 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
74.232.205.183
After watching Avatar a few weeks ago in 3D I'm convinced that 3D is the future. I've found two projectors that are capable of this. I haven't seen any TVs that can do this yet.Even though I'm only concerned with projection any way. Anyone else considering this new technology?
Follow Ups:
Cost aside, the problem is softwware. DVD went slowly at first because of lack of software, but because there was an obvious improvement in quality compared to VCR it went fast once the software was there. But DVD had the advantage of having 100 years of software already in the vaults (i.e. movies, old TV) just waiting to be transferred to that format. 3D doesn't have that advantage - there is almost NO 3D content waiting to be transferred, and what there is, is mostly schlock, made for novelty value rather than something that people would want to watch again.
.
I don't think so. I do not want to use glasses all the time to watch movies.
Will be quite some time before there's even a small variety of 3D "native" content. Then there's the matter if it's content you care about. Have to start somewhere though, the sooner the better. Production costs will significantly go up compared to 2D, especially for "real life" (not CGI) content, so we can be sure that most of the stuff the filmistas live for, the typically indie/lower-budget stuff, will remain 2D for quite some time.
I'm glad there's some enthusiasm for 3D. For myself, I'm happy to wait it out until it's established. No hurry, there's nothing really to see yet... I wonder how many quality (non-gimmicky) 3D films they can put out a year? Ten? Even after 10 years that's not many, hopefully it'll snowball. Can they recover the increased production costs, and make *more* $$ from 3D? That's what will determine the 3D success for movies. If proportionately a 2D film investment makes more, then that's what they'll do. Certainly they won't take a lot of outre chances in 3D. For 3D games I have no doubt they'll make $$.
however popular the movie is - Avatar isn't really suitable material to judge the merits of 3D.it is patchy in a lot of areas. lot's of it were filmed and created initially in 2D, then "up-convert" to 3D. how you can tell - during many moments throughout the movie, when u remove the 3D glasses and made a comparison - there aren't much differences with 2D. the clue is, for native 3D materials (shot and created in 3D), images should be blurry when seen without the 3D glasses.
perhaps not widely known - the 3D format that's already been decided for offical release will be in Full HD. it will not be like the low-rez, blue-pinkish effect that we are now getting with some 3D Blu-ray movies. so if u can, try to catch sony/panasonic offically setup demos at the coming CES - the experience is right out of this world! The thing is - those TVs really aren't that expensive. cheaper in fact, than the SCD-1 SACD player I first bought to experience SACDs. and if u already own a PS3, there will be a firmware upgrade mid 2010. aren't u glad u got the PS3!
this is what i am looking forward to in 2010 - FIFA Football World Cup 2010 in 3D!
Edits: 12/28/09
I use an HTPC..100% upgradeable for displaying movies and games in 3D. I'm already setup for nVidia 3D. All I need to buy is the shutter glasses and a 3D capable projector. I'm looking forward to all the new 3D material: games, movies and live televised programing coming to market in the near future.
What programming and define "near future", please?
-Wendell
This company is launching in the UK. I'm sure the U.S. will follow. Direct TV launched a new satellite recently to provide 3D TV. From reading an article only a firmware upgrade is needed for the digital boxes.
Edits: 12/29/09 12/29/09
But never say never. As I've said before, the real market impetus for this is gaming. All the best stuff I've seen in 3D is mostly CGI. I can see that being decent in home 3D in the near future.
Hell, I was mostly satisfied with movies on DVD. BD/hi-def A/V is an appreciated bonus. 3D doesn't offer anything I'm looking for right now. I'll be more interested in holographic presentations, hope I live long enough...I thought it'd be here long ago, flying car syndrome... I'll review my 3D stance after it's been around for 5 years or so, it takes about that long for any paradigm shift to become mostly annoyance-free in the consumer market. (BD is not a paradigm shift compared to DVD. Neither is hi-def. Upgrades only.)
