Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie Musings >> RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott Page: <<   < prev  37 38 [39] 40 41   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 2/4/2012 12:42:47 PM   
st3veebee


Posts: 2353
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: 9303 Lyon Drive
I opted for the 2D version of Pirates!... something about scientists, and know i made the right decision. Less colourful and dimmer Aarmand is just wrong. Couldn't even see any obligatory 3D moments inthe film either.

_____________________________

Latest Films:

Two days in New York: 4/5

Prometheus: 3.5/5

Abe Lincoln: VH 3/5

Twin Peaks: FWWM 3.5/5

(in reply to Ghidorah)
Post #: 1141
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 2/4/2012 2:32:29 PM   
Discodez

 

Posts: 793
Joined: 2/9/2010
I watched a 3D movie for the first time ever the other night, gave me a headache after 5 minutes so I gave up and watched it in 2D instead.

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 1142
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 4/4/2012 10:10:13 AM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6821
Joined: 18/11/2006
cameron going to make 3d pay again-

http://www.deadline.com/2012/04/james-cameron-to-address-2012-nab-show-on-the-secrets-of-making-3d-profitable/


(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 1143
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 14/4/2012 12:24:55 PM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6821
Joined: 18/11/2006
no 3 d boobies for 'titanic' in china-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/apr/13/china-censor-kate-winslet-titanic

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 1144
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 17/4/2012 12:59:54 PM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6821
Joined: 18/11/2006
1st existing movie converted to 3d for blu ray-

http://www.deadline.com/2012/04/nab-news-fox-home-entertainments-i-robot-preps-for-blu-ray-3-d-launch/



(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 1145
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 26/4/2012 10:09:41 AM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6821
Joined: 18/11/2006
scorsese and lee think 3 d is the future-

http://www.deadline.com/2012/04/martin-scorsese-and-ang-lee-tell-theater-owners-that-the-future-belongs-to-3d-cinemacon/

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 1146
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 26/4/2012 3:52:55 PM   
DancingClown


Posts: 4188
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot
quote:

“The moment (film) started, people wanted three things: color, sound and depth.”


An odd comment from someone like Scorcese. For surely films already have these things?

An alternative view from another respected veteran HERE.


_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 1147
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 4/5/2012 10:14:44 AM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6821
Joined: 18/11/2006
'avengers' 3 d backlash-

http://movieline.com/2012/05/03/the-avengers-and-the-case-of-the-near-disastrous-3-d/


yep, it was dark in first 20 mins but 3 d worked during battle scenes.

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 1148
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 4/5/2012 11:45:29 AM   
DancingClown


Posts: 4188
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot
Yeah, but I'm guessing that some people would like their 3D to be consistently good as opposed to intermittently good.

_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 1149
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 4/5/2012 11:53:53 AM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown

Yeah, but I'm guessing that some people would like their 3D to be consistently good as opposed to intermittently good.


Exactly. I was forced in to seeing Avengers in 3D, and while the battle scene was fantastic (although just as good in 2D - I went back) the rest of it was horrible. The whole opening section of the film is ruined by it, as are all of the space sequences (the post-credits sequence was barely watchable in 3D once the house lights went up) and a whole bunch of sections. Consistency is a major issue, I don't ever recall having to consider how 2D would look under certain lighting conditions, it just wasn't/isnt a concern!

On the plus side I don't think I've seen one person outright declare that the 3D is anything other than the car wreck that it is.

(in reply to DancingClown)
Post #: 1150
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 4/5/2012 12:32:42 PM   
great_badir


Posts: 4653
Joined: 6/10/2005
From: A breaking rope bridge in the middle of the jungle
quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82
quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown

Yeah, but I'm guessing that some people would like their 3D to be consistently good as opposed to intermittently good.


Exactly. I was forced in to seeing Avengers in 3D, and while the battle scene was fantastic (although just as good in 2D - I went back) the rest of it was horrible. The whole opening section of the film is ruined by it, as are all of the space sequences (the post-credits sequence was barely watchable in 3D once the house lights went up) and a whole bunch of sections. Consistency is a major issue, I don't ever recall having to consider how 2D would look under certain lighting conditions, it just wasn't/isnt a concern!


Having also seen both the 2D and 3D versions of Avengers, I completely agree with you (except I would say that it's one of the rare better examples of retro-fit 3D).

