Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Is 3D dying

Hi,

Can anyone here recall the name of the stereo 35mm film motion picture camera that was announced about 15 years ago, that had a fixed lens separation, but adjustable gate separation?

Thanks,

Mike
 
No.

No.

I ran projection on a test today with 3D @ 60p. The test included 30p material alongside 60p. 60p looks amazing 30p also looked nice but 60p action is where its at.

Test conditions: 40' silver screen, barco dp4k-32b, 60p/3d dcp, light speed designs depthQ polarization

If you want to test 4k, hfr4k, 3D, 3Dhfr, 4k3DD, hfr4k 3D send me a message...
 
3D in its present form is limited and dark cinema screens and goofy glasses at home are fatal hurdles but 3D is SO not dead. It will find a very happy and natural home in VR. Just try some VR glasses and then try pronounce 3D dead.
 
Tom Gleeson said:
3D in its present form is limited and dark cinema screens and goofy glasses at home are fatal hurdles...
Click to expand...
I think the new Laser D-Cinema projectors are game-changers in that they more than double the on-screen brightness. The question will be how many theaters will be willing to get rid of their existing projectors and upgrade to the new Laser projectors from companies like Christie and Barco.
 
I can tell from first hand experience and as someone who made their entire living off of 3D films for 5 years... 3d stereo capture is for the most part a thing of the past. It is not now nor will it ever be entirely dead... It's now back at the level it was before the boom. Every now and then a movie will shoot native 3d, maybe one or two per year. Others will convert here and there. There is still an industry there but it definitely collapsed. You just won't see the huge boom for broadcast, news, sports, and everything under the sun in 3D. People didn't want to wear glasses at home for the most part and now UHD is the new thing driving TV sales...
 
Watching the Martian in 3D left me wanting to see the 2 D version in 4K. The 3D added nothing to the movie experience IMHO.
It saw it in a very good cinema too, so it wasn't the equipments fault per se, but one could always hope.
I much rather watch a nice 4K version.
 
3D from one camera via firrmware, as described here.
 
The majority of people (84% exit poled for Lost World in San Fran by Neilson) only saw the 3D version because the movie start time was convenient for them and they would have preferred to see the 2D version.
 
My opinion, I ONLY watch a movie in 3D if it was actually filmed in 3D (such as The Martian), or created FOR 3D (such as Avatar), and I really do enjoy the experience, and when a movie is built from the ground up for 3D (it is rare).

However, the movie going audience isn't going to know if it was or was not filmed in 3D, post-3D, whatever, so I can easily see how people got fed up with lame 3D movies that didn't get it right, ruining their experience to the format all together.
 
Last edited:
All the people I know are disappointed when a movie they want to see is in 3D at their theater. I hate it too, it's a terrible experience: dark images, reflection of the eyes in the glasses, the landscapes look fake like miniatures, many shots are not working, it takes me out of the movie. But well, they make more money with that so they don't show the 2D versions anymore here. I just hope this stupidity will disappear soon.
 
2D watching of a film shot and designed for 3D is silly.

Just saw Noe's 'Love.' Subject matter aside, the 3D looked nice and have some variance in different places, nice framing shots to play with the depth and some cool silhouette shots that worked really well. Of course being Noe, he couldn't resist the temptation of a gag shot here and there, but all in all it looked nice. It was simply a window to the world of the story though, so I wish he had pushed it more to give it more of a point in the story. The one gag that actually worked really well was a character smoking towards the camera, wasn't expecting the smoke to play so successfully.
 
I get made fun of a lot by people I work with, but I really do enjoy going to 3D films. They've strayed away from the in your face annoying stuff and pushed everything into the screen making it look like you're watching through a deep window. Surprisingly, the last film that I didn't like in 3D was Guardians of the Galaxy because it had such a small effect. Mad Max, Jurassic World, The Walk, and The Martian were all really cool, with Mad Max standing out above the others. It did have a couple cheesy cgi pop out moments but the sweeping aerials were stunning in 3D. Just my two cents.
 
lord I hope so... biggest gimmick ever which ruins some decent movies due to them trying to hard to make it "cool for 3D"..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top