RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,548
Posts: 5,422,004
Members: 24,804
Currently online: 401
Newest member: comicstar100

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Tears of the Prophets
By: Michelle on Sep 12

New Wizkids Attack Wing Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Coto Drama Sold To Fox
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Braga Inks Deal
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Remastered Original Series Re-release
By: T'Bonz on Sep 11

UK Trek Ships Calendar Debuts
By: T'Bonz on Sep 10

Quinto In The Slap
By: T'Bonz on Sep 9

Burton On Shatner’s Brown Bag Wine Tasting
By: T'Bonz on Sep 9

New Trek Trading Card Series
By: T'Bonz on Sep 8

New Red Shirt Diaries Episode
By: T'Bonz on Sep 8


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 10 2013, 06:17 PM   #46
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: The 3D-quality

Saw it in 3D today and the detail was amazing, nothing wrong with the lighting or image quality, no ill effects either. But then I've never had any side effects from 3D viewing.
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 08:37 PM   #47
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: The 3D-quality

beamMe wrote: View Post
trevanian wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post

Isn't the simplest explanation that the slight darkening cause by the glasses is compensated by a slightly brighter projected image? )
Feel free to do your own homework on this. There is plenty of information online that is reliable as to what projectors put out and that the glasses are only a factor in all this, not the main issue. Xenon sources will be more of a factor in compensating, but then you're still sacrificing image quality in the form of contrast, just getting a brighter less detailed image.
Suppose I don't really care.

And since you've told us that you haven't watched a modern 3D-movie in the cinema, your opinion of the image quality mean absolutely nothing to me.
Wasn't offering an opinion on this aspect, -- just the views of industry professionals I interview and write about.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10 2013, 09:35 PM   #48
Richard Baker
Commander
 
Richard Baker's Avatar
 
Location: Warrior, AL
Re: The 3D-quality

I like 3D movies that are designed that way from the beginning- Prometheus and Immortals comes to mind. Most post-production attempts look like bad Viewmaster slides (The Sorcerer's Apprentice). I like the feel of being there, but when they make me aware of the fact I am watching a 3D effect it detracts from the film.
Richard Baker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 01:26 AM   #49
Kpnuts
Commodore
 
Kpnuts's Avatar
 
Location: London
Re: The 3D-quality

Thought the 3D was perfectly fine, just don't sit too close. I was very worried about it going in but it was quite a subtle effect 90% of the time.
Kpnuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 10:51 AM   #50
beamMe
Fleet Captain
 
beamMe's Avatar
 
Location: Europa
Re: The 3D-quality

trevanian wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post
trevanian wrote: View Post

Feel free to do your own homework on this. There is plenty of information online that is reliable as to what projectors put out and that the glasses are only a factor in all this, not the main issue. Xenon sources will be more of a factor in compensating, but then you're still sacrificing image quality in the form of contrast, just getting a brighter less detailed image.
Suppose I don't really care.

And since you've told us that you haven't watched a modern 3D-movie in the cinema, your opinion of the image quality mean absolutely nothing to me.
Wasn't offering an opinion on this aspect, -- just the views of industry professionals I interview and write about.
The image looks fine and, because of your lack of personal, subjective experience, you still don't know what you are talking about; you're just repeating what others told you.
beamMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 11:08 AM   #51
AntonyF
Administrator
 
AntonyF's Avatar
 
View AntonyF's Twitter Profile
Re: The 3D-quality

RollTide1017 wrote: View Post
Here is my rule of thumb; if the movie was shot in 3D, with 3D cameras, then I might see it in 3D. If the movie was shot in 2D and converted to 3D during post-production then I'll watch in 2D.

STID was converted to 3D during post so, I'm sticking with 2D.
That!

I watched it in 2D. Here the pre-booking was in 3D first and my friends rushed into ordering, and I wouldn't go with them. I was patient, then just booked 2D when it came up for booking.
__________________
"I'll, uh, consume this in a room without detonating crockery, thank you very much."
AntonyF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 04:20 PM   #52
Haggis and tatties
Rear Admiral
 
Haggis and tatties's Avatar
 
Location: Glasgow
Re: The 3D-quality

Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
Saw it in 3D today and the detail was amazing, nothing wrong with the lighting or image quality, no ill effects either. But then I've never had any side effects from 3D viewing.
Yeah the 3D was simply awesome.
__________________

Haggis and tatties is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 04:53 PM   #53
LOKAI of CHERON
Commodore
 
LOKAI of CHERON's Avatar
 
Location: Post-apocalyptic ruins of my once mighty Homeworld.
Re: The 3D-quality

Well, after today, I've seen the movie in both formats. The film itself is wonderful, I absolutely love it. But, as for the preferred viewing format, 2D is the clear winner for me.

While watching the 2D version, I was struck by what I perceived as noticeably increased clarity, sharpness and overall detail. Certainly, I was able to take much more in, and pick up on minutiae I missed in 3D. The contrast was stronger, the colours "popped" more - and overall - the image had an elevated sense of realism and, well, depth!
__________________
YOU MONOTONE HUMANS ARE ALL ALIKE... FIRST YOU CONDEMN, THEN ATTACK.
LOKAI of CHERON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 05:10 PM   #54
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: The 3D-quality

beamMe wrote: View Post
trevanian wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post

Suppose I don't really care.

