Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo

3D Blu Ray Question


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 of 9 Todd J Moore

Todd J Moore

    Second Unit

  • 309 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 26 2005
  • Real Name:Todd Moore
  • LocationPhiladelphia, PA

Posted December 30 2013 - 07:27 PM

I'm gonna get kicked for this and probably deserve it, but I figured it's worth asking. After less than two years, my Vizio 3D Blu Ray player is giving me issues--mainly with the tray, which will either not open, not close, or not stay closed to load the film. It takes a bit of time to get it to load almost anything. So, I'm considering getting a new player. The player I was looking at includes one of those 2D to 3D conversion options on it and I'm almost kinda curious as to how well something like that works. I certainly don't expect it to look as good as an actual 3D blu ray of a movie shot in 3D, but does it do anything? I wouldn't use such an option to watch anything like Casablanca in 3D, but I do have an off-air recording of The Moonlighter and (somewhere around here) a copy of Son of Sinbad and I'm wondering if it would give any sort of passable 3D effect. Thoughts?

 

Qualification to the question: Does such devices produce a conversion that looks like the crap the infamous Australian guy released (for those that know, the so-called "Super Living 3D") or does it look closer to a Hollywood conversion? And if a Hollywood conversion, would you say it's closer to Clash of the Titans or closer to Captain America: The First Avenger?


Viewing a 3D movie in 2D is kinda like viewing a Scope movie in Pan and Scan.


#2 of 9 StephenDH

StephenDH

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 68 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 02 2005
  • Real Name:Stephen Haigh
  • LocationUK

Posted December 31 2013 - 03:20 AM

Making  3D from 2 offset 2D images will give a cardboard cut-out effect, 3D but not exactly realistic. It can't compete against a Hollywood type conversion which takes months to create. If it were that quick and easy to do, Hollywood would be doing it.



#3 of 9 Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer

  • 10,539 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted December 31 2013 - 05:29 AM

I have a player that does 2D to 3D conversion and also my TV does it. I actually find the TV's conversion more immersive and more pleasurable than the version offered by the Blu-ray player. There seems to be more depth, and it's closer to real 3D than the player's conversion algorithm.

 

No, I've never tried it with the classics (though now that you mention it, Casablanca might be interesting in 3D; I may try this tonight for a bit just to see what it looks like); I've mainly used it to get a hint of what real 3D would look like on Dial M for Murder, Kiss Me Kate, House of Wax 2D releases (before the first and last were actually released in 3D, of course). I also tried it with Them! and I found it surprisingly effective.



#4 of 9 Todd J Moore

Todd J Moore

    Second Unit

  • 309 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 26 2005
  • Real Name:Todd Moore
  • LocationPhiladelphia, PA

Posted December 31 2013 - 09:14 AM

Matt, how did they look? Obviously not as good as the genuine 3D blu rays, but how did they look in general?


Viewing a 3D movie in 2D is kinda like viewing a Scope movie in Pan and Scan.


#5 of 9 Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer

  • 10,539 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted December 31 2013 - 01:38 PM

On the films made in 3D but presented in 2D, you could get a sense of what the real 3D would look like. No, the paddle ball didn't come within inches of my face in House of Wax, but the depth in scenes and the arrangement of objects within the frame did appear more naturally 3D than conversions of regular 2D films and TV (I tried it with an episode of Glee. Terrible. Too much quick cutting to get any kind of 3D effects within a scene, and had I watched the entire show, it probably would have given me a headache). As I mentioned, Them! surprised me with how effective it was in 3D. That's why I'm eager to see what Casablanca looks like tonight. I'll report later.



#6 of 9 StephenDH

StephenDH

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 68 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 02 2005
  • Real Name:Stephen Haigh
  • LocationUK

Posted January 01 2014 - 12:42 PM

One 2D film which would look good in 3D is Dan Petrie's "Die Monster, Die!". From the way it was shot it looks like it was meant for 3D but someone changed their mind. Almost every scene has something poking at the camera, be it ornaments, pot plants, candlesticks or anything else the prop man left lying around.



#7 of 9 Charles Smith

Charles Smith

    Extremely Talented Member

  • 4,043 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 27 2007
  • LocationNor'east

Posted January 01 2014 - 01:11 PM

One 2D film which would look good in 3D is Dan Petrie's "Die Monster, Die!". From the way it was shot it looks like it was meant for 3D but someone changed their mind. Almost every scene has something poking at the camera, be it ornaments, pot plants, candlesticks or anything else the prop man left lying around.

 

Which film is this?  Not the AIP/Karloff one?  Which Dan Petrie?



#8 of 9 Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer

  • 10,539 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted January 01 2014 - 03:15 PM

Casablanca was not especially affected by the TV 3D conversion. I actually saw only minor differences apart from the credits which were amusingly fun in 3D.



#9 of 9 StephenDH

StephenDH

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 68 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 02 2005
  • Real Name:Stephen Haigh
  • LocationUK

Posted January 02 2014 - 12:59 AM

Which film is this?  Not the AIP/Karloff one?  Which Dan Petrie?

Sorry my mistake, it was the AIP one (aka Monster of Terror) and Daniel Haller was the director. He was also an art director which may explain his fondness for clutter in front of the action.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users