Mistake in 4D, Which is 2D Too Many

jake blackstone Oct 16, 2016

  1. Marc Wielage likes this.
  2. Is the 120fps actually 120fps per eye or is it some 60fps per eye marketing lingo?
  3. Well, it was the same with Turnbull’s efforts on this front a few years ago. Not surprised.

  4. i,m sure it will be 60fps per eye i know the some the barco and Christie's support 3D 60fps per eye and straight 2k 2D 120 fps

    i have never seen 3d 120fps per eye on any kind of road map ...so i think its marketing lingo

    what ever it is I,m going to hate it

    i wish they would just sort HDR projection out and stop messing around with this stuff ..i think it looks terrible :)
  5. I really like how on the paramount lot they use those high speed 3d projectors with the active 3d lenses (my assumption is it's a lcd at 60 hz ?), mostly the film actual frame rate is just 24 fps in 3d. I think most things I watch now the display rate is either 90 fps or 120 fps, and often I watch 24 fps content at 90+ fps display rate, and it looks really good(i sometimes even see 24 fps content merged with 30 or 60 fps content that is displayed at 90 fps). But my 4k color correction monitor is unfortunately maxed at 60 fps display rate, and a lot of the people doing the post work are at varius display rates and not seeing how it actually looks at the higher display rate. So I think a lot of the producers and executives I hear are doing a lot of experimenting with all this stuff, but something as simple as comparing acquisition fps from venue fps gets confused (i.e. 24 fps 3d film frames look really nice on 120 fps displays, while 90 fps 3d frames on effectively 60 fps displays can look kind of crappy). The most common comment I hear on this is that moving to 90 fps 3d requires a change in how the story "works", and no one has that figured out.
  6. It's 120fps per eye. The projectors used for demo screening were specially developed and not commercially available.

    The film was shot on a dual F65 3D rig with 4K 120fps RAW from each camera.
    gavin nugent likes this.

  7. wow ....no wonder there is not much info out about it ....interesting to see how it's going to be projected for any kind of wider release ...im happy to see a 2d 24 :)
  8. Here are the versions for theatrical release:
    4K 3D 120fps @ 28fL - Currently planned in 5 theaters around the world (NY, LA, Beijing, Shanghai, Taipei)
    2K 3D 60fps
    4K/2K 2D 120fps
    4K/2K 2D 24fps
    Dolby Cinema 2K 3D 120fps
    Dolby Cinema 2K 2D 120fps
  9. When we did 3D projects at Lowry, we generally used XPanD and the projector was set up for a 96Hz image (each frame flashed 4 times, synced with the LCD-shutter glasses). Worked great. It's still 24fps playback, just flashed in order to reduce strobing.

    I'm curious to see the 120fps screenings of Billy Lynn just as a technological experiment. But I was not impressed with The Hobbit in 48fps, and I think this is going to be more of the same problem. The reviews I quoted from above pointed out that the increase in sharpness was not flattering to the actors and did not advance the story.

    I was also around in 1981 when Doug Trumbull did the Showscan demo in Westwood for a SMPTE crowd, and my reaction to the 60fps film there was that "it looked like very high quality video." The problem with a look like that is that (to me) it kind of prevents you from relaxing and just getting into the story and characters. Your brain keeps switching back and forth asking, "is this real? No, it's a movie. Is this real? No, it's a movie." over and over again, to the point where it's irritating.

    To me, there's a lot to like about 24fps being part of our shared human DNA, because it feels like a movie: a fantasy, a story, a drama, with the same look that everybody has been watching for almost 100 years. For reasons like this, I'm much more of a fan of HDR for cinemas, because the basic look doesn't change -- it's still a 24fps cinematic image, just with brighter highlights.
    Patrick Faith likes this.

  10. Where did you get this info? Hope to catch the 4k 120 version in LA, and wondering which theater will be showing it.
  11. That's right "xpand", I really like those glasses, everything else seems crapy after using them. I also agree on the 24 fps vs 90+ fps, it should all be story based and what is the emotional feel that the production is going for.
    Marc Wielage likes this.

Share This Page