Ever stop and think about......

[almy]

If they ever really perfect glasses-free 3-D televeisions, the only time you'd need 3-D glasses would be in a theatre?

[bhampton]

If they perfected glasses free tv,.. perhaps they would have also perfected glasses free theaters by that point.

I don't mind the glasses.

I should watch anaglyph occasionally so I can remember what people used to think was fun 3D. The new tech is worlds better!

[Villiam Hayes]

Originally Posted by bhampton

If they perfected glasses free tv,.. perhaps they would have also perfected glasses free theaters by that point.

I don't mind the glasses.

I should watch anaglyph occasionally so I can remember what people used to think was fun 3D. The new tech is worlds better!

Yeah I think that would be the case since theatre is at the forefront.

[Big3dfan]

Originally Posted by Villiam Hayes

Yeah I think that would be the case since theatre is at the forefront.

current glass-free technology relies on fancy version of lenticular screens and limit the no of sweet spots. There is no way theaters can scale this technology.

[AmrlKJaneway]

I hope they work out some way to standardize the effect first, and do away with the multiple opinions of whether the 3D in a movie looked good or not.

I also hope that when we get autostereoscopic televisions and theatres, it is not distracting to the 3D blind. This would do away with the 2D/3D session thing, everyone can go watch the same movie, and if your depth perception is no good anyway, then you simply won't see the depth in the movies, without having to sit there with glasses on (and probably copping more ghosting too, seen as your eyes won't line it up they way they're supposed to).

3D is great. But we need to stop and think about all those people that hate it or can't see it, or don't see the point of it sometimes, and try to understand why, and the industry needs to iron out the faults.

I offer no theories on to HOW to do these things I've mentioned, only that they must be done...

[bhampton]

I don't think it needs to be standardized any more than it already is.

Look at display types,.. CRT, LCD, Plasma, DLP, OLED, SXRD... And maybe a few I forgot. There is no standard but does that mean display devices are doomed?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by bhampton

I don't think it needs to be standardized any more than it already is.

Look at display types,.. CRT, LCD, Plasma, DLP, OLED, SXRD... And maybe a few I forgot. There is no standard but does that mean display devices are doomed?

agree

[Operation Swordfish]

Originally Posted by bhampton

I should watch anaglyph occasionally so I can remember what people used to think was fun 3D. The new tech is worlds better!

I think that when a lot of 3D haters hear anything about 3D, their minds are stuck in the era of fuzzy red/blue anaglyph pictures, and assume there have been no improvements to the glasses and 3D is not ready for mainstream because we still need glasses.

Having said that, sure I would like to have a glasses-free 3D TV. But there have been improvements in today's 3D by leaps and bounds so I am happy with the current technology and have no problem waiting for them to perfect the whole glasses-free 3D thing. I just don't know if it will be possible to do it for an entire movie theater audience.

Originally Posted by AmrlKJaneway

I hope they work out some way to standardize the effect first, and do away with the multiple opinions of whether the 3D in a movie looked good or not.

I really wish they could do this. I think that there is still a learning curve in filming 3D or rotoscoping 3D, and some have been able to pick it up better and faster than others so far.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by Operation Swordfish

I think that when a lot of 3D haters hear anything about 3D, their minds are stuck in the era of fuzzy red/blue anaglyph pictures, and assume there have been no improvements to the glasses and 3D is not ready for mainstream because we still need glasses.

Ohh, yeah--Despite the fact that no 50's movies ever showed in red/blue anaglyph, get a hater to joke about the current movies just because he doesn't want to pay the surcharge, and he'll think The Hobbit's "colors were all off".

(One would have to have actually USED the glasses to make the "They look funny and give me a headache!" complaint.)

Having said that, sure I would like to have a glasses-free 3D TV. But there have been improvements in today's 3D by leaps and bounds so I am happy with the current technology and have no problem waiting for them to perfect the whole glasses-free 3D thing. I just don't know if it will be possible to do it for an entire movie theater audience.

I remember the days when you had to worry about what exact center of the theater you were sitting, just so that the dual-projection polarized would actually work when viewed straight on and at the right distance. (Maybe it had no effect, I just remember never being in the right place, and rarely ever seeing a "popout moment" outside of the theme parks.)
From what I'm led to believe, I understand there's a similar concern when watching the current crop of glasses-free sets. Uh-uh, pal. I ain't goin' back there.
My active glasses not only helpfully darken the room/screen, they give each eye exactly what they should be seeing, and I can sit wherever I darn well please. To my experience, that's progress.

[Rainhurt]

There are auto 3D methods for 3D projection. Various people have filed for patterns for a few over the last few years. You just have to be seated in the right spots to see the 3D.

[AmrlKJaneway]

Originally Posted by bhampton

I don't think it needs to be standardized any more than it already is.

Look at display types,.. CRT, LCD, Plasma, DLP, OLED, SXRD... And maybe a few I forgot. There is no standard but does that mean display devices are doomed?

It was really the wrong word, cause I wasn't thinking of formats. In fact, I'd like to see 3D more places than the theatre and blu-ray, as there is still no 3D streaming or broadcast's down under.

I'm kinda talking about the image itself. And, with no technical knowledge on how any of this works beside the basics, I off no solution or theory as to how this could be achieved. I just dream of a world where everyone who can see, sees 3D in the same way, and there's no more of this; "It's the best/worst conversion I've ever seen!"

That said though, not everyone sees colour or detail the same anyway, so I might just be talking out of my arse.

[AmrlKJaneway]

Originally Posted by EricJ

Ohh, yeah--Despite the fact that no 50's movies ever showed in red/blue anaglyph, get a hater to joke about the current movies just because he doesn't want to pay the surcharge, and he'll think The Hobbit's "colors were all off".

(One would have to have actually USED the glasses to make the "They look funny and give me a headache!" complaint.)



I remember the days when you had to worry about what exact center of the theater you were sitting, just so that the dual-projection polarized would actually work when viewed straight on and at the right distance. (Maybe it had no effect, I just remember never being in the right place, and rarely ever seeing a "popout moment" outside of the theme parks.)
From what I'm led to believe, I understand there's a similar concern when watching the current crop of glasses-free sets. Uh-uh, pal. I ain't goin' back there.
My active glasses not only helpfully darken the room/screen, they give each eye exactly what they should be seeing, and I can sit wherever I darn well please. To my experience, that's progress.

Lol, you're so old, Eric!

Thanks for sharing your memories, my mental files always had the fact listed that 50's 3D screenings were anaglyph. I know 80's one's were, because when I got my anaglyph tattoo the tattooist (who was a Kiwi, so I dunno if they were screened differently throughout the world) got all nostalgic over the glasses.

It's great finding out you were wrong, and erasing that fact. It stems from that classic picture, you've seen it (I bet you're in it!), of all those fifties folk in the cinema wearing their 3D glasses. The picture is B&W and I always "saw" anaglyph glasses. Now, they are cardboard right? Using polarized lenses, and projected using two 35mm projectors, onto a silver screen?

I bet there was some 3D hate back then that stemmed from two other sources;
1. Bad 3D in the film source, from lazy directors who didn't notice a misalignment until the dailies screening, and gave up on re-shooting the scene.
2. Bad 3D in the cinema, from lazy projectionists who misaligned the PJs and didn't adjust the image when he/she realized it was wrong.

And I know you weren't a cinema going dude in the fifties (at least, I think... where's my calculator?), but you seem to know more about this stuff than I, the guy who judged 50's cinema from the B&W photo on the wall at McDonalds...

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by AmrlKJaneway

Thanks for sharing your memories, my mental files always had the fact listed that 50's 3D screenings were anaglyph. I know 80's one's were, because when I got my anaglyph tattoo the tattooist (who was a Kiwi, so I dunno if they were screened differently throughout the world) got all nostalgic over the glasses.

It's great finding out you were wrong, and erasing that fact. It stems from that classic picture, you've seen it (I bet you're in it!), of all those fifties folk in the cinema wearing their 3D glasses.

And those pop-cutesy folks who like to retro-colorize the LIFE photo to make the glasses red/blue.
50's films were all shown polarized in main city engagements, although some anaglyph red/blue prints were struck for some far-flung places that couldn't install the special reflective theater screen. Y'know, places way out in Australia, and like that.

(Although the most I know about it was from the US 80's revival of House of Wax. Which was in polarized.)

I bet there was some 3D hate back then that stemmed from two other sources;
1. Bad 3D in the film source, from lazy directors who didn't notice a misalignment until the dailies screening, and gave up on re-shooting the scene.
2. Bad 3D in the cinema, from lazy projectionists who misaligned the PJs and didn't adjust the image when he/she realized it was wrong.

Yep, five points: One of the factors that "killed" 3D at Warner was an early engagement of badly-misaligned projectionist-error showings of Dial M For Murder, that reportedly gave the audience "headaches", and was eventually folded.
http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/what-killed-3D
That led to the myth that 3D was a "flop" with the studios, although when the new widescreen formats like Cinerama and Cinemascope advertised themselves as "The new screen miracle you can see without glasses!", they had found a willing audience by that point.

[AmrlKJaneway]

Originally Posted by EricJ

And those pop-cutesy folks who like to retro-colorize the LIFE photo to make the glasses red/blue.
50's films were all shown polarized in main city engagements, although some anaglyph red/blue prints were struck for some far-flung places that couldn't install the special reflective theater screen. Y'know, places way out in Australia, and like that.

(Although the most I know about it was from the US 80's revival of House of Wax. Which was in polarized.)



Yep, five points: One of the factors that "killed" 3D at Warner was an early engagement of badly-misaligned projectionist-error showings of Dial M For Murder, that reportedly gave the audience "headaches", and was eventually folded.
http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/what-killed-3D
That led to the myth that 3D was a "flop" with the studios, although when the new widescreen formats like Cinerama and Cinemascope advertised themselves as "The new screen miracle you can see without glasses!", they had found a willing audience by that point.

Awesome! Cheers for all the information!

[3Dfan]

Originally Posted by Big3dfan

current glass-free technology relies on fancy version of lenticular screens and limit the no of sweet spots. There is no way theaters can scale this technology.

and yet somehow, they did exactly that in Russian movie theatres back in the 1950's.

While the American movie theatres of the time used the polarized system, the Russian movie theatres of the same time used the glasses-free lenticular system.