Film-Tech Cinema Systems
  Home     Products     Store     Forum     Warehouse     Contact Us    
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Clash of the titans Digital 3D issues (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Clash of the titans Digital 3D issues
Manny Montes
Master Film Handler

Posts: 270
From: United States
Registered: Feb 2010

- posted 04-01-2010 06:57 PM      Profile for Manny Montes   Email Manny Montes   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
After from hearing from a friend who screened the 3D version of the movie he told me it had tons of problems including: Foreground images being shown in the background. Background images being shown in the foreground. 3D images appear layered as opposed to smooth.
Multiple times where the image loses all 3D effects and left/right eye images appear to be out of sync/alignment.

Apparently when he complained they said it was due to being filmed in 2D and the conversion was rushed.

I cannot believe this, THIS is the problem with D-cinema, the movies i've seen that were actually filmed in 3D were awesome, but when the film companies see that they can make more $$$ off the surchage and do this crap conversion at the last minute it makes me so angry.

Glad I work with cinema-art

 |  IP: Logged
Jeremy Weigel
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1062
From: Edmond, OK, USA
Registered: Mar 2007

- posted 04-01-2010 08:40 PM      Profile for Jeremy Weigel   Email Jeremy Weigel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Screened ours earlier today (RealD) and it gave me eye fatigue. This is the first 3D feature that I have watched that has done this. I did notice a lot of the problems you mentioned as well as how dark the picture was than normal. Unfortunately I don't have a 2D version to compare to.

 |  IP: Logged
Michael Hossen
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 136
From: Perth, Australia
Registered: Apr 2007

- posted 04-01-2010 09:14 PM      Profile for Michael Hossen   Author's Homepage   Email Michael Hossen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I have to agree with you guys. I watched a bit of it last night, and it was ridiculously dark, and the 3D looked like shit at times.

 |  IP: Logged
John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999

- posted 04-02-2010 12:12 AM      Profile for John Wilson   Email John Wilson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Blecchhh...3D by Dodgy Conversions Inc.

 |  IP: Logged
Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

- posted 04-02-2010 12:27 AM      Profile for Monte L Fullmer   Email Monte L Fullmer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
...just one movie that should have stayed in the original 2D release....

Looks like "Dragon" is the clear winner for a 3D release this early spring.

 |  IP: Logged
Phil Blake
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 558
From: esperance western australia
Registered: Nov 2003

- posted 04-02-2010 02:11 AM      Profile for Phil Blake   Author's Homepage   Email Phil Blake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
i have not had a good look at my digital copy yet , but the 1.9 letterboxed ratio looks crappy since i dont have top and bottom masking.

Why dont they just stick to 1.85 for flat and leave it there ?

 |  IP: Logged
Michael Hossen
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 136
From: Perth, Australia
Registered: Apr 2007

- posted 04-02-2010 07:40 AM      Profile for Michael Hossen   Author's Homepage   Email Michael Hossen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Are you playing it in Flat Phil? I'm pretty sure it's meant to be played in Scope. Correct me if I'm so ridiculously wrong that I should be shot, but everything I've seen says it's scope, and it looks fine. I did notice the aspect ratio on the Qube saying 1.9, but we just assumed that was an error and played it in scope. Am I retarded?

 |  IP: Logged
Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

- posted 04-02-2010 07:53 AM      Profile for Mark J. Marshall     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
1.9 *IS* Scope for some people.

[Smile]

 |  IP: Logged
Michael Hossen
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 136
From: Perth, Australia
Registered: Apr 2007

- posted 04-02-2010 08:23 AM      Profile for Michael Hossen   Author's Homepage   Email Michael Hossen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm a noob. Why do they do this?

 |  IP: Logged
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

- posted 04-02-2010 03:05 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Jeremy Weigel
Screened ours earlier today (RealD) and it gave me eye fatigue. This is the first 3D feature that I have watched that has done this. I did notice a lot of the problems you mentioned as well as how dark the picture was than normal. Unfortunately I don't have a 2D version to compare to.
Dude, Just switch your server to 2-D!

 |  IP: Logged
Jeremy Weigel
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1062
From: Edmond, OK, USA
Registered: Mar 2007

- posted 04-02-2010 05:14 PM      Profile for Jeremy Weigel   Email Jeremy Weigel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah, I don't think WB would like that too much.

 |  IP: Logged
Matt Johnston
Film Handler

Posts: 37
From: Fort Myers, FL
Registered: Oct 2009

- posted 04-02-2010 06:08 PM      Profile for Matt Johnston   Email Matt Johnston   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Manny Montes
After from hearing from a friend who screened the 3D version of the movie he told me it had tons of problems including: Foreground images being shown in the background. Background images being shown in the foreground. 3D images appear layered as opposed to smooth.
Multiple times where the image loses all 3D effects and left/right eye images appear to be out of sync/alignment.

Apparently when he complained they said it was due to being filmed in 2D and the conversion was rushed.
Check your PM's. [beer]

 |  IP: Logged
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

- posted 04-02-2010 07:58 PM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
1.9 is 1.896 is when rounded. 1.896 IS THE ratio of digital imagers. Both 2K and 4K. That is probably what they meant. It would be shorthand for saying "2048" as opposed to "1920".

The flaw being...I know of no 1.896 movies that use the ENTIRE imager at once. Scope being 2048 x 857 and Flat being 1998 x 1080.

Steve

 |  IP: Logged
Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God

Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004

- posted 04-02-2010 08:01 PM      Profile for Tony Bandiera Jr   Email Tony Bandiera Jr   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Steve the real flaw is that D-Crapema is a huge cock-up.

How often do 35mm presentations have the major fuck-ups that keep happening in D-Crapema?

This industry will NEVER learn. [Mad]

 |  IP: Logged
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

- posted 04-03-2010 07:18 AM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Tony Bandiera Jr
How often do 35mm presentations have the major fuck-ups that keep happening in D-Crapema?
Probably everyday.

The difference being that film based problems are, more often than not, people caused...digital based problems are, more often than not, equipment caused.

 |  IP: Logged


All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
- Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.