Peter Jackson telling it like it is, about 3D.
  1 / 2    
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Qwmlu2tXL4&feature=related
;feature=related

#1
Posted 03/01/2012 10:26 PM   
Hopefully he will combat the negativity from george lucas's lets make a $ barebones 3d implementation. Good to see they are putting the work into it BEFORE they film and not doing post production 3D implementation. Thanks a lot for this. Its cool seeing how they are doing it. Looks like they will be ignoring the "gimmicks"(high convergence on certain elements) and more in the proper setting of depth.
Hopefully he will combat the negativity from george lucas's lets make a $ barebones 3d implementation. Good to see they are putting the work into it BEFORE they film and not doing post production 3D implementation. Thanks a lot for this. Its cool seeing how they are doing it. Looks like they will be ignoring the "gimmicks"(high convergence on certain elements) and more in the proper setting of depth.

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com

#2
Posted 03/01/2012 10:37 PM   
[quote name='eqzitara' date='02 March 2012 - 08:37 AM' timestamp='1330641450' post='1377342']
Hopefully he will combat the negativity from george lucas's lets make a $ barebones 3d implementation. Good to see they are putting the work into it BEFORE they film and not doing post production 3D implementation. Thanks a lot for this. Its cool seeing how they are doing it. Looks like they will be ignoring the "gimmicks"(high convergence on certain elements) and more in the proper setting of depth.
[/quote]

Looking forward to it. Totally against directors thinking they can convert older movies filmed in 2D into 3D. Star Wars in 3D was terrible and wish I had my movie money back. Then there is Titanic 3D coming, I mean just leave these movies alone and focus on new ones. I hope Peter Jackson says no to studios about converting Lord Of The Rings into 3D.
Anyone converting old 2D movies into 3D is doing it for only one reason,,,,,money and greed. George Lucas had the plan to put Star Wars into 3D, so why release Star Wars 2D on Bluray now? Why not hold off on that and wait till the 3D versions were out on Bluray.
I know Peter Jackson is greedy as well, after all he decided to release LOTR and then 6 months release Extended Editions. He could've just waited and only released a collectors set with both.
[quote name='eqzitara' date='02 March 2012 - 08:37 AM' timestamp='1330641450' post='1377342']

Hopefully he will combat the negativity from george lucas's lets make a $ barebones 3d implementation. Good to see they are putting the work into it BEFORE they film and not doing post production 3D implementation. Thanks a lot for this. Its cool seeing how they are doing it. Looks like they will be ignoring the "gimmicks"(high convergence on certain elements) and more in the proper setting of depth.





Looking forward to it. Totally against directors thinking they can convert older movies filmed in 2D into 3D. Star Wars in 3D was terrible and wish I had my movie money back. Then there is Titanic 3D coming, I mean just leave these movies alone and focus on new ones. I hope Peter Jackson says no to studios about converting Lord Of The Rings into 3D.

Anyone converting old 2D movies into 3D is doing it for only one reason,,,,,money and greed. George Lucas had the plan to put Star Wars into 3D, so why release Star Wars 2D on Bluray now? Why not hold off on that and wait till the 3D versions were out on Bluray.

I know Peter Jackson is greedy as well, after all he decided to release LOTR and then 6 months release Extended Editions. He could've just waited and only released a collectors set with both.

#3
Posted 03/02/2012 10:07 AM   
Yes, it's all about the money and let's not forget that a 3d movie tickets costs more than their 2d counterparts. Until this remains the case we will continue getting crappy conversions, not only of old movies, but what's more important of new productions, why you might ask? Simple, a conversion costs less than filming footage in 3d, at least that's what we're hearing, but the returns are the same as if the movie was filmed and not converted in 3d. It is also more flexible when shooting and no new tech is required.
Everyone's a money grabber these days, with Lucas being always way ahead of the pack, but let's not forget that if anyone could pull off a conversion it would be James Cameron. While we are on the subject of conversions, I really liked the one of Lion King, but I'm very doubtful that anything but an animation can be converted so successfully.
As for PJ's Lotr, I am really hyped for the innovation that Jackson is bringing, not only 3d, but 3d at 48fps, this will definitely challenge the 24fps status quo in the movie industry. Also let's not forget that a studio is behind the production (LOTR trilogy) and owns the rights for any and all releases, so I wouldn't say the PJ is a money grabber, but New Line Cinema and they can release as much BDs as they want and as long as there are people buying they'll keep releasing. This is why I wouldn't go putting Jackson and Lucas in the same basket.
Yes, it's all about the money and let's not forget that a 3d movie tickets costs more than their 2d counterparts. Until this remains the case we will continue getting crappy conversions, not only of old movies, but what's more important of new productions, why you might ask? Simple, a conversion costs less than filming footage in 3d, at least that's what we're hearing, but the returns are the same as if the movie was filmed and not converted in 3d. It is also more flexible when shooting and no new tech is required.

Everyone's a money grabber these days, with Lucas being always way ahead of the pack, but let's not forget that if anyone could pull off a conversion it would be James Cameron. While we are on the subject of conversions, I really liked the one of Lion King, but I'm very doubtful that anything but an animation can be converted so successfully.

As for PJ's Lotr, I am really hyped for the innovation that Jackson is bringing, not only 3d, but 3d at 48fps, this will definitely challenge the 24fps status quo in the movie industry. Also let's not forget that a studio is behind the production (LOTR trilogy) and owns the rights for any and all releases, so I wouldn't say the PJ is a money grabber, but New Line Cinema and they can release as much BDs as they want and as long as there are people buying they'll keep releasing. This is why I wouldn't go putting Jackson and Lucas in the same basket.
#4
Posted 03/02/2012 11:30 AM   
@ Artox
Understand. I pull my comment about greed and Peter Jackson (I imagine there can be fights between a director and a studio). I know it's not 3D related but I watched the video linked but can't understand the hype about 48fps. Isn't Bluray and watching hidef meant to be 24p? Setting up my Media Centre for Bluray I was informed that I should run Bluray at 24p for smooth frames and having higher causes frame issues etc. So how can making a movie higher than 24p be good?
I think a 3D TV manufacturer would be smart to make a high bid to have exclusive rights to The Hobbit 3D on Bluray when released. They would make a fortune. Although I would be pissed if it happened.
@ Artox

Understand. I pull my comment about greed and Peter Jackson (I imagine there can be fights between a director and a studio). I know it's not 3D related but I watched the video linked but can't understand the hype about 48fps. Isn't Bluray and watching hidef meant to be 24p? Setting up my Media Centre for Bluray I was informed that I should run Bluray at 24p for smooth frames and having higher causes frame issues etc. So how can making a movie higher than 24p be good?

I think a 3D TV manufacturer would be smart to make a high bid to have exclusive rights to The Hobbit 3D on Bluray when released. They would make a fortune. Although I would be pissed if it happened.

#5
Posted 03/02/2012 12:04 PM   
Brilliant link. Thanks.
Brilliant link. Thanks.

Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
-------------------
Vitals: Windows 7 64bit, i5 2500 @ 4.4ghz, SLI GTX670, 8GB, Viewsonic VX2268WM

Handy Driver Discussion
Helix Mod - community fixes
Bo3b's Shaderhacker School - How to fix 3D in games
3dsolutionsgaming.com - videos, reviews and 3D fixes

#6
Posted 03/02/2012 01:34 PM   
[quote name='Thrawn73' date='02 March 2012 - 03:04 PM' timestamp='1330689858' post='1377542']
@ Artox
Understand. I pull my comment about greed and Peter Jackson (I imagine there can be fights between a director and a studio). I know it's not 3D related but I watched the video linked but can't understand the hype about 48fps. Isn't Bluray and watching hidef meant to be 24p? Setting up my Media Centre for Bluray I was informed that I should run Bluray at 24p for smooth frames and having higher causes frame issues etc. So how can making a movie higher than 24p be good?
I think a 3D TV manufacturer would be smart to make a high bid to have exclusive rights to The Hobbit 3D on Bluray when released. They would make a fortune. Although I would be pissed if it happened.
[/quote]
Ok, here's the gist - movies are normally shot at 23,976 frames per second (essentially 24p), BD movies included. For the purposes of different standards they could be converted to PAL, which is 25fps, but this happens during broadcast, so BD movies don't undergo any treatment for disc playback. Now (and this is important) your TV works at various hz settings, with the native for full hd being 1080p@60hz, what this means that if you play a movie, which is 24fps to present a frame on each flicker (for every hz) the adding of duplicate frames is necessary unless you run at 1080p24hz. Essentially 24 frames at 24hz means 1:1, 48hz would mean 2:1 and so on and so forth. The problem with 60hz is that it doesn't divide evenly, meaning that for each 2 frames you get one duplicate inserted and this makes the picture choppy. So you should play 24p material at 24hz or 96hz (most tvs allow at least for these two settings).
To answer your question, BD is 24p currently if we are referring to movie footage, concerts are usually 30fps or 60fps, which delivers a more live-like but too broadcasty news-like feel for movies. So, no, it wouldn't be a problem to deliver 48p 2d BD at 1080p, there is sufficient bandwidth, but this is not the case with 3d, where we as gamers are currently struggling, as 1080p in 3d is limited to 24hz (24p) per eye. As you know this makes most games unplayable. However there are newer hdmi chips, which allow for up to 60hz at 1080p per eye in 3d and I am certain that TV manufacturers, which decide to go with this tech will try to buy exclusive rights for the Hobbit with their tvs, as was the case with Panasonic and Avatar.
What 48p means for the Hobbit is exactly what was said in the making video - a more life-like and fluid (especially during moving shots) movement, so this is what I am excited, as 24p really smears things up during fast-paced action scenes and panning shots.
[quote name='Thrawn73' date='02 March 2012 - 03:04 PM' timestamp='1330689858' post='1377542']

