"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[Bobby Henderson]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Get me a CS4 license and I can whip something up for ya...

I said HAND DRAWN/PAINTED art, not computer generated art. If you don't have the talent and skills to draw or paint something by hand you shouldn't bust on guys like Drew Struzan who are great at it.

Also, anyone with good computer graphics talent could get by without the latest version of Photoshop to do good quality work. Open source applications like The Gimp and Inkscape can generate professional quality results -just not nearly as fast and efficient as Adobe's applications.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

I said HAND DRAWN/PAINTED art, not computer generated art. If you don't have the talent and skills to draw or paint something by hand you shouldn't bust on guys like Drew Struzan who are great at it.

So you're saying someone should be a great filmmaker to be a film critic?

A great chef to be a restaurant reviewer?

Struzan has done some great work, but some of it is hack and unoriginal. Translating publicity shots into a collage for a film poster isn't great art.

[Teazle]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Yes, the PS3 WILL deliver full 1920 x 1080 24p to EACH eye.

Thanks, that's good to know!

[Teazle]

Originally Posted by Icemage

Over the in PS3 forums here the prevailing information seems to be that the PS3 will output 1920x1080p48 (1080p/24fps x 2, so a 1020p24 stream for each eye) or 720p120 (720p/60fps x 2, 720p60 for each eye).

EDIT: Here, link and an image:

Without clicking through that or diving into those forums, first blush, I have doubts whether 3D HDTVs would understand the novelty signal 1920x1080p48. To my understanding that's nonstandard and not how 3D BD standalones work. According to the wiki no incoming signal at 48Hz is supported by HDMI 1.4.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI

Anyway, it scarcely matters; I'm very grateful to have it on good authority that one way or another "full 1080p to each eye" will happen on PS3.

[ronjones]

Originally Posted by Teazle

Without clicking through that or diving into those forums, first blush, I have doubts whether 3D HDTVs would understand the novelty signal 1920x1080p48. To my understanding that's nonstandard and not how 3D BD standalones work. According to the wiki no incoming signal at 48Hz is supported by HDMI 1.4. . . .

The 3 different formats listed on the screen shot in the post above are the ones defined by the HDMI 1.4a spec. for the "frame packing" 3D format. Frame Packing is the only full resolution 3D signal format defined by the HDMI 1.4a spec. and the only format required by the Blu-ray 3D specification for the 3D output signal format from BD 3D players. In the Frame Packing format both the right and left images, each at full resolution, are encoded into a "super frame" (my term for the 1920 x 2205 pixel frame used by Frame Packing). Thus for the 1080p/24 case each of the super frames (at a rate of 24 per second) includes a left and right full resolution 1920 x 1080 image. HERE is a good write-up on the Frame Packing format. The HDMI spec. does not define a required 3D signal format where the full resolution left and right images are output sequentially. Since each super frame used by the Frame Packing format contains two images some people on-line have referred to this format at 1080p/48, however this is not the official terminology used by the HDMI 1.4a spec.

[Bobby Henderson]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

So you're saying someone should be a great filmmaker to be a film critic?

A good film critic knows what he is talking about. You don't know what you're talking about when it comes to criticising illustration.

You don't appreciate the skill and talent required to draw or paint portraits by hand when you throw out an obviously ignorant comment about Photoshop filters. You don't understand the work process involved, all the client changes that constantly try to compromise the finished work and the tight deadlines. Illustrators like Drew Struzan, Bob Peak and Richard Amsel routinely overcame those challenges to produce a lot of great movie posters.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Struzan has done some great work, but some of it is hack and unoriginal. Translating publicity shots into a collage for a film poster isn't great art.

It's 100,000 times better than what's passing for movie poster "art" these days. Today, the publicity shots themselves are quickly and sometimes badly Photoshopped into a collage. Set the title lettering in Trajan. Call it a day.

[iceman]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

I think the problem with the posts that he's illuminating is that many 3D opponents want it not to be available for anyone. Given that you have the choice to participate in something that's 3D or not to, nobody is harming you. So far, every 3D release in theater has a flat offering in another theater. Additionally, built right into the 3D spec for blu-ray is a requirement that the same disc deliver a 2D presentation.

So yes, railing against an OPTION is seeking to deprive others of their own LIBERTY to do as THEY so CHOOSE.

Very well said. Now I happen to like golf, but if I didn't I wouldn't go to golf sites and tell the people there how much golf sucks, how the manufacturers are trying to cheat the consumers by selling (to me) useless clubs, balls, equipment etc. It doesn't make sense and it's bad manners. No one is forcing me to golf and buy golf equipment and at the same time I shouldn't try to stop others from golfing.

[Jeff Kleist]

Without clicking through that or diving into those forums, first blush, I have doubts whether 3D HDTVs would understand the novelty signal 1920x1080p48. To my understanding that's nonstandard and not how 3D BD standalones work. According to the wiki no incoming signal at 48Hz is supported by HDMI 1.4.

The PS3 would be producing 48 frames, that's what it means.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Blu2U

Mr. Penton.

I had recently put up a poll about when people would buy/adopt 3D technology. You actually got me interested in it months ago. What is your take on it?
Is it a "gimmick"...

Apparently, NASA doesn’t think so….
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/dai...ploration.html
(good link for Jeff to follow the work in progress..http://marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/)

B.T.W, Jim Cameron was on a panel with scientists (real ones, not screenshot types) over at Caltech in Pasadena last Tues. night.
http://today.caltech.edu/today/story...ory%5fid=44102

At the event, he mentioned that it might be fun to do and offer a 3D conversion of the Terminator films (esp. Terminator 2) and possibly Aliens.

