1. Guest,
    If you need help getting to know Xenforo, please see our guide here. If you have feedback or questions, please post those here.
    Dismiss Notice

Jurassic Park 3D

Discussion in 'Movies' started by Johnny Angell, Apr 5, 2013.

  1. WillG

    WillG Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2003
    Messages:
    5,298
    Likes Received:
    29
    Arnold was a chain smoker in the book as well and is also killed.
    Didn't surprise me much. I don't think Spielberg would kill off a "popular" character. Once Malcolm was resuced by Ellie and Muldoon, he never seemed to be in any kind of critical condition. His situation was a lot more dire in the book.
    I guess we'd have to assume that it's based on behavior of what might be considered similar animals that exist today. But I would still maintain that Muldoon would "know" at least as much as Grant knows, and probably more since he's actually observed living Dinosaurs.
    Perhaps, but he does say something like "I've hunted things that can hunt you, but they way they move......" He is shown to be very aware of their intelligence and hunting behavior.
     
  2. Colin Jacobson

    Colin Jacobson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2000
    Messages:
    5,666
    Likes Received:
    354
    "They go straight to the main console, where RAY ARNOLDfortyish, a chronic worrier and chain-smoker, is seated."
     
  3. SamT

    SamT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,841
    Likes Received:
    464
    Real Name:
    Sam
    I saw this for the first time in 3D at home and was very impressed. The 3D is very well done.

    I'm wondering how they can do this when it was shot in 2D and if they can achieve this great look
    what's the point of shooting in 3D? Would it have been even better if it was shot in 3D?

    Did they re-render CG elements in 3D?
     
    Tino likes this.
  4. Ronald Epstein

    Ronald Epstein Administrator
    Owner

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    44,710
    Likes Received:
    3,679
    Real Name:
    Ronald Epstein
    Sam,

    I don't want to burst your bubble on this...as I am certain other members
    who have seen Jurassic Park 3D will agree....

    It's not great 3D.

    First, it would have looked better if natively shot in the format. All you are
    getting is depth.

    The other problem, if memory serves correctly, is that the level of depth
    and overall 3D is not consistent. Kind of went from looking pretty good to
    just flat several times through the movie.
     
    FoxyMulder likes this.
  5. FoxyMulder

    FoxyMulder 映画ファン

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,236
    Likes Received:
    1,612
    Location:
    Scotland
    Real Name:
    Malcolm
    Of course the removal of all the film grain for the 3D process also removes a lot of fine detail, could be worse i suppose as this one doesn't have any edge enhancement unlike the 2D release, i think i'll just stick to watching it in 2D in future.

    I'm just thinking, when they did the 3D version they should have kept the unmolested 4K scan for a 2D re-release, unless of course the 2D edition that we currently have on blu ray is derived from that same scan and Universal just decided a little sharpening with a few edge halo's was all well and good and necessary for blu ray, that wouldn't surprise me at all.
     
  6. Tino

    Tino Premium
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    7,307
    Likes Received:
    1,205
    Location:
    Metro NYC
    Real Name:
    Valentino
    I gotta agree with Sam here. I thought the 3D conversion was great.
     
  7. SamT

    SamT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,841
    Likes Received:
    464
    Real Name:
    Sam
    Interesting. I'm kind of video "savvy" (as we all are here) but still can't tell the difference between good and bad 3D.
    This shows how 3D is still new and not known well.

    Anyway I enjoyed it so much that I watched all 3 Jurassic Park movies.
    Any news if they are working on The Lost World 3D?
    I like it as much as the first one. I like it because it's completly different than the first movie
    and it's a very dark movie. (Probably that's why people don't like it that much.)
    I guess It would be hard to convert it to 3D since it's literally so dark!
     
  8. Tino

    Tino Premium
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    7,307
    Likes Received:
    1,205
    Location:
    Metro NYC
    Real Name:
    Valentino
    Sam if you think the 3D is great what does it matter what any of us think right?
     
  9. SamT

    SamT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,841
    Likes Received:
    464
    Real Name:
    Sam
    Well maybe we are not still educated enough to recognize a bad 3D (like a bad noise reduction).