@ Artox

Understand. I pull my comment about greed and Peter Jackson (I imagine there can be fights between a director and a studio). I know it's not 3D related but I watched the video linked but can't understand the hype about 48fps. Isn't Bluray and watching hidef meant to be 24p? Setting up my Media Centre for Bluray I was informed that I should run Bluray at 24p for smooth frames and having higher causes frame issues etc. So how can making a movie higher than 24p be good?

I think a 3D TV manufacturer would be smart to make a high bid to have exclusive rights to The Hobbit 3D on Bluray when released. They would make a fortune. Although I would be pissed if it happened.



Ok, here's the gist - movies are normally shot at 23,976 frames per second (essentially 24p), BD movies included. For the purposes of different standards they could be converted to PAL, which is 25fps, but this happens during broadcast, so BD movies don't undergo any treatment for disc playback. Now (and this is important) your TV works at various hz settings, with the native for full hd being 1080p@60hz, what this means that if you play a movie, which is 24fps to present a frame on each flicker (for every hz) the adding of duplicate frames is necessary unless you run at 1080p24hz. Essentially 24 frames at 24hz means 1:1, 48hz would mean 2:1 and so on and so forth. The problem with 60hz is that it doesn't divide evenly, meaning that for each 2 frames you get one duplicate inserted and this makes the picture choppy. So you should play 24p material at 24hz or 96hz (most tvs allow at least for these two settings).

To answer your question, BD is 24p currently if we are referring to movie footage, concerts are usually 30fps or 60fps, which delivers a more live-like but too broadcasty news-like feel for movies. So, no, it wouldn't be a problem to deliver 48p 2d BD at 1080p, there is sufficient bandwidth, but this is not the case with 3d, where we as gamers are currently struggling, as 1080p in 3d is limited to 24hz (24p) per eye. As you know this makes most games unplayable. However there are newer hdmi chips, which allow for up to 60hz at 1080p per eye in 3d and I am certain that TV manufacturers, which decide to go with this tech will try to buy exclusive rights for the Hobbit with their tvs, as was the case with Panasonic and Avatar.

What 48p means for the Hobbit is exactly what was said in the making video - a more life-like and fluid (especially during moving shots) movement, so this is what I am excited, as 24p really smears things up during fast-paced action scenes and panning shots.
#7
Posted 03/02/2012 02:37 PM   
I wonder if many cinema theatres are ready to show a 48fps 3D at 5k resolution.

Some 3D Cinemas are purely digital but might not be either capable of 48fps or 5k resolution.
I wonder if many cinema theatres are ready to show a 48fps 3D at 5k resolution.



Some 3D Cinemas are purely digital but might not be either capable of 48fps or 5k resolution.

Thanks to everybody using my assembler it warms my heart.
To have a critical piece of code that everyone can enjoy!
What more can you ask for?

donations: ulfjalmbrant@hotmail.com

#8
Posted 03/02/2012 04:46 PM   
That was really good, thanks.
That was really good, thanks.

#9
Posted 03/02/2012 05:23 PM   
I always thought cinema was jerky, even as a small child. It will be great when the population are hardened to 3D, so that media gets deeper, better, more of it!!

I love the way PJ makes the "window into another world" analogy... One of my favs /tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':tongue:' />
I always thought cinema was jerky, even as a small child. It will be great when the population are hardened to 3D, so that media gets deeper, better, more of it!!



I love the way PJ makes the "window into another world" analogy... One of my favs /tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':tongue:' />

#10
Posted 03/02/2012 08:02 PM   
Makes more sense now. So hopefully we will see Hollywood change to a new and better format of 48p for all new releases.
Makes more sense now. So hopefully we will see Hollywood change to a new and better format of 48p for all new releases.

#11
Posted 03/03/2012 12:44 AM   
Uh, guys? Yeah - it is all about the money. That's why you make a company in the first place, remember? Accusing a company of trying to maximize their profits is a bit like accusing a pair of sunglasses of blocking light.

They have a camera called Witchiepoo!? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.R._Pufnstuf

5K! That's 9600x5400 resolution!? At 48fps? No way will the first releases come out as anything near that but it will sure be cool when the tech catches up to the recordings.

