login

Author Topic: Lest Talk About HDTV's  (Read 6632 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MartyS (Gromit)

  • Not Quite Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 11144
  • Liked: 2362
  • Weirdies!
    • My homepage
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #30 on: February 03, 2017, 02:43:02 PM »
I've never seen a movie that was enhanced by 3D. 

What about Hugo?  I thought the 3D was used very well in that to add to the story.

Also the stop motion animated film Coraline did a thing where the fantasy and real worlds had different depths to them.

And of course there's Avatar, the 3D world was the only good thing about that movie....

It's great for nature documentaries.

As with all entertainment you get some gems and a lot of crap, if more people had adopted it maybe it would have been used to it's potential more often instead of just a way to charge extra at the theater.  A catch 22 there, lots of crap turning people off to 3D, so they don't get into it at home, so there's not enough sales to get filmmakers to use it well.

I wish they would keep it on UHD TVs, it would add at most a few dollars to a UHD TV to have it be able to play 1080p 3D, the bandwidth is already there for the UHD resolution.  All that would be needed would be to add a little software and the bluetooth transmitter to talk to the glasses.

Hopefully there will be players made that could talk to the glasses for those of us with 3D discs, it's just a stream of alternating images, it could all be done on the player side.


Offline Variety of Cells

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5764
  • Liked: 1300
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #31 on: February 03, 2017, 04:00:55 PM »
I've only ever seen it detract by limiting the cinematographer.  Chopping off the top of someone's head is common when doing a close up.  But with 3D you can't really do that or else it looks weird.  Plus the camera becomes bigger and more difficult to move around. 

And the very thing it's supposed to do, give layers of separation to the background and foreground, made The Hobbit look horrible and unnatural.  It separated the characters from the often times green screen backgrounds and made the image look like a composite instead of one cohesive picture.  It removed the characters from the world they were in, and made everything look fake.  In 2D everything blended together and looked nice.

Though I should admit part of my bias: I hate wearing glasses.  Having something touching the bridge of my nose gives me a headache.  Still, I've yet to see anything in 3D that has impressed me.  Usually things just look a little blurry, especially on the 3D TVs I've seen.


Offline MartyS (Gromit)

  • Not Quite Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 11144
  • Liked: 2362
  • Weirdies!
    • My homepage
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #32 on: February 03, 2017, 04:31:22 PM »
I take it you haven't seen Hugo in 3D?  That's probably the high water mark for me with 3D used as a tool instead of a gimmick.

I'll agree it did nothing for The Hobbit, I bought the 3D sets but don't bother with the 3D versions when rewatching it, not that I have rewatched those very many times.

I find 3D in the theater with the polarized glasses blurry, but at home on my TV it's very crisp.

Another good one I just thought of: The Martian, the extra depth of the landscapes add to the aspect of loneliness.


Offline Henry88

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5850
  • Liked: 607
  • Riff Super Monsters
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #33 on: February 03, 2017, 08:26:47 PM »
Creature from the Black Lagoon is  a knockout in 3D.
help a guy with his story project
gofundme.com/academy-days


Offline SJP

  • The FBI Pays Me to Surf
  • *
  • Posts: 2810
  • Liked: 199
  • Worst...avatar...ever!
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #34 on: February 06, 2017, 10:53:01 AM »
Older movies that are actually filmed in 3D give the biggest effect.  Black Lagoon is superb and feels natural, House of Wax with Vincent Price as well.  About the only older movie in 3D that I didn't much care for was Jaws 3-D.  The effects are actually quite good, but they are almost TOO in your face.  It may be the only movie to give me a headache, and I'm not sure if that was the case or if the film grain is so heavy that it actually gets in the way of viewing the movie properly.

Thing is, most movies that are causing the issue these days are ones that are NOT filmed in 3D...and because the cinematographer is not trying to capture a 3D image at the time, it makes editing it into a 3D movie a nightmare of bad depth (or almost so natural the depth is not noticeable), element stretching or bending (Clash of the Titans 3D is a big example of this...good night, was that terrible conversion), or hurtful on the eyes due to the editing.  If you watch Hugo, you'll notice a lot of Hugo is sweeping, long-take shots, with lots of follows and pans.  It does not cut away to different shots as often as regularly-shot movies, because Scorsese was aware that 3D has to be accomplished a certain way.  When you do post-conversion, none of that is taken into account, thus why more people don't like it; it gives them headaches because it was not edited or filmed in a way that benefits the technology.

So, I agree that post-conversion 3D doesn't give much benefit, and usually non-3D movies converted to 3D suffer from "$3 extra" ticket-price syndrome and nothing else.  But there are plenty of newer 3D movies that look right, too.  Even if they are horror movies...and granted, not all that great...the last two Final Destination movies do have very solid 3D cinematography (especially 5, if you can believe that), and even if I'm not really a fan of the series, I do appreciate it when somebody does the process right.  Fright Night 3D was OK, but unfortunately, the movie is too dark to really appreciate any effect you get from it.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2017, 10:54:53 AM by SJP »
One Man Band Riffs.  18 riffs, over 600 served, since 2009.


Offline Henry88

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5850
  • Liked: 607
  • Riff Super Monsters
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #35 on: February 06, 2017, 11:59:07 AM »
help a guy with his story project
gofundme.com/academy-days


Offline Variety of Cells

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5764
  • Liked: 1300
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #36 on: February 06, 2017, 12:43:40 PM »
8K TVs at the CES show in Las Vegas: a new year’s resolution
http://www.scmp.com/culture/arts-entertainment/article/2067137/8k-tvs-ces-show-las-vegas-new-years-resolution

why?

Because I want my nose to touch the glass when I watch my 96" TV.


Offline Pak-Man

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16766
  • Liked: 2754
  • Insert $0.25 to Play!
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #37 on: February 06, 2017, 01:26:46 PM »
Because if they don't keep pushing the envelope on visual quality somehow, they won't have an easy way to have a high end TV anymore.


Offline Henry88

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5850
  • Liked: 607
  • Riff Super Monsters
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #38 on: February 06, 2017, 07:22:15 PM »
Oppo UDP-203 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray Player
https://www.avforums.com/review/oppo-udp-203-4k-ultra-hd-blu-ray-player-review.13335#sectionAnchor49427

i hope to get this some time this year.
help a guy with his story project
gofundme.com/academy-days


Offline Henry88

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5850
  • Liked: 607
  • Riff Super Monsters
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #39 on: July 06, 2018, 01:09:24 PM »
help a guy with his story project
gofundme.com/academy-days


Offline Variety of Cells

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5764
  • Liked: 1300
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #40 on: July 06, 2018, 05:00:38 PM »
Samsung reportedly working on quantum dot OLED TV hybrid
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/samsung-reportedly-working-on-quantum-dot-oled-tv-hybrid/ar-AAzfvr9

Of course it always sounds like the best thing is two steps away.


Offline MartyS (Gromit)

  • Not Quite Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 11144
  • Liked: 2362
  • Weirdies!
    • My homepage
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #41 on: November 14, 2018, 02:20:44 PM »
Been looking at TVs, very hard to choose right now, QLED vs regular LED, OLED vs QLED....

65 inches might be too big for the room I'll be putting it into, but not sure I want to go with 55, there are some 58 and 60 inch options but can't get that size in QLED or OLED... 

Maybe I'll rearrange the room again and see if I can get a 65 in there....


Offline RVR II

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 53492
  • Liked: 3494
  • There can be Only 1...
    • RVR II's YouTube Channel
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #42 on: November 14, 2018, 02:39:15 PM »
Been looking at TVs, very hard to choose right now, QLED vs regular LED, OLED vs QLED....

65 inches might be too big for the room I'll be putting it into, but not sure I want to go with 55, there are some 58 and 60 inch options but can't get that size in QLED or OLED... 

Maybe I'll rearrange the room again and see if I can get a 65 in there....
The 75 inch Vizio is a 4k XLED and it measures 66 1/2 inches wide edge to edge.
I could still go a bit larger in my living room if I wanted to but paying double what I paid ($1200 for the 75 inch vs $2500 for an 80 inch) just doesn't make financial sense for just a 5 inch difference  :-\


Offline MartyS (Gromit)

  • Not Quite Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 11144
  • Liked: 2362
  • Weirdies!
    • My homepage
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #43 on: November 14, 2018, 04:57:29 PM »
Now I've got to look up XLED, never heard of that one before...


Offline MartyS (Gromit)

  • Not Quite Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 11144
  • Liked: 2362
  • Weirdies!
    • My homepage
Re: Lest Talk About HDTV's
« Reply #44 on: November 14, 2018, 05:41:21 PM »
OK, that's a new acronym for old technology, it's zone dimming that's been around since LED back lighting first started.

75 inches would be too big even for my living room, don't have a single wall in this house where one that size would fit.

Sunday I went to the Raymour and Flanigan Clearance Center about mile from my home and found this table and switched it for the taller more narrow TV stand I was using.  There are some good deals in that place, normally $400+ item for $160, pretty good for a real wood table, you would pay more for cheap particle board.



That TV is 46 inches, table is 50 inches wide, a 65 inch TV would hang over the sides too much and block access to the windows.  So the real decision is between a $600 58 inch UHD LED and a $1100 55 inch UHD QLED one.

Apparently over the last year Samsung has improved the quantum dots so they last longer without fading, but it's such a new technology hard to say how long they will hold up.

Only reason I'm thinking about upgrading is for 4K, there are a few movies out or coming out like 2001 that I'd love to see in 4K.  Of course that means replacing my blu-ray player and my receiver, but best to start with the TV.  Actually might not need to replace the receiver, if the HDMI audio return channel works on the TV I could plug the player and streaming boxes into the TV and send the audio back to the receiver, so it wouldn't matter if the receiver was not able to pass HDMI 2.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2018, 06:11:18 AM by MartyS (Gromit) »