The Movie Studios' Big 3D Scam 532
An anonymous reader writes "There's a lot of things wrong with 3D movies. Avatar's 3D was well executed, but Alice's 3D was really bad, like all 2D-to-3D conversions. And yet, studios are reconverting 2D movies—including classics—into 3D to milk this fad. On top of that, the theaters are not prepared for 3D, with bad eyeglass optics and dark projections. In this article, a top CG supervisor in a prominent visual effects studio in Los Angeles calls it as it is: it's all a big scam by the movie studios."
Avatar pains (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Avatar pains (Score:1, Informative)
This article saved me from getting an Avatar headache and made the 3D experience more enjoyable:
http://www.shadowlocked.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=70:how-to-avoid-getting-a-3d-headache-while-watching-avatar&catid=41:feature
Binocular Impaired (Score:1, Informative)
3D be damned. I have amblyopia. All 3D movies give me a headache. Me and 3 million other people in the US.
Re:Bigger scam for 1-eyed viewers (Score:3, Informative)
3D glasses used in modern cinema is Polarized, not tinted with red/blue.
Re:Avatar pains (Score:4, Informative)
I got headaches only with the Imax version because of the linear polarization which meant if my head was tilted even slightly to the side, there would be ghosting.
Actually, IMAX 3D uses circular polarization [wikipedia.org].
I saw the film both at a normal theater (polarized) and IMAX 3D and found the IMAX version to be much more enjoyable. The bigger screen made the entire think much more enveloping: It was more like being in the middle of the action instead of looking through a window into the 3D world.
That's my biggest beef with 3D, actually. Many theaters just aren't built with it in mind. If there is anything in your field of vision that is either illuminated or obstructing the screen, it will completely destroy the illusion of depth and drive your eyes and mind nuts. Even just the black border of the theater wall against the screen was enough to distract at times (as I said above, the "through a window" effect).
Re:Bigger scam for 1-eyed viewers (Score:1, Informative)
3D glasses used in modern cinema is Polarized, not tinted with red/blue.
Actually, 3D glasses used in modern cinema is tinted magenta/cyan when being shown in a modern cinema that has not been cinematically retrofitted to show modern-day 3D cinema. Granted, they use technology to their advantage and display/filter the pictures (with $40 glasses that need anti-theft tags so people don't walk away with them) in such a way that there's not MUCH of a color issue, but they still use them.
Re:Bad? What about it was bad? (Score:3, Informative)
I have to agree with the summary; I thought that Avatar's 3D was well done and unobtrusive, but I saw Alice in Wonderland this weekend & the 3D was really annoying to me. It's hard to describe but it seems like moving objects in the foreground get kind of transparent. I had noticed it during the 3D ad before Avatar, and it made me think that Avatar would be the same, but since Avatar was ok I figured maybe they'd just overdone it a bit for the trailer. I liked Alice, but I was wishing I was in the 2D version for most of the movie. The rest of my family, however, had no complaints, so I'm probably just weird.
Re:Bigger scam for 1-eyed viewers (Score:3, Informative)
Depends on Which 3D Tech... (Score:5, Informative)
There are three main 3D formats out there, IMAX 3D, RealD, and Dolby 3D. IMAX 3D uses linear polarization, RealD uses circular polarization, and Dolby 3D uses the Red/Blue color separation. In the first two, the glasses appear light gray, while the last has obviously colored lenses. I saw Avatar in the first two and Alice in the third.
My personal preference is for the polarized techniques. The IMAX was definitely the most immersive. The Dolby 3D seemed too dark and sometimes lighting made me aware of reflections on the inside of the lenses. Additionally, in the Dolby 3D, some of the colors, particularly greens, just seemed off.
Re:Well, Yes (Score:3, Informative)
Wouw, here we pay 120DKR (just under $20) to see Alice in Wonderland.
Re:The hidden perk of 3D... (Score:3, Informative)
Bah humbug. Most HD stuff is indistinguishable from DVD stuff, at least for normal people at normal viewing distances on normal equipment.
I don't see a movie shown in a "holotank" or whatever Heinlein called it. You'd have to have cameras all around, and then stitch them together.
I abhor the current fixation in Hollywood on big-bang graphics and effects at the expense of any real plots or enticing characters.
Heck, get a copy of Metropolis; shot in 1927 without any fancy technology, it still leaves you deeply disturbed and affected, far more than most of the hi-tech hi-def crap that rolls out of Hollywood today.
Re:Well, duh (Score:3, Informative)
Last I asked, the surcharge was $5, or an increase of almost 50%. Not worth it for a pair of glasses.
Worse still: when I saw my first new 3D movie in the local theater I asked what the extra cost was for. They told me it was a surcharge for the glasses, so I kept the glasses. When I returned with my glasses to see another film in 3D I was told I still had to pay the extra surcharge since now it wasn't for the glasses, but a cost for the upgraded theater.
Re:Bigger scam for 1-eyed viewers (Score:1, Informative)
I'm aware of that. What I meant to say is that if you're watching the 2D version of a movie that was filmed in 3D, then you're seeing the same thing as if you went to the 3D movie and just looked with one eye through the glasses. Of course, it may be cheaper just to go see the 2D projection.
My comments were mainly to correct his notion of "misalignment" and color filters, as well as to address the notion that 3D glasses make the movie "too dark".
Re:Depends on Which 3D Tech... (Score:5, Informative)
The IMAX3D is pure marketing. The technology used is not standardized. In some locations they use linear polarization, in others they use circular polarization, and in some places they even use LCD shutter glasses.
