Savannah wrote:junglesmacks wrote:trilobyte wrote:illy - that was our thinking too, masking our dorkiness as being something to do "in the name of science" and all that. I'll report back in the thread.
Why does this sound familiar, Illy?
Quit laughing, Savannah.
I CAN'T quit laughing.
O Hey-zeus! I can't stop laughing either!
Anything worth doing, is worth doing "in the name of science"!
trilobyte wrote: Besides, the science makes some sense. 24fps is the standard movie frame rate and considered the minimum for the illusion of lifelike motion. 24fps 3D is only 12fps per eye. While 12fps worked for the old classic Disney and Warner Bros animation because they were cartoons, it's not quite enough for live action feature film and results in eyestrain (some more than others).
I didn't understand the Science behind it, but that makes too much sense!
And I couldn't agree! So far, the best 3D movies I've seen, that didn't cause eye strain were animated or highly CGI. The first movie I saw in the 'new' 3D (Real D) was Caroline, and it was amazing and epic. I think it still might be one of the best I've seen. Since, then I've seen 'real' or movies with actual people in 3D and most of them cause terrible eye strain. Saw Silent Hill II just before Halloween, and it was hard to enjoy because of the eye strain. Avatar was done pretty well, but it was also very very CGI, and they kept the 3D to the really CGI parts.
but I think that with the LOTR trilogy Jackson proved that he truly loves the material and really wants to see it done as beautifully as possible.
Again, Completely Agree!!!! I have a feeling that The Hobbit, will be ground breaking! Or rather, set the new standard, for 3D movies.