Slashdot Mirror
Pixar to Release All New Movies in 3D
emcron writes "The Walt Disney Co. said Tuesday its Pixar animation studio will commit to 3-D by releasing all of its movies in the format beginning with "Up" in May 2009. Chief Creative Officer John Lasseter made the announcement in New York at a presentation of Disney's upcoming lineup of animated movies."
For me it can only be 3D if you can walk around the projection and see other sides as if it was a solid object.
The linked wikipedia articles talk about ways of making stereo movies from mono movies but I think our brains already do that without the help of extra hardware.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
And for the DVD release Pixar will ditch the old 2D disks and will release the movie on the newly released 3D DVD Sphere.
1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
.: Max Romantschuk
Just because 3d is often used as a gimmick doesn't mean it always has to be that way. It's perfectly acceptable to compose the scenes as though it were a normal movie, without all that objects flying into your face nonsense. The 3d effect will still work, and as it becomes more common people will expect a more subtle treatment. Color was a gimmick once, but now we don't expect every movie to be as colorful as The Wizard of Oz.
They use polarization separation instead. Two images, each with opposite polarization and with a slightly different viewing angle get to the viewer. Each lens of the glasses only lets in one polarization. For Beowulf they used right and left circular polarization. Which was surprising to me as I thought that circular polarizers cost too much to just be given away to moviegoers, but I guess those things are cheap now.
Obligatory Wiki article
Free the Quark 3 from asymptotic confinement! Bring your charm! Don't get down! All colours and flavours welcome!
How it works? Light polarization. Each lens has a different polarization, so it only lets through the right light.
Neat trick: take modern 3D classes, hold them flat in front of an LCD monitor, and rotate them on the axis perpendicular to the monitor. You'll see the display behind dim and brighten as the lenses see it at varying angles.
Fry: Wow, the 3-D's great!
Leela: Mine's not working!
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
Or you just get a projectionist in one of the non-3D theaters to film it. Just because they're releasing movies in 3D doesn't mean that they'll exclusively be in 3D. In fact, TFA even says so: "...Pixar movies will be released in 3-D and the traditional two-dimensional format..." Not that I'd expect anyone to bother trying to understand what they're commenting on.
This guy's the limit!
This technology isn't "newer", it's been around for decades.
I have a book published in the late 1930s or early 1940s at home called "The Marvels and Mysteries of Science", which is a very interesting read given our modern perspective. It has a complete section explaining how 3D movies work, including the polarization technique. Definitely nothing new!
The real question on everybody's mind is...
When will we see 3D porn in theaters?
eTrade SUCKS
3D does nothing for me ever since I lost an eye in a mugging.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Depends on which you saw...
If you saw the IMAX 3D, then you got the standard polarized version (one left projector with vertical polarization, one right projector with horizontal polarization, and matching cheapo glasses).
If you saw the other one (RealD?), then you got a fancy set of glasses that had to be initialized first to match the current rotation angles for single-lens single projector, which projects both fields at once with rotating polarization. More than likely, you have to give those back (I did; NL). The main advantage is that you don't have to keep your head level... you can rest your head on your SO's shoulder and still enjoy the 3D effect instead of it being lost, muddied or getting ghost images.
I wouldn't call it 'circular polarizers', btw... tends to get confused with circular polarizers in photography which are just standard polarizers with another layer that 'de-polarizes' the result so that optical autofocus systems and such don't get confused.
...I can easily move around in your seat... Note to self: never sit next to fluffman86.It's pretty obvious here that the meaning of 3D is stereoscopic, but it can be confusing to just throw around the term 3D. It can have three meanings in this case:
1. The movie is rendered using 3 dimensional data onto a 2 dimensional plane. yes I know all pixar films have been computer generated, but the less informed might think they might actually do hand drawn cartoons.
2. The movie is rendered/filmed from two perspectives, and viewed for a stereoscopic effect
3. The image is actually projected out into 3 dimensional space. This sounds unlikely, but there are actually some 3 dimension display technologies already available that allow for viewing from from any angle.
Anyway, you get my point, let's be specific when we use the word "3D".
LS
There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
Forget 3D.
I'd like Disney to revive its traditional 2D hand-drawn animation. Even if that means they produce only one movie every 3-4 years, I'd still like to see it revived. Hand-drawn art is gorgeous.
The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
The big advantage to them doing 1 film every 3-4 years is they might put a bit more thought into the script, and not churn out the same load of cheap gags and unorigional shit all the time.
What if Tetris was invented by Nazis?
The entire point of theaters going to 3D is to entice people away from their HDTVs with something that is unique and compelling can can't be as easily experienced at home.
That's why Pixar is doing it, and why George Lucas, James Cameron, Robert Zemeckis, Robert Rodriguez, Randal Kleiser, and Peter Jackson "implored the exhibition community to invest in digital projectors" to show their upcoming 3D movies.
Of course, at the same time Lucas also told Variety, "We don't want to make movies. We're about to get into television. As far as Lucasfilm is concerned, we've moved away from the feature-film thing because it's too expensive and it's too risky."
If 3D doesn't help get viewers into the theater, there will be fewer blockbuster movies coming out, and entertainment will shift further toward TV.
Five Ways Apple Will Change TV: 5 - George Lucas Talks Movies
The filter that separates left/right pictures only works if you head is perfectly aligned (vertical). If you tilt the head, the polarisation of the pictures relative to your glasses will be tilted instead of vertical/horizontal and you'll see "ghosting", i.e.: each eye see both left/right frame instead of the correct one.
Modern glasses use circular polarisation.
Now the filter works whichever is the angle of your head. Clockwise and anti-clockwise polarisation remain the same even if you tilt your head.
Now the problem would be that the
But, you will still have a lot less problems because your eyes won't be receiving 2 image at the same time.
The worst glasses are the old anaglyphs (red/blue) : Only the intensity line up between your eyes, the colors are different for each eye and the result looks weird. Some people can use it and see 3D (I do), but most people only get a headache.
The only advantage of the anaglyph is that the movie work with existing technology. It's just frames with weird-colors. Whereas the other needs polarised filters on the projector(s)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
I see better out of my left eye than my right. Maybe we should go to cinema together.