3D movies

[gpick24]

Went to cinema last night and watched my first modern 3D movie ( world war z ), and while I thought it was a decent film and enjoyed the 3D experience, I thought the picture quality compared to a none 3D movie was disappointing. The fast moving parts of the film was blurry.
I know that because I`ve done quite a bit of movie encoding in the past, that I tend to notice things that most people don`t, but even mrs24 commented after that she had noticed it.
Has anyone here watched a modern 3D movie? Was it blurry in fast moving scenes?

For the more technically minded, when I say blurry, I really mean interlaced.

[Studio25]

I haven't watched many modern 3d movies, but I gather it's done through interlacing - which instantly halves the vertical resolution, so it's going to look less detailed than your typical digital projection (the human eye "notices" loss in vertical resolution before horizontal).

If the projector lens hasn't been set up properly - you'll see interlace blurring because the polarised lenses in the specs are allowing some of the light from both phases of the projection through to both eyes...

[jaysay]

I have a 3D TV but its over rated really ain't watched 3D for ages mainly because you need the glasses, although its quite good, football 3D is a bit no plus really only the crown stand out

[gpick24]

Originally Posted by Studio25

I haven't watched many modern 3d movies, but I gather it's done through interlacing - which instantly halves the vertical resolution, so it's going to look less detailed than your typical digital projection (the human eye "notices" loss in vertical resolution before horizontal).

If the projector lens hasn't been set up properly - you'll see interlace blurring because the polarised lenses in the specs are allowing some of the light from both phases of the projection through to both eyes...

Good info Studio25, thanks.

[gpick24]

Originally Posted by jaysay

I have a 3D TV but its over rated really ain't watched 3D for ages mainly because you need the glasses, although its quite good, football 3D is a bit no plus really only the crown stand out

Don`t need a new TV yet, but when I do, will probably get 3D, hopefully by then you won`t need the 3D glasses.
Have Accy Stanley been broadcast in 3D.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by gpick24

Don`t need a new TV yet, but when I do, will probably get 3D, hopefully by then you won`t need the 3D glasses.
Have Accy Stanley been broadcast in 3D.

Don't bother until they come Specs free, you soon get bored wearing them, and can't remember Stanley being on in 3D

[gpick24]

Originally Posted by jaysay

Don't bother until they come Specs free, you soon get bored wearing them, and can't remember Stanley being on in 3D

It was a joke at your typo Jaysay, the crown stand out.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by gpick24

It was a joke at your typo Jaysay, the crown stand out.

Ah I see

[gpick24]

Won`t be getting one till we need a new TV, the ones we have aren`t that old, so hopefully by the time one has packed in, they will be specs free.
The technology is already there, there is a hand held gaming device that is 3D without glasses, just not been brought to TVs yet.
Here`s some info I found on it -
"Glasses-free, or autostereoscopic, 3D TVs have been released before, and now offered by Toshiba, but the technology is not ready for the mainstream. It's currently quite expensive, of limited screen size and requires viewers to sit in very specific places relative to the screen. Given these constraints, we expect it to be a few years at least before autostereoscopic TVs are widely available in any quantity. Of course, we could be wrong."

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by gpick24

Won`t be getting one till we need a new TV, the ones we have aren`t that old, so hopefully by the time one has packed in, they will be specs free.
The technology is already there, there is a hand held gaming device that is 3D without glasses, just not been brought to TVs yet.
Here`s some info I found on it -
"Glasses-free, or autostereoscopic, 3D TVs have been released before, and now offered by Toshiba, but the technology is not ready for the mainstream. It's currently quite expensive, of limited screen size and requires viewers to sit in very specific places relative to the screen. Given these constraints, we expect it to be a few years at least before autostereoscopic TVs are widely available in any quantity. Of course, we could be wrong."

think its Toshiba that are marketing smart TVs in line with smart phones and Ipads, with media gadgets being refined its hard to say just when to buy new gear or wait for better models to evolve, I know this weekend, when there was an add for these Smart TVs, I got the evil eye from her who shall be obeyed

[accyman]

Originally Posted by gpick24

Went to cinema last night and watched my first modern 3D movie ( world war z ), and while I thought it was a decent film and enjoyed the 3D experience, I thought the picture quality compared to a none 3D movie was disappointing. The fast moving parts of the film was blurry.

progetionist was probbably drunk iv never had issues with 3d movies at the cinema but im slective about what i pay to see it has to vbe good for me to tolerate the public while watchinga movie

depends also what method of 3d they use theres a cheap nasty rushed method which is used more frequently then theres the true 3d recording method that was used in avatar

true 3d recording is more expensive and time consuming so if a movie company thinks they can get away with it or teh movie isnt expected to be a huge blockbuster it gets teh cheap and nasty 3d process

got a 3d tv and some movies 3d are done better than others

[accyman]

theres an app that i forget the name of right now that plays files from your computer to your tv that has an end result of producing a SBS 3d effect on a standard TV when playing 3d movie files

apparantly it works pretty well i just havnt the need for it so havnt tested it out

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by accyman

progetionist was probbably drunk iv never had issues with 3d movies at the cinema but im slective about what i pay to see it has to vbe good for me to tolerate the public while watchinga movie

depends also what method of 3d they use theres a cheap nasty rushed method which is used more frequently then theres the true 3d recording method that was used in avatar

true 3d recording is more expensive and time consuming so if a movie company thinks they can get away with it or teh movie isnt expected to be a huge blockbuster it gets teh cheap and nasty 3d process

got a 3d tv and some movies 3d are done better than others

Avatar was a great movie to watch on home 3D by far the best I've seen

[gpick24]

The only program I can find converts SBS to anaglyph, meaning you have to wear the glasses with different coloured lenses so unless there is something better ( and after reading this weekend how 3dtv`s work I doubt it but would love to be proved wrong ) I won`t bother.

[accyman]

nope this program lets you use the same glasses you use at teh cinema not teh red and blue crap

i used to have it an all on my hard drive in mi downloads i wa sthinking of putting it on mi lads laptop so he could watch 3d movies on it