LOGIN  .  SIGNUP   .  SUPPORT 
HOME / MESSAGE BOARDS / GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

General Discussions

Signup   Message Boards Home   Newest Posts   My Favorite Boards   My Threads
Page 1 of 2   •  First Page  •  Previous Page  •   Next Page  •   Last Page
Signup or Login to Post
SW in 3D
 
shianova  posted on Sep 30, 2010 6:51:11 AM - Report post

Current rank: 2.5 Stars. Next Rank at 2000 Posts.
Send a message to shianova
ELITE
Link

This feels wrong, 3D is really over used and doesn't always gives the expected effect.

 
yosup  posted on Sep 30, 2010 7:01:29 AM - Report post

Current rank: 3.5 Stars. Next Rank at 8000 Posts.
Send a message to yosup
BADASS
I haven't seen a 3D movie since Spy Kids 3. I guess if I don't by the time Episode I comes to theaters, that will be my first non blue and red glasses 3D experience.
 
Dhampy  posted on Sep 30, 2010 7:09:38 AM - Report post

Current rank: 2.5 Stars. Next Rank at 2000 Posts.
Send a message to Dhampy
ELITE
Stupid idea.

When you convert a normal image into a stereoscopic image, it looks like ****.

Plus the fact that every single human being already perceive three dimensions in two-dimensional images due to perspective and visual cues.

But Lucas is all about the money. And ONLY about the money.

 
SuperSkyline89  posted on Sep 30, 2010 8:08:01 AM - Report post

Current rank: 3 Stars. Next Rank at 4000 Posts.
Send a message to SuperSkyline89
AUTHOR
Avatar wasn't true 3D and that Piranha thing was the stupidest idea I've ever seen. So I'm not impressed by the 3D movies out lately.

I think Star Wars in 3D would be cool. But first it has to be real 3D, not that 3 layers garbage in Avatar. And it has to be a completely re-filmed movie, you can't just take the original and make it 3D. That just screams money grab and nothing else.

I'll still go see the first one though. Can't bash a movie like that if I've never seen it. And it may turn out to be decent. If there was ever a movie made to be watched in theater it's Star Wars, adding more effects would just make that more so, even if it turns out to be only half decent it'll still be a bit of fun.

[Edited by SuperSkyline89, 9/30/2010 8:13:58 AM]

 
HonestGamer  posted on Sep 30, 2010 10:23:02 AM - Report post

Moderator
Send a message to HonestGamer
MODERATOR
Well my head pains and eyes get tired whenever I think of 3D Movies. Its better to stick with 2D.

I concur with shianova that 3D Movies nowadays aren't fun to watch because they don't have that many effects where you get stuff coming at you...All you get is a headache.

However if carefully made, Star Wars can suit the 3D environment...It has the caliber to become enjoyable since 3D effects suits most of the fights the movie has. What we can do is let some people go through it and ask then whether it was worth it or not.

 
golem148  posted on Sep 30, 2010 10:50:16 AM - Report post

Current rank: 1 Star. Next Rank at 100 Posts.
Send a message to golem148
ELITE
quote:
originally posted by Dhampy

Stupid idea.

When you convert a normal image into a stereoscopic image, it looks like ****.

Plus the fact that every single human being already perceive three dimensions in two-dimensional images due to perspective and visual cues.

But Lucas is all about the money. And ONLY about the money.

I don't find that correct.. yes, the human eye is receiving pictures in 3d. BUT if the screen is 2d. Then the eye will see the screen as 3d but what's in the screen will still be 2d

 
AdmiralThrawn  posted on Sep 30, 2010 12:28:56 PM - Report post

Current rank: 3 Stars. Next Rank at 4000 Posts.
Send a message to AdmiralThrawn
CRAHSYSTOR
Star Wars in 3D.

Kill me. Kill me now.

 
Dhampy  posted on Sep 30, 2010 1:05:33 PM - Report post

Current rank: 2.5 Stars. Next Rank at 2000 Posts.
Send a message to Dhampy
ELITE
quote:
originally posted by golem148

quote:
originally posted by Dhampy

Stupid idea.

When you convert a normal image into a stereoscopic image, it looks like ****.

Plus the fact that every single human being already perceive three dimensions in two-dimensional images due to perspective and visual cues.

But Lucas is all about the money. And ONLY about the money.

I don't find that correct.. yes, the human eye is receiving pictures in 3d. BUT if the screen is 2d. Then the eye will see the screen as 3d but what's in the screen will still be 2d

Your eyes don't see in 3D. Your brain interprets depth in what you see.

The same way your brain tells you that one object is closer than another in the real world--through various visual cues like foreshortening and perspective--makes you see three dimensions in a photograph, realistic painting or movie screen.

You have never once in your entire life seen a two dimensional movie or TV show. This is a fact which cannot be disputed.

Your brain has always perceived depth in the images.

All that the stereoscopic process does is exaggerate the visual cues which already exist.

And in the process, makes the image look like crap.

Do an experiment. Close one eye. You still perceive depth, don't you? And you still perceive it in the exact same way. If your eye were in the center of your head, you wouldn't know the difference.

[Edited by Dhampy, 9/30/2010 1:07:52 PM]

Page 1 of 2   •  First Page  •  Previous Page  •   Next Page  •   Last Page
  Post Reply
Go to page: 1  2 
All times are (GMT -06:00) Central Time (US & Canada). Current time is 7:11:44 PM