However, I do slightly disagree with this:
quote:

On the plus side I don't think I've seen one person outright declare that the 3D is anything other than the car wreck that it is.


3d can work, but only with a very strict set of guidelines - it must be filmed (wholly) in 3D and only be experienced at a cinema.

Avatar proved this - a shit film which was turned into an incredible spectacle in 3D.

I think Prometheus will be THE film which will decide it - a potentially brilliant film (all my fingers, toes and pubes are crossed), filmed in 3D.

Otherwise, I would agree that 3D is the same gimmick it always has been, except now we have the technology for it to be done properly and tastefully. But it will never work in a domestic environment.

_____________________________

FAVE FILMS
BO BOMBS

(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 1151
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 4/5/2012 12:36:41 PM   
Sutty


Posts: 3552
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: the front row
I heard they (they being, y'know, THEY) are going to be moving along to a more immersive cinema experience soon, with the introduction of speakers in the chairs, vibrating chairs, and even smell'o'vision!!

1. Shouldn't 3D be perfected first? Because it is far frickin' from!

2. Don't THEY know William Cstle was doing this shit over 40 or 50 years ago?!?!?

I saw The Avengers last night (in 2D) and as much as I enjoyed the movie, I am still of the opinion that staying in - in relation to movies - is the new going out. Ridiculously expensive all round and the staff were awful! Good movie though. Thank God!


_____________________________

"Lord, make me your instrument of peace. Where there is hatred, let me bring love.
Where there is darkness, light."

"When you're pushed, killin's as easy as breathin'"

(in reply to great_badir)
Post #: 1152
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 4/5/2012 12:47:13 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: great_badir

However, I do slightly disagree with this:
quote:

On the plus side I don't think I've seen one person outright declare that the 3D is anything other than the car wreck that it is.


3d can work, but only with a very strict set of guidelines - it must be filmed (wholly) in 3D and only be experienced at a cinema.


Sorry, I was referring to the 3D in The Avengers. I too think its worked well before now, with Hugo benefitting from the medium.

(in reply to great_badir)
Post #: 1153
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 4/5/2012 12:47:55 PM   
great_badir


Posts: 4653
Joined: 6/10/2005
From: A breaking rope bridge in the middle of the jungle
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sutty
I heard they (they being, y'know, THEY) are going to be moving along to a more immersive cinema experience soon, with the introduction of speakers in the chairs, vibrating chairs, and even smell'o'vision!!


The Cineworld in Glasgow has the D-Max (or whatever it's called) with the whole moving chairs with speakers in them. By all accounts it's largely pointless and the reserve of young children and excitable teens going to see the latest shit horror film.

_____________________________

FAVE FILMS
BO BOMBS

(in reply to Sutty)
Post #: 1154
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 4/5/2012 12:50:23 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sutty

I heard they (they being, y'know, THEY) are going to be moving along to a more immersive cinema experience soon, with the introduction of speakers in the chairs, vibrating chairs, and even smell'o'vision!!



I've actually seen the first (and only) smell-o-vision film to be produced by the major studios. It was a 1960 mystery called "Scent Of Mystery" in which the guy doing the detecting work follows clues which all revolve around smells. The film itself is actually fantastic, but the gimmick was only tried out once and didn't work, due to all of the scents lingering in the room after their scenes, creating a mishmash of smell by the end of the movie.

(in reply to Sutty)
Post #: 1155
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 4/5/2012 12:52:53 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: great_badir

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sutty
I heard they (they being, y'know, THEY) are going to be moving along to a more immersive cinema experience soon, with the introduction of speakers in the chairs, vibrating chairs, and even smell'o'vision!!


The Cineworld in Glasgow has the D-Max (or whatever it's called) with the whole moving chairs with speakers in them. By all accounts it's largely pointless and the reserve of young children and excitable teens going to see the latest shit horror film.


I haven't had the pleasure of being in a room with a row full of D-Max chairs, but I can imagine they make a god-awful racket (if not in the mechanics of the chair, then certainly in the "oohs" and "ahhs" of the people sitting in them). I was actually at an exhibitors summit last week, and there was talk of how multiplex audiences in Germany are now calling out for the house lights to be left on during films.

(in reply to great_badir)
Post #: 1156
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 4/5/2012 12:55:53 PM   
great_badir


Posts: 4653
Joined: 6/10/2005
From: A breaking rope bridge in the middle of the jungle
quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82
Sorry, I was referring to the 3D in The Avengers. I too think its worked well before now, with Hugo benefitting from the medium.