    Anyway, remember that Star Wars the Original Trilogy 3D are in the works. So it interests me
    to learn how 2D to 3D conversion compares to native 3D. Will they be able to achieve great 3D
    with Star Wars or Ron are you saying it's impossible from native 2D?
     
  10. TonyD

    TonyD Who do we think I am?

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 1999
    Messages:
    16,851
    Likes Received:
    280
    Location:
    Disney World and Universal Florida
    Real Name:
    Tony D.
    I'm not sure where you're going with that. Of course it matters what people think here that's what we are here for. To talk and have interaction and gain knowledge from the rest. Sam liked the 3D on the movie, he isn't wrong it's his opinion. I saw it on an imax screen in 3D and thought it was very good, not great. Still haven't looked at the disc yet though so no opinion.
     
  11. TonyD

    TonyD Who do we think I am?

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 1999
    Messages:
    16,851
    Likes Received:
    280
    Location:
    Disney World and Universal Florida
    Real Name:
    Tony D.
    But I do have to say Sam, I wouldn't say "we" aren't educated enough about 3D. That's a bit of a speak for yourself one there.As for native shot to converted comparisons. I saw the latest Apes movie last week. That was native and I feel like I wasted the extra money for the 3D. It was pretty flat and only offered minimal depth in a few shots.
     
  12. SamT

    SamT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,841
    Likes Received:
    464
    Real Name:
    Sam
    I said maybe. Trying to learn. And since they are also not filming Episode 7 in 3D we have to watch a 2D to 3D conversion. Personally if they also release it in 3D, my first viewing will be in 3D for Episode 7.
     
  13. Tino

    Tino Premium
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    7,307
    Likes Received:
    1,205
    Location:
    Metro NYC
    Real Name:
    Valentino
    My only point Tony is that if Sam is happy with the 3D, what does it matter what we think of it.
     
  14. Ronald Epstein

    Ronald Epstein Administrator
    Owner

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    44,710
    Likes Received:
    3,679
    Real Name:
    Ronald Epstein
    Take a look at a film like T.S. Spivet, any of the IMAX 3D Blu-rays...or
    even, perhaps Avatar.

    I am trying to think of other natively shot 3D films at the moment
    but am coming up short. There is so much post-converted crap
    out there.

    You take a look at those films and you can immediately see the
    difference in something composed and shot in 3D rather than
    simply upconverted.

    It really is a difference of night and day. I think most people who
    have seen good, natively shot 3D will agree that it blows away the
    stuff that is upconverted in post production.

    Would Star Wars look great in 3D? I saw a scene upconverted
    (Death Star battle) during a Cedia show a few years back. It looked
    better than the flat version. So, yes, better....but not as good as if it
    was composed and shot in the format.

    I think Titanic still stands as the most spectacular looking 3D conversion
    just for the amount of work that went into it. I also think Pacific Rim looks
    pretty friggin' incredible. Obviously more work were put into both these
    titles than the average upconversion.
     
  15. SamT

    SamT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,841
    Likes Received:
    464
    Real Name:
    Sam
    Yes I saw Avatar in Theater 3D. It was great. One interesting thing I remember was James Cameron saying that even the editing should be different when It's 3D. What I remember is that he meant the 3D and 2D versions shouldn't necessarily have the exact same cuts. But I never heard of any 3D movie cuts being different than the 2D version. I don't know if Avatar 3D and 2D are the same cut or not.
     
  16. FoxyMulder

    FoxyMulder 映画ファン

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,236
    Likes Received:
    1,612
    Location:
    Scotland
    Real Name:
    Malcolm
    He is also on record as saying he was too conservative with the 3D and that he will be far more aggressive with the three sequels, i take that to mean he is going to give us deeper depth and deeper pop outs or depth out of the screen, i hope so.
     