Seems kind of nuts to buy new video gear on the slim chance that the few 3-D movies that warrant repeat viewing would be produced on 3-D blu-ray. Even if five good movies a year were released on 3-D it still wouldn't be worth it. And that's a big "if". Avatar is not something I'd ever buy.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
This isn't the Outside or Film Asylum; your critical opinion of Avatar is based on political bias not on the quality of the film as a work of art as presented in 3D.> > > "Seems kind of nuts to buy new video gear on the slim chance that the few 3-D movies that warrant repeat viewing would be produced on 3-D blu-ray. Even if five good movies a year were released on 3-D it still wouldn't be worth it." < < <
There have already been quite a few interesting films projected in 3D (most were quite good and even the worst was more impressive in 3D). Trust me, more 3D films are on the way and it promises to be a cutting edge HT experience. Ironically, even the SONY PS3 will be upgradeable to 3D codec so I suspect you'll be changing your tune pretty quick (see link below).
Also, 3D capable televisions & projectors aren't intended simply as display devices for 3D films, they're just enhanced for it. Personally, I can't think of a better way to increase viewing pleasure (personal and for groups of friends) than the addition of the new 3D process to one's home theater.
Now admittedly, the new 3D processed films probably won't look great over an old Admiral CRT interlaced TV, but for those of us who are into expanding our HT capabilities to enhance the home cinema experience, well, that's another story!
Oh, FTR, having checked out a 60" JVC direct view 3D television being demo'd last summer at Siggraph I can convey here that it's just as impressive at handling 3D as front projected DLP in the IMAX theater, albeit on a smaller scale!
Of course, those diagnosed with permanent tunnel-vision may be precluded from fully enjoying 3D, but it might not be an obstacle for some of us here. ;O)
Cheers,
AuPh
Edits: 12/29/09
Then again, you bought several HD DVD players, which tells everyone something about your grasp of trends in the HD video market.
It doesn't have so much to do with politics as insipid writing, sophomoric direction and the other points I made in my initial reply. Though, yes I do find the politics of Avatar to have been telegraphed rather badly, adversely impacting the film.
I'm very rarely wrong about these things and I just don't see 3D taking off--not in movie theaters and not in home video. Every few years there is another push for it, but aside from sensationalist hype little comes of it.
But you always were a sucker for sensationalism, weren'tcha auph?
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
... they're still great players.
BTW, it would be interesting to learn how many BD players you own, being that you like to convey the impression that I only have HD-DVD players hooked-up in my AV systems. Note: You should have quite a collection by now and a lot of folks around here might be at least a little curious given your strong advocacy of the format.
> > > "It doesn't have so much to do with politics as insipid writing, sophomoric direction and the other points I made in my initial reply." < < <
Sorry Jazz, but your own words seem to refute that claim. The prevarication comes from your continued refusal to admit that the politics of Avatar weighed very heavily in your dismissal of the film. Furthermore, in your own words you declared a predisposition towards disliking Cameron's movie months ago.
> > > "Though, yes I do find the politics of Avatar to have been telegraphed rather badly, adversely impacting the film." < < <
You are still being disingenuous, even with this understated acknowledgement that you didn't care for the political theme.
> > > "I'm very rarely wrong about these things and I just don't see 3D taking off--not in movie theaters and not in home video. Every few years there is another push for it, but aside from sensationalist hype little comes of it." < < <
Not to beat a dead horse, but you've been wrong about a lot of things, both here and over on the Outside board; no one is counting, but this would just be one more thing in a very long dirty laundry list.
Here is one more clue: The debate over BD was never one of right or wrong, but rather of initial hardware and disc cost and whether BD regulations would be flexible enough so that film collectors would be able to acquire DVD & BD titles from other regions and zones. Fortunately, the latter issue has been resolved, even if it isn't to your liking. Let's not get into the area of overzealous BD advocacy again, that ground has been covered ad infinitum.
While 3D probably won't be suitable for every new release, I predict with some confidence that it will take off for nature documentaries, horror, SF & fantasy, animation & major action films and will be the next big attraction for the HT market (provided the economy recovers enough to generate next generation HT sales).
However, I'm merely a fan of this new immersive cinematic technology, not an overzealous advocate cheerleading the charge and pushing one HD product over something else. That is not my department, but please, be my guest.
> > > "But you always were a sucker for sensationalism, weren'tcha auph?" < < <
Did you learn chutzpah from being a Faux News junky or what? ;O)
FYI, I like Avatar because of it's ground-breaking effects, immersive otherworldly detail and cautionary theme grounded in our own history. While I think it was a bit heavy handed (with stereotypical characters and dialogue) and may be faulted for a somewhat predictable story, it still transcended it's apparent weaknesses, culminating in a highly entertaining filmgoing experience.
Cheers,
AuPh
> > .. they're still great players. < <
So what? they're obsolete and no new content is available to play on them. More relevantly, you advocated up and down this forum for the adoption of HD DVD even after the format was lying dead on a slab. You ignored repeated attempts to explain to you why Blu-ray was superior. So it's difficult to take any of your A/V "advice" seriously.
> > BTW, it would be interesting to learn how many BD players you own, < <
I don't see what's so interesting about that, but I currently own one Blu-ray player--the PS3, the same one I've owned for almost three years now. I did just decide to get an Oppo SE and mod it to optimize two-channel performance for CD/SACD and use it as my primary disc machine. The PS3 would be mostly retired at that point.
> > being that you like to convey the impression that I only have HD-DVD players hooked-up in my AV systems. < <
you did until you were forced by the death of HD DVD to adopt Blu-ray or be left out of the HD experience moving forward.
> > Note: You should have quite a collection by now and a lot of folks around here might be at least a little curious given your strong advocacy of the format. < <
Just because you wrongly suspected me of being a Sony employee or something like that doesn't mean anyone else is as stupid. Most A/V enthusiasms quickly recognized the advantages of Blu-ray and I was one of them.
> > Sorry Jazz, but your own words seem to refute that claim. The prevarication comes from your continued refusal to admit that the politics of Avatar weighed very heavily in your dismissal of the film. < <
No, I pointed out how bad the writing and acting were. On Outside, I focused on politics because that's what we focus on there. But there are more serious problems with the film.
> > Furthermore, in your own words you declared a predisposition towards disliking Cameron's movie months ago. < <
Yes, because he can't write yet insists on heavily rewriting most screenplays that come his way. He also sucks as a director for all but the action sequences, but so does another of your favorite directors, Peter jackson.
> > Here is one more clue: The debate over BD was never one of right or wrong, but rather of initial hardware and disc cost and whether BD regulations would be flexible enough so that film collectors would be able to acquire DVD & BD titles from other regions and zones. < <
No, it had to do much with audio capabilities and whether there was enough room on the lower-capacity HD DVD discs for high resolution audio Codecs. There wasn't. Being that this is primarily an audio board, I was floored that you and some others declared that you simply didn't care about better audio or high bitrate capacity. My main motivation for backing Blu-ray was its increased capacity--the only specification that mattered if you're interested in quality.
> > Fortunately, the latter issue has been resolved, even if it isn't to your liking. < <
of course it's to my liking--your inferior format died and my superior format won.
> > Let's not get into the area of overzealous BD advocacy again, that ground has been covered ad infinitum. < <
You should be embarrassed for being wrong and for being such a prick about it, not just for the duration of the format war but up until this very day.
> > While 3D probably won't be suitable for every new release, I predict with some confidence that it will take off for nature documentaries, horror, SF & fantasy, animation & major action films and will be the next big attraction for the HT market (provided the economy recovers enough to generate next generation HT sales). < <
That depends what your definition of "take off" is. A couple studios will dabble in it, but nothing more.
> > FYI, I like Avatar because of it's ground-breaking effects, immersive otherworldly detail and cautionary theme grounded in our own history. < <
Far out.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
> > > "So what? they're obsolete and no new content is available to play on them." < < <
They are still great players and I have a lot of inexpensive HD-DVD discs that either aren't available yet on BD or would use the same transfer and therefor be redundant. Also these are still great DVD upscaling players. AFAIC, they were a good investment. Of course, everyone's mileage varies except your's, but then again, you're on a treadmill in a cage of your own making.
> > > "More relevantly, you advocated up and down this forum for the adoption of HD DVD even after the format was lying dead on a slab." < < <
Have you ever analyzed Freud's theories and correlated them to your wooden nose?
My "advocacy" was primarily limited to a criticism of the BD cartel, excuse me, consortium, for imposing zone access limitations and also holding Oppo hostage by disallowing their standard all region access for DVDs as a condition for licensing their new BD players (making a "one box" solution all but impossible). I also favored HD-DVD as a less expensive format for both hardware and discs that would be more likely to entice a wide audience to high definition programming. In light of last years global economic upheaval my original perspective may have had greater merit than you'll ever publicly admit.
> > > "I currently own one Blu-ray player--the PS3, the same one I've owned for almost three years now. I did just decide to get an Oppo SE and mod it to optimize two-channel performance for CD/SACD and use it as my primary disc machine. The PS3 would be mostly retired at that point." < < <
I already have BD players for main system and guest room. Both are Oppo BDP-83 players, my primary system has the SE. Both are modified for multi-region multi-zone play and work marvelously well. BTW, if you have a modicum of DIY skill even you'll be able modify a BDP-83 SE for multi-region/zone play for under $100.
Oh, and BTW, I'd hold onto that PS3 so you can gear up for 3D when the urge to upgrade finally hits you! ;O)
> > > "you did until you were forced by the death of HD DVD to adopt Blu-ray or be left out of the HD experience moving forward." < < <
I didn't get serious about BD until word came down that modifications would be forthcoming that would allow Zone and Region free access. I started out with a relatively inexpensive Panasonic player that I recently gave to my brother (now replaced by Oppo players).
> > > "Just because you wrongly suspected me of being a Sony employee or something like that doesn't mean anyone else is as stupid." < < <
Actually, I never seriously thought you were an employee (toady, maybe, but never on the payroll). I'm sure that SONY has better personnel screening than that. ;O)
> > > "Most A/V enthusiasms quickly recognized the advantages of Blu-ray and I was one of them." < < <
Many movie fans/collectors recognized the disadvantages too. AFAIK, you have yet to convince anyone here of how the cartel's intent to limit zone access in any way advantages consumers. Food for thought.
> > > "No, I pointed out how bad the writing and acting were. --- But there are more serious problems with the film." < < <
Yeah, over 600 million of 'em world-wide to date! I'm sure that James Cameron will be just as concerned as I am with how wrong you think folks are who differ with your POV! ;^D
> > > "Yes, because he can't write yet insists on heavily rewriting most screenplays that come his way. He also sucks as a director for all but the action sequences, but so does another of your favorite directors, Peter jackson." < < <
Just think, if you had 1/100th of 1% of either of those talented gentleman's bank accounts you could easily afford a second BD player and have it properly zone & region modified to boot! ;^>
> > > "No, it had to do much with audio capabilities and whether there was enough room on the lower-capacity HD DVD discs for high resolution audio Codecs." < < <
That may have been your argument (and a rather lame one, IMO based on the similar transfer quality of discs coming out at the time), but my position was consistent and the only limited capacity issue that ever kept resurfacing from my perspective was your's.
> > > "Being that this is primarily an audio board, I was floored that you and some others declared that you simply didn't care about better audio or high bitrate capacity. My main motivation for backing Blu-ray was its increased capacity--the only specification that mattered if you're interested in quality." < < <
Capacity was never an issue because both formats would eventually be capable of multi-layer expansion that increased bitrate storage. The intent of the BD cartel, excuse me, consortium was always a more relevant issue for film fans/collectors. So, if you were floored by the logic of critics, you should've learned how to roll with the punches. Like I said, that issue has been resolved, not necessarily to your liking or that of the BD gestapo, but those of us who like the option of collecting foreign films on DVD & BD are happy.
> > > "of course it's to my liking--your inferior format died and my superior format won." < < <
Ummm, ...well, at least I'm glad that you're in bliss about it. ;0>
> > > "You should be embarrassed for being wrong and for being such a prick about it, not just for the duration of the format war but up until this very day." < < <
I guess that I could be embarrassed for you, but so far you haven't demonstrated to me that you deserve it.