Ahhh, right, gotcha.

I've not seen Hugo, but I think 3D now, even though it is still basically a gimmick, is at least more immersive than it ever was in the 80s, where the hallmark of most 3D films was a sword or something being thrust toward the viewer (and everyone reels back in wonderment). But now, with the likes of the burning embers during the village destruction scene in Avatar, I think directors (at least those using 3D technology to shoot the film) are at least thinking how it can be used for the duration of a whole film rather than a few key scenes or moments (Jaws 3D, whilst the 3D was, I seem to remember, pretty good in the cinema, nevertheless amounted to a largely 2D film with maybe five moments featuring 3D elements [Shelby Overman's arm for example]).

_____________________________

FAVE FILMS
BO BOMBS

(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 1157
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 4/5/2012 12:58:12 PM   
great_badir


Posts: 4653
Joined: 6/10/2005
From: A breaking rope bridge in the middle of the jungle
quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sutty

I heard they (they being, y'know, THEY) are going to be moving along to a more immersive cinema experience soon, with the introduction of speakers in the chairs, vibrating chairs, and even smell'o'vision!!


I've actually seen the first (and only) smell-o-vision film to be produced by the major studios. It was a 1960 mystery called "Scent Of Mystery" in which the guy doing the detecting work follows clues which all revolve around smells. The film itself is actually fantastic, but the gimmick was only tried out once and didn't work, due to all of the scents lingering in the room after their scenes, creating a mishmash of smell by the end of the movie.


Heston Blumenthal had the same problem when he tried to improve cinema food a year or two ago.

_____________________________

FAVE FILMS
BO BOMBS

(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 1158
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 5/5/2012 3:31:21 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 17997
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
Just back from a IMAX 3d showing of Avengers and I have to admit that mostly the 3d was not awful. There were flaws and errors but most of the 3d seemed well thought out in its placement (such as looking from inside a car as the windscreen was broken). That sid there was a 3d trailer for Men in Black 3 which was a masterclass in bad use of 3d. It consisted of layered crowd scenes where one flat layer was laid on another laid on another, awful fight scenes where the background was excessively blurred and the fight itself flat layered on front and just overdone and the whole thing was badly done and over used. Terrible.

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to great_badir)
Post #: 1159
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 6/5/2012 11:31:03 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010
I've just read Kermode's book, The Good, The Bad and The Multiplex, and I don't agree with him about much. But he's right about this. He's right about the true horror that is the modern cinema-going experience generally.

I've never been sold on 3D. It just looks like layers of 2D cutouts. Like Captain Pugwash or Ivor The Engine. The only 3D film I've seen which vindicated the process at all was Avatar (which was all about depth not poking you in the eye with stuff) because that's the way it was shot. Unlike all those dreadful post-convesion jobs. But even Avatar was dull and murky in places compared to the 2D version. I've watched Avatar many times since on BD (in glorious, 2D FlatoviosionTM!) and not once have I felt I was missing out at all. Quite the opposite - it looks better on BD than it ever did in the cinema.

As a wee experiment, I've seen The Avengers twice now - once in 3D, once in 2D. And guess what? It looked much better in 2D. It wasn't distracting, it was neither smudgy in the foreground nor blurry in the background, and I could actually see what was going on during Hawkeye and the Black Widow's dust-up aboard the SHIELD helicarrier the second time around - three cheers for the glories of wall-eye, ghosting and unfusable images!. Grud only knows what Prometheus 3D will look like...

We might be stuck with 3D for a while (the studios and cinema chains have invested a lot in it whether audiences want it or not) but it's still a gimmick. And one with a long tradition of dying on its arse once audiences tire of the novelty (and in this case, get fed up being ripped-off into the "bargain" - why do 3D tickets cost more anyway? And have you seen those "D-BOX" contraptions? Motion sickness is the future of cinema now, is it? If I wanted to throw-up at the movies I'd have gone to see Sex and The City 2!)

But I won't be shelling out for any more 3D movies/headaches till Avatar 2 comes out. Maybe not even then. And if that's no longer an option I'll just stop going to the cinema. So if the big studios and cinema chains are trying to stop piracy/illegal downloads, they are going precisely the wrong way about it. Kermode's right about that as well - it's Napster all over again and if the studios are serious about stopping piracy then "multi-format day-and-date" releasing (ie, in cinemas, on disc, on pay-per-view and online at the same time) is the only way to go.

