The Polar Express 3D Blu-ray (2004) [Region Free]

[Gogul1]

Is this coming to uk? I'm wishing bluray.com put uk release info on if known. Great film will be good in 3d

[dirkblack]

Originally Posted by Gogul1

Is this coming to uk? I'm wishing bluray.com put uk release info on if known. Great film will be good in 3d

Do you know what, it's not, my previous post was a mistake, i meant to post it in the Alice in Wonderland thread, My apologies.

However Polar Express is multi region and can be imported here.

http://dvdworldusa.com/shopexd.asp?id=65380

I am sure it can be gotten cheaper though.

[Metric]

Im sure some of us US members can help getting things to our UK members at more reasonable prices?

[that1guystudios]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

Not true. Edging around objects in 3D is caused by a lack of proper aliegnment between the two eye streams. Displaying only one of the streams will not have edgement. 2D extraed Blu-Rays look great. Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs bested the HD broadcast and in my opinon looked like a fantastic 2D Blu-Ray even when extracted from a 3D version

Actually it is true. Compare the 2D version of Clash of the Titans vs a single eye view from the 3D version of Clash of the Titans. The 3D with only one eye has artifacts galore and smeared lines around fast moving objects. Alice in Wonderland's 3D version is the same, but not quite as bad.

Only computer animated films will look almost identical, but there are still small differences in each eye. Disney even posted on their new 3D website stating that the reason they keep each encode on a separate disc is to ensure the best experience for each version.

[that1guystudios]

Polar Express has had a pretty significant price drop a couple of places. When I checked yesterday it was on sale at Amazon and Best Buy for $26.99. Not bad for 3D title!

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by that1guypictures

Actually it is true. Compare the 2D version of Clash of the Titans vs a single eye view from the 3D version of Clash of the Titans. The 3D with only one eye has artifacts galore and smeared lines around fast moving objects. Alice in Wonderland's 3D version is the same, but not quite as bad.

Only computer animated films will look almost identical, but there are still small differences in each eye. Disney even posted on their new 3D website stating that the reason they keep each encode on a separate disc is to ensure the best experience for each version.

Well all I can really say on the matter is that Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs looked great in extracted 2D.

Those artifacts are probably side effects of the conversion process

That post on Disney's website is marketing BS

[Jeff Kleist]

I'd say it's more insurance that they don't have a disc that's incompatible iwth a lot of 2D players out there.

[snappahead]

I was just at BB and there was an empty spot on the shelf with a tag for 3D BD Polar Express. The price was $39.99. What was this? Anyone know? If it was the real 3D version they jumped the gun on release...but it also means that it sold out quick with a price tag of $40.

[ckenisell]

Originally Posted by snappahead

I was just at BB and there was an empty spot on the shelf with a tag for 3D BD Polar Express. The price was $39.99. What was this? Anyone know? If it was the real 3D version they jumped the gun on release...but it also means that it sold out quick with a price tag of $40.

Or, it could be the placeholder for when it actually gets released.

[snappahead]

Originally Posted by ckenisell

Or, it could be the placeholder for when it actually gets released.

Nah, this was on the new release rack next to the other new stuff. My BB doesn't do placeholder advertising. I'll check again in a day or two and see if it's been re-stocked or try to find out what the deal is.

[dcprules]

In that Best Buy magazine they have out every month at the stores, The Polar Express 3D was listed as coming out yesterday. I figured it was a typo but will now swing by on my way home from work to see. This was awesome in 3D so I'd be more than willing to buy it now at a slight premium.

[Badboyztn]

Originally Posted by snappahead

I was just at BB and there was an empty spot on the shelf with a tag for 3D BD Polar Express. The price was $39.99. What was this? Anyone know? If it was the real 3D version they jumped the gun on release...but it also means that it sold out quick with a price tag of $40.

You may want to check Walmart...

http://www.walmart.com/ip/14972801

[snappahead]

What does that have to do with BB?

[Badboyztn]

Nothing ... Just relaying information to those that want to save a few bucks.

[Blu-News]

Originally Posted by HDEyes

I don't understand this being a 2 BD set, with one disc the 3-D version and the other the 2-D. I thought that all 3-D blu's are backwards compatible with any BD player. I see the same is happening with "Christmas Carol" and that will have a seprate version in 2-D.

All 3D Blu-ray discs CAN be backwards compatible, however studios are not actually doing things this way. Disney's upcoming release of 'A Christmas Carol' includes separate 2D and 3D discs. If you do not have a 3D television and 3D Blu-ray player, the disc will automatically recognize that upon initially loading and will tell you that one device or the other is not detected. So those who think of selling the 2D disc, but don't have a 3D setup will not have the option of watching a 2D version of the film on the 3D disc. It is a smart move.

[Jeff Kleist]

The seperate 3D discs come down to several factors

1- Compatibility. The PS3's handicaps when it comes to 3D requires them to forgo all of Blu-ray's bells and whistles, most of them are even avoiding any kind of popup menu, PiP or other extras (just a "home" key). Also, there have not been wide consumer tests of 3D discs in 2D players. While it works in the lab, as we all know it doesn't always work out that way in the real world, especially when you get into the people that bought the bargain basement decks. Who wants to risk a major holiday title on less than a sure bet?
2- Space- the extra 10-15GB that 3D versions need on the disc kills the room for the above bonus material. The bonus of course is that most movies with modern compression fit just fine without much compromise into a full 50GB. Personally I'd feel more comfortable with Avatar split across 2 discs, which it very well might when the extended version hits Blu 3D down the line.

No one I've talked to has ever mentioned people selling or giving away the 2D version as a factor. It's all about making sure the movie fits comfortably and trying to make sure it works the first time out of the box without firmware updates, which for some older players may never come. The big push for 3D still isn't till next year when we'll have TVs comfortably below the $2000 mark. Next Christmas will also likely be the last for the exclusives (there may be a few "early" ones like Sony and Disney did)

Actually it is true. Compare the 2D version of Clash of the Titans vs a single eye view from the 3D version of Clash of the Titans. The 3D with only one eye has artifacts galore and smeared lines around fast moving objects. Alice in Wonderland's 3D version is the same, but not quite as bad.

At least with Clash, I would chalk that up to the shoddy 3D conversion they did (assuming we're not talking about blocking and other such compression related artifacts). We're definately well into the learning curve right now as far as figuring out MVC encoding, and few people have a lot of experience at it yet. I figure by the time theres 10 or so titles out from each studio, the compressionists will have figured out the kinks. Based on conversations I've had with software engineers and compressionists, I fully expect that 3D versions will be sold in 2D/3D combo packs for the forseeable future

[ckenisell]

Wow Jeff. Thanks for posting that. It all certainly makes sense.

[Blu-News]

Well of course, those are both very obvious reasons. I am just stating the 3D disc requires a 3D Blu-Ray player and 3DTV to load up. I noticed plenty of people in other discussions mentioning selling the 2D disc and keeping the 3D disc assuming it was backwards compatible.

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

The seperate 3D discs come down to several factors

1- Compatibility. The PS3's handicaps when it comes to 3D requires them to forgo all of Blu-ray's bells and whistles, most of them are even avoiding any kind of popup menu, PiP or other extras (just a "home" key). Also, there have not been wide consumer tests of 3D discs in 2D players. While it works in the lab, as we all know it doesn't always work out that way in the real world, especially when you get into the people that bought the bargain basement decks. Who wants to risk a major holiday title on less than a sure bet?
2- Space- the extra 10-15GB that 3D versions need on the disc kills the room for the above bonus material. The bonus of course is that most movies with modern compression fit just fine without much compromise into a full 50GB. Personally I'd feel more comfortable with Avatar split across 2 discs, which it very well might when the extended version hits Blu 3D down the line.

No one I've talked to has ever mentioned people selling or giving away the 2D version as a factor. It's all about making sure the movie fits comfortably and trying to make sure it works the first time out of the box without firmware updates, which for some older players may never come. The big push for 3D still isn't till next year when we'll have TVs comfortably below the $2000 mark. Next Christmas will also likely be the last for the exclusives (there may be a few "early" ones like Sony and Disney did)



At least with Clash, I would chalk that up to the shoddy 3D conversion they did (assuming we're not talking about blocking and other such compression related artifacts). We're definately well into the learning curve right now as far as figuring out MVC encoding, and few people have a lot of experience at it yet. I figure by the time theres 10 or so titles out from each studio, the compressionists will have figured out the kinks. Based on conversations I've had with software engineers and compressionists, I fully expect that 3D versions will be sold in 2D/3D combo packs for the forseeable future

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

The seperate 3D discs come down to several factors

1- Compatibility. The PS3's handicaps when it comes to 3D requires them to forgo all of Blu-ray's bells and whistles, most of them are even avoiding any kind of popup menu, PiP or other extras (just a "home" key). Also, there have not been wide consumer tests of 3D discs in 2D players. While it works in the lab, as we all know it doesn't always work out that way in the real world, especially when you get into the people that bought the bargain basement decks. Who wants to risk a major holiday title on less than a sure bet?
2- Space- the extra 10-15GB that 3D versions need on the disc kills the room for the above bonus material. The bonus of course is that most movies with modern compression fit just fine without much compromise into a full 50GB. Personally I'd feel more comfortable with Avatar split across 2 discs, which it very well might when the extended version hits Blu 3D down the line.

1. Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 3D has had a 2D version through extraction and has abolutely great quality and compatibility. Frankly if Sony could do it for there first Blu-Ray release there is no techical reason every studio can't

2. Logically extracting a 2D versions saves alot of space. Why encode a 2D version of the movie when one already exists inside the 3D version? Its a needless waste of several gigs. For a 3 hour full 16:9 action movie like Avatar separately releasing a 2D version so that the movie can play on one disc makes sense. However for sub- 2 hour movies Despicable Me or A Christmas Carol it makes no techical sense at all.

Frankly I have yet to here a single good reason for separate 2D encodes other then marketing and giving the disc a false sense of extra value.

[SeanB102]

I'll import it as a pick-up. I've never seen it in 3D and I don't have a 3D TV. But it has the 2D version, so I'll watch that til I have enought to buy a 3D TV and a 3D Blu-ray player. Plus this comes out the same day as A Christmas Carol which was directed by Robert Zemeckis, who is the same person that directed this film, but A Christmas Carol will be released by Disney and this film is released by Warner Bros.