FYI, everyone is wrong now and then, some more than others, but cluelessness is another matter altogether. When proven wrong I've stated as such and even apologized on occasion. The problem here is that you seem incapable of finding any fault with your own opinions even when it's painfully apparent to just about everyone that is more than one side to an issue. In those situations your POV is either biased or poorly informed. It is certainly your right to differ; I couldn't care less whether you choose to be a prick or even have one.
> > > "That depends what your definition of "take off" is. A couple studios will dabble in it, but nothing more." < < <
Nearly 2/3 of American multi-plex cinemas are now equipped with one or more 3D (DLP) screens; that's a pretty big "dabble" dude.
Care to make an unofficial wager? Don't worry, I won't hold you to it (I seem to recall a wager in last years Presidential election that went unresolved)! :O)
Cheers,
AuPh
I like both of my Toshiba models. I don't own a single HD-DVD disc. They are wonderful DVD players.
-Wendell
I'll never part with my HD DVD players. Built like tanks and my wonderful collection of HD DVD movies should last a lifetime. Plus, they only cost anywhere from $1.99 to $5.00. The format may be dead moving forward, but my discs will continue to play indefinitely.
Can't believe you're still pining for hd dvd. You not only bet on the wrong horse, but you can't admit you were wrong and are grasping at straws to convince yourself you are a wise man. Pathetic.My point is, you failed to understand why your preferred format was a failure and it doesn't instil much confidence in your predictions that 3D will gain traction. Do a simple survey among your friends and get a sense of how many of them want to buy all new video gear and wear glasses just to watch a few hyped up crappy shows. 3D is dead on arrival as a home video concept. It's too gimmicky. It's a higher quality gimmick than it was in the jaws III days, but it's a gimmick nonetheless.
As for this region coding you're hung up on, it's more a mandate of the studios. It therefore cuts across any format. If HD DVD had succeeded, it too would have necessitated a provision for region coding. Why? Because like it or not, different studios own the rights to certain titles in different regions and wish to protect their intellectual property. That's just a fact.
Face it, auph, you bet on the wrong horse and you bet against a superior format with more capacity. You stupidly advocated against higher bitrates and therefore against better quality. In your defense I think you were just one of hundreds of lemmings that forums like AVS run by biased management whipped up into an anti-BD frenzy. But the fact remains that not only did you back the wrong format; you did so in spite of inferior quality. This makes you a loser twice over. Not only did you fail to pick the winner but you failed in the endeavor for better audio and video which is what this hobby is all about.
If you want to bet that this 3D gimmick will take off, I'd be glad to oblige. We need to have some metric to agree upon so that the loser can't wiggle out of the bet. How about sales of 3D home video titles never achieve greater than 5% market share and 3D broadcasts air no more than 5% of all shows on the air. If by 2013 your 3D predictions fall shy of those numbers, you owe me $50. Deal?
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Edits: 12/31/09
If a firmware update for my PS/3, a set of 3D glasses, and a new TV set were all I needed, I'd certainly consider it. The technology sure has come a long ways since the days of the original, headache-inducing "Captain Eo" feature at Disneyland way back when. Of course there's going to be a lot of gimmicky 3D effects for awhile, but that's to be expected. The early days of color movies and color TV were no different in that regard.
However, so far the word is that output resolution will have to be decreased -- 960x1080 -- due to the limitations of HDMI v1.3 (full support of 3-D requires HDMI v1.4). It's amazing what the PS3 does today and will be updated to do for tomorrow. Still the best $ : value ratio of any Blu-ray player or game console on the market.
does the new ps3 slim also have the same limitation?
In order to transmit the full 1080p 3D resolution (two 1920x1080 streams), you need an HDMI v1.4 chipset. All versions of the PS3, from the first 60GB to the latest 250GB model, only have a (version of the) HDMI v1.3 chipset. Like transmission of the advanced audio codecs for the pre-Slim models, full 1080p 3D transmission is a hardware limitation that cannot be circumvented by a firmware upgrade. In the link below, there is press release material and discussion. In the press release, notice the line "The specification is also designed to allow the PS3 to play back Blu-ray 3D content in 3-D." . How can it be done without an HDMI v1.4 chipset? The new Avatar game achieves its 3D presentation by decreasing the resolution to 960x1080 and thus makes (logical) sense as to how Sony will upgrade the PS3 to transmit 3D movie material.