Maybe then I'll be able to watch movies in the cinema in peace without having to endure the inane shite/texting of obnoxious fuckwits who'd rather be talking through the movie at home anyway. Result!

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 1160
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 6/5/2012 11:38:17 AM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1200
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: great_badir

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sutty
I heard they (they being, y'know, THEY) are going to be moving along to a more immersive cinema experience soon, with the introduction of speakers in the chairs, vibrating chairs, and even smell'o'vision!!


The Cineworld in Glasgow has the D-Max (or whatever it's called) with the whole moving chairs with speakers in them. By all accounts it's largely pointless and the reserve of young children and excitable teens going to see the latest shit horror film.


I think they're called "D-BOX" (like detox in reverse?) and I've clocked them at the Glasgow Cineworld too. And if you want proof that 3D is indeed a huckster's gimmick which returns the cinema to its sideshow roots then look no further. What next? Odorama? Smellovision? I know - Titanic 4D! With buckets of water chucked over the front row during the sinking scenes...

(in reply to great_badir)
Post #: 1161
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 6/5/2012 7:33:34 PM   
Scruffybobby

 

Posts: 4258
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: My House
quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


I haven't had the pleasure of being in a room with a row full of D-Max chairs, but I can imagine they make a god-awful racket (if not in the mechanics of the chair, then certainly in the "oohs" and "ahhs" of the people sitting in them). I was actually at an exhibitors summit last week, and there was talk of how multiplex audiences in Germany are now calling out for the house lights to be left on during films.


......the Fuck????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


_____________________________

I want to taste you like yogurt.

(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 1162
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 6/5/2012 8:02:55 PM   
Spaldron


Posts: 10485
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scruffybobby

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


I haven't had the pleasure of being in a room with a row full of D-Max chairs, but I can imagine they make a god-awful racket (if not in the mechanics of the chair, then certainly in the "oohs" and "ahhs" of the people sitting in them). I was actually at an exhibitors summit last week, and there was talk of how multiplex audiences in Germany are now calling out for the house lights to be left on during films.


......the Fuck????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Them crazy Germans.

_____________________________

And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts
And I looked and behold, a pale horse
And his name that sat on him was Death
And Hell followed with him.

(in reply to Scruffybobby)
Post #: 1163
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 7/5/2012 12:32:20 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scruffybobby

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


I haven't had the pleasure of being in a room with a row full of D-Max chairs, but I can imagine they make a god-awful racket (if not in the mechanics of the chair, then certainly in the "oohs" and "ahhs" of the people sitting in them). I was actually at an exhibitors summit last week, and there was talk of how multiplex audiences in Germany are now calling out for the house lights to be left on during films.


......the Fuck????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Indeed. The theory behind it is that audiences are used to leaving the lights on when they watch a film at home, ergo for the lights to be down in a cinema is wrong. Im not sure how widespread an issue this is, but it was enough to cause concern amongst the folk I know who run these sort of places.

(in reply to Scruffybobby)
Post #: 1164
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 7/5/2012 1:25:22 PM   
Dpp1978


Posts: 1150
Joined: 2/4/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: Scruffybobby

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


I haven't had the pleasure of being in a room with a row full of D-Max chairs, but I can imagine they make a god-awful racket (if not in the mechanics of the chair, then certainly in the "oohs" and "ahhs" of the people sitting in them). I was actually at an exhibitors summit last week, and there was talk of how multiplex audiences in Germany are now calling out for the house lights to be left on during films.


......the Fuck????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Indeed. The theory behind it is that audiences are used to leaving the lights on when they watch a film at home, ergo for the lights to be down in a cinema is wrong. Im not sure how widespread an issue this is, but it was enough to cause concern amongst the folk I know who run these sort of places.


So instead of trying to bring the theatre experience to the home, which has been the goal of many for decades, and is something which is no longer the sole domain of the very rich or the very dedicated, there are now those who want to bring the home experience to the cinema?

Talk about getting things backwards.

What's next? The screen is too big? The sound is too loud to chat with your friends?

Surely the point of going to the cinema is getting an experience you can't get at home; otherwise why bother?

