The 3D-quality

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by Marten, May 7, 2013.

  1. Commishsleer

    Commishsleer Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Location:
    CommishSleer
    My husband is legally blind in one eye but can see shapes.
    He can see modern 3D films.
    He thought STID in 3D IMAX was the best 3D film he ever saw. My teenage son thought the 3D in STID was better than the 'Hobbit'.
    They of course were sitting in the best seats in the the cinema while I was sitting to the left of screen.
     
  2. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Put simply, yes. And if you want genuine brightness on-screen (not just glare, which is how I'd typify the trek09's abovedeck interiors), I'd say ALTERED STATES in a good theater during the tank explosion sequence is THE example ... Jordan Cronenworth's cinematography (film just before he did BLADE RUNNER, at the top of his always-exemplary game) seems to exceed what is possible in terms of luminosity, even going well beyond CE3K.

    for TUC, if I'd seen it with sunglasses everything except the explosions would have gone unseen ... the Kirk/McCoy bunkbed scene was just grey-black darkness on the terrible 70mm print shown in San Jose, CA ... it was like a bad drive-in movie, no image at all.
     
  3. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    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.
     
  4. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Never notice the darkening unless I remove the glasses during the film. But why would I do that?
     
  5. beamMe

    beamMe Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Location:
    Europa
    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.
     
  6. Kemaiku

    Kemaiku Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Location:
    Ulster
    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.
     
  7. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Wasn't offering an opinion on this aspect, -- just the views of industry professionals I interview and write about.
     
  8. Richard Baker

    Richard Baker Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Location:
    Warrior, AL
    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.
     
  9. Kpnuts

    Kpnuts Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 1999
    Location:
    London
    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.
     
  10. beamMe

    beamMe Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Location:
    Europa
    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.
     
  11. AntonyF

    AntonyF Official Tahmoh Taster Administrator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2000
    Location:
    London, UK
    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.
     
  12. Haggis and tatties

    Haggis and tatties Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Glasgow
    Yeah the 3D was simply awesome.:)
     
  13. LOKAI of CHERON

    LOKAI of CHERON Commodore Commodore

    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!
     
  14. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    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.
     
  15. beamMe

    beamMe Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Location:
    Europa
    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.
     
  16. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    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.
     
  17. M'Sharak

    M'Sharak Definitely Herbert. Maybe. Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Location:
    Terra Inlandia, Kelvin timeline
    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.
     
  18. Duane

    Duane Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Location:
    Chiang Mai, Thailand
    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.
     
  19. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    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.
     
  20. M'Sharak

    M'Sharak Definitely Herbert. Maybe. Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Location:
    Terra Inlandia, Kelvin timeline
    Sit down, Jarod; you were not being addressed.