Discussion in 'Transformers News and Rumors' started by SilverOptimus, Oct 21, 2010.
News Post : Transformers: The Dark Of The Moon Is In Real And Post-Converted 3D
i dont get it
Ugh, post-converted 3D. That is a trend that should not continue.
Part of the film was shot using 3D cameras, the rest was shot using 2D cameras. The 2D shots will be converted in post-production, but won't look as good. CG robots should also look great in 3D, as they're modeled in 3D. Think of it as the difference between 'Avatar' (filmed in 3D) and Clash of the Titans (not filmed in 3D, and crappy). With this mixture, it should turn out well.
I just hope there's also the option of seeing this movie in "normal" format for those of us who hate the 3D overkill fad going on lately and don't want to sit through an already chaotic Bayformers movie with retarded glasses on.
okay now i get it!
It's not the post-converted 3D that's a problem. As is noted in the snippet even Avatar used it. Can you tell where they did it? I'm betting no one outside of James Cameron and the people who did it can tell without computer-aided analysis.
The problem with post-converting is having the Director (y'know, the person who makes all the final decisions, when not over-riden by the studio(s) , for how everything turns out in the film) and the technical crew understanding how to properly use the new technology and techniques and applying it properly.
Do I think post-converted 3D will work in TF3?
I'll refer you to the IMAX version of TF2. Specifically, the part of the movie where Devastator comes in. Where the movie switched between IMAX dimensions and resolution to standard dimensions and resolution depending upon whether or not Devastator was on screen in any way.
That made for a fairly jarring experience, and as we've seen (or anyone who has gone to see movies with the current 3D technology has) it takes someone who can handle something fairly sophisticated (of which, IMAX is not) to make 3D, post-converted or not, work in a film.
Lame A** Sh**,I too hate 3d movies since you can't see 80% of the crap with this new technique.plus you have to pay extra for those stupid glasses at the movies.So I really ain't looking forward to seeing TF3 in this crappy format,but will probably go and see it and just not wear those damn dorky glasses like I usually do with the 3d movies.
Finally I will look forward to getting the dvd,as that will probably be in regular 2d format.
I read this, and ponder the myriad of armchair experts discussing the merits of shooting 3D as opposed to the "cheap 3D conversion"... and I sit and smile.
At the end of the day, whatever works wins the race.
Post-process 3D sounds pretty scary, but I bet if they will use it for the 'pedestrian' scenes - the scenes where a 3D effect would be barely noticable anyway, it will not be a problem.
And just think about it, alot of scenes will have 3D CGI renders..some scenes might even be full 3D CGI environments (ala the Nemesis in ROTF). I bet converting these scenes into real 3D is less of a hassle than 'real' scenes.
So in short: the post-process 3D is probably alot less scary than it sounds for this movie!
...Sooo you don't want to watch movies with glasses on, so instead you look at the jumbled/'double' screen?
Mmmmm well this is great news! Means I'll be saving myself the whole 3 bucks come next summer
id say almost every 3D film that comes out has a non 3D version of it. at least every film in 3D ive seen has.
All it is theres one film all 3D'd up and another film with no effect on it at all. Even if it was shot in 3D it dosent matter. Your not going to be sitting there watching a film all fd up without glasses on.
as for the 3D processes go its still just a gimic it dosent make the movie better it just makes it seem cooler. so if they decide to use both then its fine by me.
Doesn't really matter to me one way or the other, I'm not watching it in 3-D.
Well, I probably won't really notice the difference through the headache I'll have by the end of the film. If I see it in 3D at all, it'll only be the first time. Any repeat viewings will be in 2D.
Technically, you aren't paying for the glasses. You're paying the theater extra to cover the hardware costs (so said the manager at the local theater).
Either way, if all movies are going to be in 3D anymore, it looks like the cost of tickets will forever get higher.
Some movies work with 3D, while others abuse it. Avatar was spectatular, and the 3D just enhanced an already well done film. Piranna, Saw, Jackass... LAME overuse of the 'coming at you' effects.
I have a horrible feeling MB will be an abuser, and we'll get lots of explosions coming at us.
i can not wait for this to die out post converterd or not 3d works with some movies mostly animated for me but every fraggin movie its in 3d & even has 3d in title and having 2 pairs of glasses to see it in 3d at theater or on dvd fromat sucks especially on dvd 3d dvd fromat you get 2 basic colors only red & green
directors dont realize if movie is in 3d or not there movie will stiill make same amount of money at boxoffice hollywood thinks if you make movie in 3d it will make 2 or 3 times amount what they expecting it doesnt work like that forogt who said this here its only added special effect to make movie flashy looking nothing more tha nthat
i hate 3D.
Did you NOT read the part of the article that says how your precious Avatar was ALSO partially 3D converted?
Hmmm. I'm not too upset about it, i think that it will still look good. I remember Bay saying they did 3D tests on footage form TF1 and TF2, and he wasn't happy with what he saw. So I can assume that he;s picky, and any post-pro. 3D that is done will probably be the best possible. Also, keep in mind that the visual effects will all be CREATED in 3D, and will therefore, of course, look totally fantastic. Which is the only thing that matters.
I think it will be fine, although I do hope they offer a 2D option too, just in case.
Separate names with a comma.