Avatar 3D announced for October 15/16!

[BleedOrange11]

There are a couple of short instances of reversed frame 3D in the Avatar BD3D at 00:00:59 - 00:01:02 and 00:16:00 - 00:16:02.

The first is during an extreme close-up of Jake's eye. The second is halfway through CGI neural sync where Jake's mind enters his avatar body for the first time. Flip your glasses upside down, and the 3D can be seen as intended. Hopefully, these errors will be fixed in a future 3D extended release.

[Carboooon]

The close up of the eye did seem strange. I heard it was one of the scenes that was converted and just put it down to that, but the frames are actually the wrong way round? This happens in the Panasonic verison as well I assume?

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by Carboooon

The close up of the eye did seem strange. I heard it was one of the scenes that was converted and just put it down to that, but the frames are actually the wrong way round? This happens in the Panasonic verison as well I assume?

IMO, it would be the same encode costing no additional studio expense. The first chance of a correction will no doubt be from a newly authored 3D extended addition.

Paul

[Bluepeace]

So glad I didn't get this version

[BleedOrange11]

Originally Posted by Carboooon

The close up of the eye did seem strange. I heard it was one of the scenes that was converted and just put it down to that, but the frames are actually the wrong way round? This happens in the Panasonic verison as well I assume?

Yeah, I can confirm the reverse 3D in the retail edition. Others on a different forum found it in the Panasonic exclusive, and BD reviewers have been saying that the two versions have the exact same video encode.

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by BleedOrange11

There are a couple of short instances of reversed frame 3D in the Avatar BD3D at 00:00:59 - 00:01:02 and 00:16:00 - 00:16:02.

The first is during an extreme close-up of Jake's eye. The second is halfway through CGI neural sync where Jake's mind enters his avatar body for the first time. Flip your glasses upside down, and the 3D can be seen as intended. Hopefully, these errors will be fixed in a future 3D extended release.

Originally Posted by Carboooon

The close up of the eye did seem strange. I heard it was one of the scenes that was converted and just put it down to that, but the frames are actually the wrong way round? This happens in the Panasonic verison as well I assume?

Good eye. I remember that eye, thinking the same thing, but assumed they were going for a very minimalist look for whatever reason. I'll take another look. Thanks for the heads up.

Avatar 2 is said to be out by 2015, the same year as Star Wars VII. Avatar 2 is said to include a lot of underwater scenes, and if so, hopefully they'll keep the water bright and clear for strong 3D, instead of dim and foggy.

[BleedOrange11]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Good eye. I remember that eye, thinking the same thing, but assumed they were going for a very minimalist look for whatever reason. I'll take another look. Thanks for the heads up.

Avatar 2 is said to be out by 2015, the same year as Star Wars VII. Avatar 2 is said to include a lot of underwater scenes, and if so, hopefully they'll keep the water bright and clear for strong 3D, instead of dim and foggy.

A poster on another forum pointed out the eye shot first, and then I noticed the 2nd scene. Was a little disappointed because the CGI warp didn't work as well as it did in theaters or in Underworld: Awakening and actually appeared to point outwards like a cone sticking out of the TV during the later half.

Avatar 2 should be great. I remember seeing an interview with Cameron where he said that he would have gone even stronger with the 3D in Avatar. He mentioned that he was afraid of audience eyestrain in a movie that long but has since learned that it isn't a big problem.

Very hopeful for Star Wars VII as well.

[HDvision]

Available in France, in newstands only (not retail stores) is a very limited edition of the 3D + 2D + DVD of the movie, bundled with the french language mag HDvision, which has everything including a James Cameron and Van Ling interview.

http://www.journaux.fr/hdvision-le-m...re_167524.html

If anyone is interested, you can also order it through HDvision mag website. http://www.hdvision-mag.fr

[mredman]

Originally Posted by Bluepeace

So glad I didn't get this version

what do you mean?

I just got this and its the best 3D is have ever seen

[Will21st]

Originally Posted by BleedOrange11

A poster on another forum pointed out the eye shot first, and then I noticed the 2nd scene. Was a little disappointed because the CGI warp didn't work as well as it did in theaters or in Underworld: Awakening and actually appeared to point outwards like a cone sticking out of the TV during the later half.

Avatar 2 should be great. I remember seeing an interview with Cameron where he said that he would have gone even stronger with the 3D in Avatar. He mentioned that he was afraid of audience eyestrain in a movie that long but has since learned that it isn't a big problem.

Very hopeful for Star Wars VII as well.

Just imagine if we get almost all-CGI movies in 48FPS 3D..... our eyeballs are gonna pop-out and heads will explode due to awesomeness!

48FPS is a watershed moment for 3D to me and as far as I'm concerned 24 is dead in the water.

[Big3dfan]

"3D is here to stay, get used to it"

You should change it to "3D is here to suck you in, so suck it up"

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by BleedOrange11

Avatar 2 should be great. I remember seeing an interview with Cameron where he said that he would have gone even stronger with the 3D in Avatar. He mentioned that he was afraid of audience eyestrain in a movie that long but has since learned that it isn't a big problem.

Very hopeful for Star Wars VII as well.

