, but it could be Miss Sadie Thompson.


Man In The Dark, coming in January.

I've just recently replaced my old widescreen sxrd set with a plasma that also has 3D capability. Have watched just a couple so far (the last one I even had the tv reasonably well adjusted for it), took a little getting used to but so far it's been fun. Don't anticipate spending a lot of time with it, but I'll likely opt for the occasional 3D versions in lieu of the regular ones when they are reviewed well. (Not much of an animation fan, may check out one or two eventually.)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Mon Oct 14, 2013 1:58 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:59 am
MAN IN THE DARK has "quickie" written all over it (19 days) but it's a VERY entertaining entry in the 1950's 3-D cannon.

Some people complain about the rear-screen roller coaster ride and a few other process shots, but the amazing black and white stereoscopic footage of Ocean Park in Santa Monica - and LAFFING SAL - more than makes up for it.

Like some other Columbia titles, it's pretty heavy on the gimmicks with the cigar "dotting the eye" being a real favorite. It's got a terrific cast and an interesting script plus the photography by Floyd Crosby is quite good for such a fast shoot.

With that said, it was a new, un-tested camera rig and the film has a higher than average amount of baked-in vertical misalignment. I once had original 35mm left/right prints and it's been that way since day one. Hopefully, those errors have now been corrected.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:28 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am
One of the more acclaimed films from the Golden Age of 3-D, Roy Ward Baker's Inferno, will be getting a Blu-ray 3D release in the UK by Panamint from a Fox restoration. Presumably a U.S. release will follow at some point, perhaps from Twilight Time.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:35 pm 
Dot Com Dom
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Quote:
Pat Boone interview with Rhonda Fleming, courtesy Trinity Broadcasting Network

Now there's a source you rarely come across in DVD extras!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3-D
PostPosted: Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:20 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany
EddieLarkin wrote:
One of the more acclaimed films from the Golden Age of 3-D, Roy Ward Baker's Inferno, will be getting a Blu-ray 3D release in the UK by Panamint from a Fox restoration. Presumably a U.S. release will follow at some point, perhaps from Twilight Time.

I recently got this and it's the best looking release of a 50s 3D film yet. Or better, it's the best shot of the 50s 3D films I've seen, by the great Lucien Ballerd no less and this Blu-ray does it full justice. The combination of lush Technicolor and the exaggerated depth of 50s 3D is simply eye popping. The film is good fun too, a mixture of film noir and survival adventure film. Best looking Blu-ray release of a vintage film I've seen this year.

As to 3D in general, when they decided to release several 50s classics on Blu-ray 3D I started to get interested. Seeing Gravity in 3D at the theatre was the last nudge I needed and I got myself a 3D projector last Christmas. And it's great fun ! I went on a bit of a BLu-ray 3D spending spree and admittedly made a few regrettable purchases but when I fire up my projector to watch a 3D film, especially with a bunch of friends round, it feels like an occasion.

I will make no claims for the artistic validity of the format, but I like a good gadget and with active glasses the quality of 3D at home is considerably better than that at most theatres. Only a percentage of 3D films are genuinely well thought through in terms of how to use that extra dimension but there are certain films which I would not want to see any other way again.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection