Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

3d Prometheus is it really worth it.

Mark Toia

Mark Toia

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Messages
4,142
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Could be anywhere in the world today.
Hi Alien Fans...

Just got back from the movies.. 3 in a Row! Yes I'm a movie JUNKY!!!!!!

I like seeing the big block buster trailers... (yes I'm weird) And in watching 3 movies in a ROW you get to see the trailers 3 times....

So I saw the Prometheus trailer in 3d stereo... My Son and I looked at each other and were both thinking the same thing... Why !!!. Yes maybe a few bits of dirt fly past screen and some futuristic graphics floating before our very eyes, but Really... Is the distraction really worth it.

The 3dstereo Prometheus trailer was Dull because of the glasses... that touch of softness or not quite in focus or aligned, that comes from glasses... Feels like your watching the movie with sun glasses on making the image not so bright etc etc... not to mention the tension between your eyes which slowly turns into a mild Migraine by the end... Disappointing to say the least.

Then we go into movie number two in 2d and the Prometheus trailer comes up again (in 2d) and WOW! Bright, Deep, sharp, rich, Just fantastic! I took it all in...

Both my son and I said in unison.... I'm seeing it in 2D !!!

Avatar was the only movie thats pulled this off 3d magic so far... Why is everyone else not getting the same results.. Is it that Avatar was all 3d FX and they could really maximise on the separation of the 3d elements making the illusion fantastic.. like Toy story...
But shooting 3d stereo for real never quites get there unless a bit of 3dFX gets chucked into the shot.
Transformers 3 I saw twice 3d and 2d... with the 2d version being far greater experience. So much fast motion in the 3d just makes it to hard to focus on any one thing.

We watched the new Titans movie, Fantastic Effects... But also was the 3d stereo in this film really worth the effort or that extra 5 dollars to go see it... I say no. But thats my opinion (and my sons)

Just my 5 cents worth... and I'm sure 3d will be around for some time to come, because big studios looooove to pay twice as much for there films post and cameras and data and and and and... .

Come on 4k Projectors ! Save 3d or bring 2D to life.
 
If Ridley Scott is so excited about 3D that he says "I'm never going to make another non-3D movie"

...then that's good enough for me to take him at his word and watch it in the format he prefers to create his art in.

I say at least give him the benefit of the doubt for the first 2 or 3 3D movies he makes :)

But that's just me and I generally like 3D. However, I am really careful about what theater I go to... because dark fuzzy 3D is terrible. Sounds like you need to go to a different theater!

Yes, Avatar worked well in 3D because they could really get the separation right. But more importantly it worked well because James Cameron and Vince Pace knew what the hell they were doing, methinks?

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
Vince Pace isn't the King of 3D.
Avatar was very safe 3D, technically. Beautiful imagery nonetheless.

Ridley Scott, one of our heroes, is getting old. Indeed, he might shoot his last pictures in 3D only.

Guess I'm a luddite but my money would be on a 4K digital projection as the future for my entertainment dollar.
 
Saw "John Carter" in 3D and though - 3D is dead after all - just didn't give me any thing more and even distracted me on simple conversation scenes. Saw Avatar Trailer on RED's laser beamer last year and want'ed to go and shoot 3D off the spot - but was it because of Avatar's 3d or RED's projector?.......
 
Watched John Carter today in 2d.., Was a really good film.. I went in thinking it might be a flop. So glad I didnt see it in 3d. So much was going on.

ooooh and Star was 3d! SAVE YOUR MONEY!!!!! what a waste of time that was.. Absolutely nothing gained,

Brian D. Goff said:
Saw "John Carter" in 3D and though - 3D is dead after all - just didn't give me any thing more and even distracted me on simple conversation scenes. Saw Avatar Trailer on RED's laser beamer last year and want'ed to go and shoot 3D off the spot - but was it because of Avatar's 3d or RED's projector?.......
Click to expand...
 
David Collard said:
Vince Pace isn't the King of 3D.
Avatar was very safe 3D, technically.
Click to expand...

A huge amount of the live action stereo in Avatar is absurdly terrible and difficult to watch. Go look at the shot of Evil Corporate Guy putting... Some of the worst, most painful stereo I've ever seen, as they do a huge convergence pull without reducing the IA so the background goes totally nuts. The cartoon parts of the movie are pretty decent, but the live action scenes betray the fact that none of those guys knew what they were doing when they shot Avatar. We'll see what they've learned for Avatar 2.
 
Brian D. Goff said:
Saw "John Carter" in 3D and though - 3D is dead after all - just didn't give me any thing more and even distracted me on simple conversation scenes.
Click to expand...

Don't forget, John Carter was shot in 2D by a director who vocally didn't care about 3D at all and was then post-converted to 3D for release.
 
My opinion is, if it was shot in 3d, you should watch it in 3d. the cinematography was geared towards the 3d, thus the story telling was shaped in 3d and it should be the only way to watch it because that was the intention. but a lot of people get fooled into thinking a post converted movie was shot in 3d, and there was no intention of telling a story in 3d with a post converted film, so the creative direction is way different.

http://realorfake3d.com/


this should give you a list of what's post converted or shot in 3d. I've always enjoyed the films when they were actually shot in it.
 
I saw Wrath of the Titans in IMAX 3D yesterday. Plot was thin, but watchable for what was there.

For my money, IMAX 3D exists for films like Wrath. Crazy good feels-like-your-there experience. Almost like a ride at Universal. :)
 
There is no doupt that IMAX is the best... IMAX 3d is fantastic... especially in a dome... !
I watched a Space IMAX 3d movie years ago and almost fell out of my chair so much so that the vision took over my body.. some people left the theatre because it was making them sick.

