Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: 3D

  1. #1
    mixedgas's Avatar
    mixedgas is offline Creaky Old Award Winning Bastard Technologist
    Infinitus Excellentia Ion Laser Dominatus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    A lab with some dripping water on the floor.
    Posts
    9,186

    Default 3D

    Just saw 3d avatar. polarization on the glasses is rhcp and lhcp.

    Steve
    Qui habet Christos, habet Vitam!
    I should have rented the space under my name for advertising.
    When I still could have...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    7,067

    Question

    AND..? Any opinion on the actual movie?
    Love, peace, and grease,

    allthat... aka: aaron@pangolin

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    520

    Default

    haha, a true PL-post, optics only!

    I loved the movie, also saw it in 3D and brought the glasses home for a quickie in the photospectrometer...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,488,805

    Default

    If you haven't seen Avatar yet, go ahead and see it. It's worth it for the visuals alone.

    I saw it in Imax 3D - twice. I really enjoyed the film, but the story itself is heavy-handed, predictable, and anything but original. Think "Fern Gully", but with spaceships and guns. Sigh.

    Still, don't let the weak story line prevent you from seeing this movie. The visuals alone are worth the price of admission. The world of Pandora is completely stunning in it's beauty and detail. Also, some of the cool tech gadgets that they have to play with will really blow you away. (Pay attention to the computer displays!)

    Finally, the 3D effects are extremely well done. I did not have a headache after watching this film, which is a first for me when viewing 3D films. Also, the 3D is done very subtly, so as to enhance the setting. It does not detract from the film like it usually does in so many other 3D films. There's none of that "shit floating right in front of your face for the whole film" crap. There are only one or two times when things seem to poke out of the screen, and it never feels like a cheap effect. Most of the time you simply notice that the scene has depth, and it serves to draw you into the setting. It's really cool.

    In short - go see Avatar. See it in 3D if at all possible, and if you can see it in 3D at an Imax, that's your best bet.

    Adam

  5. #5
    mixedgas's Avatar
    mixedgas is offline Creaky Old Award Winning Bastard Technologist
    Infinitus Excellentia Ion Laser Dominatus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    A lab with some dripping water on the floor.
    Posts
    9,186

    Default

    having built a few 3D video digitizing and playback systems(Nanofibers the Movie, In 3D!) for my cheapskate former employer, I can attest that ANY poorly done 3D gives me instant headaches. Avatar did NOT give me the headaches. They are changing polarizations 144 times a second and 4 times per frame, and perhaps for data storage reasons, large parts of the movie seem to blend from 2D to 3D (only seen if goggles are off) seamlessly. A great technological achivement. The biology is lifelike and well thought out. The aircraft are lifelike and well though out, and the details in the scientific gear etc are lifelike and well thought out.

    This is the first movie ever where Sigorny Weaver is NOT a annoying witch. They used low end talent that can actually act, although the guy playing the colonel doesnt do it right at all. In fact he'd be more or less modeled off of COBRA in GI JOE. NOT a C.O. type, too GUNG HO.

    Visuals stunning. And few science gaffs and goofs unlike most science ficton stories. Ie the physics models work. Aircraft fly like aircraft for the most part. Although why the heck you need a control tower for a base in the year 2240 or so beats me. Also in the real world, those aircraft would be drones, not manned, but oh well. The war stuff was not wrote by warriors, as Buffo notes, but I would not call it cheesy.

    Effects and modeling, 5 stars
    plot 3 stars
    Use of color 5 stars
    sex scene that is not a sex scene but is a sex scene, wierd...
    flat breasted alien chicks, slightly underdone.....
    Undertone, background, morality plays, very interesting....


    Fact that because its so realistic the images stick in your mind for 3 days,kinda disturbing. Maybe not on the IMAx, but I woke up this morning viewing one of those scenes. It goes RIGHT to the brain. If you look around the theatre, NOBODY is talking or moving around. And everybody stayed to watch the 10-15 minutes of credits. Its addictive....

    I had a sore eye that day, so I was getting "interrupts" and took the glasses off a few times. Everybody was "locked" into viewing that....

    Steve
    Qui habet Christos, habet Vitam!
    I should have rented the space under my name for advertising.
    When I still could have...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Knoxville, TN & Huntsville, AL, USA
    Posts
    3,121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by buffo View Post
    If you haven't seen Avatar yet, go ahead and see it. It's worth it for the visuals alone.

    I saw it in Imax 3D - twice. I really enjoyed the film, but the story itself is heavy-handed, predictable, and anything but original. Think "Fern Gully", but with spaceships and guns. Sigh.

    Still, don't let the weak story line prevent you from seeing this movie. The visuals alone are worth the price of admission. The world of Pandora is completely stunning in it's beauty and detail. Also, some of the cool tech gadgets that they have to play with will really blow you away. (Pay attention to the computer displays!)

    Finally, the 3D effects are extremely well done. I did not have a headache after watching this film, which is a first for me when viewing 3D films. Also, the 3D is done very subtly, so as to enhance the setting. It does not detract from the film like it usually does in so many other 3D films. There's none of that "shit floating right in front of your face for the whole film" crap. There are only one or two times when things seem to poke out of the screen, and it never feels like a cheap effect. Most of the time you simply notice that the scene has depth, and it serves to draw you into the setting. It's really cool.

    In short - go see Avatar. See it in 3D if at all possible, and if you can see it in 3D at an Imax, that's your best bet.

    Adam
    Yeah - what he said!!

    Quote Originally Posted by mixedgas View Post
    ...Avatar did NOT give me the headaches. ...
    A great technological achivement. The biology is lifelike and well thought out. The aircraft are lifelike and well though out, and the details in the scientific gear etc are lifelike and well thought out.

    This is the first movie ever where Sigorny Weaver is NOT a annoying witch. They used low end talent that can actually act, although the guy playing the colonel doesnt do it right at all. In fact he'd be more or less modeled off of COBRA in GI JOE. NOT a C.O. type, too GUNG HO.

    Visuals stunning. And few science gaffs and goofs unlike most science ficton stories. Ie the physics models work. Aircraft fly like aircraft for the most part. Although why the heck you need a control tower for a base in the year 2240 or so beats me. Also in the real world, those aircraft would be drones, not manned, but oh well. The war stuff was not wrote by warriors, as Buffo notes, but I would not call it cheesy.

    Effects and modeling, 5 stars
    plot 3 stars
    Use of color 5 stars
    sex scene that is not a sex scene but is a sex scene, wierd...
    flat breasted alien chicks, slightly underdone.....
    Undertone, background, morality plays, very interesting....
    ...

    Steve

    Yeah, what he said, too!!

    Except the part about the colonel - I've know a few National Guard "Weekend Warriors" that came across that way, one weekend a month and two weeks during the annual training event...

    And the control towers HAVE to be there -
    the pilots in the those Apache / Comanche / Osprey hybrids need something to buzz in a fly-by after returning from missions...it's an unwritten law of combat aviation....
    RR

    Metrologic HeNe 3.3mw Modulated laser, 2 Radio Shack motors, and a broken mirror.
    1979.
    Sweet.....

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    333

    Default

    On the CP glasses thing, I have been hacking around with a laser, two sets of scanners and some waveplates....

    It does work, but the optics get a little hairy if you want colour as waveplates tend not to cover octave bandwidths (Also, projection surfaces need to be polarisation preserving which rules out glass beaded screens).

    One interesting thing to do is to set up two lasers (one LH, one RH, you could also use H &V but head tilt is less of an issue going CP) and just scan a cloud of smoke from a couple of slightly different angles, looks surreal when you put the glasses on.

    Ohh yea, avatar is a cool movie, missing plot aside.

    Regards, Dan.

  8. #8
    mixedgas's Avatar
    mixedgas is offline Creaky Old Award Winning Bastard Technologist
    Infinitus Excellentia Ion Laser Dominatus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    A lab with some dripping water on the floor.
    Posts
    9,186

    Default

    [QUOTE=DMills;131601]On the CP glasses thing, I have been hacking around with a laser, two sets of scanners and some waveplates....

    It does work, but the optics get a little hairy if you want colour as waveplates tend not to cover octave bandwidths (Also, projection surfaces need to be polarisation preserving which rules out glass beaded screens).

    end quote.


    I've seen single scan head Laser 3D in full color off a quadmod 32, in a Pangolin Demo. I'd like to see it again. The orbiting shuttle demo was flawless. Tim Walsh had something to do with it. These days EO modulators should be cheap. I have a few that do red and blue.

    QM 32 had a dedicated Z channel. Sadly Qm2000 does not.

    Steve
    Qui habet Christos, habet Vitam!
    I should have rented the space under my name for advertising.
    When I still could have...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    799

    Default

    It is a great movie, but the 3D never seems real. Well, calling it 3D isn't entirely correct... It's just stereoscopic. I think we normally only use stereoscopic vision at close distances. To give a perception of depth at longer distances something else is needed.

    Regarding lasers and 3D and lasers, well... lasers have to be the most convenient light source for that since they're already linearly polarized. Going from linear to circular polarization seems to be easy, or you can just keep it linear and rotate the polarization of the other image by 90. The limiting factor becomes the scanners, because you need to scan twice as fast to get a stereoscopic image.

    Oh, and you need to make a silver screen too... Apparently it took Imax some years to get the formulation of their silver paint right.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    333

    Default

    I was doing 2 scan set with X and X', which is lightly different to what you seem to be talking about (one scan set, frame sequential, EO cell to flip the polarisation)?
    Your approach might be better given that modern scanners are getting quick, I figure the EO cell could follow a PCAOM getting you colour without the multiple beam paths that my rig needed.

    Have you had a play with those MEMS scanners yet, they look interestingly fast for all that the angles are small.

    Totally off the wall thought: Take a LCD panel with the polarising film stripped off it, pass coherent light through it, now by driving the pixels we can selectively change the polarisation on a pixel by pixel basis..... Could this behaviour be leveraged into a 'phased array' scanner?
    I have a nasty feeling that the grid is nowhere near dense enough, and that actually we would need pixel spacing tighter then 1/4 wavelength?

    Regards, Dan.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •