Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[Jeff Kleist]

The Insider is the one Michael Mann film I didn't regret paying to see in the theater.

[Mr. Cinema]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

The Insider is the one Michael Mann film I didn't regret paying to see in the theater.

Is that even on the radar? I'd be optimistic if it was from any other studio, but unfortunately, Disney owns the rights and we know how much they care about live action catalog.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Mr. Cinema

Shakespeare in Love won over Saving Private Ryan.

American Beauty won over The Insider. Sadly, the latter was 0 for 7 on Oscar night. A real shame.

Originally Posted by garyrc

I thought that Saving Private Ryan was the same year as Shakespeare in Love, and the latter won Best Picture, while Ryan got Director. American Beauty was another year, I think. I think the Academy got it about right by rewarding the director for incredible battle scenes in Ryan, but giving Best Picture to Shakespeare, which was a masterpiece.

You're right, corrected.

And it was better than SIL.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by garyrc

Do any of you know if anyone in the industry is working on glasses-free 3D, and, indeed, if there is any way this can be done practically?

That is the rub. The answer to the first is yes, there are many that are "working" on it. The issue is that, IMHO, the answer to the second is not for movie (TV/sports) watching at home. There are two main technologies parallax barrier and lenticular lens. In the end they both do the same action, block images at given angles while letting you see the other ones. Then there are two applications of those techs right now, autostereoscopic and multi-view autostereoscopic. The first uses two views and so tends to be much more limited, if your left eye is not where it has to be and the right one is not where it needs to be then you don't see what you need to see (could be 2D, could be reversed) and so they are extremely limited in viewing position. Multi-view, tries to get around it, instead of just a left and a right image there are many images. This image from Epson explains it a bit better.


in this example instead of 2 images there are 8 and in this example the angle slices are so small that one of them falls between so the person in the example sees 6 and 4 but if he bent his head a bit or leaned on a friend he could get 5&3 or 7&5. This is good for specific tasks (gaming, medicine.... any application where you have a virtual hologram) But this has many issues for movies in real life here are some of the BIG ones

1) the # of views needs to match the display, if you have 6 views and the display has 8 like this example then what do you put in the other two, if you have 8 and the display has 8 but they are not the same 8 (i.e. if a person sees 6&3 or 5&4). That is why gaming and medicine can be interesting, If a computer builds a virtual 3D environment and has the HP then it can create all the exact views that are needed for the display.
2) 3D movies are filmed in stereoscopic vision, two images, in this example if we assume 4 & 6 where the ones filmed then 1,2,3,5,7 & 8 don't exist and studios are not ready to add many other views, there is also a BW/capacity issue, if you have 8 views it will obviously take up more space then 2 views which take up more space then 1 view
3) A movie is a single perspective, you don't want a different image and experience if you are sitting at seat that sees 1-3 instead of 6-8. Imagine in a movie a guy is hiding behind some boxes or a column or a tree, the person seeing 8-6 can see him a bit because of the slight difference in angle while the guy in that seas 1-3 does not see him because the thing he is hiding behind is in the way.
4) each view needs pixels for it, so an 8 view display like the example above that would be 1080p would need to be 1080x15360 (=8x1920) and pixels add to manufacturing cost.

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by merrick97

I feel it is overrated. It got a lot of praise (ala many people saying it should win best picture), but I got very annoyed while watching the film because I felt that while watching that all it did was scream for an oscar. It was a film that was just begging to win the best picture award.

A Beautiful Mind is also a film that was made for the sole purpose of winning an oscar. Many people actually fell for it. However, I was happy for Ron Howard for getting it, since he did deserve to win for Apollo 13, which lost to Braveheart.

Was RtP a bad film? Not at all, I was just negatively rubbed by that impression I got while watching it.

It did deserve the award for best cinematography. I will say that.

I haven't seen it in quite some time so maybe my opinion will have changed.

I think it should've at least been given a 'best movie' or 'best director' nomination. And yes, it should've won over Chicago. But then again, a lot of movies should've beaten that one .

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by garyrc

Do any of you know if anyone in the industry is working on glasses-free 3D, and, indeed, if there is any way this can be done practically?

