Search results

Flesh for Frankenstein initially, as Paul Morrissey expected him to do the work for free. It wasn't until Vinegar Syndrome got involved that he was willing to work on that one.

And he would tell you exactly the same thing.

Did you see the 4K 3D remaster of T2? Should be made a permanent exhibit at Madame Tussaud’s.

I doubt there is much room for improvement, as the majority of the film was shot in ArriVision 3D with chromatic aberrations “baked-in”. They might be able to fix some vertical alignment issues, but they’re limited by budget and available information in the negative.

Why? Just why? I can understand 4K, and the 3D conversion is among the best out there, but HFR is just going to give Titanic the “soap opera effect” writ large. It wasn’t shot HFR, so this is just stupid.

It’s debatable whether a complete remaster would fix Jaws 3D, as the chromatic aberrations are baked in, courtesy of the problematic ArriVision rig. The best looking shots are the underwater shots done with Chris Condon’s rig.

It should now be possible, with 8K displays now widely available, to offer not only passive 1080p 3D, but passive 4K 3D. It won’t be cheap at first, but it could kickstart the next wave of 3D with a sufficient push.

If we were talking about shooting IMAX 3D on film, costs would be ridiculous. However, with a digital workflow, the real cost is human capital: people who know how to shoot and edit 3D to minimise eyestrain and retain the stereoscopic illusion as much as possible. Frankly, it used to be storage...

Agreed, though when I recently commented on a post by LG on Instagram about wishing they still made 3D OLED displays, they liked my comment and responded "taking notes". Gives me a tiny glimmer of hope.