Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 3D Coming back to film?

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » 3D Coming back to film? (Page 11)

This topic comprises 24 pages: 1 2 3 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 22 23 24

Author

Topic: 3D Coming back to film?

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 11-26-2009 03:03 AM

What about Star Wars or The Spy Who Loved Me in '77? Or Empire Strikes Back in '80?

All chock-a-block full 6 reelers.

Empire was so full when they added the mag coating it was hard to get the trunks to close.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 11-26-2009 11:30 AM

Reel 2 of True Lies in 35mm was literally right to the edge of the reel.

| IP: Logged

Cameron Glendinning
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 845
From: West Ryde, Sydney, NSW Australia
Registered: Dec 2005

posted 11-26-2009 03:06 PM

Filum was thicker in them days though!

| IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 11-28-2009 01:08 PM

quote: Jack Theakston
Ah, I thought you were referring to shutter phase. Yes, they're going to have to mark these things to be idiot-proof.

Actually, even if it's projected correctly, I still anticipate seeing a certain amount of the images being out of phase. The spinning shutter will unblock one image before unblocking the other. I'm really curious to see how my eyes react to that.

I recently had a chance to see IMAX digital 3D which used two projectors. Presumably the eyes were supposed to be in sync. Although it looked quite a bit better than RealD, something about it was still off.

I know I'm one of about three people here that can actually see this, and that's fine. I'm just saying that I'm really curious to see how over/under on film looks to my annoyingly highly critical eyes.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 11-28-2009 01:54 PM

quote: Mark J. Marshall
I'm just saying that I'm really curious to see how over/under on film looks to my annoyingly highly critical eyes.

Actually, the over/under films of the early 80's was better than RealD - if you sat close in the middle of the house since that old stuff was the typical linear polarization process back then.

"Spacehunters: Adventures in the forbidden zone" (1983) was the best over/under 3D that could have came out for Columbia. Movie had more realism to the image instead of the 'layered look' that comes from these live action 3D movies of today (prob why there is a tonnage of 3D films made using the CGA process..which is eventually gonna destroy the 3D market).

-Monte

| IP: Logged

Karl Borowski
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 161
From: Sulking in GameFAQ Forum
Registered: Sep 2009

posted 11-30-2009 06:50 AM

Mark, if you can see the shutter closing down on one part of the stereo image before the other, do you have a problem with seeing temporal distortions from the shutter when the movie was originally photographed too, or seeing the shutter close on a 2D film? [Razz]

I mean, this stuff isn't perfect. Even if you had a movie photographed with a focal plane or a leaf shutter, instead of a slit mopic one, there'd still be slight artifacts visible from one part of the image being exposed at a slightly different moment in time than another part.

There's a famous still photo, forget who the photographer was, of a race car being photographed, probably from back in the '20s, where you could actually see the top of the car was further to the right of the frame than the bottom, due to the shutter and the great speed at which the car was travelling.

| IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 11-30-2009 07:33 AM

No I don't see the shutter closing. What I see is one eye being slightly ahead of the other eye. Properly projected dual strip 3D DOES appear perfect to my eyes. Properly projected single projector RealD does not. I've posted about this extensively here if you want to go back and search on it.

| IP: Logged

Jack Theakston
Master Film Handler

Posts: 411
From: New York, USA
Registered: Sep 2007

posted 11-30-2009 03:54 PM

Mark, you are correct that RealD is by definition out of phase (unless they're using a two projector system). I notice it, too, although I think the cycle rate is higher, so it's not as bad as dual-strip out of phase, for example.

Correctly photographed 3D is always is phase.

| IP: Logged

Karl Borowski
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 161
From: Sulking in GameFAQ Forum
Registered: Sep 2009

posted 11-30-2009 03:57 PM

You're right guys, you're absolutely right. Let's tear out every one-projector auditorium and switch back to all duals!

While we're at it, let's tear out the platters too. . .

If you're going to argue trivial BS like spinning shutters and film pull-down intermittent movements, you had might as well stop arguing against DLP projectors, because you can, currently, only have one "evil" or the other.

Might as well have finger puppets in front of a flickering candle in the mean time if you can't get past the technological limitations that aren't noticeable by 99.99% of the audience that pay to keep you working at your jobs.

| IP: Logged

Martin McCaffery
Film God

Posts: 2481
From: Montgomery, AL
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11-30-2009 04:12 PM

quote:
You're right guys, you're absolutely right. Let's tear out every one-projector auditorium and switch back to all duals!

