Re: Chicken Little in 3-D - Real D 144 frames per second?
- From: hchickpeaREMOVEME@xxxxxxxxxxx (Harry Chickpea)
- Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 00:48:07 GMT
moviePig <pwallace@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>Harry Chickpea wrote:
>
>> Martin Hart <namewithheld@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>If we go back and re-read the original announcement we note that they
>>>claim to use a "different" type of polarization. A "different" type
>>>might work with a spinning filter wheel. For instance, if you used
>>>circular polarization, clockwise for one eye and counterclockwise for
>>>the other, then the polarization wouldn't change, plus tilting one's
>>>head would still block light from opposing filters and eyeglass lenses.
>>
>> Circular is, AFAIK, the method used. Tilting doesn't affect it like
>> linear polarizing. Some of the claims are pure hype, but it is a legit
>> application of this type of polarization.
>
>By "pure hype", you mean claims of "no distortion" from anywhere in the
>theater... implying that those last available seats at
>bottom-screen-left have now magically become viable...
Correct. Foolishness that should come with a disclaimer that the
person reporting it has one good eye.
>More detrimentally, when I saw CHICKEN LITTLE 3D, I noticed a distinct
>depth-artifact afflicting objects in rapid transverse motion. It
>resembles when film-3D's two projectors are threaded a frame or two out
>of sync (which I've never seen with Imax, btw). Afaik, the DLP process
>should obviate such a snafu, so I'm puzzled. Meanwhile, I've heard no
>other reports of the phenomenon... (No, I'm pretty sure I wasn't
>hallucinating...)
Sounds like typical alternate frame displacement. I might go to one
of the local theatres playing it to check it out. Can't say that it
is high on my list of priorities right now though.
.
- References:
- Re: Chicken Little in 3-D - Real D 144 frames per second?
- From: Mike Ackerman
- Re: Chicken Little in 3-D - Real D 144 frames per second?
- From: Martin Hart
- Re: Chicken Little in 3-D - Real D 144 frames per second?
- From: Mike Ackerman
- Re: Chicken Little in 3-D - Real D 144 frames per second?
- From: Harry Chickpea
- Re: Chicken Little in 3-D - Real D 144 frames per second?
- From: moviePig
- Re: Chicken Little in 3-D - Real D 144 frames per second?
- Prev by Date: Re: Chicken Little in 3-D - Real D 144 frames per second?
- Next by Date: Re: DTS-ES - Six channel matrix or six channel discrete?
- Previous by thread: Re: Chicken Little in 3-D - Real D 144 frames per second?
- Next by thread: Re: Ben-Hur DVD image quality
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|