Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: How was Michael Jackson's 3-D at the Grammy Show?

This is topic How was Michael Jackson's 3-D at the Grammy Show? in forum The Afterlife at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000825

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 02-01-2010, 06:59 PM:

I missed the Grammy show lat night and was wondering how the Michael Jackson 3-D clip was. I understand the glasses were avaulable at Target for free but I never bothered to get one because I had other plans last night. Some of the anaglyph 3-D I have seen on Blu Ray is not bad including JOURNEY TO THE CENTRE OF THE EARTH. Because the Grammys was broadcast in HD, I would like to think the 3-D would look rather decent.

-Claude

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 02-02-2010, 11:43 AM:

Saw it in standard definition (i.e. not in HD) and it wasn't too bad.

You know, anaglyph.

The people shooting the scenes with the little girl knew what they were doing, but the CGI people and other shots not so much.

They needed more 3D camera rigs, though. I think they only had one on the stage and sometimes they would cut to a 2D camera, which with the anaglyph 3D background looked wrong, of course. For example things in the background screens "come out" but the singers in front were in 2D (or 3D but behind the screen) so they were "behind" ... can't have something "in front" another thing that's "behind" but it's occluding it ...

So your usual TV anaglyph show. Probably left more people confused about "the dammed 3D" than excited about it ...

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 02-03-2010, 07:13 PM:

One word says it all: Anaglyphic. [puke]