|
here. Sounds interesting but doesn't really explain how it will work. |
More rumours. 3d projection!?!
-
AnotherMartin 6,229 posts
Seen 11 years ago
Registered 20 years ago -
Did they learn nothing from the Virtual Boy? .gif)
-
hulahoops 2,311 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 20 years agoIt does work! I can't find the videos but they've been doing the rounds... -
Oooooh, now that's a juicy rumour! .gif)
-
So what are we talking here? Red and green glasses and monster headaches? Or have times moved on since Jaws 3D? -
AnotherMartin 6,229 posts
Seen 11 years ago
Registered 20 years agodepends how it works really, this could be tied in with the patent from a few months back that, at the time, people thought could've been to do with four swords.
two things that give hope from that article are that supposidly it was shown for the GC at the last E3 (but i can't believe it wasn't leaked before now) and the comment about trying to get similar tech into cinemas*. these both point to it being failry mature technology, something that's been worked on for a while.
* plus if it is going into cinemas i can't see it being like the VB.
but one to definiatly file under rumour for now. even if this is true i can't see them announcing it at this E3, i think it'll be one they'll keep hush for a while yet. -
AnotherMartin 6,229 posts
Seen 11 years ago
Registered 20 years agoBlerk wrote:
So what are we talking here? Red and green glasses and monster headaches? Or have times moved on since Jaws 3D?
nah, I'm thinking polarized glasses like they have in iMax these days. not the old lcd chunky headsets but the thin plastic ones. -
I've never been to an iMax, so I've no idea. Doesn't it make your eyes go funny after ten minutes? -
AnotherMartin 6,229 posts
Seen 11 years ago
Registered 20 years agoNope.
The newer ones in imax are freakin' great.
i took the nephew to see the Santa 3d one a couple of xmas' back and the 3d affect is stunning. tbh you get more of a headache if you take the glasses of and try to look at it normaly.
On a big screen though the affect is truly stunning, can even induce feelings of motion.
Which thinking about it that tied in with gyroscopic controllers could rock. -
Ooh! Hopefully they'd look a bit cooler than those, but you know nintendo... it'll probably end up having ears on them. -
AnotherMartin 6,229 posts
Seen 11 years ago
Registered 20 years agocubbymoore wrote:
Ooh! Hopefully they'd look a bit cooler than those, but you know nintendo... it'll probably end up having ears on them.
that's the fellas.
Hopefully the lenses will be a bit smaller. i assum the imax ones are large due to the screens being so big. -
The look like Timmy Mallett's cast-offs!
It would be interesting to see if they could get such a technology to actually work with a game. I mean, a 3D effect in a film is one thing, but in something you have to interact with it's something else entirely. I can see precision placement of a character could be difficult, for instance. -
AnotherMartin 6,229 posts
Seen 11 years ago
Registered 20 years agothinking about gyro controllers and that patent from last year I'm thinking that your character would be failry static in the center and the game world would move around it.
Which written down sounds pretty much like most 3rd person games now but is different in my head. if that makes sense.
but it won't be for all games I'd imagine.
And fps', racing games, things with fairly static views could be great.
i think k.o.ti. said he had tried those goggles deem was after and mentioned games like ico being stunning through them. not sure if they where proper 3d goggles or just the ones that simulate a big display. -
AnotherMartin 6,229 posts
Seen 11 years ago
Registered 20 years ago -
terminalterror 18,932 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 20 years agoAnotherMartin wrote:
Nope.
The newer ones in imax are freakin' great.
i took the nephew to see the Santa 3d one a couple of xmas' back and the 3d affect is stunning. tbh you get more of a headache if you take the glasses of and try to look at it normaly.
On a big screen though the affect is truly stunning, can even induce feelings of motion.
Which thinking about it that tied in with gyroscopic controllers could rock.
I saw Polar Express in 3D IMAX and it was absolutely stunning. The standard of the CG was far better than Santa versus the Snowman, and little things like a scene with falling snow become fantastic. -
AnotherMartin 6,229 posts
Seen 11 years ago
Registered 20 years agooh, I'll look that one up. Me and the nephew keep saying we'll go back and see another one but haven't sorted it out as yet.
