Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Has anyone seen a movie that uses the "Real 3D" process?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
52 replies to this topic

#1 of 53 OFFLINE   EricSchulz

EricSchulz

    Producer



  • 4,493 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 2004

Posted July 02 2008 - 01:34 PM

One of the screens on our new theater is being converted to "Real 3D" (unfortunately, not before "Journey...Earth" starts next week!). I tried doing a forum search and came up empty. (Mods: if a thread exists, please link or merge this with it.)

How does this process work? Is it still a glasses/headset set-up? What's the quality like? Any pros or cons any of you care to share?

I LOVED the last 3-D resurgence (I remember seeing "Jaws 3-D", "Friday the 13th 3-D", "Comin' At Ya" and a revival of "House of Wax") and hope this becomes a viable movie viewing experience rather than a passing fad.

#2 of 53 OFFLINE   Douglas Monce

Douglas Monce

    Producer



  • 5,514 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 16 2006

Posted July 02 2008 - 08:57 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricSchulz
One of the screens on our new theater is being converted to "Real 3D" (unfortunately, not before "Journey...Earth" starts next week!). I tried doing a forum search and came up empty. (Mods: if a thread exists, please link or merge this with it.)

How does this process work? Is it still a glasses/headset set-up? What's the quality like? Any pros or cons any of you care to share?

I LOVED the last 3-D resurgence (I remember seeing "Jaws 3-D", "Friday the 13th 3-D", "Comin' At Ya" and a revival of "House of Wax") and hope this becomes a viable movie viewing experience rather than a passing fad.


I would also like to see a really good 3D system make a come back. When I was a kid in the 70s a local theater showed a double feature of Creature from the Black Lagoon and It Came from Outer Space in 3D! I was VERY impressed. I wish some local theater would do a marathon of old 3D films.

Doug
"I'm in great shape, for the shape I'm in."
Bob Hope in The Ghostbreakers

#3 of 53 OFFLINE   Radioman970

Radioman970

    Producer



  • 5,887 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 22 2006
  • Real Name:James Perry
  • LocationCould be anywhere

Posted July 02 2008 - 11:27 PM

I'm hoping the theatre in my tiny town gets Journey in 3D. I doubt they will. I'm wondering if it's worth seeing in 2D...

The last 3D movie I watched was Spykids 3D at home on DVD and I thought it was kind of cool but didn't match what I remember from seeing stuff like Space Hunter and Warhal's Frankenstein in the early 80s in the movie theatre.
Silly Party Candidate: Tarquin Fin- tim- lim- bim- whin- bim- lim- bus- stop- F'tang- F'tang- Olè- Biscuitbarrel

#4 of 53 OFFLINE   Gary Seven

Gary Seven

    Screenwriter



  • 1,450 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 15 2003
  • Real Name:Gaston
  • LocationLake Worth, Florida

Posted July 03 2008 - 08:42 AM

I too am curious of this process. The 3D movie I saw was Flesh for Frankenstein in a midnight movie and it was wild.

#5 of 53 OFFLINE   Radioman970

Radioman970

    Producer



  • 5,887 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 22 2006
  • Real Name:James Perry
  • LocationCould be anywhere

Posted July 03 2008 - 11:34 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Seven
I too am curious of this process. The 3D movie I saw was Flesh for Frankenstein in a midnight movie and it was wild.
That's the one I saw too. Sometimes it's called Andy Warhol's Frankenstein. I saw it in the 80s. Funny, I was about 15 or so and me and a friend who was about 13 went to see it. Ha! Mom dropped us off but the ticket lady wouldn't sell us tickets. Mom was urked. "What the hell...? Why won't they sell you tickets?!" She didn't wait for an answer and bought our tickets for us and sped off. I mean, it was just Frankenstein, right? Posted Image Even funnier, right in the middle of it my friend was saying "I don't think I'm supposed to be watching this..." (I believe during the imfamous rape scene) and I told him to just put his hands over his eyes. Posted Image Damn, that's a good memory!!! One of my favorite personal movie moments. Poor mom...she thought it was Karloff in 3D!!!

I have both Fresh for Frankenstein and Blood for Dracula on DVD now and they are absolute blast! I really wish there were 3D version available on DVD though. There's just something missing watching 3D in 2D.. That's what I'm afraid of with Journey. Posted Image
Silly Party Candidate: Tarquin Fin- tim- lim- bim- whin- bim- lim- bus- stop- F'tang- F'tang- Olè- Biscuitbarrel

#6 of 53 OFFLINE   Thane101

Thane101

    Agent



  • 25 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 23 2007

Posted July 03 2008 - 02:14 PM

I think you are refering to Real D technology. As far as I know its never been called Real 3d.

