8mm Forum: Will 3D become the norm?

This is topic Will 3D become the norm? in forum General Yak at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=001572

Posted by Stewart John Boyle (Member # 1785) on January 16, 2010, 01:41 PM:

Hi all
I feel,that the current 3D rebirth will pass as every other 3D phase in the past has done. How do other members feel about this? To me the prospect of having to wear the glasses all or most of the time you go to the movies fills me with dread [Frown]

Regards
Stewart

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on January 16, 2010, 01:46 PM:

It's just a fad, IMO.

Look back at movie history - it's been around before.

Posted by Steven J Kirk (Member # 1135) on January 16, 2010, 03:04 PM:

I hope it WILL pass, I don't like it. It adds nothing to the Art of film and only distracts.

Posted by Darren Payne (Member # 1517) on January 16, 2010, 03:32 PM:

Disagree. More 3D films have/are being produced than ever before with many more in pre-production for 2011, 2012 and beyond, where a 2D version of the same film is playing in theatres (multiple prints), the 3D gross is greater by approximately 70-80%

Biggest grossing film of all time? Avatar 3D.

Digital equipment roll outs this year and next within Odeons estate are all 3D (Real D) capable.

It will certainly be around for a while yet.

Posted by Thomas Murin, Jr. (Member # 1745) on January 16, 2010, 04:28 PM:

Steven, Hitchock used the 3-D for Dial "M" For Murder to open up what would otherwise be nothing more than a filmed stage play (which it is). Having seen it both ways (via field sequential 3-D), I feel the films is more involving in 3-D.

James Cameron worked hard to use 3-D to enhance Avatar, not distract. Looking at the 2D print in our theater, there are no obvious attempts to throw things at the viewer.

Also, having been just old enough to actually see House Of Wax on it's last theatrical re-release in 1981 (I was 11), I can tell you that movie plays MUCH better in 3-D, much more suspensful.

Posted by Stewart John Boyle (Member # 1785) on January 16, 2010, 05:30 PM:

George Lucas will be releasing A New Hope in 3d shortly,i cant see the attraction being honest. Unless its the original cut.
Stewart

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on January 16, 2010, 05:39 PM:

When I saw A Christmas Carol in 3D it didn't feel at all like the gimmicky old style 3D from years ago, it was new and different.

I started to wonder if maybe it won't be enough for movie viewers to see a movie in 2D in a few years.

By the same token, I wonder how well this will transfer over to home presentation. How large a screen does this take to be effective and will it be immersive enough in normally lit rooms.

You'll know if it’s for real the day you go to your optometrist and he asks if you also want a pair of cinema glasses made in your prescription.

Posted by Bill Phelps (Member # 1431) on January 16, 2010, 05:54 PM:

Thomas...I am a big Hitchcock fan and I am wondering how you saw DIAL 'M' FOR MURDER in 3D? I didn't think it was ever released in 3D because at the time the fad had died down. I know it was filmed in 3D.

I want to see it in 3D!!

Bill

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on January 17, 2010, 02:50 AM:

Bill,

I also saw DIAL M in 3D in 1984 in a cinema in Tottenham Court Road, London. I guess there must've been a limited run re-release at the time.

My opinion is that it made no difference to the film - the film plays just as well without it. It DID give me a migraine though!!

Posted by John Clancy (Member # 49) on January 17, 2010, 04:08 AM:

I enjoy the novelty of 3D occasionally but I can't imagine wearing the glasses every time I go to the cinema. I'd rather look at a nice 'Scope widescreen with pin-sharp definition. The LCD glasses are great but every time???

Posted by Thomas Murin, Jr. (Member # 1745) on January 17, 2010, 09:03 AM:

Bill, Dial "M"'s original 1954 release was in 3-D and a fairly big hit for Warner Bros.

As I was born in 1970, clearly I didn't see it then. LOL! A few years ago, I got a bootleg DVD made from the Japanese VHD disc which was in field sequential (similar to IMAX) 3-D. It uses shutter glasses and the quality is excellent.

Anyway, the improved technology for 3-D ensures that it will be around for some time to come. The home version will arrive later this year as the Blu-Ray specs have recently been finalized.

The initial release of Avatar on Blu-Ray will be 2-D only with a 2-D/3-D combo due out later in the year. In addition, Dreamworks has already announced a re-release of Monsters Vs. Aliens in 3-D sometime this year. All 3-D Blu-Rays will be required to have a 2-D version.

No, it's not going away this time. I suspect 3-D will finally become a regular fixture in cinemas. I also believe that 2-D movies will continue to be made.

As for the glasses issue, there is already work being done in holography which would allow for glasses free 3-D.

Finally, I would suggest anyone with an interest in 3-D to track down a copy of the out of print book Amazing 3-D by Hal Morgan and Daniel L. Symmes. It's an excellent read covering everything 3-D in various media up to the early 1980's. The book also has tons of anaglyph pictures including entire comic book stories. It's well worth tracking down.

Posted by Steven J Kirk (Member # 1135) on January 17, 2010, 09:24 AM:

I saw DIAL M FOR MURDER at the ICA Arts Centre. It must have been around 1984. I really didn't feel it added to it and although technically I can see the interest it remains an unwanted addition for me. In fact, I'm not a huge fan of full surround sound either but I do like the centre speaker for dialogue on 5.1. I'm not an old fogey either, only 46 but hey, bring back black and white and mono sound too!

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on January 17, 2010, 12:21 PM:

At the moment 3D is doing very well in particular with Avatar [Roll Eyes]

last year I would have said its just a passing phase now I dont think so, its here to stay, however as they say what goes up must come down and as such I think the hype driven interest in 3D will drop and find a certain level with a particular type of audience.

Graham.

Posted by Mark Williams (Member # 794) on January 17, 2010, 01:02 PM:

Like or loathe it 3-D is here to stay!!!

The mega successfull release of AVATAR over x-mas has really raised the bar here and is reported to be fully booked up until February.

The trailers for TOY STORY 2,PLANET TERRA & TIM BURTONS ALICE IN WONDERLAND were all very impressive when viewed in 3-D yesterday @ my local Cineworld.

And of course AVATAR in its digital format was simply stunning with perfect definition and none of the old crap 3-D gimmicks of old.

I felt the 2-D version dragged a bit in the middle wherin the 3-D version did not due to the wonderful 3-D imagery on display.

Cheers MW

Posted by Bill Phelps (Member # 1431) on January 17, 2010, 01:58 PM:

That's fine with me about 3D sticking around but I hope they don't go overboard with it. I certainly don't want every film coming out 3D!

About DIAL 'M'...I am almost certain that on it's first release in 1954 it was not shown in 3D. I have read many books about Alfred and I know I have seen this stated many times. Although I could be wrong. I love the film even without the 3D effect.

Has anyone seen the film on it's first run and can confirm this?
Thomas I didn't mean to infer you had seen the film back in 1954! Sorry!

Bill

Posted by Ricky Daniels (Member # 95) on January 19, 2010, 06:40 AM:

Digital 3D will stick around for sure because it brings in more revenue for the studios and it's just the beginning [Wink]

Posted by Mark Williams (Member # 794) on January 19, 2010, 06:47 AM:

AVATAR has taken $1.6 bn (£979m) so far upon its release worldwide so do the math!!

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on January 19, 2010, 10:54 AM:

I agree that it's probably here to stay but I don't think it will take over and it may continue to be a relatively small proportion of films made. I don't know if it costs a lot more to make a film in 3D, but I suppose the recent releases have been films with a fairly, or very, high budget.

One important point (perhaps Darren or someone with knowldege of this can comment) is what sort of proportion of the digital projectors now in use in cinemas can present films in 3D? If many can't, would a cinema need to install a new one to show 3D? If so, there must be cinemas that are unwilling to make a similar investment in digital projection again so soon. On the other hand, it seems that there could be a new era of cinemas showing 3D via 35mm! (See the Avatar thread for more about this.)

Posted by Mark Williams (Member # 794) on January 19, 2010, 12:37 PM:

A Hollywood insider friend says that in 10 yrs time it will be normal for all big budget blockbusters to be released exclusively in the 3-D format.

What with SPIELBERG,LUCAS and JACKSON now working on 3-D movies the future looks very bright indeed.

Digital 3-D projection is far superior to 35mm in my humble opion and that looks like the way it will go for the future.

I believe a special digital projector is currently required for 3-D presentations.

Posted by Patrick Walsh (Member # 637) on January 19, 2010, 05:02 PM:

I own a cinema and I can not afford to put a digital projector in to show 3d films, the price of the projector and a sliver screen is worth more than my whole cinema is worth!
I am looking with interest at the Thompson-Technicolor system.
Pat

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on January 19, 2010, 05:26 PM:

Patrick - that helps put things in perspective! Would the cost of a digital projector suitable for 3D be a lot more than one that's not suitable for 3D?

Posted by Patrick Walsh (Member # 637) on January 19, 2010, 06:14 PM:

Hi Adrian
The latest digital projectors in use around here can play normal movies as well as 3d ones.
The cost of the projector itelf here is $NZ200,000, and the silver screen is about $NZ15,000 and the installation is another 20k so it is very expensive, so I say why replace somthing that is doing the job fine.
There is under 10 screens in the whole county that can show electronic 3d.

Posted by Gian Luca Mario Loncrini (Member # 1417) on January 19, 2010, 06:42 PM:

Darren Payne wrote:

quote:
It will certainly be around for a while yet.

I do think the same.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on January 19, 2010, 07:42 PM:

It'll be around to stay, but not for all films. After all, what 3D thrills would you get in a romantic film, (wait a minute, I shouldn't have asked that! 3D close-ups of sex scenes!)

Posted by Joerg Polzfusz (Member # 602) on January 20, 2010, 01:34 AM:

Hi,

so the crowd is storming the cinemas to see "Avatar"...
... but is this because it's a Cameron-film? Because it's a topic that hasn't been stressed to much the last years (AFAIK the last major "endangered primitive tribe"-film was "Dances with Wolves" in 1990)? Or because of that "new" 3D-technique?
And what will the audience think of "digital 3D" once the novelty wore off? Will "digital 3D" turn into a "box office poison" in a year or two when the only "digital 3D"-movies will be sequels, prequels, remakes and re-releases of cheesy 2D-videos? (The 3D-cinema of the 1950s didn't die because of technical problems, but because of the fact that at least 95% of all 3D-movies have been at best cheap "B" movies!) And will "digital 3D" still make the people go into the cinemas once Panasonic's "digital 3D bluray home entertainment system" got released?
There have been other "digital 3D"-movies before "Avatar", e.g. "Ice Age 3". And none of them had been a real blockbuster!

Jörg

Posted by Mark Williams (Member # 794) on January 20, 2010, 02:32 AM:

Osi,

I believe 3-D adult XXX movies are being prepared for eventual home viewing as we speak,luckily the scratch & sniff craze of the 80's didnt catch on!!!

Posted by Ricky Daniels (Member # 95) on January 20, 2010, 08:45 AM:

Patrick,

It's interesting to see Technicolor revive the 'over/under' 35mm system for Celluloid only cinemas, good luck with your installation if you go ahead.

http://www.technicolor.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/Technicolor/Technicolor_3D_web_Brochure.pdf

Rick

Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 549) on January 24, 2010, 12:10 AM:

3D will be here to stay when we can view movies in 3D without glasses.

As much as Avatar has taken, it is nowhere near the all time most popular films due to the premium price on the 3D tickets.

The current 3D will be a part of the industry for a while, but already people are complaining about having to wear glasses for movies that are not speial events like Avatar.

As to digital 3D being better than the old film 3D, I have five words as an answer; see it in IMAX 3D. It is simply incredible.

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on January 24, 2010, 03:41 PM:

David,
I wondered if you have seen 'Avatar' in 70mm ('15-70') film at an enormous screen IMAX cinema? If so, it would answer recent questions that can be seen in the 'Avatar' thread. I think it can be seen in this format but the use of the term IMAX in relation to 3D presentations on much smaller screens is causing confusion.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2