Works for me! I'd be the only game in town [evil]

| IP: Logged

Jack Theakston
Master Film Handler

Posts: 411
From: New York, USA
Registered: Sep 2007

posted 11-30-2009 04:44 PM

quote: Karl Borowski
Might as well have finger puppets in front of a flickering candle in the mean time if you can't get past the technological limitations that aren't noticeable by 99.99% of the audience that pay to keep you working at your jobs.

I was going to reply courteously to your otherwise vitriolic post, but after reading the last paragraph and thinking about it, with all due respect, Karl... [fu]

| IP: Logged

Cameron Glendinning
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 845
From: West Ryde, Sydney, NSW Australia
Registered: Dec 2005

posted 11-30-2009 05:37 PM

Because Karl has no idea......

IMAX digital 3d and Sony 4k projectors systems are basically 2 projector 3d systems.

Film based 3d in the 1950's and IMAX 15/70 3d also are duel systems.

quote:
technological limitations that aren't noticeable by 99.99%

Personally I would say that perhaps 10-20 percent of the population have issues with 3d and is one of the major reasons films in the same multiplex are often offered in 2d as well...

quote: Karl Borowski
do you have a problem with seeing temporal distortions from the shutter when the movie was originally photographed too, or seeing the shutter close on a 2D film?

WTF? What do you do for a living again? [sleep]

| IP: Logged

Karl Borowski
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 161
From: Sulking in GameFAQ Forum
Registered: Sep 2009

posted 11-30-2009 06:47 PM

I'm a projectionist, Cameron.

I stare at the DLP 3D projector, with 3D glasses on, every day I work up in the booth.

To say that 2-projector 35mm projection is better than a 1-projector system is like saying that fucking 70mm 5-perf. is better than 35mm scope.

NO SHIT!

Instead of arguing past standards against current technological dilemmas (35mm TECH 3D vs. Real 3D DLP) howabout living in the real world, the 21st century, and our current technology?

There are, what, under 500 IMAX systems worldwide? How many real 15/70s are there now that "New IMAX" dual 2K is here?

And how many 15/70 film IMAX installations are set up for IMAX 3D, 10%?

Sony 4K, now THERE is a big segment of the market! That's not an ideal, it's a BIG CHUNK of the pie, a REAL REALITY. Hell, every theatre I've been to in the past DECADE has 4K. It's ubiquitous it is so common in your average mutlplex.

If I were working at one of maybe a couple dozen IMAX 3D locales WORLDWIDE, or 4K DLP for that matter, I would hardly be so arrogant as to tout it as a viable option for a 10-billion person audience, no sarcasm or vitriolicity intended. . . [Eek!]

| IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 11-30-2009 07:18 PM

quote: Karl Borowski
I stare at the DLP 3D projector, with 3D glasses on, every day I work up in the booth.

Try looking at the screen instead. Maybe you'd notice that the images are out of sync.

Honestly, I'm not sure what you're ranting about. If you're going to be a troll, at least be a good one. I said that I was curious how MY EYES would perceive the 3D from a single projector over/under system since they have a hard time with other out-of-phase systems.

| IP: Logged

Karl Borowski
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 161
From: Sulking in GameFAQ Forum
Registered: Sep 2009

posted 11-30-2009 07:35 PM

Yeah, fine!

I'm not being a troll, just pointing out that you can't bitch about TECH 3D and DLP RealD both unless you have some legacy theatre or super-expensive 4K facility within an hour's drive of your home.

And, again, the very act of spinning a shutter leaves artifacts. I have read your prior posts BTW. I don't get how can you be that picky about what amounts to a minor phenomenon; I don't even buy that you are in the 10% that supposedly gets dizzy or distracted by 3D movies.

Sure, there are people that get sick, but they don't have concrete descriptions, as you do, as to why. I rememeber seeing an early 120-Hz video projector, early model, where I could see a rainbow effect, due to, apparently, its spinning RGB filter, as I scanned my eyes back and forth across the screen.

I was the only one who objected to it out of several dozen viewers. Yet I don't have nearly the same problems watching a 2K DLP 3D Barco projector, or excuse me, the 2K DLP 3D Barco's projected image (NOW who is the troll?!)

So I have noticed projection phenomena, just as you have. Seriously, though, what is your solution, though, Mark?

I am the one ranting, right? I am perfectly fine with both systems. You are pefectly fine with no system that has anywhere near widespread acceptance.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 24 pages: 1 2 3 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 22 23 24

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.