|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Real D and "Meet The Robinsons"
|
Mark J. Marshall
Film God
Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 04-19-2007 01:53 PM
Specifically it will look far superior because one eye won't be retaining one frame with persistence of vision while the other eye is seeing the next frame. In other words, your brain won't be "seeing" two different frames at the same time. Indeed your eyes can not perceive a flicker at 144 fps, but that's not the problem. Your brain can certainly perceive when one eye is 1/144th of a second behind the other (at least mine can, apparently)... which it is for the duration of the entire show. It's not a problem if there's no (or very little) motion on the screen, but most animation since Roger Rabbit has included a lot of quick whip pans and other flying camera tricks which causes quite a bit of motion on the screen, and that leads to the eye images separating, and the 3D effect turning into the eyes seeing two completely different things.
Imagine watching a double interlocked presentation with two 35mm projectors equipped with three blade shutters. Each projector will be presenting at 24 fps times three blades, which equals 72 fps. Times two projectors is 144 fps, which by the way is EXACTLY the frame rate everyone has an orgasm over when they talk about the RealD setup. But setting that aside, imagine that one of the 35mm projector's shutters is out of sync with the other by one full shutter blade. Anyone who has run interlocked 35mm will tell you that in that situation, the 3D will look noticeably "off", yet ironically, that is EXACTLY what you get in a RealD presentation, and everyone thinks it looks great... probably because they haven't seen what 3D can look like with two projectors.
Trust me, it can look much better if the frames are completely in sync on the screen. The average viewer probably isn't missing anything right now because they haven't seen a two projector setup before except in special venue locations. I guess that's fortunate for the industry. Wait until more high end theaters start installing a second projector, then we'll see if more people notice the difference. Or... maybe they won't. People still don't think our warbling 650 is a problem, and it's been something like three years.
Of all people, Bobby, I would think you would certainly understand the problem with this setup. Maybe I'm not explaining it well, or maybe you think it's not as big of a deal as I do? Maybe I'm too picky for this industry. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002
|
posted 04-20-2007 01:42 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
The Z-screen cuts light output slightly. If you're showing a standard 2D movie it's always better to swing the Z-screen out of the way of the projector lens rather than just unplugging it.
If you're talking about unplugging the Z-screen while 2D trailers play during a 3D movie, that would be a no-go. Since the Z-screen has to be carefully balanced I would prefer to fiddle around with the thing as little as possible. Frequent swinging back and forth and/or unplugging cables is sure to eventually mess up some adjustments.
You're right, the Z-screen should absolutely be removed for 2D movies. I was referring to switching from 2D to 3D trailers. I don't really know much about it, but the cable is a single standard phone jack-looking thing (which, in a completely unrelated note, was co-invented by my grandpa). I can't imagine much going wrong by plugging and unplugging it. Certainly, there's less room for error in doing that than in repositioning the entire screen every show. But like Darryl said, it's a moot point with the proper setup. This is just a suggestion for theaters who don't have that setup in the mean time.
EDIT: Is it possible that by plugging in the z-screen while the movie's running, the eyes could be out of phase?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Tristan Lane
Master Film Handler
Posts: 444
From: Nampa, Idaho
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 04-21-2007 04:35 AM
As Darryl stated in an earlier post, all theaters should be instructing the player/projector to play all 2D content at 48 FPS. If the system is setup up correctly, the 2D content will look exactly the same as the 3D content (minus the depth). Unplugging the zscreen rather than swinging it out of the way during the 2D trailers may have adverse affects on the viewers who insist on wearing their glasses. The zscreen mount is intended allow the screen to be moved out of the way and back again without any alignment. Circular polarization is pretty forgiving this way.
Moving it out of the way for trailers and back for 3D is asking too much of the projection staff at the common multiplex, and more important: Isn't needed if the showlist and automation are set up correctly.
quote: Mark J. Marshall
Trust me, it can look much better if the frames are completely in sync on the screen. The average viewer probably isn't missing anything right now because they haven't seen a two projector setup before
The more I think about this, the less I believe that this could be detrimental to the picture in a way that you have described. You describe jerky motion artifacts and such, and chalk it up to a 144/second delay between what the left eye sees as opposed to what the right eye sees. I would think that this add a smoother motion effect since one eye is still retaining an image from the last frame of motion - and would provide a smoother transition between the previous frame motion and the present frame. I also wonder if image retention over 144th of one second might be splitting hairs a little, as the majority of viewers have no complaints about the presentation. (many of which HAVE seen 2 projector 3D in IMAX)
quote: Mark J. Marshall
Just install a second projector and get rid of the stupid Z thingy. All your problems will go away.
A two projector RealD presentation, or any two projector digital 3D presentation is presently not economically practical, nor is it needed. This would present a problem with the two projectors both trying to decrypt content coming from one source. Present players are only allowed to playout content to ONE projector at a time. The use of two players may fix this, and require the players and projectors to remain in sync but this adds more cost on top of an additional DLP.
The "Stupid z thingy" does it's job adequately. I don't see anything distracting or irritating with RealD or In3's 3D effectn in comparison to what I saw on a daily basis as an IMAX operator. I'm not comparing picture quality or inherent motion artifacts that have been present in past 2K releases, just the 3D effect .
Mark, I'm not saying that you are wrong. But I get the feeling that you are strongly set in your opinion, and perhaps a little bit jaded by fact that it is only single projector 3D, and that the projector is digital ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 10 pages: 1 2 3 ... 6 7 8 9 10
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|
Home
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic