Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Do not touch 2001: A Space Odyssey. All these films are yours, except 2001. Attempt no remakes there.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:

I'd like to see Starship Troopers remade properly, to cleave to the book, but there's fat chance of that.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
I'd like to see Starship Troopers remade properly, to cleave to the book, but there's fat chance of that.

---

Very gorram sadly.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Cybersnark:
bring back RHW, give him an actual budget, don't fire the creator from his own gorram show

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Remake Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope. No - scratch that. Don't "remake" it; just render it in 3D. That's doable now, allegedly - the doing old 2D movies into 3D, but it's expensive and time-consuming, but I'm those aren't things that have bothered Lucas in the past.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
I'd like to see Starship Troopers remade properly, to cleave to the book, but there's fat chance of that.

--Anthony

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

A good Leyte Gulf movie featuring The Battle off Samar and Taffy III. There's been lots of History Channel movies, but I'd like to see something big-budget and very slightly fictionalized a-la Tora-Tora-Tora.

---

Quote:

---

I'd like to see Starship Troopers remade properly, to cleave to the book, but there's fat chance of that.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by lwaves:

Logan's Run - A good call. It's a great story but does look very dated these days.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Remake Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope. No - scratch that. Don't "remake" it; just render it in 3D. That's doable now, allegedly - the doing old 2D movies into 3D, but it's expensive and time-consuming, but those aren't things that have bothered Lucas in the past.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

?!? I just watched a clip from that Roughnecks cartoon. Apparently better than the movie, but... even in a CARTOON they chose not to do the suits? Do they deploy as they do in the book? And do the early episodes show the recruitment and training process?
--Anthony

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:


I don't know what kind of digital trickery they are using to modify old films so they can then call it 3-D (just to sell tickets), but this can't really be done with any movie that wasn't shot with dual 3-D optic cameras from the start.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:


I don't know what kind of digital trickery they are using to modify old films so they can then call it 3-D (just to sell tickets), but this can't really be done with any movie that wasn't shot with dual 3-D optic cameras from the start.

---

Oh, you SO can produce a 3D image from a 2D one now.
The program simply produces a second image from a 4 inch different theoretical perspective. It then distorts all the images to correspond to that perspective, and voila! 3D.


The laughing Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

I can't believe the effect is as good as real 3d?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:


If it's so easy why don't they just make 4D then, huh Mr. Science??

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:
If it's so easy why don't they just make 4D then, huh Mr. Science??

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:


I don't know what kind of digital trickery they are using to modify old films so they can then call it 3-D (just to sell tickets), but this can't really be done with any movie that wasn't shot with dual 3-D optic cameras from the start.

---

Oh, you SO can produce a 3D image from a 2D one now.
The program simply produces a second image from a 4 inch different theoretical perspective. It then distorts all the images to correspond to that perspective, and voila! 3D.


The laughing Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

I can't believe the effect is as good as real 3d?

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:



Define "real 3d".

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:


I don't know what kind of digital trickery they are using to modify old films so they can then call it 3-D (just to sell tickets), but this can't really be done with any movie that wasn't shot with dual 3-D optic cameras from the start.

---

Oh, you SO can produce a 3D image from a 2D one now.
The program simply produces a second image from a 4 inch different theoretical perspective. It then distorts all the images to correspond to that perspective, and voila! 3D.


The laughing Chrisisall

---

A little more involved than that, but basically that's about it. Say you've got a shot of an airliner coming at you, front 3/4 view - the nose much closer to you than the tail. You have to - and now you CAN - go in an manipulate the length of the plane by dividing it into "layers" - each layer being a little closer to a theoretical 3D "vanishing point". So you have a shot of the nose layer, and some distance away (call it 5x) you have the extrapolated view (from your other eye, natch). Go towards the rear of the plane, about 1/5th of the way down it's length, and that distance between the two images (the real and the computer-derived one) is now 4x. A little further back, it's 3x, then 2x, then x. More layers and more separation gets you to more depth, up to a point.

It's just a way to trick your mind into THINKING you're looking at two different images, and you don't necessarily need two vastly different images to fool it for the length of time it takes for a frame of motion picture film to go past and be "seen" by your brain.

It can be done, it's BEING done; it's just quite expensive and time-consuming to do it. But as noted before, such trivial details and time and money never really seemed to bother George Lucas before. And he is very good at driving the effects realm towards better and cheaper ways of accomplishing what he's after.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:

Thing is 3D is not created by multiple depths - for sure that's what the result is, what our mind's perceive is depth - but to create that you need multiple perspectives, the differing perspectives of 2 eyes.

---

Quote:

---

I think anyone who presents old films as 3D should be gutted and have their entrails sold at a very creepy auction.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:

Thing is 3D is not created by multiple depths - for sure that's what the result is, what our mind's perceive is depth - but to create that you need multiple perspectives, the differing perspectives of 2 eyes.

---

Exactly Piz, and the computer *creates* the 2nd perspective based off the initial image! It really is that simple (in a kind of nightmarishly complicated way, that is).

Quote:

---

I think anyone who presents old films as 3D should be gutted and have their entrails sold at a very creepy auction.

---

That kinda damages my calm some...


The laughing Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:
Deal is you can't recreate what it doesn't know, it can only guess what was there, so it uses Digital Fudge ™ to approximate what *might* be there. It's fake, it's a lie, it's implants, and it's all just to separate fools from their money. Studio Exec: "Content? Ha! WTF is that?? Why put $effort$ into writing when we can fool, er, entertain the dumbasses, I mean, masses?"

---

Quote:

---

But it's not a good approximation of the 3D we experience in real life imho, and I think anyone who presents old films as 3D should be gutted and have their entrails sold at a very creepy auction.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:

Thing is 3D is not created by multiple depths - for sure that's what the result is, what our mind's perceive is depth - but to create that you need multiple perspectives, the differing perspectives of 2 eyes.

---

Exactly Piz, and the computer *creates* the 2nd perspective based off the initial image! It really is that simple (in a kind of nightmarishly complicated way, that is).

Quote:

---

I think anyone who presents old films as 3D should be gutted and have their entrails sold at a very creepy auction.

---

That kinda damages my calm some...


The laughing Chrisisall

---

I like that: *creates!* For you I will *creates* a diamond from a malted milk ball. Sorry Chris, I'm a visual purist.
Did you do that eye thingy thing I mentioned? Deal is you can't recreate what it doesn't know, it can only guess what was there, so it uses Digital Fudge ™ to approximate what *might* be there. It's fake, it's a lie, it's implants, and it's all just to separate fools from their money. Studio Exec: "Content? Ha! WTF is that?? Why put $effort$ into writing when we can fool, er, entertain the dumbasses, I mean, masses?"

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Hey, you're preachin' to the choir here, to an extent. You're talking to the guy who can't watch the 3D movies - either the old style with the red&blue glasses OR the new kind like Avatar, because I can't see the 3D, and just end up watching a blurry mess that gives me a giant headache in less than 2 minutes

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,
I have read many summations of the battle off Samar, but not Tin Can Sailors. If you recommend it, it's going on my waiting list at the Library.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Yup, it's odd - I used to be able to watch 3D just fine. A few years back, I had a problem with my right eye (iritis), which tends to come back in late July/early August *IF* it's dry and hot enough (which leads me to believe it's definitely triggered by some kind of allergic reaction, but to which pollen I don't know - yet.).

Anyway, ever since that first attack, which rendered me legally blind in that eye for over a month, I haven't been able to see the whole "3D" thing on screen. Fortunately, I can see it just fine in real life. :)

---