[Jeff Kleist]

You think I don't read those sites Penton?

I hope he doesn't even try it. Instead, put the 3D footage for the T2 ride on the (you know it's coming) next T2 re-issue. Who cares if it doesn't make sense without the stage show

I seriously doubt Aliens would work well, it's just too dark for the computers to "grip" it

Filmmmakers need to focus less on how much they wish they'd shot old films in 3D, and concentrate on making great new ones. I wish Cameron would forget Avatar 2 and join up with Ridley Scott on the co-directing thing on new Alien movies they were planning as an attempt to get Fox to dump Alien vs Predator (they were wrong that an AvP movie was a bad idea. They were right that THIS AvP movie was a bad idea )

[wallendo]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

... So far, every 3D release in theater has a flat offering in another theater. ...

Unfortunately, this is not the case in smaller towns. Our local theatre, as well as the next nearest one 60 miles away, does not show movies on more than one screen at a time.

I wish theatres would provide glasses where both lenses have the same polarization for those who get 3D headaches. My wife gets them, and it limits our family movie experiences.

[Jeff Kleist]

This is correct. The flat screenings do not play everywhere, and are likely to become less common, especially with the ticket premium. "Headache glasses" certainly would be a good idea to pursue as this becomes more common

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

. So far, every 3D release in theater has a flat offering in another theater. .

Not true. Lots of members here have pointed out and complained of exactly the opposite. Which frankly, scares me.

If folks want 3D, cool, but please keep theatrical 2D as an option.

Edit: I see I was beaten to the punch. :-)

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well, I believe in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, whether it be related to 2D, 3D…. or anything else for that matter, and some peoples’ posting behavior obviously runs counter to that.

Hopefully, we don’t have an ‘incorrigible’ situation over there.

As an aside, I received a bunch of PMs about SCE’s FREE recent update firmware version (3.3), for owners of the Playstation 3, whom I would assume, 99% of which originally purchased the unit just for 2D viewing, so in essence, 3D capability is, or should be, considered icing on the cake for them, so to speak.

Anyway, I don’t speak regularly with the SCE division, but what I do know is that the recent PS3 update version 3.3 supports 3D gaming and streaming (yes it’s early). Gaming and streaming will typically be 720p, but 3D movies can be either 720p or 1080p and this fully complies with the Blu-ray spec. in other words, when the firmware is made available to play 3D movies, the PS3 will support 1080p.

Hey Penton, long time no see!

I can confirm that the PS3 supports 3D at resolutions up to 1080p and a framerate up to 60Hz, so 30 for each eye. It isn't able to do 1080p120, but that is a bit unrealistic anyway.

The Blu-ray spec is geared towards 1080p24 in each plane on 240Hz TVs which the PS3 is fully compatible with (well, as long as you have a 3D capable TV...). On the gaming side there is a handy little slide which explains everything in more detail, but the gist of it is 720p60 for most games built for 3D and ~ 600p30 for games originally in 720p. The last bit isn't on the slide, but it's supposed to be in between 480p and 720p depending on how well the game converted...

I'll be in LA this summer for a bit of fun an business, so it would be super awesome to meet up for drinks at some point!

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Maximus

Hey Penton, long time no see!

!

Uh.....who is your Avatar?

[Teazle]

Originally Posted by ronjones

The 3 different formats listed on the screen shot in the post above are the ones defined by the HDMI 1.4a spec. for the "frame packing" 3D format. Frame Packing is the only full resolution 3D signal format defined by the HDMI 1.4a spec. and the only format required by the Blu-ray 3D specification for the 3D output signal format from BD 3D players. In the Frame Packing format both the right and left images, each at full resolution, are encoded into a "super frame" (my term for the 1920 x 2205 pixel frame used by Frame Packing). Thus for the 1080p/24 case each of the super frames (at a rate of 24 per second) includes a left and right full resolution 1920 x 1080 image. HERE is a good write-up on the Frame Packing format. The HDMI spec. does not define a required 3D signal format where the full resolution left and right images are output sequentially. Since each super frame used by the Frame Packing format contains two images some people on-line have referred to this format at 1080p/48, however this is not the official terminology used by the HDMI 1.4a spec.

I have read this post twice and I think you are agreeing with me. Like I suspected (post #13674 above), the PS3 will not have to output anything at 48Hz. It will draw larger frames, 2205x1920 including the blanking lines, and output these at 24Hz, exactly like the 3D-capable standalones. So this is called "Frame Packing".

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Uh.....who is your Avatar?

Susan Coffey.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by maximus

susan coffey.

ty

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Maximus

Susan Coffey.

In a word....yummy

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

You think I don't read those sites Penton?

I hope he doesn't even try it. Instead, put the 3D footage for the T2 ride on the (you know it's coming) next T2 re-issue. Who cares if it doesn't make sense without the stage show

I seriously doubt Aliens would work well, it's just too dark for the computers to "grip" it

Filmmmakers need to focus less on how much they wish they'd shot old films in 3D, and concentrate on making great new ones...

Well, that (new films) is, and has been for awhile, what is getting the primary attention and time from filmmakers (the conversions of old films being more ‘supplemental’ in nature) and that goes for other titans in the industry as well, like Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson for this (TinTin)…http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar...a-tintinfilm22

For you techies out there, this is a decent update as to how they (Weta) are advancing the state of the art…
http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/s...the-human-face