“The golden era of 3D home movie releases”
The era was never golden. Most people did it a handful of times, got a headache, and never did it again.
I did it fairly often throughout. Left the 3D slider of my 3DS cranked up permanently, too, if you must know.
Either way I do own a bunch of 3D Blurays until they started making you choose between 3D and 4K and eventually stopped making them altogether.
Theres a bit of a difference between slider on the 3ds and the fad that was 3d tvs that came with their own glasses. We used it like a handful of times when we first got the TV, but I think no one I lived with actually liked the effect, it just made them nauseous or annoyed by the glasses. My parents were mad at first when i got rid of their 3d tv, and I said good riddance lol.
Well, 3D was a feature on many high end TVs, all the way to the start of the OLED era. It's not like it was mandatory to use. But yeah, not everybody was into it, and I certainly would much prefer glassless 3D as with the 3DS. The big problem there is supporting multiple viewers at once. I would definitely take it for a monitor or a phone, all else being equal.
When I first got VR I got a bunch of 3D Blu-rays to rip but the quality was trash. You have the 30/24 fps (can’t remember which) divided by two (for each eye).
It was so bad that action scenes just looked like a huge blur (probably partially due to having to re-encode).
I still wonder if BigScreen has better source material because the rentals there always looked great.
I thought Men in Black were awesome in 3D. I don't understand why more movies were not released in that format
IMAX 3D was impressive. Regular cinemas with 3D movies, meh.
I'd be watching all my shit in 3D...
If they actually sold 3D TV's that used the polar glasses and streaming services streamed 3D movies.
People say they were a gimmick, but a basic polarized TV's for a reasonable price were never a thing.
I used to do a lot of research in 3D imaging, and my take is that passive stereoscopic glasses were always destined to fail because they cause eye strain for too many people. And that eye strain is usually caused by the fact that the focal point is fixed, and a lot of eyeballs fight that when they see a three dimensional image. We’re used to being able to shift focus at will with real-world 3D space.
This problem doesn’t impact everyone, and it’s not as bad with immersive experiences that keep items sharp in the foreground and background, or with films that don’t have interesting shit happening the background.
That said, it’s a really old and well documented problem, and I don’t believe we have affordable varifocal viewing solutions on the market yet.
It was a gimmick. Half the movies released in 3D during the last wave were poorly done conversions not even shot for 3D.
It's always fun to watch some cheesy action or horror movie from when 3d was being pushed super hard. All of a sudden there's a scene where things are being flung at the camera for no apparent reason and you say, oh yeah, this was supposed to be 3d.
Yeah, that's not quite the "shot for 3D" I was talking about. Those are the worst 3D films that don't even hide that it's a gimmick.
I don't know if they're shot in 3D, but I enjoy the nature and science movies shown at my local planetarium. There's nothing gimmicky about them, just subtle depth.
I think that's a different beast.
Half the movies released in 3D during the last wave were poorly done conversions not even shot for 3D.
Only half? -_-
I've only seen a few movies that were actually filmed in 3D. Even Gravity was filmed in 2D.
The problem is that actually filming in 3D requires using different (and expensive) hardware, and different creative direction all across the board. You can't just upgrade to a 3D camera and call it a day. Not many studios will put in that kind of effort for something that is not proven in the market. And not many filmmakers are actually skilled at working in 3D, simply due to lack of direct experience.
I saw the Hobbit movies in high framerate 3D in the theater, and while they were not good movies, they looked absolutely amazing because they were committed 100% to the format from start to finish — not just with the hardware, but with the lighting, makeup, set design, everything. It's a shame the movies sucked, and it's a shame that there has never been a way to watch them in HFR 3D outside of select theaters.
The Ghost in the Shell movie in VR is jaw dropping. The 3d effects work beautifully.
Ok, I'm intrigued but looking it up there's apparently a few GitS things in 3D/VR:
I'm guessing you're talking about the live movie, but now I also want to know how an anime would look like in 3D.
I've only tried the live action movie. I just downloaded a pack of random 3d movies to try out the experience, and that happened to be the one I picked first.
I watched Avatar (the one about blue alien Indians) in 3D, had terrible nausea through all the time, but since I watched it with my grandma, a memory.
It's so silly that these days they are still making the 3d movies for theatres but just not releasing them on streaming services.
It would be a major competitive advantage and something I would use fairly often if I could just open the Netflix or Disney+ app and watch some 3d movies on my PSVR2. I love laying and watching movies in VR when I'm tired but not ready to sleep. 3d would be an additional draw.
I'd honestly be down to buy a VR headset if movies otherwise used them in some sort of universal format. Definitely not buying Samsung/Sony/Paramount/Meta VR bullshit though.
You get to choose your format if you dump your own media. Plus you also get to host a media server and stop paying to not watch Netflix.
There are tons of options to play back 3D media on a HMD. Honestly my complaint here is that watching media on a virtual screen in VR kinda sucks. The quality just isn't there and you still have a big thing strapped to your face. I'd much rather have good glass-free screens and leave VR for VR things, but it doesn't seem to be the way tech is going.
It'd actually be kinda cool if there were movies with supplemental VR. That is, mostly 2d but with VR headset sections. I know they had this in the theatres in thr past with red/blue VR glasses, but it'd look so much better with a good VR headset.
The issue is that it's a bit of a hard sell within an already limited market segment. You'd need to already have a largeish TV, and then also a 3D headset on the same PC.
I'd think most VR enthusiasts would have their VR on either a standalone unit or on a gaming PC, not on their HTPC.
As you've said, watching an entire film in VR is kinda ass.
How would that even work? Like, small segments in immersive VR? That seems... very specific.
The idea with 3D TVs is they could do 3D on demand. They failed because even the lightweight 3D glasses were a bit of a hassle. It's fine in a movie theatre, more or less, where you know you'll be seated for the whole thing, but at home you don't want anything extra sitting on your face, let alone putting stuff on and off mid-movie.
I agree on the VR filmwatching being ass thing, though. It's hot, sweaty and isolating to do at home when your TV is right there, and it'll take a whooole lot of normalizing before I pull out a HMD while I'm on a plane or a train without feeling like a complete idiot, regardless of whatever Apple was thinking about how the Vision Pro would get used.
How would that even work? Like, small segments in immersive VR? That seems... very specific.
Yes exactly. They did this in theatres where small sections of the movie would be in 3D. There'd be a blinking icon to tell you when to put your 3D glasses on.
The problem with 3d anaglyphs is that there's a tradeoff: To get the depth information across, there's a big loss in colour reproduction. It's fine as a gimmick, but doing the whole movie that way probably isn't the best idea.
VR headsets just have a different set of tradeoffs (hot, sweaty and isolating ;) which make them basically equally undesirable for a good viewing experience.
The idea behind having only sections in 3d is that you only accept the tradeoffs when they're most worthwhile.
Meeeeh... at the cost of breaking up the experience pretty severely.
They did it that way in the days of anaglyph 3D because the color filtering made a mess of everything else about the movie With modern shutter or polarization you can just watch the whole thing that way with minimum issues.
And even those proved to be too much. Nothing short of perfect glassless seems to be enough. I can't imagine people would accept paying 600 bucks of a bulky HMD, stop a movie halfway and strap that on just to get immersive VR effects when they could just be playing a VR game instead.
Maybe as part of a more expansive mixed media thing, like in a museum or a theme park. For movie watching I don't think it'd take.
Spy Kids 4D
Yeah it would be nice to get Movies Anywhere or something fully on board. All the movie studios are sitting on 3D movies already, they just need to make the app(s).
I think I'd like more engagement though to really commit. Be able to turn my head and see more of the scene. Stand up and view a slightly different angle.
All of the tech exists to make this possible, I just don't know if filmmaking can work that into the mix.
There’s an app I got for Plex for my Meta Quest 3 and I gotta say that it is top notch. They have a bunch of settings for how you’d like your environment to look like but I prefer the one that makes you feel you’re at the movies and it really does feel that way.
Not sure if that’s what you were getting at or not but I enjoy it when I’m out and about instead of using my iPad or iPhone.
Downside is that you need to sideload this which requires a Meta developer account (free, just unnecessary hassle) as far as I know. Other is that it requires Plex and not the native Netflix/etc. app. Though YouTube has a similar format in their official app.
Seeing Spy Kids 3D in the theatre as a child was wild af.
I think I saw that at Disney World as a kid as my first 3D experience.
Well shit. I missed out on VR.
I have a psvr, but only one company makes an app you can watch your own files on. And they charge $30 for the app.
But then they say "no porn".
Well then I'm not buying your overpriced VR app!!! Why do you think I was even looking in the first place??? I was going to download some porn files in VR, and then watch it them through a usb stick in the ps4 on your app! But noooooooooooo. You hate money! Asshole!
Sorry. Not you. I was talking to the app.
You have to use the one linked to your Facebook account and share your porn history with Zuck.
Valve index, pimax, vive, varjo?
Everyone's out here acting like the two options are the quest or the psvr, there are tons of headsets out there, especially if all you want to do is jork it
Lol back in highschool one of my buddies accidentally clicked an fb like button on a porn site and it shared the video to his feed
Nah, can't have been a pure accident, there'd have been more steps than a single button. He'd have had to sign in at least
If you were signed into Facebook in the same browser session then you wouldn't need to sign in again
Look at these noobs not using a private window at minimum.
Senator Cruz?
o7
I don't even HAVE a facebook account.
Don't need one to share with zuck. He's already scraped all of your comments on lemmy too
Just embrace being horny on main. :) Unless you're American. Then instead of you coming, they'll be coming for you in the next 4+ years.
I bought the psvr2 and module to hook it up to my pc but watching vr stuff in general isn't easy a you would think.
I tried some vr stuff on YouTube but I can't seem to get it to work. People suggest downloading the movie and use apps but I just want to click the video and stream it.
Same on pornhub, I don't know what I'm doing wrong.
I had better results with my s7 with the vr goggles...
I think there is specifically a YouTube 3D. Maybe it's an app. I was pretty unimpressed by most of the VR stuff. Blurry and distorted. Rollercoasters are fun. Nature documentaries would be neat but the quality is so low you can't really see much detail, just the grand vistas.
I personally find VR porn really meh. I want to like it, but again it's blurry - especially when they shove genitals in your face and your eyes can't focus, and you have this really awkward view of someone simulating oral sex that just hurts your eyes, and it's not even as stimulating as it would be to watch someone else doing it from a reasonable distance. At least for me.
That said, all my shit is a few years old and maybe the resolution and frame rates are better with newer stuff than oculus 2, but I think VR works better with simple shapes than video. Beatsaber is a great experience in VR and there are some similar rail shooters but most everything else has been disappointing.
Minecraft should've been fun but it made me sick. Skyrim VR was pretty fun. Especially because you could still mod it, but again the resolution and frame rate are too low for the level of detail in the game.
Not too late. Depending on your stance with Meta though.
I purposefully missed out. I think it's gimmicky in it's current state.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
