Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
cafe67

Best 3D movie or implementation of 3D in a movie.

Recommended Posts

I did a search couldnt find a previous thread thread ( surprised) 

 

what is the best 3D movie , you’ve seen? 

 

or perhaps a better question - what’s the best implementation of 3D in a movie you seen? 

 

Ive always liked Avatar has it seemed the 3D was used to complement the movie ( the “ floating jelly fish scene”) whereas other movies seem to use it more as a gimmick ( spears or dinosaurs 🦕 in your face ) 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Avatar then 20 light years nothing and then the rest, I think active 3D tech (also used in Avatar) has advantage in immersion vs passive we see in majority cases after it and these days 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was 17 at the time and managed to get into a Friday the 13th In A Hoyts Cinema.  Can’t remember which version but Definately not the original.  With the 3D glasses I can remember saying to myself WTF is the 3D version all about, and it wasn’t until a scene where they  filmed a kid from below tossing a yo-yo where it was going straight to the camera lens......  all I remember was I ducked!    Didn’t even think about it!  And from that moment.... alright!  This is cool!    There’s also a scene where someone throws a spear and it comes 3inches from between your eye balls....wow!  

All the 3D they have now on Blu-ray.....   nothing compared to this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure I can remember the local paper including 3D glasses because Jaws 3D was playing that week on telly.

 

So yeah, that was a while ago.

 

:D

 

I don't actually have that many, if any, (sorry lyrics in my head) 3D movies.  But Dredd 3D isn't too bad.  Okay,  so I'm a Judge Dredd fan, but it was implemented okay I reckon.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


12 hours ago, kukynas said:

Avatar then 20 light years nothing and then the rest, I think active 3D tech (also used in Avatar) has advantage in immersion vs passive we see in majority cases after it and these days

Your terminology isn't familiar to me. What do you mean by "active 3D tech"?  I have heard of active and passive 3D glasses, but I don't think you're referring to the type of glasses used to view the movie.

 

I note that for real life scenes, the 3D for Avatar was done with separate cameras for the Left and Right views. For the animated parts of Avatar, the 3D was computer generated as Left and Right views.  On the webpage Is it Real or Fake 3D?, Avatar is listed as "real". 

 

Conversely, for some movies the 3D is created from 2D footage, after shooting is complete. Titanic (1997) was converted to 3D for its re-release in 2012.  Such movies are listed on the Is it Real or Fake site as "fake". [In my opinion, this was a very well done post-production conversion, and the result is well worth watching.]

 

Generally, I don't find simulated 3D as immersive as 3D actually shot with a stereoscopic camera rig.  I find this particularly so for close ups.

 

Simulation technology continues to evolve. The quality of the 3D in Alice in Wonderland (2010) was somewhat lacking with conversion artefacts quite noticeable at times (e.g. the cardboard cut-out effect for objects at various distances); but, at the time, post-production 3D was necessarily a very labour-intensive task, with relatively unsophisticated computer assistance.

 

These days post-production 3D is usually free of obvious conversion artefacts, and many directors seem to prefer it over the inconvenience of using stereoscopic cameras while shooting. A quality-conscious director would want there to be be a quality assurance expert or panel in place to review all of the draft simulated 3D footage, and to send back for further conversion work any scenes that were arguably "competent" but, as a 3D viewing experience, "lacking". 

 

A really good post-production 3D conversion requires sophisticated computer software, skilled personnel, sufficient time, sufficient budget, and -- very importantly - dedication to producing a quality result.

Edited by MLXXX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MLXXX said:

Your terminology isn't familiar to me. What do you mean by "active 3D tech"?  I have heard of active and passive 3D glasses, but I don't think you're referring to the type of glasses used to view the movie.

 

I note that for real life scenes, the 3D for Avatar was done with separate cameras for the Left and Right views. For the animated parts of Avatar, the 3D was computer generated as Left and Right views.  On the webpage Is it Real or Fake 3D?, Avatar is listed as "real". .

Yes, I meant active 3D glasses, but it’s not only about glasses, production is also made differently for active vs passive glasses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, kukynas said:

Yes, I meant active 3D glasses, but it’s not only about glasses, production is also made differently for active vs passive glasses

I still don't understand what you're getting at.

 

Avatar was filmed at 24 frames per second, with each frame having a Left view and a Right view. It was shown in public cinemas at 24 frames per second. Most public cinemas provided patrons with passive 3D glasses. Some cinemas used a different projection technology and provided patrons with active 3D glasses.  For the cinema patron, the picture would look much the same with either type of glasses.

 

You can watch Avatar with a 3D Blu-ray player on either a TV set that uses passive glasses 3D or a TV set that uses active glasses 3D. 

 

In short, Avatar was not filmed or produced specifically for viewing with active 3D glasses.

 

 

Improvement in vertical resolution for passive 3D TV screens

 

Passive 3D TV sets use a film-type patterned retarder layer that causes the odd numbered lines to have one polarization and the even numbered lines an opposite polarization. With Full HD screens (1920x1080 pixels) you could get only 540 pixels of vertical resolution for 3D. Some people didn't like seeing faint black lines when they got close to the screen.

 

This ceased to be an issue with 4K passive TV sets, which provide 1080 pixels of vertical resolution in 3D mode.  (3D Blu-ray discs come with a maximum resolution of 1920x1080 pixels so a screen vertical resolution of 1080 pixels is sufficient.)

 

You can watch Avatar on a 4K 3D TV set and enjoy the same visible resolution with active glasses as with passive glasses.

Edited by MLXXX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, MLXXX said:

Some cinemas used a different projection technology and provided patrons with active 3D glasses.  For the cinema patron, the picture would look much the same with either type of glasses.

sorry, you right, it's about projection not production technology, but I always liked active more than passive, not sure why...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


On 16/02/2019 at 10:54 PM, cafe67 said:

Ive always liked Avatar has it seemed the 3D was used to complement the movie ( the “ floating jelly fish scene”) whereas other movies seem to use it more as a gimmick ( spears or dinosaurs 🦕 in your face )

Avatar (2009) did set a high bar. Early in the movie the scene of the administration centre with its transparent 3D monitors on desks impressed me a lot.  Later in the movie the scenes of Na'vi flying on the backs of the Ikran (mountain banshees) were exhilarating to watch.
 

There have been so many movies with very pleasing 3D. I would count Hugo (2011) among them. The 3D was never intrusive, just natural looking and a delight to watch.

 

The opening scenes of wildlife in Life of Pi (2012) impressed me a lot.  David Attenborough's Galapagos 3D nature documentaries (2013) were amazing, in giving us the ability to see creatures in 3D that we would probably never have the opportunity to see with our own eyes in real life.

 

In more recent years, there has been a trend towards post-production 3D, and many of the movies I have seen have failed to thrill me, because for my eyes the 3D has lacked detailed 3D relief in closeups. An example of that is Star Trek Beyond (2016). Reviews of the 3D for that movie were favourable, but I was not all that impressed myself. I think the stereography of many post-production 3D movies has not been done with passion, enthusiasm, and a desire to set high standards. Rather it has been done to a budget, applying computer algorithms that were sufficient to deliver a 3D effect, but not sufficient to present a rich 3D tapestry for people like me, who love their 3D.


There has also been a strong trend to use 3D only for action or sci-fi genres. However these types of movies such as Thor, or Captain America, are not everyone's cup of tea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does not matter how many wonderful 3D effects Avatar has, it cannot hide the fact it's one of the worst movies ever made.

  Script is a bad copy of Pocahontas and acting so so wooden.

 

  I prefer the 3d special effects of Friday the 13th vs anything in Avatar.

 

The 3D in Mad Max fury road was pretty good.

Edited by metal beat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, metal beat said:

Does not matter how many wonderful 3D effects Avatar has, it cannot hide the fact it's one of the worst movies ever made.