What's rather sad is that some people will endlessly post their hopes that a firmware upgrade will allow what it takes hardware capability to do. Probably many of the same people who held on for an advanced audio codec transmission upgrade through firmware. Some people have even posted that the PS3 is capable of processing 2 HD streams at the same time, so it may be possible. What they seem to forget is that the PS3, while capable of processing 2 full HD streams at the same time even to this day, was shown outputting the video to two displays in pre-release . In its pre-release state, the PS3 had 2 HDMI connections. The release PS3 only had, and to this day still has, 1 HDMI connection. So, while the cell processor is capable, the hardware is not capable of such an output.
See the chart at wiki (about the middle of the page) for a table re: what each version of HDMI is cable of providing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI
I think even at reduced resolution, it'll look great on my 32", 1080P TV set. No rush to replace my still-pretty-new TV, HT receiver and PS/3 for this alone, at least not at this early date.
the 3D demo i saw was driven by a PS3 unit. if what u said is true - that means the resolution of the demo i saw was only 960x1080. it was great and real. that means what could be had from standalone blu-ray players will be even better. more gears to buy. but what the heck - whatever it takes to get 3D at home, man.
Edits: 01/03/10
Erm...maybe he just didn't like Avatar that much? That's a perfectly legit reation - what's politics got to do with it?I enjoyed my 3D IMAX experience with Avatar but I don't think it's a great movie - I think Pandora is a marvelous creation but the same things I didn't like about Aliens and Titanic - simplistic plot, carboard evil villains, weak character development etc - are all there in Avatar. So Avatar is not a movie I'll likely own either, although I'm glad to have experienced it in the theater through large format presentation.
I'm perfectly happy for those fans who love Avatar and other 3D actioners and can't wait to upgrade to 3D HT. That's great. Y'all have fun.
But what is 3D gonna do for my favorite films? Other than Coraline, NOTHING. And politics has NOTHING to do with my opinion. It's a matter of personal taste - I don't think After The Wedding or Mulholland Drive or Children of Men or The Lives Of Others or Let The Right One In or Goodfellas or The Conversation are coming out in 3D. And those are my favaorite sorts of movies.
Edits: 12/29/09
All from the same thread discussing Avatar courtesy of the "classy" Jazz Inmate:
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/outside/messages/1290692.html
"gee, a film about an imperialist force invading foreigners for their natural resources ... If you have any doubt this is anti-American propaganda, you're a nutter of immense proportion. It's telegraphed in every sequence of the plot."
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/outside/messages/1290713.html
"what's sad is Jim is indoctrincated in the same anti-US tripe that enabled studio moguls pay for Avatar"
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/outside/messages/1290673.html
"i'd rather spend three minutes on the toilet"
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/outside/messages/1290695.html
"i think they first showed previews of this movie during the world series pretty obvious it sucked."
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/outside/messages/1290724.html
"truth, justice and the canadian way"
> > > "I enjoyed my 3D IMAX experience with Avatar but I don't think it's a great movie - I think Pandora is a marvelous creation but the same things I didn't like about Aliens and Titanic - simplistic plot, carboard evil villains, weak character development etc - are all there in Avatar. So Avatar is not a movie I'll likely own either, although I'm glad to have experienced it in the theater through large format presentation." < < <
I agree with your observations and also agree that this could have been a much better film (see link below). However, it is worth owning if for no other reason than it will be an awesome demo disc for any system, 2D or 3D and it's story, while flawed and unnecessarily simplistic in it's final realization is still a story worth telling time and again. I suspect that outside pressure from partnered studios (demands for a product) limited the original scope of this film.
