3D 3D is Not Dead. It's Awesome! (1 Viewer)

[Bryan^H]

Nice. I just picked it up. I don't remember what 3D film I saw at the theater that "The Walk" trailer played in front of. But I do remember thinking that the 3D In that trailer was better than the film I watched.

 

[RJ992]

The 3D in "The Walk" was quite possibly the most astonishing thing I've ever seen in my life. I was completely surprised to discover it was converted. I stopped being critical of something being a conversion since then.

I think the main reason the movies 3D conversion was done so well is that it was directed by Robert Zemeckis. He is one of the early pioneers of today's modern 3D, starting with BEOWULF. So even though THE WALK was a conversion, he knew how to frame and design his shots as well as supervising the conversion. Unfortunately many of today's directors do not have such a visual eye.

 

[Jeff Flugel]

I can say from first-hand experience that the thread's (and linked article's) sentiments are spot-on. Just a month ago, I took the plunge and ordered an Optoma HD28DSE projector, a manual pull-down 100" screen, a ceiling mount, an RF emitter and a few pair of active-shutter glasses. I had bought a fairly cheap Sony 3D Blu player a couple of years ago, when an earlier Blu deck died. The whole set-up is in a finished basement room, so outside light isn't really a problem. Even when set in the somewhat-less-bright "Eco" mode (to extend the life of the projector's bulb), the 3D is outstanding! So far, I've watched CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON, INFERNO ('53), DIAL M FOR MURDER, most of 3D RARITIES, and sampled several other discs (both classic-era titles, like HOUSE OF WAX, GOG and THE BUBBLE, and newer fare, like MAD MAX: FURY ROAD and PIRANHA 3D), and I've been having a ball!

Was it worth it? In this particular case, emphatically yes. I still have my regular, non-3D 50" Panasonic plasma TV (the 100" screen pulls down in front of it), and if the 3D option had solely been for another non-projection 3D set of similar size to my Panny... no, the expense to simply watch the 3D discs I currently have wouldn't nearly justify the cost. However, getting the projector allows me to watch my massive film and TV collection at double the size, with the big added plus of 3D, so it was well worth it. Also, the projector and accessories (not counting the Blu player) ended up costing less than the Panny plasma did, when I bought it in early 2009 (and the latter was at a discount, as well).

Great set-up, Peter! I did a similar thing earlier this year and love it! My set-up is temporary, in an extra bedroom in a small 2-bedroom house here in Osaka. Hopefully sometime in the next few years, we'll move to a bigger house where I can have a dedicated home theater room. But for now, I'm enjoying the heck out my 3D BenQ HT2050 projector, portable 100" tripod screen and Region Free Sony 3D Blu-Ray player. Like you, I've enjoyed a number of 3D films like INFERNO, DIAL M FOR MURDER, THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON, DRAGONFLY SQUADRON, MISS SADIE THOMPSON and GOG (plus AVATAR, the one modern 3D film I own). I love my 50" Panny plasma, but it can't compare for sheer size with the projector, which also boasts a terrifically sharp image. And just like you, my projector set-up cost half of what I paid for my plasma TV back in 2008. I've seen HD projectors referred to as "the best kept secret in home theater," and boy is it true. I can't recommend this kind of set up enough.

 

[Jimbo64]

I have a huge fear of heights and held onto my sofa arm squirming during The Walk.... I must have looked absolutely ridiculous

 

[Mark-P]

The 3D in "The Walk" was quite possibly the most astonishing thing I've ever seen in my life. I was completely surprised to discover it was converted. I stopped being critical of something being a conversion since then.

Considering that a lot of the locations were generated in a computer to begin with it's hardly fair to consider the entire movie a conversion. Actual location photography would be converted, but the CGI shots can be considered native.

I think the main reason the movies 3D conversion was done so well is that it was directed by Robert Zemeckis. He is one of the early pioneers of today's modern 3D, starting with BEOWULF. So even though THE WALK was a conversion, he knew how to frame and design his shots as well as supervising the conversion. Unfortunately many of today's directors do not have such a visual eye.

Zemeckis made The Polar Express three years before Beowulf.

 

[RJ992]

Zemeckis made The Polar Express three years before Beowulf.

Correct. He was doing.3D well before AVATAR came along. Wish he'd bring his expertise to a comic book movie.

 

[TravisR]

I have a huge fear of heights and held onto my sofa arm squirming during The Walk.... I must have looked absolutely ridiculous

I don't really have a fear of heights but seeing The Walk in IMAX 3-D actually did make me uncomfortable a few times.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I have a huge fear of heights and held onto my sofa arm squirming during The Walk.... I must have looked absolutely ridiculous

You and me both. In IMAX 3D, I was squirming and holding onto my armrest for dear life.

(Naturally I loved every minute of it.)

 

[DFurr]

I can't speak to home theatre market but at least in commercial theatres, 3D is FAR from being dead. Here's some news from one of the world's largest theatre chains. It appears that 3D is thriving in markets out side of the US.

Cinemark renews its 3D global agreement with RealD through to December 2022.

Cinemark was an early champion of the 3D format and one of RealD’s first major customers when the company launched in 2005. During the term of the pact’s extension, Cinemark will be installing RealD 3D systems in all new-build theatres.

3D continues to thrive in foreign theatrical markets like Russia and China where it has seen it drive tickets sales. 57% of the global $522M box office for Warner Bros./Village Roadshow’s Ready Player One came from the 3D format with RealD responsible for $80M of all ticket sales.

 

[Gary Seven]

Based on 3D ticket sales I have seen this week for the Avengers, I agree.

 

[Camps]

Still a huge waste of money though.

Sez you....

 

[DFurr]

For those of you interested in what is real 3D opposed to conversions, check out this website.

http://realorfake3d.com/#start

 

[John Dirk]

For those of you interested in what is real 3D opposed to conversions, check out this website.

http://realorfake3d.com/#start

You read my mind. I was just about to ask. Looking forward to the read.

UPDATE:
So it looks like studio support for native 3D began to decline rapidly around 2015, probably [yet again] because they realized the average viewer wouldn't care or even know if they were watching converted content. Enthusiasts take the hit again but, I guess, that's why we're called enthusiasts.

 

[David Norman]

Since many of the 'conversions' actually have better 3D presentations than the 'Real' one's I've never seen a big reason to worry about it.

Similar to the realorfake 4K site, so far it's basically shown itself to be a useless red herring

 

[John Dirk]

Since many of the 'conversions' actually have better 3D presentations than the 'Real' one's I've never seen a big reason to worry about it.

Similar to the realorfake 4K site, so far it's basically shown itself to be a useless red herring

Possibly but "better" is subjective and if conversions are the thing now you can bet it's because they represent some sort of cost savings for everyone in the chain except, of course, the consumer.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I've said this before but I no longer believe a 3D film must be natively shot to be good. I've seen natively shot films that had minimal 3D, and I've seen converted films that blew my mind.

Consider these two:
-X-Men: Days Of Future Past, a native-3D film from director Bryan Singer
-The Walk, a converted 3D film from director Robert Zemeckis.

Bryan Singer had previously directed Jack The Giant Slayer in native 3D, and it's a phenomenal presentation. But he stated in interviews that he hated directing for 3D because it required him to be in a tent away from the action watching on 3D monitors, and that he felt he spent all of his time working on 3D and very little with the actors. Why his production environment was set up that way in the first place, I don't know, but he proved that he was both great at composing for 3D, but also bothered by the hassle. So, when it came to X-Men: Days Of Future Past, he said that he simply selected one 3D setting on the camera rig for the entire film, and shot the entire movie with 3D cameras but paying no attention to the 3D and shooting as if it were 2D. And when you watch the movie, it shows. It's the most two dimension looking native 3D ever shot.

On the other hand, you have The Walk, by Robert Zemeckis. In interviews, he said that budgetary constraints led to them considering both native and conversion, and that ultimately, tests revealed that the conversion process gave him a better result. The film was shot with 2D cameras, but was planned as being a 3D release from day one, so every shot was designed with the 3D conversion in mind. The film boasts some of the most outstanding 3D I've ever seen; when Joseph Gordon-Levitt's character steps out onto that wire between the Twin Towers, my real-life fear of heights kicked in and I held on to my armrest for dear life. It was perhaps the most effective 3D sequence I have ever seen in my life.

So it's not really about whether it was natively shot or converted - it's about, how involved were the filmmakers in the 3D process. It's sort of the same with surround sound mixes. Some directors are very hands on and want to have a say in how each and every effect sounds and what's coming out of what speaker and how it plays, while other directors are content to allow the sound editors and mixers to take their rough ideas and turn them into a finished product.

All of the Marvel Studios 3D films were actually conversions, but many of them are quite outstanding - it really comes down to whether the director decided to be involved in that process or not. Joss Whedon planned the 3D look of the first Avengers film, James Gunn was thinking about the 3D for the two Guardians films when he was still writing the script (and 3D cues are actually written in the script), and Scott Derrickson was also very hands on with the 3D design for Doctor Strange. On the other hand, Iron Man 3 director Shane Black says he wasn't informed the movie was going to get a 3D release until he was halfway through shooting it, so it didn't factor into his plans. But the effects teams knew that it would be 3D, so you have some live action footage that doesn't always lend itself to a conversion, but pretty cool looking 3D effects sequences.

I think in 2010, you could pretty safely say that if it was converted, it wasn't going to be very good, but in 2018, a converted film can be just as good as a native-shot one.

 

[John Dirk]

Thanks Josh. Interesting as always. I actually just finished watching "Star Wars - The Force Awakens" and "It Came From Outer Space" in 3D at home. To my surprise, the latter looked much better IMHO. I saw Black Panther in a commercial theater in Real 3D and was completely underwhelmed.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I have been very disappointed with RealD presentations of late.

I think a potential problem with RealD is that the single projector isn't putting out enough light, especially if its a theater that is in the unfortunate habit of turning down the projector bulbs under the completely incorrect assumption that reducing brightness will make it last longer. Dimness in 3D projection kills the 3D effect almost entirely.

Then, add to that that RealD has a very specific spec for what the screen size must be, what type of screen it must be, and what the throw distance needs to be - I would not be at all surprised to find that many theaters are using RealD outside of the recommended specifications, which will also kill the 3D effect.

I think RealD is most effective when used with a very bright projector on a small-to-medium sized screen. RealD is used in a lot of so-called "premium large format" auditoriums, but the screens in those auditoriums can be larger than what the RealD spec recommends, which can lead to subpar 3D.

3D on my projector at home almost always looks better than RealD, and at least equals what IMAX has to offer. My projector can be extremely bright, and I'm not projecting onto the largest screen ever, so that allows all of that light to hit the screen. Because it's so bright, the glasses can't kill it, and it just looks fantastic.

 

[DFurr]

Josh hit the nail on the head. Dim 3D is BAD 3D. My Epson does a good job on 3D BD's and when I project 35mm 3D in my HT I turn the lamphouse rectifier up to maximum voltage output to operate the xenon bulb at it's highest rated amperage.

 

[StephenDH]

For those of you interested in what is real 3D opposed to conversions, check out this website.

http://realorfake3d.com/#start

Looking through this list, I saw that the 1964 movie, "The last Man on Earth" is marked as being shot in 3D. Is this actually true?