1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

[Film] 3D is Inevitable

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout' started by JunkyardDwg, Jun 27, 2012.

  1. JunkyardDwg

    JunkyardDwg Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    Messages:
    8,652
    Likes Received:
    716
    I'm all for new technology, but when it comes to film I still maintain that 3D is nothing more than a niche technology. I've seen Avatar, Cloudy w/ Meatballs, Tron Legacy and Prometheus in 3D and the only movie of those that was worth it's salt in that realm was Avatar. Outside of that movie I'm just not impressed, and sure as hell would not use it in my home. I don't want a film to be as realistic as possible because I know I'm watching something that is not real in the first place.

    With 3D and all the talk about moving up to 48 fps on The Hobbit (and apparently 60 fps on Avatar), I just feel that film is losing a sense of what makes it so special and authentic as a medium. I absolutely hate the "soap opera" effect caused by those high refresh rates on new tvs. And despite what Peter Jackson may say, no my eyes will not get used to it. I remember back in the day my professor said at some point screen resolution will be so high that the naked eye won't be able to distinguish any difference. I kind of feel like we're at a point with film/tv technology that it's almost starting to ruin the medium I fell in love with long ago. 3D and higher refresh rates might be good for live events, but I sure hope it doesn't become the standard across the whole medium.






    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/9359588/The-Dark-Knight-Rises-director-Nolan-will-join-3D-revolution-claims-RealD.html
     
  2. A00man

    A00man Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    933
    Likes Received:
    66
    Don't care about 3D, but higher frame rates in movies are long overdue. Can't wait to watch the Hobbit in 48 fps!
     
  3. SwoLy-D

    SwoLy-D Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2001
    Messages:
    37,606
    Likes Received:
    1,431
    There was a study earlier last year saying that [people in the United States] will pay "whatever" for 3D... and that it didn't matter what movie it were at the time, people would watch it because of the "hip" thing that 3D is/was. :eek:

    Why do we even "care" about frame rate, if film projectors are now displaying movies that can show up to 60fps with a 120hz refresh rate?

    Is it just the "Big Screen" thing? :confused:
     
  4. JayZ750

    JayZ750 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2000
    Messages:
    24,331
    Likes Received:
    10,657
    I think you're just being stubborn.

    Not that I LOVE 3D either. It's ok. I haven't seen many movies in 3D. I did see Avatar in 3D and thought it was great, though. I do have a 3D capable tv at home, have used it very very infrequently. too much of a hassle for too little benefit.

    But with all that, I still welcome the technological improvements. One improvement leads to another, leads to another.

    While I'll clearly never see it in my lifetime, if in the future we can "go to the movies" by literally being virtually placed in the middle of the film.. well, that would be awesome. I think I'll likely feel somewhat similar about it as I do about 3D... but that's a human nature element of getting older.
     
  5. JunkyardDwg

    JunkyardDwg Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    Messages:
    8,652
    Likes Received:
    716
    See to me that's too much. I guess I'm like Nolan in a sense...I never had a problem with the grainy look of actual film. Not to say I don't enjoy digital because I do. But again I know I'm watching something that is a work of fiction, so I don't care about being in the middle of it, or it looking as real as if I'm right there watching it filmed.

    You wanna immerse me, then come up with an engaging story and interesting characters played by decent actors. Why do we love the original Star Wars trilogy over the Prequels? It's not because the special effects are better and more realistic.

    3D, for many films, is not worth the price. As for tvs, I'd be more willing to watch 3D w/o the glasses. I'm not gonna put on glasses to watch movies in my living room. I know the technology is heading that way, and I think there are a few tvs that can do it already if I'm not mistaken, like the 3DS. But imo, 3D is better when the focus is on depth of field and not things jumping out at you.

    As for higher frame rates, maybe, just maybe my eyes will adjust. But right now I'm completely skeptical. I've tried watching a movie with the higher refresh rates and I hated it from beginning to end. First thing I do when I get a new tv is turn off the motion plus setting. And when Hobbit comes out, I'm definitely watching it in a standard theater.

    But you're right...I'm guessing I'm gonna have to get used to 48-60 after almost a century of 24fps.
     
  6. KingCheetah

    KingCheetah Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    48,829
    Likes Received:
    34,809
    I really enjoyed the 3D on Prometheus -- it provided an extra layer of depth that just meshed with the movie.
     
  7. CourtOfDreams

    CourtOfDreams Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,113
    Likes Received:
    299
    I guess I am in the minority, I like 3D and want my picture to be a realistic as possible.
     