> > > "But what is 3D gonna do for my favorite films? Other than Coraline, NOTHING. And politics has NOTHING to do with my opinion. It's a matter of personal taste - I don't think After The Wedding or Mulholland Drive or Children of Men or The Lives Of Others or Let The Right One In or Goodfellas or The Conversation are coming out in 3D. And those are my favaorite sorts of movies." < < <
Good points all. but in discussing the next generation of home entertainment when combined with the retroactivity of 3D front projection and direct view televisions and the likely increase in both future and classic computer animated films displayed in 3D (all current, past and future PIXAR films for instance) it does seem to have merit. And yes, IMHO this will add greatly to the immersive filmgoing and HT experience.
...I generally avoid "Outside". :-)
Never say never, but I well know I'm not the target consumer for 3D.
I think it could be tremendous for gaming, however.
As for Avatar, there's many things I love about JC's films, but plot and character development aren't among them. I don't mind recyled plot elements, if done well. (How many stories are there anyway?)
But we've had cardboard cut-out villains in The Abyss (my personal favorite), Aliens, Titanic, and now Avatar - I think that has to indicate an intrinsic screenwriting weakness, not a mandate from timid studios. It keeps Cameron's admittedly visually accomplished and entertaining movies from transcending their genre, like say...2001. But Avatar is gonna be huge anyway, no matter what I think, and people who've fallen in love with it will gladly overlook its (IMO serious) flaws for its considerable virtues.
Auph doesn't have an aversion to crappy writing or poor character development. Probably because he's a crappy writer and a shady character.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
It was done well for Coraline, and it was fun for the IMAX version of Avatar. That's 2 movies out of...several hundred that I care about.
I hate to be a jaded old fart but I don't much like 3D and don't find it well implemented in films other than the two mentioned above. Undoubtedly it will get better, but there are very few instances where I find it compelling enough to weorry about it at home.
Now, Blu-Ray, that is wonderful.
3D - it ain't gonna do much for most of the mvoies I watch.
I hear ya...I felt the same way before Avatar. It has changed my thought process on the matter.
I'm a fan of Blu ray as well..but don't use it much. Most of what I watch is 720P.After delving into the projector world recently...there's no looking back.
I think that is what pushes me towards 3D. If I were using a flat panel to watch my movies, I'm sure I would feel the same. But throw the same image on a 10 ft diagonal screen...now we're talking a whole nother ball game.This is where 3D is going to really take off with the advancements in filming and source equipment that can produce nearly holographic images. The nVidia 3D setup claims to be even better than what you've seen in the movie theaters offered so far. Its less gimmicky than the old school 3D material.
I really like the immersive feel of the newer 3D technology.
Edits: 12/28/09
that means 1080p full frame per eye-side.
we saw a scene where there was a school of whales swimming in a pool.
it was so real. until anyone has seen this they simply don't have any f****** idea how the game has changed.
the only catch is that as one of the whales swam near the pheriperal of our eyesight, it didn't "jump" out of the screen as our instinct expected it to. instead it got "folded" beneath the side baffle of the TV set. it goes to show the bigger the screen size, the better to experience the immersive effect. if that TV set's side baffle had been outside of the pheriperal of our eyesight, the whale's swim-pass effect would have been complete.
the standard 16:9 video aspect ratio is sadly inadequate to fully convey the reality that 3DTV can create.
Now that sounds amazing!!!You're torturing me here!! lol
I'm gonna start saving my pennies now for a 3D projector!
I have a retail friend that saw something similar at a CES show in Atlanta.
He said it was something he's NEVER experienced before!
Edits: 12/29/09
I'll buy Coraline on BD, but not Avatar - Pandora was a marvelous creation, but the movie around it was typical JC action movie. Not my cuppa. I can live without 3D for Coraline.
One of the things I find slightly offputting about 3D is the size change of the actors relative to the frame when going from tihht shots to medium shots to long shots. Humans are big, then get little then get big again.
Plus, my favorite movies aren't the blockbusters and big action movies that are likely to be the main source of 3D material for the forseeable future.
But I do agree with you that bigger is better when it comes to movies at home. I don't have a spot for FP, so I can't go there quite yet. But I have friends with FPs and it's a thrill to see a movie at 108".
Even if I had a projector, I wouldn't want the display area any bigger than my 60" plasma because of how close I sit. Screen size has nothing to do with 3D.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Exactly how close do you sit? I think you miss what I'm trying to convey.
