3D and 2D on the same disc

[HD Goofnut]

Who supports this and who doesn't? Please vote and post your opinions.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Who supports this and who doesn't? Please vote and post your opinions.

Would help if you created a poll.

[nolfoc]

ha yea HD a poll is missing anyways i am against this.. i hate 3D and hated that Dredd came in 3D only.. i hope this in't a trend

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

Would help if you created a poll.

It's up.

[KilloWertz]

I don't support it. Even though I loved Dredd and paid $18.99 for it, I flushed it down the toilet when I realized there wasn't a 2D disc...

[Show spoiler]No, I'm not serious.

[madlost1]

No problem with it. It keeps the cost down especially if it's the only blu sku available. And a lot cheaper for future proofing.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

My worry is that PQ/AQ suffers for both versions when they're crammed on the same disc.

I think the silliest thing happened with Resident Evil: Retribution. The 2D-only disc had the movie and Bonus Features on one disc.

The 3D version had 3D and 2D on one disc and a second disc with Bonus Features.

If Sony had to use two discs anyway, why not keep the 3D and 2D versions separate? As it is, they had to create three different discs for this movie.

A) 2D & Bonus Features on same disc

B) 3D/2D disc

C) Bonus Features disc

If they had simply made a 3D only disc, they would've had only two discs.

A) 2D & Bonus Features on same disc

B) 3D-only disc

[poke smot]

hate it on the same disc. im less likely to lend it to friends (ones i trust with my blus), and there is still a bad taste in my mouth from underworld awakening.

[nagysaudio]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong...

When 2D is selected, the left eye is displayed on the screen. The right eyes does not have as much information and only takes up a fraction of disc space. Therefore picture quality should never take a hit.

Avatar being the prime example, as both the 2D and 3D versions are identical.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by poke smot

hate it on the same disc. im less likely to lend it to friends (ones i trust with my blus), and there is still a bad taste in my mouth from underworld awakening.

Yeah, I decided to stick with the 2D only release of Underworld Awakening after Sony botched the 2D version that came with the 3D release.

[GamerBoy14]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

My worry is that PQ/AQ suffers for both versions when they're crammed on the same disc.

I think the silliest thing happened with Resident Evil: Retribution. The 2D-only disc had the movie and Bonus Features on one disc.

The 3D version had 3D and 2D on one disc and a second disc with Bonus Features.

If Sony had to use two discs anyway, why not keep the 3D and 2D versions separate? As it is, they had to create three different discs for this movie.

A) 2D & Bonus Features on same disc

B) 3D/2D disc

C) Bonus Features disc

If they had simply made a 3D only disc, they would've had only two discs.

A) 2D & Bonus Features on same disc

B) 3D-only disc

I couldn't agree more. As it currently stands, I don't mind, but if trends continue like you pointed out, then I'm going to really hate studios decisions in doing this.

[tylerdurden10]

Originally Posted by madlost1

No problem with it. It keeps the cost down especially if it's the only blu sku available. And a lot cheaper for future proofing.

My thoughts exactly

[unsung122212]

I don't think that there are two versions of the film on the disc. It is my understanding that you have the 2d that has the a separate file that gives us the 3d effect with it. So if some if doesn't have 3d TV or and 3d player than the part the gives us that effect is just ignored when playing. The file size is around 30gb, to big for two versions to fit on Blu-ray Disc. My only beef with not having a 2d only disc is that, like how some have been posting about the Dredd movie, the special treatment done to the film to help give best 3d effects is encoded into the 2d part of the film and it looks different and for some a turn off. I would like a film that is cropped for 2d playback and not 3d that is, in essence, scaled down to 2d when watching it in 2d version.

[Villiam Hayes]

I voted for 'no preference' which is the case as long as quality isn't compromised.

[Whirlygig]

I didn't think a true 2D and 3D on the same disc was possible (or at least I didn't think it was something they're doing now)?

I know you can watch a 3D disc in "2D", but I thought doing that generally causes anomalies including black space to one side due to the fact that it's only showing the frames meant for one of your eyeballs...and also that everything would be slightly shifted for that eyeball as opposed to an actual 2D flattening of the full image.

That belief of mine, perhaps incorrect, is why until now I have only bought 3D releases that include a separate true 2D disc -- I was assuming any single-disc 3D edition would only play in "simulated" 2D.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by Whirlygig

I didn't think a true 2D and 3D on the same disc was possible (or at least I didn't think it was something they're doing now)?

I know you can watch a 3D disc in "2D", but I thought doing that generally causes anomalies including black space to one side due to the fact that it's only showing the frames meant for one of your eyeballs...and also that everything would be slightly shifted for that eyeball as opposed to an actual 2D flattening of the full image.

That belief of mine, perhaps incorrect, is why until now I have only bought 3D releases that include a separate true 2D disc -- I was assuming any single-disc 3D edition would only play in "simulated" 2D.

I think this problem appeared when someone used screencaps from the Avengers 3D disc, and it worried a lot of people that the 2D disc would look like that. Turns out the 2D is fine. This is why 3D and 2D encodes need to be separate!

[bam777]

I like them on separate discs, but it seems that 3D Blu-ray's that are on the same disc seem to be a bit cheaper. So if having them on the same saves me some extra money then it's all good by me. Considering how many movies I buy I could always use the extra savings.

I just recently watched The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl on 3D Blu-ray that had 2D on the same disc and the 3D and 2D both looked fantastic so I don't think it really decreases the quality, and if it does I didn't see it.

[BJKH]

I could honestly care less about this. I mean, what's the big deal? As long as you get the movie in your preferred format, why does it matter? Even if the picture quality suffers from 2D and 3D being on the same disc, at least you have the movie to watch. If you really love movies then the picture quality shouldn't matter that much.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by BJKH

I could honestly care less about this. I mean, what's the big deal? As long as you get the movie in your preferred format, why does it matter? Even if the picture quality suffers from 2D and 3D being on the same disc, at least you have the movie to watch. If you really love movies then the picture quality shouldn't matter that much.

It is January 10, 2013 in Texas right now.

10 days into the new year, you have already Failed the Mother of All 2013 Fails.

[Villiam Hayes]

Originally Posted by BJKH

I could honestly care less about this. I mean, what's the big deal? As long as you get the movie in your preferred format, why does it matter? Even if the picture quality suffers from 2D and 3D being on the same disc, at least you have the movie to watch. If you really love movies then the picture quality shouldn't matter that much.

Quite the opposite I think....and take that Xmas hat off,it make's you look like a fool.

[Show spoiler]