where is the pop-out??

[almy]

Last week I got a 65" Panasonic VT50 3-D television that is being used with an OPPO BDP93 player with signals all going thru HDMI (along with Pioneer Elite a/v receiver). Very satisfied in general but see very little "in-your face" 3-D pop-out effects. Sad to say the only real in-your-face effect is on a 3-D porn disc (no, it is not a human organ - just a yardstick long twig that really seems to be inches away from my eyes). In AVATAR I do see those pimk spidery things seemingly hanging between me and the TV screen, but scenes in a variety of movies (AMAZING SPIDERMAN, TOP GUN, DARKEST HOUR) that one would expect to pop-out seem to come to the edge of screen and go no further. The effect of depth is fine, but I'm looking for things that make the viewer jump - think the paddle ball scene in the old HOUSE OF WAX. Am I doing something wrong, expecting too much or is this the way many 3-D releases are made? Thanks

[Spaulding]

Horror movies generally have more pop. I went from being disappointed in the lack of out of screen to being more interested in realistic 3D. Natural shape to things and space between them. Great 3D doesn't give you the theme park ride but makes it all seem normal and natural. Especially after you get used to it.

[koover]

Originally Posted by almy

Last week I got a 65" Panasonic VT50 3-D television that is being used with an OPPO BDP93 player with signals all going thru HDMI (along with Pioneer Elite a/v receiver). Very satisfied in general but see very little "in-your face" 3-D pop-out effects. Sad to say the only real in-your-face effect is on a 3-D porn disc (no, it is not a human organ - just a yardstick long twig that really seems to be inches away from my eyes). In AVATAR I do see those pimk spidery things seemingly hanging between me and the TV screen, but scenes in a variety of movies (AMAZING SPIDERMAN, TOP GUN, DARKEST HOUR) that one would expect to pop-out seem to come to the edge of screen and go no further. The effect of depth is fine, but I'm looking for things that make the viewer jump - think the paddle ball scene in the old HOUSE OF WAX. Am I doing something wrong, expecting too much or is this the way many 3-D releases are made? Thanks

I can't imagine or even begin to think if it would be enjoyable if it was nothing but constant pop out. 3d is all about depth with occasional pop to thrill the viewer into believing something is right in front of your face. Otherwise, it's all about the immersion.
Constant pop is for amusement park rides and not 3D movies. There are some that go the extreme, but those usually are pretty bad films, with the exception of both Sammy movies. If you want a lot of pop and thats all you're looking for, go to YesAsia and import both of these titles.

[Clinton3779]

Like previously stated go buy sammys 1 & 2, spy kids 3d game over, sharkboy & lavagirl, final destination 4 & 5, also lorax, Madagascar 3! Not the equipment but what you put in it! Resident evil 4 & 5 and silent hill revelation too!

[Operation Swordfish]

Pop out in your face movies are just the "gimmicky" 3D kind of movies. They are mainly in horror movies and kids animated movies, and I can't even think of any that are just constant pop-out after pop-out. A movie can't be taken seriously if it has loads of pop-outs. Current 3D is all about depth and the feeling of immersion.

But if its pop-outs you need check out Resident Evil Afterlife, Resident Evil Retribution, Silent Hill Revelation, the Final Destination movies, and definitely check out Yogi Bear 3D. Yogi is one of the few kiddie 3D movies I've seen but it does have quite a few great pop-outs.

Also, check out this thread. Its perfect for you. https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=171400

[PaulGo]

"Popout" is subject to the "window effect" that occurs when you watch some something through a frame. When you see the frame your brain thinks the object is beyond the frame or window so the brain minimizes the "popout". The way to avoid it with a 3D TV is to sit close enough to the frame of the TV is not really visible. When you go to an Imax theater they use a huge screen to maximize the 3D effect.

[RocShemp]

Hugo has a good deal of popout (sometimes to the extreme) as do the slomo sequences of Dredd.

[postulio]

Yeah youre not doing anything wrong, its just the current technology and theory surrounding 3D (depth and immersion, vs theme park thrills). Point in case: Every movie mentioned here with pop out is absolutely terrible and I cant imagine anyone spending more than $10 to see them, 3D or not.

One of the best 3D movies i have seen so far is Tintin, although without much popup, it has the best feeling of depth yet.

[RocShemp]

No love for Dredd or Hugo, postulio?

[postulio]

Originally Posted by RocShemp

No love for Dredd or Hugo, postulio?

OK i didnt mean those two... although i havent seen Dredd, Hugo was OK but not something i would rewatch, and was not my idea of a movie that needs to be in 3D.


I'm actually interested in Dredd, I hear very mixed reviews.

[RocShemp]

Originally Posted by postulio

OK i didnt mean those two... although i havent seen Dredd, Hugo was OK but not something i would rewatch, and was not my idea of a movie that needs to be in 3D.


I'm actually interested in Dredd, I hear very mixed reviews.

I can see Hugo not being to everyone's taste (the film does have an intentionally meandering pace) but I found the use of 3D fantastic.

As for Dredd, the 3D underwhelmed me when I saw it theatrically. Except for the slo-mo sequences, I swore the film was actually 2D. However, on BD the film looks like 3D through and through. The bulk of the film employes depth whilst the slo-mo sequences also add good amounts of popout (like during the scene when Anderson and Dredd raid that first apartment in Peach Trees).

[paul5939]

Dave in the Friday the 13th 3d post made a great point ....

he quotes

"I can tell you why this movie & the 3D movies from the early 80s work so well & have extreme pop out & the more recent 3D efforts of the last 10 years don't. It's because the old 3D cameras used a method where by the 2 left & right lenses turned inwards towards each other when an object was poked towards the screen. If you watch that Youtube video i posted in the side by side split screen view with the 3D on your TV turned off, you'll notice when an object is being poked at the screen, the left & right views of that object are coming towards the screen on an angle towards each other. This is what creates the extreme pop out effect.
Whereas now, the 3D rigs basically have the 2 lenses only move closer or further apart from each other, but don't turn inwards. This is mostly James Cameron's doing when he devised the new 3D rigs. Because he's actually stated before that he hated the old pop out 3D & found it intrusive (um yeah that's the whole point). Yeah awesome James, a 3D effect that's not even remotely 3D at all :7.
That coupled with the fact that most of the stuff now is not even shot in 3D, but post converted.

EDIT: Just to clarify, when i say the 3D in this movie worked well, i meant the theatrical version in its original 3D process. The anaglyph version on the deluxe edition DVD/Bluray is not an accurate reflection of the 3D effect utilized in this film. What ever was done to it by the studio for the DVD/Bluray to create the anaglyph is not correct. That & the fact that it was not filmed for anaglyph. "

[EricJ]

I've discovered there is one helpful indication on the case cover that lets you know how much or little pop-out will be in the movie--
For example, if you want to look for a movie with a lot of pop-out, you check the front of the case carefully, to see if it contains the word "Dreamworks".