Watching a 60 inch TV and watching a 100" or larger screen is a different experience.Even an 80 inch screen would make you think twice about using your TV for movies anymore.There's a cinematic feel you get that I've never experienced from a television..not one can give you the cinematic feel of a large projection screen.
I have 52 and 42 inch panels here.I use neither for movies anymore.
It's one of those things. Until you experience it at home, you won't understand.
Edits: 12/29/09 12/29/09
> > Exactly how close do you sit? < <
I have a 60" Kuro screen. I sit about 8 feet away.
> > I think you miss what I'm trying to convey. < <
Ditto.
> > Watching a 60 inch TV and watching a 100" or larger screen is a different experience. < <
Without a point of reference, it doesn't matter. My plasma looks bigger than the big screen at my local AMC when I watched Young Sherlock holmes this afternoon from the rear seats. It all depends on how close you're sitting. The smaller screen can provide better resolution and a more film-like experience.
> > There's a cinematic feel you get that I've never experienced from a television..not one can give you the cinematic feel of a large projection screen. < <
I don't have a room in my house that would make projection feasible or more advantageous than a plasma.
I have 52 and 42 inch panels here.I use neither for movies anymore.
It's one of those things. Until you experience it at home, you won't understand.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
The cinema experience is different from flat-panel television as opposed to projector and a 100" or larger screen.
For movies my wife and I prefer front projection rather than watch our LCD direct view TVs, and they're 40" and 48" respectively, and everything we have is 1080P capable.
Cheers,
AuPh
One of my panels is 1080P. The other panel and the front projector are 720P. One of these days I'll bump the projector up to 1080P. This will probably happen once 3D friendly 1080P projectors come to market.
Yup once you go front projection and screen...you never go back to a direct view TV for serious viewing! lol
"Yup once you go front projection and screen...you never go back to a direct view TV for serious viewing! lol"
Sometimes it's about quality, and not about size. :) [Yeah, I know you're trying for a jab there.] That's one reason why many people have both. Just don't compare an LCD panel with a good plasma, I'd choose the PJ over the LCD too, for now. [There's my jab.] But yes, some people like the cinema "feeling" that only a very large screen can give. Especially when combined with a bunch of viewers, I'm convinced some movies are made to be seen with "crowds" and you need a large screen for that.
OK..you got me there!lol I have to say out of my Plasma flat panel, LCD flat panel and DLP projector. Giving consideration that the LCD is 1080P. My 720P projector still beats it across the board in color saturation, black levels and shadow detail. I've done several comparisons between them displaying Blu rays ripped to hard drive. I have them both set to display the same image at the same time from the same source.The only thing my flat panels do better, is viewing in direct sunlight. No projector can defeat the ambient light issue.
Edits: 12/29/09 12/29/09
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hey, at least it should put you in good with the Antiques Roadshow folks! ;O)
We'll have to agree to disagree about global warming until the next global cooling scare comes along
Where does one get 3D source material?
I purchased the Blu-Ray of "Coraline" which includes a 3D version, but discovered that it's the sort which uses red/green specs which I find sort of hard to watch. Wasn't aware of any which are viewable with the polarizing-type specs as used in the cinemas?
nVidia offers 3D video cards which include LCD specs, but these also require a 120 hz monitor in order to do their thing.
Just purchased a Fujifilm "Real3D" still camera recently, and the special LCD on the back requires no special glasses at all, but aside from this an a matching 3D digital frame, I wasn't aware of any other products offering 3D LCDs. It's neat, but has a smallish viewing sweet spot and don't know if the technology will scale up well beyond postcard size?
Well I believe this technology is geared towards gamers and the newer 3D movies being released this coming year. There's a couple of projectors being released that are supposedly spec'd to work with the nVidia 3D glasses.
I've also read that most 120Hz LCDs are not compatible with the 3D software nor the shutter glasses. It is because these TVs upconvert a 60Hz signal to 120 or 240hz. They can't receive a pure 120Hz signal however.The only two projectors I know of that can do this is an Acer and the Optoma HD66. Both can be had for $700 if I'm not mistaken.
Edits: 12/28/09
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
