Whine like a baby, now with 500% more drama!

Also, comparing 80s 3D to current 3D is an automatically broken argument. 80s 3D looked just plain aweful due to having to use the red/cyan glasses.
Um, no. They used the polarized glasses. At least the theatrical releases did.

There was a very brief experiment in the early 80s with 3D television. Some local stations would show old 3D movies where you did have to wear the colored glasses. Picked them up from the daily paper or at nearby mini-marts. Not all that successful.
 
Well, gee, it's a shame they don't also come out in 2d as well... oh wait, they do. I'm sorry it's not something you can partake in, but that still doesn't mean that it can be written off entirely.
In the case of, for example, Tintin, I didn't have that choice. There were no 2D screenings in the entire city(and there never was). I sucked it up and watched it in 3D because I really wanted to see it. You know what 3D added to Tintin? Nothing. 3 dollar gimmick.
 
Ugh, I give up. I'm sorry 3d movies give you headaches, but quite frankly, there's a reason that it keeps being brought back into films. My overall thought is that, NO, not many movies have made an effective use of the technology artistically, however, that doesn't mean that it CAN'T be.
 

fade

Staff member
I've had the 3D argument before. Not just with movies, but with my job, where companies try to sell us 3D visualization all the time. No one's going for it in industry either, and these places are hemorrhaging money. The reason I think 3D is failing is because it's something your brain already does well. There is enough information in the scene already that your brain interprets as 3D even without any glasses. People don't actively think of this when they dismiss 3D, but they do get underwhelmed. With color, I don't think your brain works that way. It interprets grays as grays, not as proxies for color.
 
With color, I don't think your brain works that way. It interprets grays as grays, not as proxies for color.
I'll just say this about that. Did you percieve the blood going down the drain in psycho as red or black? Not visually, but perceptually.
 
I know what your intention was to say that the comparison of 80s 3D to Current Tech 3D was silly and pointless.... however so is your comparison to the addition of color and sound to cinema to current tech 3D. You can't use it as a base argument.

Also, I'll fix this quick for you:

3D makes nothing better. Haven't you learned anything from the Castlevania series? /laughtrack
 

fade

Staff member
I'll just say this about that. Did you percieve the blood going down the drain in psycho as red or black? Not visually, but perceptually.

Completely honest answer: I perceived it as blood. Not as any color. It was mapped to a concept, but not to a specific color. Honestly, you can always think of exceptions. Grass is green, sky is blue. But what color suit was that guy wearing? What color were her eyes. Blond or redhead? Those things are added.
 
I could also argue that Gone With the Wind would have been just as great in Black and White, however, Wizard of Oz, used it to great effect. So, yes, depending on what the artists do with it adds or detracts overall.

Also, comparing 80s 3D to current 3D is an automatically broken argument. 80s 3D looked just plain aweful due to having to use the red/cyan glasses.

In summation:
View attachment 4962
I didn't say anything about the look; I said the usage. I just recently saw some crappy CGI animated film commerical where they were chucking rocks at the screen. People don't need to pay $13 to see rocks coming at them; you can go outside and ask others to pelt rocks at you.
 
Because colour and sound didn't raise he ticket price 140%, colour and sound didn't give people headaches and force them to wear uncomfortable peripherals just to enjoy the movie, and colour and sound were new, so people said that without previously experiencing them, whereas 3D has an established history of short lived fads dating back to the 50s.
3dchart.jpg


Though the same "it adds nothing to the film" argument could be made against either sound or colour, making that argument for any of the three would be wrong. It adds nothing when applied to the WRONG films. And that's what the fad is. They're going gung ho and adding 3D to everything to try and capitalize on the gimmick, while audiences are slowly but surely getting sick of paying the extra money to see washed out colours in films that were not filmed with 3D in mind.
 
And yet, no one out there sees the biggest obstacle to 3-D gaining wide acceptance.

Namely, our friends Deuteranopia, Protanopia, and Tritanopia.
 
