I wouldn't say 3D is nothing but a gimmick That's used to get more money out of the consumer, good 3D conversions exist as you have said and they tend to have a lot of work put into them to make them good. My personal go-to for a 2D film converted into 3D that I like to bring up is the original Doctor strange, The movie was shot in 2D but the 3D version is phenomenal and I think it is a film that I will never watch in 2D. Another one of my favorite 3D conversions is Pixar's Monsters Inc, the establishing shot of the door vault in the film's final act is amazing as all of the rails of the doors ride on are able to draw the perspective for the viewer.

Also in case you're curious, I watched 3D movies in my VR headset on my PC which requires me to rip the movies to my PC and convert them to siide by side 3D, so I do get a bit of quality loss on the horizontal axis but it's worth it in my opinion just to be able to watch it

@@chrisfratz I don't think it's nothing but a gimmick, just that lazy studios looking for money have converted so many movies to 3d for the gimmick. And that's what a lot of people remember, at least general audiences.

@@FrameVoyager That's fair, I still haven't run into a poor 3D conversion but I have heard of some films getting a really bad conversion, but I remember hearing of a 3D conversion from DreamWorks where they only gave the team a few weeks to do it and it was apparently absolutely garbage quality.

@@chrisfratz exactly! I love 3D, when it's done right. But really in the video was trying to show that studios have just left a bad taste in the mouths of audiences over the years.

Yep! If you watch this video this is exactly what we talk about

See that's a great use case of it! 3D, like any tool or technique, should be used with some sort of purpose to it. Similar to how the movie The Whale used aspect ratio to it's advantage in the film.

EXACTLY. Had the same reaction to it like you did when I went to see Avatar in 3D.

😂😂😂

Laser 3D is AWESOME!

True! Like we said, not all post converted 3D movies are created equal. Some will rush to convert it to 3D and others will take the time to make sure it's done well. There are a few examples of that.

​@@idkanymore3382 I'm also planning on getting a 3D projector at some point, but right now I don't have the space or the money for a projector. So using my VR headset to watch 3D movies is a better option at the moment.

@@chrisfratz do the images actually pop how's the depth look like ?

@@goggishdrute2874 it all comes down to the film you're watching, but yeah there's some pretty good depth, and I watched Spy Kids 3 in 3D which is absolutely gimmicky and there was a lot of pop out. And I absolutely loved it, it's like junk food for me, it's not good but it's fun.

ABSOLUTELY! 3D movies on a VR headset are amazing. No luminance loss as you said, but also no ghosting. Apparently the PS5/VR2 can't play 3D Blu-rays which is just *IDIOTIC.* I was ready to buy one until I heard that.

​@@chrisfratzIf you're looking into 3D projectors, You should look into getting two projectors and polarization filters. Because of how niche 3D projection is it may end up being cheaper to get two projectors. At least if you want to do a passive 3D setup. I never got to do an a/b test So I can't directly compare image quality.(I'm guessing there's not a huge difference besides the glasses themselves) Active 3D is probably less expensive but can be very difficult to get the correct equipment/components for. This can make it more expensive, but probably not.(assuming you can find what you need) I've done this sort of setup before. The set up it's not too bad as long as you don't have to move it very much. Otherwise the setup's a bit fiddly each time you move them unless it's all hard mounted with screws. Even then you may have to do minor adjustments depending on how you mount them. Passive 3D is also more sensitive to screen material due to the need to preserve light polarization. Some random knowledge on 3D projection knowledge I've acquired. (I kind of got off topic, but I couldn't bring myself to delete it because it might be interesting) I've also done some peppers ghost style digital projection setups as well. Trying to get that working with 3D was an interesting physics and material science problem. The only solutions I found was cost prohibitive for the size required. At least on our budget. I left the project/group and don't know if any progress has been made.(I'm guessing there has been) This is where the idea for multiple projectors came from. These setups generally have a ton of loss of image intensity which requires bright projectors, and generally multiple ones converged for increased brightness.(It really depends on screen size and loss) So trying to add passive 3D was an interesting idea. That wouldn't be too difficult to implement if it worked. Considering we were already converging multiple projectors for increased brightness, it's not really much more work. Essentially the core of the problem is you need to preserve the light polarization for the 3D effect to work properly. It also helps a lot if you render/record proper stereoscopic 3D, otherwise it just looks worse than 2D affect.

Oh that's so odd you hide that in the comment section because in your thumb nail, your actual quote is "3D SUCKS. " .......weird

@@dr.wolfstar1765 That's because that's the general consensus by a lot of audiences. So it's addressing "why it sucks" but we quickly explain that premise in the intro of the video as well. It's a good title

@@FrameVoyager it will get alot of clicks for sure

It sucks.

We aren't saying that 3D sucks, just that studios being cheap made it suck and that's what audiences remember

I saw Avatar 2 in 2D for the first viewing experience and then 3D for the second time watching it. I enjoyed the 3D more than I thought I would, but it definitely took me at least half the movie to get used to it. I wonder sometimes if it's just our exposure to 3D content is so limited and that's why it's so jarring to us.

I don’t know. But I don‘t see the benefits for a „normal“ movie. Virtual Reality, Gaming, some special documentaries like „Cave of forgotten dreams“ - yes. But as long as you make a movie with all the visual conventions for 2D and use 3D as an add on, it is little more than a gimmick. One would have to create a whole new visual language for 3D films. Something that demands to be seen in 3D. We need pioneers like Eisenstein or D.W. Griffith back in the day to do that. It would take real artists to make something that would free 3D cinema from being a technical layer at a premium price.

😅😅😅

Totally different! I feel like AR or VR will be the way we consume content in the next 50 years.

Animations are way easier to pull off as well. You don't have as much of the "uncanny" valley feeling because you already know it's not real. Actually want to go see the Mario movie in 3D for fun lol

YES INDEED! Higher resolution, higher peak brightness, better contrast and better color are just SO STOOPID!

3D with 4K HDR would be amazing.​@@StubbyPhillips

Appreciate it! Those were also movies made by a director who is in love with 3D. So of course they would be great!

The titan movies? I'm pretty sure I remember people complaining about headaches after watching that movie. And it came in right after Avatar and was quickly up-converted.

People have been conditioned to think of 3D as bad because of the cheap gimmicks they were exposed to for a long time. So totally agree with you. 3D can be AMAZING

I saw this and thought there was a "but" coming 😂 appreciate it!

We just use Channel Memberships instead of Patreon 😅 about to revamp that but makes it easier to see who's a member and who's not within KZfaq! You can check that out here --> kzfaq.info/love/mXGDFnFh95WlZjhwmA5aeQjoin

That's a decent point about the theatres not having the projectors to do it justice. That's becoming less of an issue lately, but in certain areas I bet it's still not great.

😅😅😅

You're right. Dolby 3D does fix a lot of those issues.

@@FrameVoyager Correction, it was in south-west Germany where we reviewed an Infitec video processor and the necessary color filters, before they had licensed their technology to Dolby. I confused it with a manufacturer of auto-stereoscopic monitors in East Germany.

We mention this towards the end of the video about stereo blindness and how for a portion of the population, they can never experience it. But we don't think 3D sucks! We just think studios being cheap made it suck

​@@FrameVoyager To be honest, I'd just be happy to see normal films clearly too 😁.

@@izzieb I bet! I can only imagine what that would be like...

don't listen to the clown talking about 3-D that he doesn't understand. Do you wanna make sure you're watching an active 3-D my AWOL vision LT 3500 is outstanding in 3-D. I've had yet to have a single person see my system and not want one. the problem is is there's just not enough content I personally on about 253 D movies all of them are Blu-ray except for some of the specials and one Star Wars but it's thoroughly enjoyable. Don't let this guy turn you off. He's just one of these people that wants to talk crap about something because he either doesn't understand it or doesn't have a system worth watching it on, he started out with the blue and red glasses that was gonna be crap. Also, he doesn't understand the difference between passive and active.

haha thanks, you too!

I think IMAX helps with some of this, but that's a good point. Though some would argue that it helps to immerse you more. Depends on preference I guess

I think a lot of times it does come down to personal preference or what projector and theatre you see something on. I personally wouldn't want to go see every movie in 3D, but every once in a while it's fun.

@@FrameVoyager I can totally agree with that. It has just never wowed me or actually felt "3D" and I was thinking more about it, I think its because even with depth in a movie it is still fixed perspective, its 3D but not the same way as being able to actually look around things, so for me the illusion never fully works. I can see the effect and what they are going for with it, but it still feels like the old stuff flying at you, but now its more peaceful stuff far away from you effect, an upgrade and more impressive but still not really "3D".

Depends on the method for sure. I've seen good 3D and downright AWFUL 3d and I think everyone has experienced the AWFUL more than the good.

@@FrameVoyager Sometimes I wonder if people even realize that they SEE IN 3D ALL DAY LONG (assuming they have normal vision.) They just don't want to do it while watching a movie or TV for some reason.

Haha appreciate it! We actually have a team of writers and researchers we work with now that help do a lot of heavy lifting on the episode. I'll come back through and help with insights and re-write it to fit the style I want and then check as much of the research as I can. These take a lot of effort to put together and it was really hard when I was the only one doing it haha

@@FrameVoyager yeah, that’s incredible. Your videos are always top notch. I was up till 6AM this morning working on my next video and I’m not anywhere near done. It just blows my mind how much work goes into these. Well done! I need to improve my editing skills. Lol

@@CNC-Time-Lapse haha appreciate it! A lot of it is really getting down your porcesses and then setting up stuff so you don't always have to repeat steps in the editing process. Templates and custom hotkeys help a lot

@@FrameVoyager just curious, does your team use Premiere or Resolve for your workflow? I have licenses for both but have been just sticking to Premiere (I don’t shoot in BRAW, but ProRes due to file size). I have been thinking of switching to Resolve and buying some kind of DAW. Haha I should probably become an expert about both.

😂