Quantcast

I have seen Avatar 3D and...

I have seen Avatar 3D and... (tick all that apply)


  • Total voters
    2,187

mikeyp

Well-known Member
What are the 3.75% of people going on about?!?! You couldn't see anything in 3D, are you blind?
It just doesn't work for some people. Eyeryone's eyes are different. 3D (at the cinema and at home) has always just been a blurry mess for me and given me a massive headache but Avatar was amazing. I'm very pleased with the new non-migraine technology, but it obviously still doesn't work for some people.
 

dhicks001

Active Member
It just doesn't work for some people. Eyeryone's eyes are different. 3D (at the cinema and at home) has always just been a blurry mess for me and given me a massive headache but Avatar was amazing. I'm very pleased with the new non-migraine technology, but it obviously still doesn't work for some people.
Apologies, it was meant to be a jokey comment. Should have wrote that somewhere.
 

kempez

Well-known Member
It took me 45 mins to get used to the 3D and there were still some points that close up object had blurring whilst panning.

However, having gone to the cinema a huge skeptic about 3D, I was hugely impressed with Avatar. There was fantasic depth of field in the movie. I noticed that the fully CG bits were amazing and actually better than the filmed actors, perhaps due to the fact that all-CG parts of the film were more integrated.

The adverts for the other 3D movies were thoroughly unimpressive though, I hope Avatar isn't 'one of a kind', because if all 3D movies are like it then I may have to look into buying in. I don't think home cinema will be ready for 'proper' 3D for some time soon though.
 

nheather

Distinguished Member
I saw Avatar 3D at the weekend and this is the first 3D film that I have been very impressed with.

This was because it was 3D all the way through where as I have felt that previous films have been 2D with some 3D scenes.

3D certainly added to my viewing experience.

I checked "don't think we should pay more for 3D" because this was the closest option to what I feel.

At my cinema it cost £10.70 per person to see Avatar 3D. This is a lot of money. For something as long and epic as Avatar I can just about justify this but for other films I would not be prepared to pay this.

I am comfortable for paying a little more for 3D films, the problem is that the price of a standard film (£8.00) is already too much.

What are the 3.75% of people going on about?!?! You couldn't see anything in 3D, are you blind?
Perhaps they didn't realise that you had to wear the special glasses!

Cheers,

Nigel
 
Last edited:

Noggin1980

Well-known Member
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Anybody got any comments about my question on the glasses or goggles a few posts up,

cheers,

Graham
yes they are different, you used circular polarised glasses, both images are on screen at once but each eye sees a different image because one image has the light polarised one way and the second image the other way.

The option your friend saw is active shutter glasses, this is the system that most of the tv sets are going to use in the home, voltage is applied to each lens in sucession and it makes the lens go dark, this happens many many times each second, for these only one image is on the screen at once, first an image for your left eye while your right eye is dark and then vise versa many times a second.

It seems like for home 3d at least the shutter ones are best because if you are having to put both images on screen at once (for the polarised) then it's not full hd anymore because each picture can only use half the pixels. The disadvantage of the active shutter glasses is that they are about 10 times more expensive. That's going to be a pain for home use, you live with your wife do you want 2 pairs at £50 a peice or are you happy spending an extra £100-200 for the few times you watch movies with friends at home.

I've only seen 3d using the type you have used though so this isn't first hand info and there seems to be very little info from people who have seen both, I hoped we would get more info from the guys at ces about this.
 

r3tract

Well-known Member
yes they are different, you used circular polarised glasses, both images are on screen at once but each eye sees a different image because one image has the light polarised one way and the second image the other way.

The option your friend saw is active shutter glasses, this is the system that most of the tv sets are going to use in the home, voltage is applied to each lens in sucession and it makes the lens go dark, this happens many many times each second, for these only one image is on the screen at once, first an image for your left eye while your right eye is dark and then vise versa many times a second.

It seems like for home 3d at least the shutter ones are best because if you are having to put both images on screen at once (for the polarised) then it's not full hd anymore because each picture can only use half the pixels. The disadvantage of the active shutter glasses is that they are about 10 times more expensive. That's going to be a pain for home use, you live with your wife do you want 2 pairs at £50 a peice or are you happy spending an extra £100-200 for the few times you watch movies with friends at home.

I've only seen 3d using the type you have used though so this isn't first hand info and there seems to be very little info from people who have seen both, I hoped we would get more info from the guys at ces about this.
Good news for 3D fans,

Technology is being developed at Durham University (Co-incidentally the world leaders in 3D screen technology), whereby users no longer need to wear glasses to view in 3D. It also allows for true HD 3D and projects in the z axis not just a false dual image. It does this by tracking your eyes with dual cameras.

At the moment only one person can view it at a time as the technology requires cameras to track the viewer pupils, but no doubt soon enough the technology will have been developed to allow for multi-users!