Garyrc,
Yes, in fact, several glasses-free 3D TVs were actually on display at the past NAB (based on both lenticular and parallax-barrier technology). The fact is, you’re looking at a minimum of 5 years out before they become a viable consumer option and many people (who work in the business) believe that timeline could be closer to 10 years.

See Anthony P’s fine post above. All I’ll add is that a BIG problem with that technology is that it has a very, very narrow *sweet* viewing zone. By that, I mean the same quality image isn’t even seen by the viewer sitting right next to you !

I guess there is an upside to that though, if you’re single and dating. Meaning, your date has to virtually sit in your lap to get the same quality 3D effect.

But, I guess that ultimately would be counterproductive to actually watching the content on the glasses-free display because it would probably invoke a real world 3D effect which would then lead to you not watching the dang thing in the first place and tending to *business*.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Garyrc,
Yes, in fact, several glasses-free 3D TVs were actually on display at the past NAB (based on both lenticular and parallax-barrier technology). The fact is, you’re looking at a minimum of 5 years out before they become a viable consumer option and many people (who work in the business) believe that timeline could be closer to 10 years.

See Anthony P’s fine post above. All I’ll add is that a BIG problem with that technology is that it has a very, very narrow *sweet* viewing zone. By that, I mean the same quality image isn’t even seen by the viewer sitting right next to you !

I guess there is an upside to that though, if you’re single and dating. Meaning, your date has to virtually sit in your lap to get the same quality 3D effect.

But, I guess that ultimately would be counterproductive to actually watching the content on the glasses-free display because it would probably invoke a real world 3D effect which would then lead to you not watching the dang thing in the first place and tending to *business*.

Penton, that imparts a new meaning to "sweet spot" in regards to 3D... and might cause me to find the pop-up effect less of a gimmick after all... and actually quite a welcome distraction...

[ClaytonMG]

For the sync issue:

What version: U.S.

What Blu-ray Player: Sony PS3 Slim 250gb

What Receiver: Yamaha HTR-5990

Decoding internally or bitstream: Internally

Connnection: HDMI to Receiver, HDMI from Receiver to TV.

Timecode: 2:18:59 (on the DTS DVD, it's at 2:18:49 according to my BDP-S1). With the DTS DVD, the sound of the shots clearly sync up to the flashes from the gun fire. On the Blu-ray, the sound does not match the flashes. Pausing, using the pop-up menu, none of it seems to effect it.

[DenonCI]

Clayton,

I'll test that time stamp on both of my systems.

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

For the sync issue:

What version: U.S.

What Blu-ray Player: Sony PS3 Slim 250gb

What Receiver: Yamaha HTR-5990

Decoding internally or bitstream: Internally

Connnection: HDMI to Receiver, HDMI from Receiver to TV.

Timecode: 2:18:59 (on the DTS DVD, it's at 2:18:49 according to my BDP-S1). With the DTS DVD, the sound of the shots clearly sync up to the flashes from the gun fire. On the Blu-ray, the sound does not match the flashes. Pausing, using the pop-up menu, none of it seems to effect it.

If this is a widespread problem Paramount has only a 50/50 success rate with their Sapphire series titles--

Braveheart and Forrest Gump great

Gladiator and now Saving Private Ryan? not so great

[wallendo]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

...

See Anthony P’s fine post above. All I’ll add is that a BIG problem with that technology is that it has a very, very narrow *sweet* viewing zone. By that, I mean the same quality image isn’t even seen by the viewer sitting right next to you !

...

Could this technolgu be modified so that you can watch a good movie while your significant other thinks you are watching a chick flick with her?

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

Clayton,

I'll test that time stamp on both of my systems.

That'd be great. I will say it wasn't the easiest thing to detect. I had headphones on when testing just to make sure it wasn't just my imagination. But after seeing how it sounds on the DVD where the shots are clearly in sync with the flashes, I realized the sound was not matching up on the Blu-ray. With dialogue, it's much, much harder to tell IMO.

[garyrc]

Thanks to all for all of your informative (and sometimes funny) responses to my 3D question!

