Inception (2010) Never in 3D

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

No they can't. They can look good, but not as good as native 3d. To quote James Cameron, a good conversion is more like 2.8D. Alice in wonderlands cgi was all done in real 3d, not converted, and that part of the film looked great, the converted elements where very average. I'm not against conversions, but i'm against converting when you could have shot in 3d to begin with.

I mostly agree. Probably the best conversion I have seen was the trailer for Chronicles of Narnia Voyage of the Dawn Treader. It was very very close to as good as the Native 3D movie that followed.

Theoretically a conversion can match a Native 3D but it rarely if ever happens because of time and money constraints. Even the best conversions haven't quite matched Native movies. But Alice in Wonderland came close.

Ive said repeatedly on this forum that I think shooting a movie in 3D is the best option when avalible. However I totally disagree with your statement that there have never been a "decent" conversion. Cameron has a bias towards Native 3D because he has patents on the Fusion Camera. And even he admitts that conversions can look more then decent if done right.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

I mostly agree. Probably the best conversion I have seen was the trailer for Chronicles of Narnia Voyage of the Dawn Treader. It was very very close to as good as the Native 3D movie that followed.

Theoretically a conversion can match a Native 3D but it rarely if ever happens because of time and money constraints. Even the best conversions haven't quite matched Native movies. But Alice in Wonderland came close.

Ive said repeatedly on this forum that I think shooting a movie in 3D is the best option when avalible. However I totally disagree with your statement that there have never been a "decent" conversion. Cameron has a bias towards Native 3D because he has patents on the Fusion Camera. And even he admitts that conversions can look more then decent if done right.

I didn't say it couldn't look good, I said it couldn't look as good. You can't create what is not there, hence things shot in 3d will look better then even the best conversion, ceteris paribus.

[Batman Begins]

I don't think Nolan would do it.

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Batman Begins

I don't think Nolan would do it.

Nolan on 3D

“3D I think is an interesting development in movies or the resurgence of 3D. It’s something we’re looking at and watching. There are certain limitations of shooting in 3D. You have to shoot on video, which I’m not a fan of. I like shooting on film. And so then you’re looking at post-conversion processes which are moving forward in exciting ways.”

"We did tests on "Inception" to look at the post conversion process, and they worked very well. It's quite easy to do, in fact. But it takes a little time, and we didn't have the time to do it to the standard that I would have been happy."

Judging by his statements on the issue Nolan hardly seems like 3Ds biggest fan but I don't see him opposed to it either. Seems like had Nolan had more time Inception would have had a 3D option. Nolan was right to drop it to avoid a Clash of the Titans fiasco

[Dase]

I hope they leave well enough alone. This movie was not meant for 3D. If Nolan does something in 3D, he will take the time to do it correctly, not a post production patchwork job on an already perfect film. My .02...

[Hale-Bopp]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

I didn't say it couldn't look good, I said it couldn't look as good. You can't create what is not there, hence things shot in 3d will look better then even the best conversion, ceteris paribus.

Exactly why conversions should not be made.

[Tech-UK]

I do not agree with these 2D-3D conversions, no matter how good the algorithms are to produce these presentations. Prime example;

[Show spoiler]Clash of the Titans .

I'm not totally against 3D, especially if the film was shot natively in 3D or is an animated film, i.e. UP (Great in 3D). Please leave this great film alone and bring on the blu-ray .

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Tech-UK

I do not agree with these 2D-3D conversions, no matter how good the algorithms are to produce these presentations. Prime example;

[Show spoiler]Clash of the Titans .

I'm not totally against 3D, especially if the film was shot natively in 3D or is an animated film, i.e. UP (Great in 3D). Please leave this great film alone and bring on the blu-ray .

Inception is coming to 2D Blu-Ray in December and any possible 3D version released later will have a 2D option for sure. So I don't see the big deal. Even if this 3D conversion is crap in the mold of Clash of the Titans the 2D version will always be avalible and will always survive. So the way I see it we have nothing to lose but alot to gain from the conversion process.

[Hale-Bopp]

If a 2D conversion looks inferior to native 3D film processes, then what have we gained?

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Hale-Bopp

If a 2D conversion looks inferior to native 3D film processes, then what have we gained?

Even if it won't quite match native 3D there is still much to be gained. It can be a nice computer enhancement. No different then any other visual enhancement added after shooting.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Hale-Bopp

Exactly why conversions should not be made.

I'm not against it if proper time is taken to have good results, and the option of shotting in 3d wasn't available at the time. However the option to shoot in 3d is now available, so any film that decides to convert instead of shot nativly I am against.

[Lovemy3D]

Had a great lucid sex dream last night, in the middle of a crowded restaurant.
Just one of the many benefits of lucid dreaming. Complete sexual freedom. Ha ha.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Lovemy3D

Had a great lucid sex dream last night, in the middle of a crowded restaurant.
Just one of the many benefits of lucid dreaming. Complete sexual freedom. Ha ha.

If that's the best you can do with a lucid dream you need help.

[Lovemy3D]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

If that's the best you can do with a lucid dream you need help.

Lol. No, that's far from the best. And something I don't use it for that often. Because I see it as kind of a waist after putting so much work into inducing them. But there are times when it just is the thing to do, and can be a hell of a good time.

If you are a guy, you can't tell me that if you had your pick of literally any hot female you can see around you, or even summon if you have the skill to summon a particular person you want. That you wouldn't be giving in to the temptation from time to time. Especially since your body is naturally aroused during REM sleep. Trust me, you would. If not, there must be something wrong with you lol.

For me, it's actually just the feeling of being in a dream completely aware that it's a dream, and the sense of absolute freedom that you simply can not experience anywhere else. That, in combination with some of the most intensely beautiful imagery you could ever see is what has me so addicted to it.