And since you've told us that you haven't watched a modern 3D-movie in the cinema, your opinion of the image quality mean absolutely nothing to me.
Wasn't offering an opinion on this aspect, -- just the views of industry professionals I interview and write about.
The image looks fine and, because of your lack of personal, subjective experience, you still don't know what you are talking about; you're just repeating what others told you.
Sure. I take everything said at face value without crosschecking or doing conventional comprehensive research, then submit the material for publication without even letting all parties proof it for errors or omissions.

What, do you think I write about cinematography for a supermarket tabloid, or Fox News?

If you have no interest in legitimate professional statements of fact -- not opinion -- on actual measured aspects of what you're just babbling about, then wallow away in ignorance, you've certainly got plenty of company here.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 05:25 PM   #55
beamMe
Fleet Captain
 
beamMe's Avatar
 
Location: Europa
Re: The 3D-quality

trevanian wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post
trevanian wrote: View Post

Wasn't offering an opinion on this aspect, -- just the views of industry professionals I interview and write about.
The image looks fine and, because of your lack of personal, subjective experience, you still don't know what you are talking about; you're just repeating what others told you.
Sure. I take everything said at face value without crosschecking or doing conventional comprehensive research, then submit the material for publication without even letting all parties proof it for errors or omissions.

What, do you think I write about cinematography for a supermarket tabloid, or Fox News?

If you have no interest in legitimate professional statements of fact -- not opinion -- on actual measured aspects of what you're just babbling about, then wallow away in ignorance, you've certainly got plenty of company here.
The technical facts, aspects and reasons for a somewhat lower image-quality are one thing.
But the personal, subjective impression you get from actually watching a 3D-picture is far more important.
beamMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 05:29 PM   #56
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: The 3D-quality

trevanian wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post
trevanian wrote: View Post

Wasn't offering an opinion on this aspect, -- just the views of industry professionals I interview and write about.
The image looks fine and, because of your lack of personal, subjective experience, you still don't know what you are talking about; you're just repeating what others told you.
Sure. I take everything said at face value without crosschecking or doing conventional comprehensive research, then submit the material for publication without even letting all parties proof it for errors or omissions.

What, do you think I write about cinematography for a supermarket tabloid, or Fox News?

If you have no interest in legitimate professional statements of fact -- not opinion -- on actual measured aspects of what you're just babbling about, then wallow away in ignorance, you've certainly got plenty of company here.
It IS curious that you write about it, but haven't experienced it. You are gathering opinions of others, why don't you make up your own?

beamMe's point is a valid one, I think.

The views of industry professionals are not fact. And the technical specs of theater equipment really mean nothing to the personal experience and personal preference.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 06:06 PM   #57
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: The 3D-quality

beamMe wrote: View Post
trevanian wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post

Suppose I don't really care.

And since you've told us that you haven't watched a modern 3D-movie in the cinema, your opinion of the image quality mean absolutely nothing to me.
Wasn't offering an opinion on this aspect, -- just the views of industry professionals I interview and write about.
The image looks fine and, because of your lack of personal, subjective experience, you still don't know what you are talking about; you're just repeating what others told you.
beamMe, that will be enough. I would like very much not to see you sniping at anyone again - not at Deck 1; not at trevanian; not at anyone. Just stop it now.

Disagree with points made or opinions offered by others and, if you choose, rebut those points and opinions with facts and well-constructed arguments of your own, but leave the personal stuff out or take it outside. I'm busy enough here already with things which are actually about the movie; I do not need to be policing schoolyard squabbles and no one else needs to be reading them in this forum.
__________________
"Recently my 8 year-old cousin asked me, with a wicked twinkle in his eye, if I'd ever microwaved a banana. I'm terrified to try, but I'm sure whatever happens—splattering, abrupt, radioactive—sounds exactly like an Annie Clark guitar solo."
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 06:11 PM   #58
Duane
Captain
 
Duane's Avatar
 
Re: The 3D-quality

I saw it in 3D today in Thailand (2D and IMAX were not options) and the 3D added nothing to the experience. I hope to see it in 2D soon. I hope this helps.
Duane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 06:15 PM   #59
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: The 3D-quality

M'Sharak wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post
trevanian wrote: View Post

Wasn't offering an opinion on this aspect, -- just the views of industry professionals I interview and write about.
The image looks fine and, because of your lack of personal, subjective experience, you still don't know what you are talking about; you're just repeating what others told you.
beamMe, that will be enough. I would like very much not to see you sniping at anyone again - not at Deck 1; not at trevanian; not at anyone. Just stop it now.

Disagree with points made or opinions offered by others and, if you choose, rebut those points and opinions with facts and well-constructed arguments of your own, but leave the personal stuff out or take it outside. I'm busy enough here already with things which are actually about the movie; I do not need to be policing schoolyard squabbles and no one else needs to be reading them in this forum.
But there's no personal attack in that particular quote. Trevenian DOES lack the personal experience if he has never seen a modern 3D film, and he IS only repeating what others told him.

Trevanian talks about how apples are better than oranges because he talked to experts about it and posts facts about oranges and apples. But he has never eaten an orange or an apple to judge for himself.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 06:32 PM   #60
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: The 3D-quality

Sit down, Jarod; you were not being addressed.
__________________
"Recently my 8 year-old cousin asked me, with a wicked twinkle in his eye, if I'd ever microwaved a banana. I'm terrified to try, but I'm sure whatever happens—splattering, abrupt, radioactive—sounds exactly like an Annie Clark guitar solo."
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:49 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.