Dana. Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I also have to disagree with Bosendorphin about Avatar: I think the 3D aspects of Avatar added a TON to the movie and is one of the main reasons that it was so successful. When I saw Avatar in 3D on a huge screen, it was visually stunning in a way that was different from anything that I'd ever seen before. Completely agree. It was a totally immersive, non-gimmicky experience that added greatly to the movie. +1 You either give yourself over to the experience or you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phred Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 NOTE: I did not watch the video that prfessed to explain 3d, so maybe some of this is there... But I will give my best to outline the 3 main 3D types that are out there now. All three of these work by giving each eye a slightly different picture, and depending on how pronounced that difference is will determine where the image fits on the z axis. Here is the laymans description on how they work: 1) Red/Blue (or Red/Green). You wear glasses that have a red lens and a green lens. The picture has a regular image, however the outlines of the film have red and green around them, of varying amounts. Your eye with the green lens can't see the green lines, and to that eye the red line looks black. Similarly the other way around... Therefore each eye sees a different picture. Pros: you can do this with any type of broadcast media, TV, Movie, and even print. Cons: the colours look like kaka, and the 3Dness doesn't look very good either. I suspect that colour blind people more have difficulty seeing the 3d effect... 2) Polorized glasses Popular in movie theaters. The glasses have two lenses that look the same, but are actually quite different. They are each polarized perpendicular from each other. One allows only horizontal light through, and the other only allows vertical light through. Here is a fun thing to try when you are at a movie theater wearing these glasses... Look at someone else who is wearing the glasses and close one eye (or try this in a mirror). One of their lenses will go black. Switch eyes and their other lens will go black. It's pretty cool. Anyway, the theater is set up with two projectors (or probably one projector that can project two images). One image is shown using vertical light waves, the other is shown with horizontal (this part is magic to me...). Again, each eye gets a different image. Pros: much less color distortion (just a little darker). Glasses are cheap. Cons: You need an elaborate projection setup for it to work. To my knowledge, you can't do it using TV type technology. 3) Active Lens The glasses and TV/blueray work together to flip images back and forth to each of your eyes. The glasses are capaple of very quickly darkening each eye one at a time, and are in sync with the TV. So, the TV shows you an image meant for your left eye, at the exact same time as your right eye is blacked out. Do that fast enough, you get 3d. Pros: in theory the color and brightness stays the same, can be done on more media types than the polorized style... Cons: you need very expensive glasses for everyone watching. You need special TV etc. I'm just saying', everyone that confuses correlation with causation eventually ends up dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phred Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I watched the video, and it appears that I mispoke when I said that the polarized glasses approach whouldn't work with tvs, and need a projector. I appears that the way they support it on TV is by flitering every second pixel row the opposite direction so that each eye sees a different set of rows. I wonder how well it works? I'm just saying', everyone that confuses correlation with causation eventually ends up dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richwhite9 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 LG's demonstrated Home TV polorized Glasses. http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-lg-unveils-fpr-polarized-3d.html It's expected to be available in US in 2012. Red/green appears to be a deadend. Auto 3-D (no glasses) will be the 2020 mass market thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richwhite9 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 More on LG's 3840-by-2160 pixel resolution Ultra-HD 84-inch Polarized 3-D set. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37345659/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/ it's only money..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Alfredson Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 IMNSHO... more crap to keep people's attention away from what's really happening in the world. Huh? Since when does seeing 3D movies prevent people from paying attention? If people are ignoring what's going on, it's because they choose to, not because the entertainment exists. Forest. Trees. Nothing wrong with 3D or "entertainment" per se. I think people spend too much time / money on passive entertainment and I also think this is by design. That's all I'm going to say on the subject because we can't talk politics here. Keep it greazy! B3tles - Soul Jazz THEO - Prog Rock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real MC Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Hollywood tried 3D back in the 50s and seems doomed to repeat history. Failing that, I haven't paid money to a movie theater since 1999. Hollywood hasn't made any movie worth my trouble, way too many people distracting the film with their cell phones, I don't like paying $5 for popcorn, and I don't pay good $$$ to sit through commercials (now up to twenty minutes?!?) before the film begins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridog6996 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Thanks for this lengthy reply which answered zero of my questions above. Do you have to wear glasses? If so, what kind? Paper red/green throw away glasses? Some sort of "polarized" glasses that you have to turn in? What happens if you don't? Electronic LCD shuttered glasses that have to be synced with the picture? Clearly I wasn't replying to your post. But yes, as others have said, you wear glasses, and every theater I've been to uses to the polarized glasses. My YouTube Channel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dana. Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Hollywood hasn't made any movie worth my trouble... Hahaha. WRONG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridog6996 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Hollywood tried 3D back in the 50s and seems doomed to repeat history. Failing that, I haven't paid money to a movie theater since 1999. Hollywood hasn't made any movie worth my trouble, way too many people distracting the film with their cell phones, I don't like paying $5 for popcorn, and I don't pay good $$$ to sit through commercials (now up to twenty minutes?!?) before the film begins. The 3D used now is light years ahead of those old movies. At this point, there's too much of an investment in developing media for 3D technology for it to go away. As far as the other stuff, that's why I always buy my snacks BEFORE I get to the theater, and show up usually 10 minutes or so late to skip the previews and commercials. My YouTube Channel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Zeger Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Now THIS is 3D content: NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Hoping to prime demand for 3-D TVs, Sony has sponsored a 3-D video version of Sports Illustrated's new Swimsuit Issue for consumers to rent or buy starting Feb. 15 through Sony's PlayStation 3 and Bravia web-enabled, 3D-compatible TVs and Blu-ray players. http://adage.com/images/bin/image/photo/sports-illustrated-julie-henderson-010411.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.