I work as a projectionist at a theater that has a 3d screen, and I have seen all of the 3D films since The Nightmare Before Christmas. I don't know how to compare it to older 3D films (since I haven't seen any), but the digital technology is supposed to make the images much more sharp, and the polarized glasses fit comfortably and cause minimal strain on your eyes.
The effect works quite well, almost like your watching a stage production.

#7 of 53 OFFLINE   EricSchulz

EricSchulz

    Producer



  • 4,493 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 2004

Posted July 03 2008 - 02:56 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thane101
I think you are refering to Real D technology. As far as I know its never been called Real 3d.

I work as a projectionist at a theater that has a 3d screen, and I have seen all of the 3D films since The Nightmare Before Christmas. I don't know how to compare it to older 3D films (since I haven't seen any), but the digital technology is supposed to make the images much more sharp, and the polarized glasses fit comfortably and cause minimal strain on your eyes.
The effect works quite well, almost like your watching a stage production.


Ooops, I guess you are correct! Thanks for the info...

#8 of 53 OFFLINE   Leo Kerr

Leo Kerr

    Screenwriter



  • 1,699 posts
  • Join Date: May 10 1999

Posted July 05 2008 - 06:25 AM

REAL-D uses circular polarization to make their system work. The single projector is alternating left-eye/right-eye with an LCD shutter in front of the lens that applies the polarization. The glasses are also circularly polarized.

The big difference between this and "old style" polarized 3-d is that if you tilt your head, you don't get the double-image thing going.

Leo

#9 of 53 OFFLINE   Stephen_J_H

Stephen_J_H

    Producer



  • 4,053 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 30 2003
  • Real Name:Stephen J. Hill
  • LocationNorth of the 49th

Posted July 05 2008 - 07:52 AM

The other big difference is the single digital projector. Previous film based systems had to have two projectors running simultaneously, so film lengths were typically restricted until the platter system came along. House of Wax actually had an intermission so the projectionist could change reels.

Alternate film based systems have been proposed with a beam splitter and a single length of film, but Real D has been the first time a 3-D system has been implemented that requires minimal adjustments to the theatre.
"My opinion is that (a) anyone who actually works in a video store and does not understand letterboxing has given up on life, and (b) any customer who prefers to have the sides of a movie hacked off should not be licensed to operate a video player."-- Roger Ebert

#10 of 53 OFFLINE   EricSchulz

EricSchulz

    Producer



  • 4,493 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 2004

Posted July 06 2008 - 11:31 AM

Well, apparently switching over a screen to use this process isn't a huge deal...the local paper today states that "Journey..." will be showing next week in "Real D".

Thanks for the info guys...now, does anyone know whether older 3-D films can be "converted" to utilize this process? ("House of Wax", for example)

#11 of 53 OFFLINE   Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul



  • 37,845 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted July 06 2008 - 01:10 PM

I take it that no one saw Beowulf in RealD last year?
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#12 of 53 OFFLINE   Adam Lenhardt

Adam Lenhardt

    Executive Producer



  • 14,303 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 16 2001
  • LocationAlbany, NY

Posted July 06 2008 - 02:03 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thane101
I don't know how to compare it to older 3D films (since I haven't seen any), but the digital technology is supposed to make the images much more sharp, and the polarized glasses fit comfortably and cause minimal strain on your eyes.
The effect works quite well, almost like your watching a stage production.
I saw a screening of a 3D copy of Dial M for Murder at this year's 3D Film Festival in Brookline, MA and it was also polarized with the same glasses. I think polarized came first, with the other formats more middling but easier to handle.

#13 of 53 OFFLINE   GregK

GregK

    Supporting Actor



  • 963 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 22 2000

Posted July 06 2008 - 03:23 PM

Showing public 3-D features using polarized light has been ongoing sense the 1939 World's Fair. All of the over 50+ Hollywood features produced in the first part of the 1950's were also shown in the Polaroid 3-D process.

There are some minor differences, (Real-D uses circular polarization, while previous theatrical polarized venues used linear polarization) and the methods of getting the two left and right images onto the screen has varied.

The 1950's 35mm polarized set-ups used two interlocked 35mm projectors. This offered the best presentation, but could easily be knocked out of sync if an edit or cue point was set wrong. Properly projected dual 35mm 3-D projection is still a sight to behold, and is highly recommended.