  17. Jason Charlton

    Jason Charlton Ambassador

    Joined:
    May 16, 2002
    Messages:
    3,400
    Likes Received:
    316
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Real Name:
    Jason Charlton
    ^^ This (emphasis mine). It's all about how the material is composed for 3D that makes the biggest difference. It's the main reason why even if something is shot natively in 3D it doesn't necessarily translate to a "better" 3D experience than a good upconversion (like Titanic mentioned later).

    For me, it's not the film that makes me want to see something in 3D, it's the filmmaker. Sort of relates to the composition issue. The fact that it's a Star Wars movie has very little to do with how good or bad the 3D will be. The question is more along the lines of "What has JJ shown us in the past that leads us to believe the 3D experience will be well thought out and executed."

    I am most definitely not on the "3D" bandwagon, but I am a big time James Cameron fanboy, and since he (more than any other filmmaker out there) KNOWS 3D inside and out, I'm most likely to watch his films in 3D - simply because I have the highest confidence that the 3D experience will be about as good as it can get.
    It's not so much that the cuts should be different, per se, it's that when editing a film that's in 3D you also need to take the third dimension into account when you make a cut. It takes our eyes a finite amount of time to adjust the depth of focus, so when editing scenes together, you want to avoid having drastic changes in the focus depth of the viewer. Too many rapid and sever changes in depth focus can lead to headaches and eye strain.

    I love Cameron's story about his "flop cut" technique: After spending hours, days, or even weeks editing together a complex action shot with many cuts, and watching the scene evolve dozens or even hundreds of times, he subconsciously "learns" where the focus of the action goes from one cut to another and he is thus able to "predict" where the action takes place (left, right, up, down).

    First time viewers don't have this foreknowledge of how a scene is cut, so to test whether the edited action is still "followable" by a first-time viewer, he watches the scene with the images flipped horizontally - thus defeating his ingrained knowledge of the scene's flow. If he's still able to follow the action effectively, then he knows the edit is good to go.

    When you take a 3D movie into the editing room, you have all those factors to consider PLUS the added depth dimension.

    I remember feeling that the 3D in Avatar was very natural and not so distracting - which for me personally is the way I prefer it. However, should this philosophy change for the Avatar sequels, I will have the utmost faith that the result will be worth watching.
     
    Mikael Soderholm likes this.
  18. SamT

    SamT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,841
    Likes Received:
    464
    Real Name:
    Sam
    Jason, do you know any 3D movies having a different cut than their 2D version?
     
  19. Wayne_j

    Wayne_j Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    251
    Real Name:
    Wayne
    I thought the 3D in Jurassic Park was OK. The lack of grain really threw me though. They probably should have added some back in.
     
    FoxyMulder likes this.
  20. Jason Charlton

    Jason Charlton Ambassador

    Joined:
    May 16, 2002
    Messages:
    3,400
    Likes Received:
    316
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Real Name:
    Jason Charlton
    I'm not aware of any movies actually having different cuts between 2D and 3D versions, but then again, I haven't seen that many 3D movies.

    However, again using Avatar as an example, the presentation CAN be varied between the 2D and 3D versions. In the case of Avatar, Cameron preferred the narrower 16:9 aspect ratio for the 3D presentation versus the wider 2.35:1 aspect ratio for the 2D presentation.

    For much of his career, Cameron has shot his films using the Super35 format - which actually captures images in a narrower aspect ratio (almost 4:3) and for widescreen presentation, the larger frame area is actually cropped top and bottom (and sometimes the sides) to produce the 1.85 or 2.35:1 image. There are lots of comparisons between the 2.35:1 and 1.85:1 versions of Terminator 2 and True Lies that demonstrate the narrower aspect ratio actually opens up the frame when compared to the wider format.

    In essence, during filming, Cameron is composing the frame for the narrower aspect ratio (which is closer to the 3D presentation) and then cropping to the wide aspect ratio during post-production for 2D. Since the editing process for 2D could be considered "more lenient" than the editing process for 3D, this approach would make sense. The priority during filming and editing is to create the best possible 3D presentation. Although the 2D presentation is (to a very small degree) a somewhat compromised version, the compromises are NOT made at the expense of the 3D presentation.
     

Share This Page