It's bad enough when they leave the masks open for non scope films, which reduces perceived contrast. But to keep the house lights on as well will make the image so washed out as to be all but unwatchable. Cinema projectors tend, even when running above standard levels (and many don't even meet this minimum), to have less contrast than even a modest flat panel. You'd think people would want less ambient light, not more to counteract this. There are those who object to having lit fire exit signs because it affects peak contrast.

I hope we'd object if they tried to pull that sort of stunt here but, sadly, it seems most of us are happy to accept whatever crappy screen practises the chains want to undertake in the ongoing quest to cut costs.




(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 1165
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 7/5/2012 3:01:35 PM   
matty_b


Posts: 14445
Joined: 19/10/2005
From: Outpost 31 calling McMurtle.
Surely I can't be the only person who turns the lights off when watching a film at home?




_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze
Mattyb is a shining example of what the perfect Empire Forum member is.


(in reply to Dpp1978)
Post #: 1166
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 7/5/2012 3:57:21 PM   
Spaldron


Posts: 10485
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair
quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

Surely I can't be the only person who turns the lights off when watching a film at home?



I have three little electric candles that I place around the tv when watching a film. They give off a very nice ambience while not affecting the screen contrast.

Yeah I'm hardcore.

_____________________________

And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts
And I looked and behold, a pale horse
And his name that sat on him was Death
And Hell followed with him.

(in reply to matty_b)
Post #: 1167
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 7/5/2012 4:54:24 PM   
Scruffybobby

 

Posts: 4258
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: My House
quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

Surely I can't be the only person who turns the lights off when watching a film at home?





I don't tend to have the lights fully off but I do have them dimmed to a pretty low level. To go to the cinema and expect the house lights to stay on tjough is just weird.


_____________________________

I want to taste you like yogurt.

(in reply to matty_b)
Post #: 1168
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 7/5/2012 4:58:11 PM   
Dpp1978


Posts: 1150
Joined: 2/4/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

Surely I can't be the only person who turns the lights off when watching a film at home?



I have three little electric candles that I place around the tv when watching a film. They give off a very nice ambience while not affecting the screen contrast.

Yeah I'm hardcore.


Unless you have a front projection set up, your screen will not be as drastically affected by ambient light as a cinema screen.

TVs, be they plasma, LCD, CRT or anything else, emit the light you see. Cinema screens reflect light from the projector back at the viewer and any additional ambient light will be reflected back too. For a projection system to work at optimal levels it should be the only source of light in the viewing area. For a number of reasons the elimination of all other light is unrealistic, especially in a commercial environment, but it should be kept to a bare minimum.

So dim lights in a room with a TV will not adversely affect the image, in fact there is a good argument for placing a neutrally balanced white light behind the screen as this has been shown to improve perceived black levels. Even daylight will not, unless it is shining directly on the screen, usually render the image unwatchable.

Even dim lights in a cinema will significantly wash out the black levels and drastically reduce contrast levels.

(in reply to Spaldron)
Post #: 1169
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott - 7/5/2012 5:40:22 PM   
Spaldron


Posts: 10485
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978


quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

Surely I can't be the only person who turns the lights off when watching a film at home?



I have three little electric candles that I place around the tv when watching a film. They give off a very nice ambience while not affecting the screen contrast.

Yeah I'm hardcore.


Unless you have a front projection set up, your screen will not be as drastically affected by ambient light as a cinema screen.

TVs, be they plasma, LCD, CRT or anything else, emit the light you see. Cinema screens reflect light from the projector back at the viewer and any additional ambient light will be reflected back too. For a projection system to work at optimal levels it should be the only source of light in the viewing area. For a number of reasons the elimination of all other light is unrealistic, especially in a commercial environment, but it should be kept to a bare minimum.

So dim lights in a room with a TV will not adversely affect the image, in fact there is a good argument for placing a neutrally balanced white light behind the screen as this has been shown to improve perceived black levels. Even daylight will not, unless it is shining directly on the screen, usually render the image unwatchable.

Even dim lights in a cinema will significantly wash out the black levels and drastically reduce contrast levels.



Its not so much a contrast issue but I get a ton of motion blur if I watch films in daylight, I'm sure its merely a perception thing as it goes away when its dark.

_____________________________

And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts
And I looked and behold, a pale horse
And his name that sat on him was Death
And Hell followed with him.

(in reply to Dpp1978)
Post #: 1170
Page:   <<   < prev  37 38 [39] 40 41   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie Musings >> RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott Page: <<   < prev  37 38 [39] 40 41   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.703