I still don't see how they deal with the big theater problem. How do you make 3D that looks good from 90ft away without getting divergence for the people that are 15ft away?
Uh, guys? Yeah - it is all about the money. That's why you make a company in the first place, remember? Accusing a company of trying to maximize their profits is a bit like accusing a pair of sunglasses of blocking light.



They have a camera called Witchiepoo!? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.R._Pufnstuf



5K! That's 9600x5400 resolution!? At 48fps? No way will the first releases come out as anything near that but it will sure be cool when the tech catches up to the recordings.



I still don't see how they deal with the big theater problem. How do you make 3D that looks good from 90ft away without getting divergence for the people that are 15ft away?

#12
Posted 03/03/2012 01:32 AM   
Btw I've just seen Hugo and I can recommend it to any lover of 3d. The movie has far less depth from what we are used to in games, but imo it is the first attempt towards making more mature and serious movies in 3d. Scorcese has managed to use 3d for the benefit of cinematography, which is a first. It is a kid's film, but one that is also very entertaining for adults.
Btw I've just seen Hugo and I can recommend it to any lover of 3d. The movie has far less depth from what we are used to in games, but imo it is the first attempt towards making more mature and serious movies in 3d. Scorcese has managed to use 3d for the benefit of cinematography, which is a first. It is a kid's film, but one that is also very entertaining for adults.
#13
Posted 03/03/2012 10:59 PM   
[quote name='Zloth' date='03 March 2012 - 01:32 AM' timestamp='1330738349' post='1377833']
Uh, guys? Yeah - it is all about the money. That's why you make a company in the first place, remember? Accusing a company of trying to maximize their profits is a bit like accusing a pair of sunglasses of blocking light.
[/quote]

Amen brother!

And if somebody still wants to complain: go talk to your bank or insurance company. They are the really greedy people in this world!
[quote name='Zloth' date='03 March 2012 - 01:32 AM' timestamp='1330738349' post='1377833']

Uh, guys? Yeah - it is all about the money. That's why you make a company in the first place, remember? Accusing a company of trying to maximize their profits is a bit like accusing a pair of sunglasses of blocking light.





Amen brother!



And if somebody still wants to complain: go talk to your bank or insurance company. They are the really greedy people in this world!

#14
Posted 03/04/2012 01:32 PM   
Twenty-four frames per second has naught to do with imaging technology or bandwidth.

It was a standard established in the early days of film making as being the lowest rate that would generate "smooth" motion [i][b]while using the least amount of that new-fangled, very expensive celluloid[/b][/i]...
Twenty-four frames per second has naught to do with imaging technology or bandwidth.



It was a standard established in the early days of film making as being the lowest rate that would generate "smooth" motion while using the least amount of that new-fangled, very expensive celluloid...

"AIO": Intel Xeon E5-2690 v2 @ 103.2 MHz BCLK | ASUS X79-Deluxe | SwifTech Apogee Drive II Pump and Block | 120 mm + 240 mm Push-Pull | 64 GB G.Skill PC3-12800 @ 1924 MHz | NVIDIA RTX 2070 FE | LG 25UM56 UW Monitor | Plextor 1TB PX-1TM9PeY PCIe NVMe (Windows 10 Pro x64 1809) | Plextor 1TB PX-1TM9PeY PCIe NVMe (UserData) | 4x SanDisk 500 GB SSDs in Marvell SATA3 RAID0 (C:\Games) | 2x WD 250 GB SSDs and WD 3 TB RED HDD in Marvell HyperDuo RAID (Media) | 16 GB RAMDisk (Temp Files) | WD My Book Essentials 3 TB NAS (Archives) | LG BP50NB40 ODD | eVGA Supernova G+ 1000 W PSU | Cooler Master HAF-XB

"Gaming": Intel Xeon E5-1650 v2, Turbo 44x (5-6), 45x (3-4), 46x (1-2) | ASUS Rampage IV Extreme | SwifTech Apogee Drive II Pump and Block | 120 mm + 240 mm Push/Pull | 32 GB G.Skill PC3-12800 @ 1866 MHz | NVIDIA GTX 1080 FE | NVIDIA GTX 970 RE | Samsung U28E510 UHD | 2x PNY 480 GB SSDs in Intel SATA3 RAID0 (OS) | Plextor 1TB PX-1TM9PeY PCIe NVMe (Disk Games) | 4x PNY 240 GB SSDs in Intel SATA2 RAID0 (On-Line Games) | eVGA Supernova G+ 1000 W PSU | Cooler Master HAF-XB | Windows 10 Pro x64 1809


Stock is Extreme now

#15
Posted 03/04/2012 02:09 PM   
  1 / 2    
Scroll To Top