  8. professorjay

    professorjay Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    Messages:
    9,676
    Likes Received:
    388
    The problem is not the technology, just how it's used. Most of the time it's tacked on like a gimmick, and it feels like just that.

    But I think movies like Avatar and Prometheus used it 'properly' and shows the true potential of it.
     
  9. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    25,806
    Likes Received:
    2,716
    3D is a new cash cow. It is a fad for consumers but with the massive numbers Avatar put up from being able to charge twice as much per ticket, it isn't going anywhere for studios.

    It takes away from the movie for me because it actually hinders getting pulled into the movie. Every effect reminds me I'm watching a movie.
     
  10. JunkyardDwg

    JunkyardDwg Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    Messages:
    8,652
    Likes Received:
    716
    See Prometheus..I only noticed it for the first ten minutes.

    Shoot I'd rather more money be put into filming on Imax and utilizing the extra screen area and the sound.
     
  11. Depressio

    Depressio Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2009
    Messages:
    6,416
    Likes Received:
    366
    You're like a newer version of those old people who miss the days and black and white TV. "I miss the good old days when the framerate was so slow, the picture wasn't completely smooth!"

    3D, I think, is a niche until someone figures out a way that works for everyone: no glasses and viewable from all angles. Even then, it might still be novelty. There are too many limitations right now for it to be completely viable... but higher resolutions and smoother framerates? Everyone can, and should, appreciate that because it simply makes it better.
     
  12. dmc89

    dmc89 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    3,816
    Likes Received:
    255
    Same. Everyone kept raving about the 3D in Prometheus so then I watched it in both RealD and IMAX 3D. With the exception of Avatar and Hugo, all 3D becomes a distraction or forgotten because the novelty wears out soon.

    I recently watch Baraka and Contagion on Blu Ray, two movies with great cinematography and presentation. The former was filmed using 65mm stock and the latter using a Red One camera. I want more movies filmed like them rather than gimmicky 3D.

    However, in the future movies will become a virtual reality experience so this clinging to 24fps and 2D is just human desire on my part to resist change.
     
  13. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    25,806
    Likes Received:
    2,716
    No it isn't. These fads keep you from being pulled into the story. Books are the best at melting away and just leaving the story and they have the least glitz of every medium.
     
  14. JunkyardDwg

    JunkyardDwg Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    Messages:
    8,652
    Likes Received:
    716
    So you're telling me watching something on a tv that has a high refresh rate doesn't bother you at all?

    To me, you get to a point where something looks so real it looks fake... i.e. soap opera effect. If I can get used to that, then sure I'm all for it. But I'm not convinced I will. It's just way too noticeable for me. But again, I'm having to break something that I've grown used to all my life.

    New technology is great...but at the end of the day, a great film is created by the dedication and commitment put into the craft, not the technology alone.
     
  15. Cowboy_Bebop

    Cowboy_Bebop Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,503
    Likes Received:
    122
    Don't really give a rat ass about IMAX because I'm not getting it on my HDTV at home when I purchase the Blu-ray. IMAX is a rip off anyway because good luck finding the 70mm 1570 format theater(s). The one I saw Prometheus was no bigger than a regular screen and the only thing that make it bigger because you sit so damn close to it. I have no problem with 3D only if it's done right and for certain movies only. 48fps would totally help push the 3D even further but I totally hate the look of it.
     
  16. tehG l i d e

    tehG l i d e Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    18,583
    Likes Received:
    6,362
    I thought Prometheus looked cool in 3D but I probably won't ever watch a 3D again. It was pretty distracting at points.
     
  17. JunkyardDwg

    JunkyardDwg Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    Messages:
    8,652
    Likes Received:
    716
    And 3D on your home tv is better? I can understand being in a theater and feeling a part of the movie...but unless you got a projection screen that fills the whole wall, I don't see how the same effect will be as engaging at home.

    But I agree, IF done right, 3D has a place. A film shot in 2D converted to 3D is pointless, as are the many films that use it as a gimmick.
     
  18. Ziggy

    Ziggy 99ers STAND BY
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 1999
    Messages:
    34,694
    Likes Received:
    10,650
    I've watched 3D on purpose only once (Prometheus). Actually... never. Prometheus IMAX is what I wanted but had to couple it with 3D. The other times it was by accident or the only available showing (Avengers). So yeah, I paid whatever for 3D, but sure as hell didn't want to.

    I'm with Nolan on this. 2D is where it's at. Just like I'm anti-"torch mode" and extra framerate modes on HDTV sets. Give me true colors and speed.

    I think kids are driving the 3D rage. Kids and old people. In other words, dumb people.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now