Snow is always a cool effect in 3d, even in the Santa one I kept looking in my pop corn to make sure none had floated in and started making it soggy.
In the Santa one did you get the feeling of movement at all? I'm thinking of the bit near the begining where the camera pans about the presents and the tree and comes up behind Santa sat at the computer.
Plus I liked the trick with using the nice side effect of 3d and the PoV. the bit where santa says he's going to point out who in the audience has been bad. -
terminalterror 18,932 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 20 years agoAnotherMartin wrote:
oh, I'll look that one up. Me and the nephew keep saying we'll go back and see another one but haven't sorted it out as yet.
Snow is always a cool effect in 3d, even in the Santa one I kept looking in my pop corn to make sure none had floated in and started making it soggy.
In the Santa one did you get the feeling of movement at all? I'm thinking of the bit near the begining where the camera pans about the presents and the tree and comes up behind Santa sat at the computer.
Plus I liked the trick with using the nice side effect of 3d and the PoV. the bit where santa says he's going to point out who in the audience has been bad.
That bit was good!
At the moment they are showing Robots at the bfi IMAX, but unfortunately it isn't in 3D. I can't understand why as the source is in 3D and it can't take very much longer to make a 3D IMAX version than a 2D IMAX version.
Whatever that anime that James Cameron is now doing as a 3D live action film should be stunning in IMAX.
If you want to see a live action 3D IMAX film, I highly recommend Space Station 3D. They took up a 3D camera and filmed the astronouts eating popcorn in zero g. There is a really stunning part where they go for a space walk and take the camera, and there is a shot where you look vertically down to the earth where everything is tiny, with an astronaut floating below you in orbit. That has to be the single most stunning shot I have ever seen.
Edited by terminalterror at 13:41:40 26-04-2005 -
Freek 7,682 posts
Seen 8 years ago
Registered 18 years ago3D animation isn't the same as 3D projection. The source is a 2D movie, just like everything else. Why they diden't make it 3D is probably becuase it was cheaper just to scale it up then to go all the way. Robots perhaps isn't as proffitable as they hoped it would be. -
AnotherMartin 6,229 posts
Seen 11 years ago
Registered 20 years agoTT, have you been to the imax in the Science museum or just the one at waterloo. I've only been to the one waterloo but the science museum one is easier for me.
thanks for the recomendation for SS:3d as that was one we thought about. -
MrWorf 64,187 posts
Seen 13 hours ago
Registered 20 years agoHyoushi wrote:
OMG Revolution!!!
OMG! I remember a time when I used to think that game looked wicked, ROFLOL look at it now! ffs... live eh? -
MrWorf 64,187 posts
Seen 13 hours ago
Registered 20 years agok.o.t.i wrote:
They're using them in stores for POS so it aint that cutting edge.
But it would be another bloody good idea by Nintendo!
Edited by k.o.t.i at 14:50:19 26-04-2005
That fucking pwns -
MrWorf 64,187 posts
Seen 13 hours ago
Registered 20 years agohmmm... sounds gay o_O -
terminalterror 18,932 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 20 years agoAnotherMartin wrote:
TT, have you been to the imax in the Science museum or just the one at waterloo. I've only been to the one waterloo but the science museum one is easier for me.
thanks for the recomendation for SS:3d as that was one we thought about.
Only the bfi IMAX on the South Bank by Waterloo. I had been to the Pepsi one in the Trocadero, but it closed down years ago. -
terminalterror 18,932 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 20 years agoFreek wrote:
3D animation isn't the same as 3D projection. The source is a 2D movie, just like everything else. Why they diden't make it 3D is probably becuase it was cheaper just to scale it up then to go all the way. Robots perhaps isn't as proffitable as they hoped it would be.
Robots is a CG movie, so they've got it all in 3D, I can't see why it would be too hard to rerender it twice, once shifted slightly to the left, once shifted slightly to the right. I would have thought they rerendered it for IMAX format anyway. -
AnotherMartin 6,229 posts
Seen 11 years ago
Registered 20 years agoYeah, I went to the one in the Troc years back when they still had the big headsets with the shutters on the lenses, built in headphones and the infrared sensor thingies.
Went to the one in waterloo a while back but not tried the one in the science museum as yet. I imagine it'll still be decent but I can't see it being anywhere near as big.
Might have to try it though as it's almost walking distance from where I am. -
terminalterror 18,932 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 20 years agoHyoushi wrote:
terminalterror wrote:
Heh, terror, these things aren't exactly rendered in a couple of hours, you know
Robots is a CG movie, so they've got it all in 3D, I can't see why it would be too hard to rerender it twice, once shifted slightly to the left, once shifted slightly to the right. I would have thought they rerendered it for IMAX format anyway. There may be hundreds of separate scenes to render, some with multiple effect passes, shifting the camera in all of those and rendering them twice and then compositing and editing is not something you do at the touch of a button! 
I know it isn't that simple, but they would hardly just start on the IMAX release the week before they start showing it. Admittedly it would take time and effort to achieve, but the cost of rerendering it into 3D must be vastly less than converting something for IMAX 3D from scratch. -
Freek 7,682 posts
Seen 8 years ago
Registered 18 years agoterminalterror wrote:
Hyoushi wrote:
terminalterror wrote:
Heh, terror, these things aren't exactly rendered in a couple of hours, you know
Robots is a CG movie, so they've got it all in 3D, I can't see why it would be too hard to rerender it twice, once shifted slightly to the left, once shifted slightly to the right. I would have thought they rerendered it for IMAX format anyway. There may be hundreds of separate scenes to render, some with multiple effect passes, shifting the camera in all of those and rendering them twice and then compositing and editing is not something you do at the touch of a button!
I know it isn't that simple, but they would hardly just start on the IMAX release the week before they start showing it. Admittedly it would take time and effort to achieve, but the cost of rerendering it into 3D must be vastly less than converting something for IMAX 3D from scratch.
That is essentially remaking the entire movie, that would be more expensive. It has probably just gone through the same conversion procces as other movies. That would be the cheaper way to do it as it doesn't involve the whole animation and post production team.
What they did for Robots is probably the same thing they did for Star Wars, rather then go all the way and recreate the entire movie as a stereo scopic 3D experience, they merely scaled up the movie so it could be displayed on I-max format.
Edited by Freek at 16:15:02 26-04-2005 -
moggsy 3,859 posts
Seen 3 days ago
Registered 18 years agoSaw a few 3D Imax files in Las Vegas. All of them without fail gave me strained eyes after a short time.
This tech is not suitable for prolonged gaming sessions. -
terminalterror 18,932 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 20 years agoFreek wrote:
terminalterror wrote:
Hyoushi wrote:
terminalterror wrote:
Heh, terror, these things aren't exactly rendered in a couple of hours, you know
Robots is a CG movie, so they've got it all in 3D, I can't see why it would be too hard to rerender it twice, once shifted slightly to the left, once shifted slightly to the right. I would have thought they rerendered it for IMAX format anyway. There may be hundreds of separate scenes to render, some with multiple effect passes, shifting the camera in all of those and rendering them twice and then compositing and editing is not something you do at the touch of a button!
I know it isn't that simple, but they would hardly just start on the IMAX release the week before they start showing it. Admittedly it would take time and effort to achieve, but the cost of rerendering it into 3D must be vastly less than converting something for IMAX 3D from scratch.
That is essentially remaking the entire movie, that would be more expensive. It has probably just gone through the same conversion procces as other movies. That would be the cheaper way to do it as it doesn't involve the whole animation and post production team.
What they did for Robots is probably the same thing they did for Star Wars, rather then go all the way and recreate the entire movie as a stereo scopic 3D experience, they merely scaled up the movie so it could be displayed on I-max format.
I see what you are getting at, but they did it for Polar Express, so it must be possible and commercially viable for just showing at IMAX screens. I'm slightly suprised that more IMAX theatres aren't popping up with the number of feature films that are now coming out in the format.
I have never got any eye strain from 3D IMAX films. -
Revolution doesn't use projection, it uses something which you can already buy in the shops for your PC - but its just not the standard in games consoles and therefore will be unique.
its like the rumblepak in that, unless its built into the joypad you cannot make games require it, as then people would be left out. but by making sure every joypad has a built in rumble pack allows you to do some toally unique stuff.
Edited by Pirotic at 18:12:38 26-04-2005
.gif)
.gif)
Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.