On another topic, since somebody mentioned Chicago, when I saw it in the theater, I was shocked at how constricted the high frequency response seemed (e.g., how cymbal crashes didn't have much shimmer, how their was so little "air" in the soundtrack) and although there might have even been a slight boost at 4 to 8K Hz, it sounded very rolled off above 8 or 10K. I assumed it was the theater, but worried that something had finally happened to my high frequency hearing (although the traffic sounded just fine on my way home). I put on a couple of CDs at home, followed by a movie musical, and they also sounded fine. When the DVD came out, I actually bought the thing to convince myself that the problem was the theater's sound system, and the DVD was just as constricted sounding and high overtone shy as the film in the theater! Other musicals sound great (and always have) on my system. I haven't heard it on Blu. Have others had this experience with Chicago?

[Vincent Pereira]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

The Insider is the one Michael Mann film I didn't regret paying to see in the theater.

This surprises me, since THE INSIDER is a pre-DI Super-35 'Scope movie and as we all know, all pre-DI Super-35 'Scope movies looked like crap in theaters

Vincent

[MerrickG]

Jeff,

I love ME2 so far, but Im not a fan of planet resource probing. It takes too damn long even with the scan upgrades.


Is it possible to get the full level 30 on 1 playthrough. The game seems to be moving rather quickly.

[Show spoiler]I just got my first 4 squad members and completed the planet with the cannon and have now been assigned to get 3 more squad members as well as take on loyalty missions

How far am I?

[Jeff Kleist]

This surprises me, since THE INSIDER is a pre-DI Super-35 'Scope movie and as we all know, all pre-DI Super-35 'Scope movies looked like crap in theaters

I've never seen a Mann film that didn't look like crap in the theater, so that's probably why I didn't notice And not all POST-DI Super35 look good, it's only recently with the new stocks that are DI optimized that things started getting better

I love ME2 so far, but Im not a fan of planet resource probing. It takes too damn long even with the scan upgrades.

No one likes it, something BioWare has acknowleged They made a cool little flowchart about their goals and what worked and what didn't. I suggest just looking around the net for planet guides so you only mine the ones that are worth it.

I busted level 30 on 1 play with the Zareed DLC, but not Kasumi (cause it wasn't out at the time). I also started at level 5 or 6 from the ME1 import

Maybe 25%-ish. I did virtually all the missions and I think my time was either 32 or 36.

[jaaguir]

Jeff, is Warner going to release some of Universal's catalog now? "The getaway"(1994) was announced as a double-feature for July, and it seems "Timecop" has been announced for September. Why is this?

Thanks,

P.D.: And it seems that Lionsgate will continue releasing Paramount's B-catalog (there are July releases at least), despite Paramount having started releasing their own catalog again (but more A-list). I guess titles like "Nick of time", "Congo" and "The ghost and the darkness" cannot be far behind...

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

No one likes it, something BioWare has acknowleged They made a cool little flowchart about their goals and what worked and what didn't. I suggest just looking around the net for planet guides so you only mine the ones that are worth it.

I busted level 30 on 1 play with the Zareed DLC, but not Kasumi (cause it wasn't out at the time). I also started at level 5 or 6 from the ME1 import

Maybe 25%-ish. I did virtually all the missions and I think my time was either 32 or 36.

Is there more than enough resources to do all the upgrades? I dont want to be caught in a position where I am having to go back to every planet just to find every last little bit of resources just so they can be depleted. Ive read that upgrades and loyalty are necessary to

[Show spoiler]survive the suicide mission

Speaking of that

[Show spoiler]how hard is it to keep all the squad members alive for the final mission? Im playing on casual. I dont have the patience for hardcore or insanity, cuz I found that I would get killed FAR too often having to babysit my squad

[Jeff Kleist]

Yes and I didn't have trouble

[ClaytonMG]

Just a heads up, I tested the disc on my BDP-S1 (bitstreaming the DTS core) and got the same results.

And also, the DTS DVD does have the same time stamp as the Blu-ray, but my BDP-S1 screws up the timestamps of DVD's apparently. So it's 2:18:58-59 on both the DVD and Blu-ray.