![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Lovely girl, but no 3D vision.
Have a 3D pic.
![](http://tribs.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/images/b3ta/3D3D.jpg)
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 13:24,
archived)
Have a 3D pic.
![](http://tribs.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/images/b3ta/3D3D.jpg)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
the 3D version is rubbish... oh wait it wasn't just the 3D...
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 13:27,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
but I had high hopes for the film itself
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 13:31,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Apparently the 3D version isn't as good.
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 13:34,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
the original still stands as the better of the two - there is a small nod to the original with the mechanical owl which plays a very brief cameo. The 3D in of itself is good but the film doesn't make proper use of the technology as there is a lot of fast action sequences that just look dark and blurry in 3D and it's very hard to focus on what's going on - also because of the scale of the monsters the 3D doesn't work as it's clipped by the boundaries of the screen and the effect works much better when the 3D elements are within the boundaries thereby appearing to come out of the screen.
The movie is a 'meh!' update probably better seen in 2D
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 13:39,
archived)
The movie is a 'meh!' update probably better seen in 2D
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Explain? Is it like a series of cardboard cutouts stood at different distances to each other?
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 13:54,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
then added the 3d in post, when avatar did well.
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 14:07,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
looks like I chose the wrong film for my first look at the new 3D.
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 14:09,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
I was thinking about going to see it in 3D, as my first experience of the new 3D... I don't think I'll bother now.
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 14:13,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
I might just watch the original again. I'll download it from torrents. FUCK YOU DIGITAL ECONOMY BILL!
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 14:17,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
You'd never be able to look into her eyes without wondering if she was gazing lovingly at someone just behind you.
It'd work well for love triangles though.
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 13:27,
archived)
It'd work well for love triangles though.
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
she would just assume you were standing closer?
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 13:28,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
I've just never been able to do those or the 3D pictures that get posted here all they do is give me an headache.
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 13:26,
archived)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
What sorcery is this? HTML5? Web2.0? USB3?
(lovely illusion)
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 13:35,
archived)
(lovely illusion)
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Oddly, there are no curtains in this flat.
/natural light blog
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 13:44,
archived)
/natural light blog
![link to this post #](/images/board_posticon.gif)
because I'm a bit of a shit like that sometimes.
![](http://s1.b3ta.com/host/creative/55979/1263914662/AutoStereoGram.jpg)
It's interesting to see what people make of it.
( ,
Thu 8 Apr 2010, 13:36,
archived)
![](http://s1.b3ta.com/host/creative/55979/1263914662/AutoStereoGram.jpg)
It's interesting to see what people make of it.