  Script is a bad copy of Pocahontas and acting so so wooden.

Some of the acting can certainly be criticized. (For example, I found Sam Worthington's attempt at an American accent when playing Jake Sully not all that convincing.)

However the 3D effects, with the skilled guidance of director James Cameron,  were spectacular. The success of these effects in this one film, launched the modern era of 3D. Cameron is the father of the modern 3D movie.

 

I might also mention that the post-production conversion of Titanic (1997) under Cameron's guidance, released in 2012, set a very high standard for post production 3D. I found the 3D relief in Kate Winslet's face in close-ups uncanny. It was like watching genuine 3D shot with a stereoscopic camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi MLXXX, I was under the impression that there are no 4K 3D tvs available. I also love 3D. I have a Panasonic 65 in plasma 3D tv. Late last year I bought a 75 in Panasonic LED 3D tv as a backup in case the plasma died. I have over 100 3D blu ray discs and would hate it if I coudnt watch them .Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


3 hours ago, MLXXX said:

Some of the acting can certainly be criticized. (For example, I found Sam Worthington's attempt at an American accent when playing Jake Sully not all that convincing.)

However the 3D effects, with the skilled guidance of director James Cameron,  were spectacular. The success of these effects in this one film, launched the modern era of 3D. Cameron is the father of the modern 3D movie.

 

I might also mention that the post-production conversion of Titanic (1997) under Cameron's guidance, released in 2012, set a very high standard for post production 3D. I found the 3D relief in Kate Winslet's face in close-ups uncanny. It was like watching genuine 3D shot with a stereoscopic camera.

Also Her Big Hat when She is about to board Titanic and the first time engines pistons start firing......3D was very well done....In fact 3D on the T2 Judgement day is also good.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, metal beat said:

Does not matter how many wonderful 3D effects Avatar has, it cannot hide the fact it's one of the worst movies ever made.

  Script is a bad copy of Pocahontas and acting so so wooden.

 

  I prefer the 3d special effects of Friday the 13th vs anything in Avatar.

 

The 3D in Mad Max fury road was pretty good.

You go hand your man card in right now 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gillmaverick said:

Also Her Big Hat when She is about to board Titanic and the first time engines pistons start firing......3D was very well done....In fact 3D on the T2 Judgement day is also good.....

Your mentioning of the engine pistons reminds me how very impressive I found that in the Titanic 3D conversion.

(I had looked forward to the T2 Judgment Day 3D conversion with great anticipation, it being one of my favourite movies. However it didn't impress me as much as the Titanic conversion. And I was disappointed at the decision to use the shorter theatrical cut version for the steel works confrontation at the end of the movie.) 

 

2 hours ago, bones28643 said:

Hi MLXXX, I was under the impression that there are no 4K 3D tvs available. I also love 3D. I have a Panasonic 65 in plasma 3D tv. Late last year I bought a 75 in Panasonic LED 3D tv as a backup in case the plasma died. I have over 100 3D blu ray discs and would hate it if I coudnt watch them .Cheers.

Yes it is very unfortunate that the manufacturers no longer provide 3D as an option for consumer 4K TVs. I have a 2015 model Sony 4K LCD TV that uses passive 3D technology. However its crosstalk performance is poor.

 

These days I use a projector (a BenQ W2000) for serious watching of  3D. There is quite a range of 3D home projectors available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I use a projector now too. A Sony 4k one. It is so good for watching 3d, 115" screen.

 

I've been watching so many since I jot it finished a year ago, and have been adding Atmos to a lot of them that had it skipped.

 

It is hard to pick a fav. It is hard separate the 3D movie I've enjoyed the most vs the 3D presentation. A really nice natural looking, and sounding one was Blade Runner 2049, although a lot people seem to complain it is "weak". Maybe, but it is natural looking. I loved The Walk, Gravity. 

 

Avatar I've been meaning to watch on it, but I'm not that big a fan of the movie, so keep watching other movies over it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...