In the case of, for example, Tintin, I didn't have that choice. There were no 2D screenings in the entire city(and there never was). I sucked it up and watched it in 3D because I really wanted to see it. You know what 3D added to Tintin? Nothing. 3 dollar gimmick.
Why can't you just accept that 3D is something you should like and pay for, and that your failure to do so is outright denial of cinema's next big step forward?
 
There is no reason I should be up at 7:30 on a Sunday, especially when I went to bed late. But, my little doggie just can't handle it and one of us has to get up and keep him company in the front room or the barage of squeaking will keep both of us up. Yes Fly, I'll get up and sit on the couch while you wag at me happily...
I'm so tired.

(On the bright side, Nate let me sleep in yesterday, so there is that.)
 

ElJuski

Staff member
*likes her 3DS.*
actually, I haven't seen that in action, but with gaming I feel like there's more of a point for it, rather than a movie. But I'm also the guy that hated using the two-screens and (most of the time) the touch screen on the DS, so, when it comes to gaming, I'm an odd duck.
 
Finished with St. Patrick's Day. 1 million drunken revellers in a city that normally deals with about a fourth of that.

My feet and knees are killing me, and I can't seem to get my head straight today.

At least I'm not on River St right now... they still have shoulder-to-shoulder traffic.

On the upside, I traded for a bunch of patches, and convinced an Irish prison guard Captain to part with his epaulets. *grins*
 

fade

Staff member
JKA/AF decided to have a tournament. In New Orleans. On St. Patrick's day. On a street on the UNO campus that was closed for construction. Needless to say, everyone was late, even the organizers.
 
Finished with St. Patrick's Day. 1 million drunken revellers in a city that normally deals with about a fourth of that.

My feet and knees are killing me, and I can't seem to get my head straight today.

At least I'm not on River St right now... they still have shoulder-to-shoulder traffic.

On the upside, I traded for a bunch of patches, and convinced an Irish prison guard Captain to part with his epaulets. *grins*
Traded patches? Do they have to bring in police from other cities/ provinces to cover St. Patrick's Day?
I think its a cool practice. My dad went to a 9/11 memorial service in New York where he traded patches with firefighters from all over North America. He traded a bunch of his for a uniform shirt that was actually at ground zero.

What do you do with all the patches? My dad's are just in a drawer somewhere. Seems to me like they should be displayed somehow.
 
Why can't you just accept that 3D is something you should like and pay for, and that your failure to do so is outright denial of cinema's next big step forward?
That is not, and never has been my argument. I'm simply trying to figure out why simply because it's newer, it's invalid as something that can add to film.

The only valid responses I've gotten are cost and headaches, both of which are valid concerns, but other than that, it's all about hating on the newest thing.
 
That is not, and never has been my argument. I'm simply trying to figure out why simply because it's newer, it's invalid as something that can add to film.

The only valid responses I've gotten are cost and headaches, both of which are valid concerns, but other than that, it's all about hating on the newest thing.
It's not new. It's older than I am.

Are you a cyclops? Because that's the only way I can see someone feeling this is so revolutionary and wonderful.

I apologize if you actually are a child of Poseidon.
 
Traded patches? Do they have to bring in police from other cities/ provinces to cover St. Patrick's Day?
We do, but only for the parade. For the celebration itself, all hands are on deck - no-one gets leave. Light-duty officers take phone reports or man the cameras, the precincts switch to two 12-hour shifts with about 15 officers per shift, and everyone else works the festival area.

What do you do with all the patches? My dad's are just in a drawer somewhere. Seems to me like they should be displayed somehow.
Right now, they're sitting in a box, awaiting a proper mount. I intend to put 'em up on my "I love me" wall with other memorabilia. Half of my patch collection is still with my parents - I started when I was young.

Hey you, would you like some cap badges and stuff from the Canadian military?
Uhm, yeah? *dry smile* hit me up via PM, and we'll talk.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
we're in the middle of migrating to a new traffic system and are so far behind it's not even funny.

the traffic director has been out sick for 3 days

it's all I can do that barely keep up with day to day basis stuff

the migration is going to hell

and it was supposed to go live monday and we're past the point of no return

and now the power has gone out

my battery backup failed

my computer lost power my windows was corrupted.

so here I sit doing a repair install and whining on this forum through my cellphone.
 
Top