From the mid 1960's on, the two images were crunched onto a single 35mm frame. ..No more dual projection sync issues to worry about, but the resulting image had the equivalent quality of dual 16mm. And because most of these were also shot using the single strip method, these given 3-D movies will always look a little under par.. even when shown in 2-D.

Real-D uses a single digital projector alternating between the left and right images (and polarizing each image as needed) at 144 times a second. Many of the early digital projectors were 720P, but most new Cinema digital projectors are 1080P. Every once in awhile, if there is a camera pan at just the right speed, you may see a bit of strobing from the 144hz alternating images. But this effect is far and few between and is easily far superior to what was shown in the early 1980's. And for the most part for the projectionist, Real-D is a start and forget procedure.

#14 of 53 OFFLINE   Morgan Jolley

Morgan Jolley

    Lead Actor



  • 8,161 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2000

Posted July 06 2008 - 04:52 PM

I just graduated college with a BS in Optical Engineering and my dad has subjected my brother and I to a lifetime of film appreciation, so this RealD method is extremely intriguing to me. Any links to articles on this? The theory is pretty interesting, but I'm curious if there are any issues with the polarization being lost/reversed as the light hits the screen. I'm guessing this isn't the case (and if it is reversed, then that's an extremely easy problem to overcome).

Note: I figure I can probably Google/Wiki the term "RealD" but I'm hoping someone on here knows a good, direct link.

#15 of 53 OFFLINE   GregK

GregK

    Supporting Actor



  • 963 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 22 2000

Posted July 06 2008 - 05:10 PM

Morgan,

Here is a nice PDF article on Real-D's operating system.

http://www.reald-cor...so... Conf .pdf

#16 of 53 OFFLINE   Tarkin The Ewok

Tarkin The Ewok

    Supporting Actor



  • 654 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 15 2004

Posted July 07 2008 - 04:58 AM

How is Real-D different from the Disney Digital 3-D films like Meet the Robinsons and Bolt, or are they the same process with different branding?

#17 of 53 OFFLINE   Brett_M

Brett_M

    Screenwriter



  • 1,313 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 18 2004
  • Real Name:Brett Meyer
  • LocationMos Eisley Spaceport

Posted July 07 2008 - 06:05 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricSchulz
One of the screens on our new theater is being converted to "Real 3D" (unfortunately, not before "Journey...Earth" starts next week!). I tried doing a forum search and came up empty. (Mods: if a thread exists, please link or merge this with it.)

How does this process work? Is it still a glasses/headset set-up? What's the quality like? Any pros or cons any of you care to share?

I LOVED the last 3-D resurgence (I remember seeing "Jaws 3-D", "Friday the 13th 3-D", "Comin' At Ya" and a revival of "House of Wax") and hope this becomes a viable movie viewing experience rather than a passing fad.

I saw Beowulf and it was INCREDIBLE. The glasses are comfortable and I did not worry about them after about 20 seconds. The 3-D effect was sweet.
Many Shubs and Zuuls knew what it meant to roast in the depths of the Sloar that day I can tell you.

#18 of 53 OFFLINE   Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul



  • 37,845 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted July 07 2008 - 06:15 AM

Not that I would know first-hand, but wasn't the Hannah Montana movie also in RealD?
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#19 of 53 OFFLINE   Josh Steinberg

Josh Steinberg

    Screenwriter



  • 2,630 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 10 2003
  • Real Name:Josh Steinberg

Posted July 07 2008 - 08:44 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Sun
Not that I would know first-hand, but wasn't the Hannah Montana movie also in RealD?

Yep. ...and before you start looking at me funny, I wouldn't know firsthand either. Posted Image I learned all about Hannah Montana when I was trying to figure out why the heck U23D wasn't playing anymore.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarkin The Ewok
How is Real-D different from the Disney Digital 3-D films like Meet the Robinsons and Bolt, or are they the same process with different branding?

I believe it's the same process.

Disney likes to call things that already otherwise have names by something with their corporate moniker. Thus, a DVD in the hands of their marketing department becomes "DisneyDVD", and the standard "DVD" logo gets replaced by a Disneyfied version. I'm actually surprised that the people in charge of the DVD spec and logo haven't complained.

#20 of 53 OFFLINE   Adam Lenhardt

Adam Lenhardt

    Executive Producer



  • 14,303 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 16 2001
  • LocationAlbany, NY

Posted July 07 2008 - 09:38 AM

The only thing I hate about 3D is having to wear glasses over my glasses. Less than comfortable.


Back to Movies (Theatrical)



Forum Nav Content I Follow