?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Abi

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
11:20 pm: I am Beowulf, and I am here to kill your MONSTA
just back from seeing Beowulf (at the BFI London IMAX, in 3d). need to write it up for work. not terribly impressed by their technical setup there, in fact - there was noticeable ghosting (a hazard of polarised systems, as you have to get everything - including your head - aligned exactly right). i see clearly now the advantages of the new dolby 3d system (which works by having slightly different peaks for rgb for the left and right eye, and then very expensive glasses).

film itself made reasonably good technical use of 3d. there were some sections where rapid cuts required reconvergance far too often - i'm not quite sure why people are still doing this. foreground items that go off the side of the screen remain a problem - particularly noticeable when arrows were half on screen with the left eye, and a third on screen with the right eye. the sheer size of imax minimised this.

what would be interesting is for someone to make a 3d film with no cuts - all transitions between scenes to be accomplished with camera motion. what 3d stuff i've seen lacks a real sense of space, and this could accomplish that. beowulf could have done this since it was all motion capture/cgi - and there were some quite spectacular sequences in that direction. but they weren't going for realism in the 3d of this - things were being put right under your nose just for the hell of it. the motion capture/cgi wasn't half bad - still not 100% photorealistic but getting there. skin and faces was very good on some of the characters - downy hairs on people's faces - and you could see every hair in ray winstone's beard.

and as a film? it's not bad. beowulf fights some monsters. angelina jolie has breasts (but no nipples). it's good that special effects technology has now finally caught up to the type of stuff they were writing 1200 years ago.

um, yes, that's all.

Tags:

Comments

[User Picture]
From:katsmeat
Date:November 20th, 2007 01:56 am (UTC)
(Link)
I just saw the 2005 version. Zero CG, but plenty of dirt, blood and people saying 'fuck' - I kind've liked it. It'll be interesting to compare the two.
From:thatmakesmemad
Date:November 20th, 2007 08:42 am (UTC)
(Link)
From what I saw of the trailer it still looked like cut scenes from games.
Angelina Jolie has lips but no face
[User Picture]
From:nmg
Date:November 20th, 2007 09:44 am (UTC)
(Link)
i see clearly now the advantages of the new dolby 3d system (which works by having slightly different peaks for rgb for the left and right eye, and then very expensive glasses).

What distinguishes this from colour anaglyph 3d?
[User Picture]
From:abigailb
Date:November 20th, 2007 10:22 am (UTC)
(Link)
Regular colour anaglyph just uses the red channel from the left camera, combined with the green and blue channels from the right camera. This can be surprisingly effective, but you don't end up with full colour going into either eye, and does distort colours.

This system projects full RGB for both eyes, but it's filtered so that left-R is say 700nm, but right-R is 720nm. You wear corresponding glasses. Each eye ends up getting a full RGB signal.
[User Picture]
From:psych0naut
Date:November 21st, 2007 05:38 am (UTC)
(Link)
angelina jolie has breasts (but no nipples).

Ew… nipples are the best part. Without them, they may as well just be huge pendulous rolls of squishy fat. Then again, that's a good a description as any for Jolie's lips.

Powered by LiveJournal.com