mlopinto2k1
Distinguished
- Apr 25, 2006
- 817
- 0
- 18,930
- Status
/www.red.com/store/red-rocket/product/red-rocket
mlopinto2k1
Distinguished
- Apr 25, 2006
- 817
- 0
- 18,930
You wanna talk about Apple being overpriced!!?? They want $300 for a 16GB Flash Card and $50 for a buzzsaw shaped PIN. Huh!??
tsnorquist
Distinguished
- Dec 8, 2009
- 265
- 0
- 18,930
I'm sure "RED" cuts them a pretty sweet deal for the publicity of their cameras as well. What's $1.74MM anyhow to a blockbuster. They'll make that back in the first showing on opening night.
bill gates is your daddy
Distinguished
- Apr 28, 2009
- 231
- 0
- 18,830
TwoDigital
Distinguished
- Jan 2, 2008
- 137
- 0
- 18,630
I look at it kind of like the change-over from black/white to color film. Purists were against the move saying color wasn't necessary and took away from the art of filming... but it's closer to how we SEE. It will take off once they figure out how to show these movies without the need for special glasses. It'll see moderate success in its current form.
Dirtman73
Distinguished
- Sep 11, 2009
- 186
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]pakardbell486dx2[/nom]can't they just for once forgo the CGI/3D and just make a movie the old fashion way. This 3D crap is useless eye candy that only small children and the impotent appreciate it. It cheapens the movie and shows lack of creativity and only serves as a filler to make up for the lack of content and plot today's movies are showing. Has every one forgotten how a film should be...............[/citation]
Said it better than I could.
Said it better than I could.
thegreathuntingdolphin
Distinguished
- Nov 13, 2009
- 133
- 0
- 18,630
Lame. I was hoping the Hobbit would NOT be in gay 3D. MMM....nothing like enjoying a movie while wearing poor fitting, cheap plastic glasses!
I am really getting tired of this lame 3D crap. $4-5 extra per ticket is not worth it... Its crap like this that continue to make me stay at home with my 65 inch TV and Polk 7.1 surround system.
The only good news is that aside from the 3D aspect, these cameras sound pretty awesome. 120 FPS @ 5K resolution and highest dynamic range available...yeah I like that.This movie will look killer on Bluray (like Avatar).
I am really getting tired of this lame 3D crap. $4-5 extra per ticket is not worth it... Its crap like this that continue to make me stay at home with my 65 inch TV and Polk 7.1 surround system.
The only good news is that aside from the 3D aspect, these cameras sound pretty awesome. 120 FPS @ 5K resolution and highest dynamic range available...yeah I like that.This movie will look killer on Bluray (like Avatar).
[citation][nom]pakardbell486dx2[/nom]can't they just for once forgo the CGI/3D and just make a movie the old fashion way. This 3D crap is useless eye candy that only small children and the impotent appreciate it. It cheapens the movie and shows lack of creativity and only serves as a filler to make up for the lack of content and plot today's movies are showing. Has every one forgotten how a film should be...............[/citation]
Mostly agree. While these things can enhance a movie the temptation most producers face, and give in to, will be to focus on special effects/3D at the cost of the rest of the movie. Personally I think if a movie cannot stand in 2D on its own it's really not worth watching. At least I am old enough to remember the movie industries last love affair with 3D and some of the absolute abominations that produced. Will it be different this time?
Mostly agree. While these things can enhance a movie the temptation most producers face, and give in to, will be to focus on special effects/3D at the cost of the rest of the movie. Personally I think if a movie cannot stand in 2D on its own it's really not worth watching. At least I am old enough to remember the movie industries last love affair with 3D and some of the absolute abominations that produced. Will it be different this time?
steiner666
Distinguished
- Jul 30, 2008
- 117
- 0
- 18,630
awesome, i cant wait till the 3D bluray comes out (**** theater polarized 3D)
*Post edited by moderator* Cool it on the language.
*Post edited by moderator* Cool it on the language.
ok so now there's no more need for a 1-D screen. i will be able to play this in the center of my room and watch it from any angle or even in the middle of it as if i was actually there or they were actual people in my room, just images instead because that's what 3 dimensions are. anything less then that is as big of a lie as the 1950's 3-D was!
[citation][nom]steiner666[/nom]awesome, i cant wait till the 3D bluray comes out (fuck theater polarized 3D)[/citation]
Dude do you kiss your mother with that mouth. this aint no 18+ site. Watch the language you hillbilly.
BTW all of you saying 3d sucks well if you haven't noticed. human vision is in 3d and thus watching a movie in 3d is more natural. And i think Hobits are GAY.
Dude do you kiss your mother with that mouth. this aint no 18+ site. Watch the language you hillbilly.
BTW all of you saying 3d sucks well if you haven't noticed. human vision is in 3d and thus watching a movie in 3d is more natural. And i think Hobits are GAY.
gm0n3y
Distinguished
- Mar 13, 2006
- 1,548
- 0
- 19,730
[citation][nom]TwoDigital[/nom]I look at it kind of like the change-over from black/white to color film. Purists were against the move saying color wasn't necessary and took away from the art of filming... but it's closer to how we SEE. It will take off once they figure out how to show these movies without the need for special glasses. It'll see moderate success in its current form.[/citation]
I agree with you to a point. The problem is that 3D in current movies looks awful and directors haven't figured out how to do it properly yet. You always get the feeling that the director is just making things 3D because it 'looks cool', not to make the movie better.
Once the technology matures a bit (and yes, no more glasses) and the directors figure out how to take advantage of it without the kitschy feel, then I'm sure that 3D will because worth the time. But like any transition, it just takes time / money / experience.
I agree with you to a point. The problem is that 3D in current movies looks awful and directors haven't figured out how to do it properly yet. You always get the feeling that the director is just making things 3D because it 'looks cool', not to make the movie better.
Once the technology matures a bit (and yes, no more glasses) and the directors figure out how to take advantage of it without the kitschy feel, then I'm sure that 3D will because worth the time. But like any transition, it just takes time / money / experience.
[citation][nom]djgene01[/nom]Dude do you kiss your mother with that mouth. this aint no 18+ site. Watch the language you hillbilly.BTW all of you saying 3d sucks well if you haven't noticed. human vision is in 3d and thus watching a movie in 3d is more natural. And i think Hobits are GAY.[/citation]
What's natural about 3D movies? It's a trick of light to make your brain think the two separate 2D images presented are in fact real 3D objects. If it was "natural 3D" people wouldn't be getting headaches watching them. I don't get headaches watching them but the eyestrain get rather tiring. Personally I don't object to 3D movies as long as 3D doesn't become the whole reason for the movie.
What's natural about 3D movies? It's a trick of light to make your brain think the two separate 2D images presented are in fact real 3D objects. If it was "natural 3D" people wouldn't be getting headaches watching them. I don't get headaches watching them but the eyestrain get rather tiring. Personally I don't object to 3D movies as long as 3D doesn't become the whole reason for the movie.
[citation][nom]Dirtman73[/nom]I have a feeling that Jackson is kowtowing to the studios to make this in 3D. If not, he's lost my respect as a filmmaker; he should be above this gimmicky ticket-selling fad.[/citation]
Keep in mind, you're talking about the same director who made "Meet the Feebles" and "Bad Taste"....
Keep in mind, you're talking about the same director who made "Meet the Feebles" and "Bad Taste"....
Went to the Red website... those camera's are awesome! I want one... I'm not greedy... just one would be fine by me... with a nice selection of lenses and accessories.
By the way... it's the camera body itself that cost $57k... then you'll probably have another $50k for lenses and equipment... per camera.
By the way... it's the camera body itself that cost $57k... then you'll probably have another $50k for lenses and equipment... per camera.
These cameras shoot at like 14MP, its amazing quality. The website even says that HD was a step backwards...
no doubt the recording quality of the Red Camera is worth the 58k considering the size of the unit.
As for 3D, as long as the movie was shot in 3D from the start vs "post edit 3D" it actually looks good.
no doubt the recording quality of the Red Camera is worth the 58k considering the size of the unit.
As for 3D, as long as the movie was shot in 3D from the start vs "post edit 3D" it actually looks good.
- Status
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter