Re: Why 3-D?

[P3D Gabriel Jacob <jacob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Larry Berlin writes

>If they
>are heavy you must have been using the LCS type of glasses. Other IMAX
>theaters use passive polarized glasses which must be much lighter. If I were
>wearing the heavy version, and it seems too heavy after a while, I would
>continue to wear them and support them with my hands LONG before I would
>take them off and forgo the rest of the movie!!!!!

Awhile back I had inquired about the two different systems, here on P3D.
This was due to being fortunate enough to have two Imax 3D theatres in the 
Montreal area with the different glasses. Having tried the polaroid type
on numerous occasions, I was curious to see how the LCS type compared.

I got a chance to go with a fellow P3D'er visiting from out of town 
(hi Wlad!) and saw the LCS version. The weight issue is a slight 
problem and they are on the heavy side, compared to the feather weight
polaroid type glasses. This I sorta was expecting. Quality of the images
to me looked practically the same. This is not to say that the LCS is 
not better, since it probably is. But not having a side by side comparison
at the same time, made it difficult to say which was better in quality.

One thing that I would like to comment, that was never brought up
in the comparision between the two types is.....

The one thing that I found extremely disappointing was the limited 
field of view of the LCS glasses when sitting close to the front.
Sitting in the front center row, the overlap between what was viewed
with the left and right shutters was maybe at best 70%. The parts 
that didn't overlap, of course weren't in 3D. This I found to be
unacceptable. Of course I was sitting in the front and very likely
in the back, the problem would be less noticable. But the same
situation with the Polaroid glasses never presented this problem
since they have much larger "windows" on the glasses.  

>I hope that the glasses do become lighter, but I would enjoy the rare
>priveledge of viewing such a remarkable system by any means available.

Well I hope you get a chance, because disregarding the poor field of
view with the LCS version, you haven't seen 3D "movies" till you've
seen Imax 3D!!! It will blow you away. :-)

There have been a few comments, that maybe 3D all the time wouldn't be
a good idea. Don't know about that, it might not be a good idea to
always have movies in 3D but I think the majority should be done in 3D 
(not withstanding any technical difficulties or law of economics or
whatever).

Your points on educating the public and it being a matter of getting 
accustomed to it, are very well taken. I agree 500%. :-) Once the
public gets used to the idea, I think they won't find it a novelty and
wonder how they lived without it. I think we have been programmed for
to long in thinking the way it should be is, viewing from a distance,
such as viewing through the infamous stereo (or 2D) window. Until
recently most 3D movies from the past were all of that type till
Imax 3D. The pretext of regular 2D Imax is to fill your field of
vision, thus getting rid of the window. Imax 3D takes it a step
further and dumps reality in your lap, so to speak! It is total
immersive movie watching. Do we really "not" want to be that close???

P.S. In your face 3D, sounds good to me. For those that would like
to achieve reality, isn't that what it's all about!? 

Gabriel throwing a rock at the 3D window!


------------------------------

End of PHOTO-3D Digest 2129
***************************
***************************
 Trouble? Send e-mail to 
 wier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
 To unsubscribe select one of the following,
 place it in the BODY of a message and send it to:
 listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
   unsubscribe photo-3d
   unsubscribe sell-3d
   unsubscribe mc68hc11
   unsubscribe overland-trails
   unsubscribe icom
 ***************************