Cool! I'd like to see stronger 3D during the distance shots, which were mostly the only shots that paled for 3D in Avatar, the rest being very strong.

Originally Posted by Will21st

Just imagine if we get almost all-CGI movies in 48FPS 3D..... our eyeballs are gonna pop-out and heads will explode due to awesomeness!

48FPS is a watershed moment for 3D to me and as far as I'm concerned 24 is dead in the water.

HFR is great for 3D then? That's good to hear. But I still think there will be an audience for 24 and 48, just like 2D and 3D.

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Cool! I'd like to see stronger 3D during the distance shots, which were mostly the only shots that paled for 3D in Avatar, the rest being very strong.



HFR is great for 3D then? That's good to hear. But I still think there will be an audience for 24 and 48, just like 2D and 3D.

Have to agree. 24 FPS is the historical standard that has been imbedded in current society's psyche, has become classic in its scope and is persistently evolving into the state-of-the-art 3D format. 48 HFR is a present stepping-stone to 60 HFR, which is devisible by 24, making it forever-compatible-friendly. IMO, 120 HFR will become the classic standard of the future, given technologies easy reach forward, and which 24 FPS will be able to hold rightfully, Hollywood's silver-screen endearments.

Paul

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by Paul H

Have to agree. 24 FPS is the historical standard that has been imbedded in current society's psyche, has become classic in its scope and is persistently evolving into the state-of-the-art 3D format. 48 HFR is a present stepping-stone to 60 HFR, which is devisible by 24, making it forever-compatible-friendly. IMO, 120 HFR will become the classic standard of the future, given technologies easy reach forward, and which 24 FPS will be able to hold rightfully, Hollywood's silver-screen endearments.

Paul

I can see 48 fps definitely paving the way for future cinema. But I'll add that Computer animated films have been 30 frames per second for many years now, compared to 24 fps live action, and few people noticed unless someone told them. 48 is double the speed though, so it's a marked improvement in smoothness and life like speed of motion.

The biggest concern with 48 frames per second (and above)? Home video, and can Blu Ray's double sided 50 GB's handle 48 fps on one disc? Nevermind adding 3D MVC encoding on top of that.
The other concern is for filmmakers. 48 frames every second is twice the amount of current rendering and CGI processing over the current standard 24 frames per second. So unless computers get much faster at rendering, only the big studios will be able to afford 48 fps.

24 does give things a unique look, but I agree, it's all a matter of preference, opinion and style of the film's motion.

With Hobbit I's stunning HFR 48 3D presentation, I don't see any problems with Avatar 2's use of the frame rate.

[BozQ]

I don't think we will see HFR 3D on Blu-ray anytime soon. It requires a revision of current Blu-ray specifications. And even then, there's a chance a compromise had to be made with 720p resolution.

Anyway, 3D rendering in 48fps or not is not a huge issue with visual effects companies. Transformers Dark of the Moon is quite possibly the most taxing render I know, especially Driller Bot. 288 hours to render per frame per eye. Holy Crap!

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by BozQ

I don't think we will see HFR 3D on Blu-ray anytime soon. It requires a revision of current Blu-ray specifications. And even then, there's a chance a compromise had to be made with 720p resolution.

Anyway, 3D rendering in 48fps or not is not a huge issue with visual effects companies. Transformers Dark of the Moon is quite possibly the most taxing render I know, especially Driller Bot. 288 hours to render per frame per eye. Holy Crap!

Thanks for that info. They have probably a hundred rendering machines or more, working on each rendered frame in their big budget render farms. I wonder if hte 288 hours only took less than a day with the render farm, or 288 hours on one machine to render?

I agree that we won't be seeing 48 fps with 3D with Blu Ray even at 50 GB double sided. Just look at Lord of the Rings Extended Cut, one movie was about 3h45 minutes or so, and they had to split it onto two discs to maintain full quality. In 2D no less.

I'll gladly accept Avatar 2 and Hobbit I and II and III in 24 fps Blu Ray 3D, hopefully on one disc, but likely two (which disrupts the immersion in the movie when it's time to change the disc).

48 fps looks great though, even if it's not yet ready for home theater. Very life like speed of motion.

[Bluepeace]

Originally Posted by mredman

what do you mean?

I just got this and its the best 3D is have ever seen

I mean that I am happy that I didn't get this version....

Originally Posted by Will21st

Just imagine if we get almost all-CGI movies in 48FPS 3D.....

48 FPS is too slow. Really.

http://magazine.creativecow.net/arti...me-rate-cinema

I say bring on 120 fps.

[BozQ]

There was a discussion about bringing HFR 3D to BD. And there might be a way without revising the current specs.

Speed up 48 frames per second to 50fps @720p in either SBS, TAB or Interleave 3D encoding. Then use the consumer 3DTV to decode the image from there.

Of course, this is far from ideal. Losing resolution is one. And it requires quite a fair bit of know-how on the consumer's end. Which is not a very good thing.

I have a question though, is it a problem playing 720/50p video on American HDTV/3DTV?

[Nighteyes]

Somebody claimed that Cameron himself has ruled out the possibility of the extended cut/special edition of Avatar ever being released on 3D-BD. I find this very hard to believe. Or did I miss something?