RealD always uses circular polarization, although the glasses polarization is actually slightly elliptical. If you tilt you head while wearing them the brightness of the film can vary some, but ghosting does not occur. Of course, tilting your head by too much will destroy the image. (Thing about watching the move with your head at a 90 degree angle to the horizon. The images would then appear to overlap "vertically" rather than horizontally, and since they don't when overlapped) like that...)
Dolby 3D does not use the old 2 color glasses trick, but does use a related trick, where there are two red wavelengths used, two blue wavelengths used, and 2 green wavelengths used. One set of RGB wavelengths is intended for each eye, and the glasses contain filters so only the correct light for each eye enters. This can cause some issues with color perception, as at most one of those could be tuned to the optimal wavelengths for each of the cones in the eye. Further the fact that the different eyes are seeing different wavelengths can result in different perceptions of brightness of two "equal" reds for example.
Re:Well, Yes (Score:4, Informative)
Movies still have their place. I've noticed that there's a substantial under-21 crowd. It's somewhere to go on a date, where you can be alone in a dark room with her. Parents don't generally tolerate sexin' up your date at home. :) Foreplay in the theater, intercourse in the back seat of the car, and back to moms house by midnight.
The over 21 crowd usually head for bars and clubs, and then back to their own apartments.
The over 30 crowd usually have friends over for food, drinks, and to watch movies, and then sexless nights with the wife. {sigh}
Back to the original statement. Ya, I've noticed that the crowd is rather young, compared to the way it used to be 20 years ago.
Re:Where 3D works (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Bigger scam for 1-eyed viewers (Score:1, Informative)
Dolby 3D is a pretty cool idea.
It is not Red/Blue or magenta/cyan tinting.
The red for the left eye is in a different part of the spectrum from the red for right eye. Both look red, but the glasses can separate the 2 parts of the spectrum.
Same for the green and blue.
Pretty clever.
Re:Avatar pains (Score:3, Informative)
http://lmgtfy.com?q=circular polarization [lmgtfy.com]
Re:The hidden perk of 3D... (Score:3, Informative)
Most HD stuff is indistinguishable from DVD stuff, at least for normal people at normal viewing distances on normal equipment.
I think you meant crap equipment. I absolutely (and my wife) can tell the difference between a DVD and a bluray at 1080p.
And since we still have SD in one room, we continue to see the difference.
I abhor the current fixation in Hollywood on big-bang graphics and effects at the expense of any real plots or enticing characters.
You must not be seeing the right movies then, because there are plent which are more than big-bang graphics and effects. And as far as 3d goes, i think Avatar shows it can add something, when used properly. It will take filmmakers time to figure out how to use 3d, just like it did 2d, but they'll get there. I'm sure the people said the same thing when they first added color. Sure, B&W might have a great plot, but you're not as immersed as you are with color. I think the same will be said for 3.
Heck, get a copy of Metropolis; shot in 1927 without any fancy technology, it still leaves you deeply disturbed and affected, far more than most of the hi-tech hi-def crap that rolls out of Hollywood today.
You're blaming technlogy for bad movies, when hollywood is doing what its ALWAYS done; making a ton of crap with a few gems. If you haven't been able to find great films in recent years, I suspect you're the problem, not hollywood. They are out there, you just need to find them.
Re:Bigger scam for 1-eyed viewers (Score:3, Informative)
Polarized glasses are not $40 and don't require anti-theft tags. They even let you walk out of the theater with them. You're thinking of IMAX.
I'm definitely not talking about IMAX. IMAX uses polarized glasses. I'm talking about Dolby 3D. Read my post again.
Its high time for higher framerate (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Well, Yes (Score:5, Informative)
Social? Movies? If anything, the people around me are the biggest reason why I would NOT go.
Quite seriously: When I hear "social", I'd expect some kind of interaction. Sitting next to each other watching something and not having anything in common but to be annoyed by the chattering teens behind us is not what I'd consider a social experience.
Re:Avatar pains (Score:5, Informative)
I know this because I've worked at an IMAX theater for ~4 years. Here's a quick test to see if the 3D glasses you are using are circularly or linearly polarized:
1. Get to pairs of glasses (borrow a friend's).
2. Place one of the lenses of one pair in front of one from the other so that you're looking through two lenses at once.
3. Rotate the glasses, see if the light getting through cycle through black/clear (a period of 180).
Linearly polarized glasses will do this, since it relies on the angle at which you overlap the glasses/projected image. Circularly polarized will not and will be either all-dark or all-light regardless of rotation.
If you have headaches or can't see 3D... (Score:3, Informative)
... It is probably means vision problems: http://www.connectmidmichigan.com/news/story.aspx?id=253449 [connectmidmichigan.com]
Re:Bigger scam for 1-eyed viewers (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Well, Yes (Score:3, Informative)
You are still paying to watch the ads. I don't mind watching a preview or two, but sitting in the cinema and being told downloading is stealing is a bit hard to take.
Paying to be told the industry is dying, when the apparent evidence is to the contrary... /facepalm
Re:Bigger scam for 1-eyed viewers (Score:3, Informative)
What you are pointing out is less about frame rate, and the fact that you need a higher frame rate to compensate for the CRT drawing in the image line by line.
You don't need as high a frame rate when the whole frame is drawn at once like on an LCD screen as there is no amount of time when the screen is blank. Higher frame rates on LCD are desired for high motion so you don't get the jumping effect. If the picture never moved, the update rate on an LCD could be even 5Hz and you'd never notice.
So yes, I can see 60Hz on a CRT and it gives me a headache (especially with florescent lights flashing a the same rate) but not on an LCD. Film is slightly different again in that it's strobed but you essentially get the entire frame at once.