Author Topic: You will be amazed (Read 6359 times)

Jeff · « **on:** December 25, 2009, 03:51:40 pm »

Tammy and I went to the movies for Christmas. We went and saw Avatar in 3D. I'm pretty hard to impress and I walked out of there knowing that there has never been a movie made before this one that was so technically amazing. You will also see the biggest tree you have ever seen in your life and believe that it is real. As long as you don't try to draw any political or moral conclusions from the story line, you should walk out of there mesmerized.

Don't waste your time with the non-3d version. I'm going to go see this one again. Go see it if you get the chance.

Brad_S. · « **Reply #1 on:** December 25, 2009, 03:58:23 pm »

I agree. It sets the bar for movies from here on out.
See it on the big screen, it will not be the same on DVD.

Sprucegum · « **Reply #2 on:** December 25, 2009, 04:06:09 pm »

I have a date for New Years Day - a new 3-D is the only thing that will get me in to the big city

Ianab · « **Reply #3 on:** December 25, 2009, 06:49:31 pm »

Wish it was showing in 3D locally

It was 'filmed' in NZ by the company that did Lord of the Rings, so it's motion capture of real actors. They run 30,000 computer cores to render the graphics.

Ian

Jeff · « **Reply #4 on:** December 25, 2009, 07:01:02 pm »

Several time during the movie, I tipped my glasses down to see what it looked like without them. Not the same. Not even close. You certainly would not want to view the 3-d movie without the glasses. The non-3 d version was running at the same theater. Why anyone would want to watch it that way, other then if there are some epilepsy issues or something, I dont know.

This was not your daddy's 3D. I've got my 3D glasses right here. They look like Drew Cary's Sunglasses. Clear lenses. None of the old red and blue. Not sure what makes then 3d. I'm gussing some sort of polarization.

ScottAR · « **Reply #5 on:** December 25, 2009, 10:32:39 pm »

guess I'll have to miss it then. I can't see "3d" stuff.
just looks like the film ain't lined up right to me.

DR_Buck · « **Reply #6 on:** December 25, 2009, 11:01:07 pm »

Quote from: ScottAR on December 25, 2009, 10:32:39 pm

guess I'll have to miss it then. I can't see "3d" stuff.
just looks like the film ain't lined up right to me.

I have the same problem with the old 'red'-'blue' 3d glasses. But the new polarization glasses work fine.

Jeff · « **Reply #7 on:** December 25, 2009, 11:41:56 pm »

Quote from: ScottAR on December 25, 2009, 10:32:39 pm

guess I'll have to miss it then. I can't see "3d" stuff.
just looks like the film ain't lined up right to me.

This is totally different then the old 3D. You'll be able to see it.

wesdor · « **Reply #8 on:** December 25, 2009, 11:58:23 pm »

Jeff is right.

This is probably the best movie I've seen in years. Just got back from seeing it with the family a few minutes ago.

Although the story line gets a bit preachy at times, the scenery is fantastic and the special effects are beyond anything I have ever imagined.

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #9 on:** December 26, 2009, 07:30:41 am »

Quote from: Jeff on December 25, 2009, 11:41:56 pm

Quote from: ScottAR on December 25, 2009, 10:32:39 pm
guess I'll have to miss it then. I can't see "3d" stuff.
just looks like the film ain't lined up right to me.

This is totally different then the old 3D. You'll be able to see it.

Some people can't see stereo Jeff. Stereo is what movie or photo 3D is. It's basically images with an overlap between frames. We had 1 or 2 students in our aerial photo interp. classes that could never see the 3D relief in stereo photo triplets (30 % overlap between frames). Both eyes have to look straight ahead, if your looking down your nose you wont see 3D.

Ironwood · « **Reply #10 on:** December 26, 2009, 07:38:34 am »

Swamp is right on. I was a Terrain Analyst in the Amry. Steroescopic vision is necessary to "see" this type film, not everyone has it. If you remember those funky posters in the 1980's that people asked you to stare at, if you can see the "whatever they had on them", then you can see in steroe vision. Also, for those history minded folks, if you remember the wooden stereo veiwers (circa 1900-1920) you could veiw stereo on those as well. The lenses looked like magnafying glasses.

Ironwood

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #11 on:** December 26, 2009, 07:52:04 am »

Stereoscope. They are still in forestry classes. You can buy the ones like Ironwood describes and a desktop model with binoculars and side mirrors, which is very expensive.

Also, remember viewfinders? and viewfinder projectors. I still have mine from over 30 years ago. Mom had some reals from when the Queen was crowned in 1953. I think they are also around here somewhere.

Ironwood · « **Reply #12 on:** December 26, 2009, 08:20:54 am »

We have View Masters as well, I forgot about that option as a description.

Ironwood

Jeff · « **Reply #13 on:** December 26, 2009, 09:06:07 am »

Obviously if you have some sort of physical vision impairment that effects your natural depth perception you can't see the third dimension but if you can see things like a view master, you can see the movie. I am another that could not see the 3-d in the old movies. Also if you have color blindness of some sort involving red, you would not be able to see the old style.

Even people with normal vision sometimes could not see those posters.

andybuildz · « **Reply #14 on:** December 26, 2009, 09:41:52 am »

My mind was blown when I saw that extravaganza. I never expected anything that clear!!
One question for those of you that saw it...

(ADMIN PRIVILEGE TAKEN HERE. ANDY, your question is a movie scene stealer. I removed it until people have a chance to see it. I'll answer it though. That part of the movie was troublesome for me and It made me feel bad) Jeff...

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #15 on:** December 26, 2009, 09:44:52 am »

Quote from: Jeff on December 26, 2009, 09:06:07 am

Even people with normal vision sometimes could not see those posters.

Yup, exactly. It's not vision impairedness I was restricting my comment to. Sometimes all it takes is some training of the eyes to see it and some just can't master it. It's like trying to do the Spock greeting, some can, some can't.

Jeff · « **Reply #16 on:** December 26, 2009, 09:48:40 am »

Donk, I do beleive that in that sort of case, one will be able to see the 3-D. The glasses do the polarizing. No matter how you looked at the screen, it was 3 -D. You could tip your head, turn it, pull the glasses out a foot from your face, what ever, as long as you looked through the lenses, it worked. I'm the type of guy that wants to know and I played all those games as I enjoyed the movie.

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #17 on:** December 26, 2009, 10:03:09 am »

Yes, I guess your likely right there Jeff.

Ironwood · « **Reply #18 on:** December 26, 2009, 11:16:14 am »

Stereoscopic vision is a "brain inner connectedness" issue (left/right regions). You either have it or not, regardless of ANY vision "eye" issue. At least that is what Uncle Sam told us.

Ironwood

SwampDonkey · « **Reply #19 on:** December 26, 2009, 11:34:06 am »

In Jeff's movie case, I guess the eyes are being aided. Our examples, the eyes are unaided and if you can't train yourself to look ahead instead of at a converging point, when looking at a close object, then you can't see stereo. When starring at those aerials, you have to take the approach that your looking 10000 feet away and not 12 inches from your nose, so to speak. The most frustrating part is the fact that from one photo to the next the scale can change (oops hit an updraft there during that shot) and it always changes with distance from the focal point. Put your fish eyes on.

News:

Author Topic: You will be amazed (Read 6359 times)