Thats hard core 3d... now thats something else.
 
Mark Toia said:
Hi Alien Fans...

Just got back from the movies.. 3 in a Row! Yes I'm a movie JUNKY!!!!!!

I like seeing the big block buster trailers... (yes I'm weird) And in watching 3 movies in a ROW you get to see the trailers 3 times....

So I saw the Prometheus trailer in 3d stereo... My Son and I looked at each other and were both thinking the same thing... Why !!!. Yes maybe a few bits of dirt fly past screen and some futuristic graphics floating before our very eyes, but Really... Is the distraction really worth it.

The 3dstereo Prometheus trailer was Dull because of the glasses... that touch of softness or not quite in focus or aligned, that comes from glasses... Feels like your watching the movie with sun glasses on making the image not so bright etc etc... not to mention the tension between your eyes which slowly turns into a mild Migraine by the end... Disappointing to say the least.

Then we go into movie number two in 2d and the Prometheus trailer comes up again (in 2d) and WOW! Bright, Deep, sharp, rich, Just fantastic! I took it all in...

Both my son and I said in unison.... I'm seeing it in 2D !!!

Avatar was the only movie thats pulled this off 3d magic so far... Why is everyone else not getting the same results.. Is it that Avatar was all 3d FX and they could really maximise on the separation of the 3d elements making the illusion fantastic.. like Toy story...
But shooting 3d stereo for real never quites get there unless a bit of 3dFX gets chucked into the shot.
Transformers 3 I saw twice 3d and 2d... with the 2d version being far greater experience. So much fast motion in the 3d just makes it to hard to focus on any one thing.

We watched the new Titans movie, Fantastic Effects... But also was the 3d stereo in this film really worth the effort or that extra 5 dollars to go see it... I say no. But thats my opinion (and my sons)

Just my 5 cents worth... and I'm sure 3d will be around for some time to come, because big studios looooove to pay twice as much for there films post and cameras and data and and and and... .

Come on 4k Projectors ! Save 3d or bring 2D to life.
Click to expand...

I agree.
I liked avatar but I had to rest my eyes in the theater a few times and when I saw the DVD I actually thought it was better flat.
I do not believe in films as "a window to another world" I want a film to be a motion canvas. It could look like oil paint or it could look like super fine prints but eye fatiguing 3D images does not really impress me for more than a few minutes. I know Cameron made his jungle so he could move every plant and such around not only to build the scene but to make sure the 3D would work. From my own experience there is quite a wast amount of scene setups that does not work in 3D. In my opinion you should never let anything get out of the screen. In other words make sure there is nothing in between in the triangle made up between eyes and the edge of frame. So for cinema purposes that means no visible objects closer to camera than 5-10m or so and then it's not easy to make a good film. Panoramic shots and so, yes no problem, being inside a car.... big problem, being inside a car that drives... makes me take of the glasses or puke...

So until we got those stereo laser beams projecting images right into our eyes I think it's better to stick with the mono stuff.
 
What are everyone's thoughts on HUGO in 3D. I missed it, but just from reading director interviews it seems like this would be fantastic to have seen in 3d. Opinions?
 
Brian D. Goff said:
Saw Avatar Trailer on RED's laser beamer last year and want'ed to go and shoot 3D off the spot - but was it because of Avatar's 3d or RED's projector?.......
Click to expand...

It's the combination of the two.

It's the unique stereo presentation technique of the projector that makes the biggest difference, but it really shines when the 3D content is done well too.
 
I've worked at IMAX for about 5 years doing stereo conversions and I have to say, the 3D is a tough sell. For 3D to be done properly, it really needs to be done whole heartedly, and not a compromise to be able to finish for 2D as well. For 3D to shine, framing is very different for optimal experience. This drives directors crazy. Wide angle shots look great in 3D and can actually engage the viewer, where in a 2D world, the director would be more inclined to do medium and closeups to create that connection. Hugo was actually pretty close to pleasing both formats.
 
Wasn't the Great Gatsby shot 3D? Maybe we'll get to see that on the RED Laser projector: Ruby, isn't that a fitting name for her ( :
 
Mark Toia said:
So I saw the Prometheus trailer in 3d stereo... My Son and I looked at each other and were both thinking the same thing... Why !!!.
Click to expand...

Mark, I'm 100% with you on this, and I haven't seen a 3D film in a theater since Tron Legacy came out. I'm just not interested in seeing a movie in 3D. It's not because of the glasses, or the dim screens, or maybe it's that and everything else. It's not because "I still haven't seen 3D properly done and it'll get better". I'm just not interested (and I took a workshop for 3D production a few weeks ago here, organized by the local camera guild, just in case I end up working on a 3D shoot).

I'm glad I live in a city where I have the chance to choose. I choose 2D. (Actually, from what I've been hearing around, at least here in Rome, 3D is becoming less and less popular and at least 5 theaters which were well on the way to convert to digital projection just for 3D are not going that way anymore).
Having said that, and to kind of answer your question about Promethues, it's because:

a) Sir Ridley Scott is one of the best directors in the world, and frankly he can do whatever he wants. If he wants to shoot 3D, that's fine with me, as long as I get to see his movies in 2D.

b) He's got economic reasons for it, besides the production side of it ( http://www.vulture.com/2010/05/ridley_scott_3d_alien_prequel.html )

Just my 2 cents..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top