:)
 

timoth27

Standard Member
just wanted to say that i saw it in the US over xmas in a reletivly small ciniema (elkin west verginia)and it was my first 3D film. same price as 2D, free (blues brothers style) glasses and thought it was awsome:clap::clap::D:clap::clap: u had 5 mins of 3D adverts first to get used to it and so when the film started i was comfortable and found the whole film a good balance and not too much 3D but plenty to keep you emmersed in the film. Throughly enjoyed it just needed more comfortable seats.

P.s why is it that we seem to be ripped off ALL the time in the country:mad:
 

Chazfest

Standard Member
Saw it at the iMax in Birmingham. 3D and screen size/quality blew my mind. Seats were spectacularly low budget!
 

Andris L

Well-known Member
Just back from cinema and all i can say is WOW. I really enjoyed the movie plus 3D totally blew my mind.

Just amazing :smashin:.
 

Banksie

Active Member
The only reason the film studios are pushing 3d so hard is to try and combat piracy.

A film theif cannot sit with a camera and film a 3d film.
 

confused88

Novice Member
The only reason the film studios are pushing 3d so hard is to try and combat piracy.

A film theif cannot sit with a camera and film a 3d film.
I don't think it's the only reason. It's a new technology and it presents an opportunity for making a profit. If a studio decided to pass others would benefit from it.
Piracy is not a problem for 3d movies as we don't have 3D ready TVs and players yet (or do we?). However, high quality illegal copies of 2d films are not made with the help of a camcorder either.
 

PeterHeron

Standard Member
Avatar was a brilliant movie in its own right but I have to say that I’d rate the 3D experience of the movie as 'good' viewing but not as spectacular as I hoped it would be. There were a couple of 3D adverts on before the movie and to be honest, they were much more dramatic and in-your-face in terms of 3D presentation than Avatar was!
 

FoxHound

Novice Member
I went to see Avatar this afternoon, and was completely blown away by it, I thought all aspects of the picture quality and 3D effects at the cinema where I saw it were absolutely stunning.

The 3D made it seem for me at times like I was actually standing in the room/spaceship/forest with the actors, it was far and away the best perceived PQ I have ever seen.

I wasn't sure if the effect would work or be comfortable for me as I already wear glasses, but I had no problems with the large glasses I was given, althought I couldn't see myself wearning them to watch TV at home.

Ticket was decent value as well at £6.50.

The actual movie wasn't bad either :D
 

Jules

Distinguished Member
Just back from my Avatar IMAX 3D experience. It's my first visit to the cinema in over 10 years as my home cinema has been better quality in that time.

My view is that Avatar as a film is a complete triumph. I loved it and think James Cameron is a genius... his films are always perfectly paced, and Avatar is no different.

My favourite 3D moments were simply the shots where the camera flew over the edge of a cliff.... these moments made me gasp in amazement, and you just don't get that with 2D.
Other parts of the film I would have preferred in high resolution 2D, so it wasn't a total 3D success.

A truly great experience though, and James Cameron must now (if he wasn't already) be considered the best director in the world.
He's never made a duff film, whereas Spielberg has made some awful shockers!

I really can't wait to see Avatar on Blu-ray at home.... 2D or 3D I don't care. Great film!
 
P

pompeyexile

Guest
Well me and my other half came out of the cinema with our mouths open in awe and if we could have, would have turned round there and then and gone in to watch it again.

The 3D effect was brilliant. Clear sharp no blurring no headaches no funny vision. The big sunglass like 3D specs were comfortable.

Unlike old 3D films where there were scenes set up just to be gimmicky like throwing something at the audience, it was just a film but with a greater depth of field. OK of course there were times when things came towards you but only in the context as they would have anyway no matter how the picture was filmed.

Colour, movement etc were spot on and in my opinion it gave the alien planet a sense of realism that 2D could never give.

Modern 3D so much more superior than 50's 3D.

Maybe we were lucky and the cinema we saw it at was just set up correctly and that's why we had no issues, no having to give it ten minutes to get used to or headaches etc. Nobody left early and it was packed.

Did it deserve the hype? You bet!

As for the story, perfectly acceptable.

I will be going to see it again before it goes however even if it were in 3D at home unless you're looking at it on huge a screen it will never have the same impact.

Visually the best film i've seen in years.:thumbsup:
 

kempez

Well-known Member
Will it be in watchable 3D at home, or will we need '3D' TV's? I'm asking as there's simply two images on the screen at one time. Surely that can be done on a normal TV, with the glasses?

There's no way in hell I'm buying a new TV for some time, that's for sure.
 
You'll need a new TV. And I feel the same way about my projection setup - I just got one I'm happy with (and don't really care for 3D anyway).
 

Razor

Distinguished Member
I saw this movie at BFI Imax in London and it blew me away. It is without doubt the best cinema experience I have ever had. :thumbsup:
 

kempez

Well-known Member
You'll need a new TV. And I feel the same way about my projection setup - I just got one I'm happy with (and don't really care for 3D anyway).
Thanks for the clarification David :thumbsup:

I enjoyed Avatar in 3D, but then I don't think not seeing it in 3D at home is a great loss, it just means films I want to see in 3D will be a cinema visit (I am a fairly regular cinema goer anyway). Same as you (whilst not as good, I'm sure :D!), I am more than happy with my TV and general AV setup and another investment in such an expensive item just isn't going to happen.

The film will still look gorgeous in Blu Ray 2D, I'm sure :smashin:
 

ObeyOne

Active Member
Took my Mum to see this yesterday and we were both really impressed with it. Great film - Good story - Visually superb. Not seen many 3D movies but to me looked great - quite natural compared to the last one i saw (Christmas Carol). Missing Pandora already.\
\Karl
 

Chester

Well-known Member
Went to see Avatar Friday night at the Birmingham IMAX. Walking into the place and into the cinema itself certainly was full of wow factor. Unfortunately due to traffic we arrived late (took almost 2 hours from Peterborough!) so my wife took an outside seat and I was one seat in. The first thing I noticed is the screen didn't have any masking and I was a little worried this would detract from the film.

Initially I found the curved screen a bit off-putting virtually sitting at the edge. The image didn't stretch to the bottom of the screen, but I soon forgot this during the film. The 3D images at first hurt, I mean focusing was painful. I think this was due to the 3D images 'falling off' the screen. Somehow some of the opening scenes seemed artificial; I know they are but it's meant to look real, right!?! Also Phil's earlier comment about the colours being a little green also were true in my experience. It's not clear to me whether it was meant to be like this, but that will be apparent once I've got the film on Blu-Ray.

Settling down into the film, the 3D at times became very subtle, almost what I'd call 'natural', very cleverly done. The perspective on Pandora, looking over the cliff faces and such like were breath taking and literally had me moving in my seat; obviously deliberate and it has the desired effect. But what really shocked me was the sound. I haven't heard a cinema like this in a long time. Simply put, LFE moved you whist centre dialog was clear, and the soundtrack and surround effects brought you right into the action with emotion, never seeming out of breath, boomy or lacking detail. In the end, this had more of an emotional effect on me than the 3D visuals; I'm not kidding!

Talking about how good the film is has been done to death here, so I'll just say that I really enjoyed it and as earlier stated, will be part of my Blu-Ray collection.

Getting closer to the end of the film, the glasses were taking their toll. I take a 57/58cm (medium) motorcycle helmet so don't have a large head, but the glasses were biting at the back of my head and my nose. I where prescription glasses too, but don't think it would have mattered if I didn't. My wife had the same issue too, even more sore, and she has a much smaller head.

So in the end, it was definitely worth the trek to Brum to see the film and get our first IMAX experience. I definitely want to see another. But it was the sound that added more drama for me than the 3D. Indeed, some of the 3D 'vanished' from where we were sitting, so our normal closer to the middle seating position is going to be a must I feel, then hopefully this won't happen. It took time to acclimatise to the 3D effect, but we didn't have the disorientation and headache afterwards that we did after seeing Ice Age 3 in Huntingdon.

Would I want 3D in the home? No. Content is king, will be at least initially limited, and broadcast material is going to be pay-per-view/premium prices. Moreover, there's talk of HDMI 1.4 being necessary which requires a change in cables and a surround sound receiver/processor, not just the display and source device. This equates to too much spend, and I'd rather pursue better sound (speakers and room prep) and make the move to 2D projection at home. I think this will ultimately reward for all of my content rather than just a snapshot.

So I'll say that 3D for me is going to be an IMAX event from now on. Our local multiplexes can't offer the sound and the blurry visuals just annoy me. The experience we had at Millennium Point (Brum's IMAX cinema) is one I'd wholly recommend to anyone thinking of seeing even a 2D presentation, not just 3D.
 
Hi all,

I took my wife and a friend to see Avatar at Staples corner (Junction 1 ,M1),just before Christmas. We deliberately got there one hour before the start to get good seats. The cinema was only half full for the whole screening !!!! The whole experience was totally amazing, all three of us were blown away by the 3d effects.
I am currently building my own home (after taking voluntary redundancy),and have bought many items to place in it when completed (Sonos, Surround sound equipment, etc). The only thing I cannot store in my current home due to size is a new T.V. If the Panasonic VT25 range proves to be as good as the hype, I will definitely get one (beats leaving everything to the kids) !!!

Chris
 

Latest News

Samsung Onyx cinema LED screen opens in Australia
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Disney CEO Bob Iger steps down
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Quantum Dot development could mean cheaper displays
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Netflix launches daily top ten rankings
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
OLED TV sales exceed one million in Q4 2019
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom