Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Convert me (Page 2)

 
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: Convert me
Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 11-28-2008 10:28 AM      Profile for Tim Reed   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Lyle Romer
collusion is not allowed
The studios do it.

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 11-28-2008 01:22 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
BOLT was playing on two screens.
One was in Digital 3-D; one was 2-D 35mm.
The tickets were $12.00 for the 3-D presentation.
Tickets for regular shows are $9.00
This theatre has only one digital projector and it is beside a 35mm. There were more people seated in the 2-D house than the 3-D.

Nothing better than shooting yourself in the head! I don't know of any out here that are also running a 2-D version if they are running 3-D.

Mark

 |  IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 11-28-2008 01:26 PM      Profile for Frank Angel   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Angel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm not verifying, just relaying what the guy said. And with all due respect, because you don't know of any such situation doesn't mean there isn't any.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 11-29-2008 11:58 AM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Nothing better than shooting yourself in the head! I don't know of any out here that are also running a 2-D version if they are running 3-D.
Speaking of shooting oneself in the head....

Not EVERYONE wants to see things in 3D, period (well, at least cinema 3D). There are some that just wont wear the glasses...take my son (age 3) that simply won't do it. As such, a 2D version was sought out and, again at 3...he sat all of the way though the movie and wants to go see it again, in a theatre.

The theatre he saw the film in did have both 2D and 3D versions available too.

Presumming Frank's data is correct...it indicates that 3D is not the selling point for EVERYONE. In fact, it may indeed be a distraction.

 |  IP: Logged

Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008


 - posted 11-30-2008 08:20 PM      Profile for Julio Roberto     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
A few studies show that aprox. 8% of the population have some eye problem that affect their stereopsis perception.

Stereoscopists have long agreed that, for many different reasons, most of them medical (amblyopia, strabismus, etc), about 10% of the general population would NOT enjoy (or even dispise) stereoscopic 3D projections.

On the other end, there is a number of people (which I haven't read any studies to figure out what percentage) that have very little trouble fusing stereo images and no eye-strain from separating convergence and focus (something that never occurs in nature, only when watching stereo images that are focused on a screen at some distance but are to be fused at a convergence point in front-of or behind said screen).

Just to give a general idea, of the 3D projections I have done, I'd say about 10% of those watching have no problem whatsoever with even bad presentations (extreme ghosting, huge convergence angles or even DIVERGENT ones, vertical parallax, etc).

So for a minority, 3D is great and without shortcomings. Those people just don't understand what others are complaining about and don't understand why doesn't everybody just love 3D.

For another minority, 3D is painful, bad, and not satisfying (or even perceived) at all.

For the rest, it's somewhere in-between.

So a few people would not want to miss a show in 3D and would go out of their way to actually watch it. They would even watch a movie ONLY for the 3D, even if it's bad. They'll even hapily pay a higher ticket price.

Another similar set of people would NOT make any effort to watch the movie in 3D and, given the choice or any advantage (such as cheaper price), would much rather watch it in 2D.

For the rest of the population, 3D may add something but not enough to make them "3D fans".

Those that enjoy 3D movies the most are usually young people with supple visual systems (children 9-13, their heads are smaller than adult-size therefore their eyes are closer together therefore they see an exagerated 3D effect since it has been shot with the eye-separation of an adult in mind). But other types might also enjoy it, such as people with unusually large heads that are used to fuse "difficult" images with large parallax due to their eyes being so far apart from each other, i.e.).

I have also found that people that watch stereo films for the first time often get a more satisfying feeling that quickly wears out after they've see a few films and start to complain of eye-strain, etc. Once the novelty wears out, they no longer want to put up with dim images, uneven/mismatched illumination/color (silver screen axial aberrations), ghosting, flickering, you-name-it.

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 11-30-2008 10:34 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Julio... You are 100% correct!

 |  IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 12-03-2008 09:51 AM      Profile for Frank Angel   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Angel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Julio, excellently stated.

Since I am one who falls into the "...a few people would not want to miss a show in 3D and would go out of their way to actually watch it. They would even watch a movie ONLY for the 3D, even if it's bad. They'll even hapily pay a higher ticket price" catagory, and because I certainly can no longer consider myself "young" by any stretch of the imagination (I used to call myself "middle aged" until a friend pointed out that would only be true if I planned to live to 120), then I must conclude that my inordinate love of anything 3D can only be attributed to my unusually BIG HEAD and my wide-stance eyeballs"...other types might also enjoy it, such as people with unusually large heads that are used to fuse "difficult" images with large parallax due to their eyes being so far apart from each other...." Sweet. [Big Grin]

 |  IP: Logged

Frank Bruno
Film Handler

Posts: 50
From: houston, tx
Registered: Aug 2003


 - posted 12-03-2008 03:49 PM      Profile for Frank Bruno   Email Frank Bruno   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Does anyone know the next release to have a digital 3D release? I can't get too excited for Bolt; my own theater has a 2d print i havent bothered with, and Ive heard ok things about the movie. I know the Jonas Brothers are getting the Hannah Montana treatment come spring, but I'm not a teen girl. Pixar's Up & Cameron's Avatar are looking like must-sees in 3D. One of these days I'll probably head to that Morristown Clearview, I've enver been to that theater and I'm not that far away.

Do we have a good "digital-for-dummies" resource here on film-tech somewhere? If you can't tell I'm plenty curious but can't keep up with the (inevitably) technical direction conversations on it take.

 |  IP: Logged

Sam Graham
AKA: "The Evil Sam Graham". Wackiness ensues.

Posts: 1431
From: Waukee, IA
Registered: Dec 2004


 - posted 12-03-2008 04:07 PM      Profile for Sam Graham   Author's Homepage   Email Sam Graham   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Nothing better than shooting yourself in the head! I don't know of any out here that are also running a 2-D version if they are running 3-D.
Megaplex 12, 13, 17, and 20 are all running Bolt in both 2-D and 3-D, as are the Layton, Ogden, and West Jordan Cinemarks, and the Sandy and SLC Centurys.

(That's all I looked up before feeling extremely lazy).

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Lensenmayer
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1605
From: Upper Arlington, OH
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 12-03-2008 04:51 PM      Profile for Mark Lensenmayer   Email Mark Lensenmayer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
All four 3-D theatres around me have at least one 2-D room running BOLT. Most have 2 2-D prints.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.