Film-Tech Cinema Systems
  Home     Products     Store     Forum     Warehouse     Contact Us    
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » James Cameron: 3D conversion best for classic films (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: James Cameron: 3D conversion best for classic films
Michael Brown
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1522
From: Bradford, England
Registered: May 2001

- posted 11-05-2010 09:20 AM      Profile for Michael Brown   Email Michael Brown   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
From BBC NEWS:

Full Artical

---------------------------------------------------
James Cameron: 3D conversion best for classic films

James Cameron has taken a swipe at studios who add 3D to films in post-production, saying that 3D retro-fitting should only be used for classic movies like Jaws or ET.

The Avatar director said it had been a "mistake" to attempt to add 3D to the latest Harry Potter film, the Deathly Hallows: Part 1.

And he predicted that the practice of adding 3D to movies in post-production would end with the widespread take-up of 3D by TV broadcasters.

Speaking at the Blu-Con event in Beverly Hills, Cameron repeated his assertion that studios should not attempt to "shoehorn" 3D conversion - after the film has been shot - into the normal post-production time frame.

"I maintain you can't do a good conversion of a two-hour movie with high quality in a few weeks like they tried to do with Clash of the Titans.

"I don't mean to throw that movie under the bus because my buddy Sam [Worthington, star of Avatar] is in it, but I think everybody realised that this was a point at which people had gone too far."

Cameron added: "You see another stumble with the most recent Harry Potter movie from the same studio making the same mistake - except really getting spanked for it now because they didn't get the film done.

"They announced it in 3D - threw a bunch of money trying to convert it to 3D in post-production and it simply didn't work. They just didn't get it done."

3D ET

Last month, Warner Bros said it could not complete the 3D conversion of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 in time for its 19 November UK and US release date.

Warner Bros said it did not want to keep fans waiting for the film.

Cameron said: "My personal philosophy is that post conversion should be used for one thing and one thing only - which is to take library titles that are favourites that are proven, and convert them into 3D - whether it's Jaws or ET or Indiana Jones, Close Encounters... or Titanic.

"Unless you have a time machine to go back and shoot it in 3D, you have no other choice. The best alternative is if you want to release a movie in 3D - make it in 3D."

At the end of October, it was announced that the first sequel to blockbuster hit Avatar will be released in December 2014 with a second to follow 12 months later.

Avatar holds the record for the highest-grossing film ever, having earned some $2.77 billion (£1.76 billion) at the global box office. A "special edition" 2D Blu-ray version of Avatar is set for release in November, with a 3D Blu-ray release in the pipeline.

Cameron predicted that the days of 3D conversion in movies were numbered.

"The thing that's going to be the coffin nail for conversion is when the broadcasters start broadcasting thousands, if not tens of thousands of hours a year in 3D.

"If you've got 5,000 cameras doing live sports feeding in over many different network delivery systems, it's going to be pretty hard for Hollywood producers to claim that 3D is just too complicated to make a movie in 3D, when it's being done every day by people a lot less talented and a lot less well-funded."

The director also said that glasses-free 3D would be a reality within a decade.

"Once we get to auto-stereoscopic, that's watching 3-D without glasses, it is going to be the way we watch all of our media. That's probably eight to 10 years away."
-------------------------------------

So let me get this absolutely clear, he hates 3D conversion on new titles but would be perfectly happy to go and ruin classics like Jaws and ET??

 |  IP: Logged
Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

- posted 11-05-2010 10:28 AM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
James Cameron, the Ted Turner of our times.

 |  IP: Logged
Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"

Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

- posted 11-05-2010 10:48 AM      Profile for Manny Knowles   Email Manny Knowles   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
He doesn't see it as ruining it -- and I don't take it to mean that he personally wants to see those movies in 3-D -- he's using them as examples of movies that:

(a) already exist in 2-D and
(b) would have a built-in audience, given their popularity

FWIW, I don't think 3-D conversion automatically "ruins" a movie. For example, I think Disney exercised a lot of restraint with NIGHTMARE BEFORE CHRISTMAS. Did 3-D improve the movie? No. Did it ruin the movie? I didn't think so.

I wouldn't mind seeing 3-D classics re-released in digital 3-D...

CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON and/or REVENGE OF THE CREATURE
JAWS 3-D
CAPTAIN E/O

 |  IP: Logged
Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

- posted 11-05-2010 02:02 PM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
Michael, there seems to be some glitches with your copy/paste from the article. I've made the corrections below for you.

quote:
Last month, Warner Bros said it could not complete the 3D conversion of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 in time for its 19 November UK and US release date.

Warner Bros said it did not want to wait any longer for their money and saw this as a unique opportunity to milk the movie for even more money by doing a delayed release in 3D before the final Potter movie opens next spring.

quote:
Cameron said: "My personal philosophy is that post conversion should be used for one thing and one thing only - which is to take movies either Spielberg or myself have made, and convert them into 3D - whether it's Jaws or ET or Indiana Jones, Close Encounters... or Titanic.


 |  IP: Logged
Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

- posted 11-05-2010 03:04 PM      Profile for Tom Petrov     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
There should be absolutely no reason to change a classic movie to 3D.

Cameron really should re-think the idea to modify Titanic.

 |  IP: Logged
Joseph L. Kleiman
Master Film Handler

Posts: 380
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Apr 2005

- posted 11-05-2010 03:34 PM      Profile for Joseph L. Kleiman   Email Joseph L. Kleiman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Mr. Cameron seems to have forgotten that three of his four 3D films (Ghosts of the Abyss, Aliens of the Deep, Avatar) had scenes that were shot in 2D and then converted to a stereographic image in post.

 |  IP: Logged
Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

- posted 11-05-2010 04:23 PM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
He's referring to "rush jobs" that are done without proper planning beforehand. In that case I agree with him....it shouldn't be done.

As for 3-D'ing old classics? I can't imagine how it would improve anything.

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 11-05-2010 11:41 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
While I detest 2D to 3D conversions, I think a movie studio can do the artificial 3D thing to a catalog or classic movie. However, I think it is extremely important to preserve the original 2D version of the movie and keep it available.

The special edition stunts like those pulled by George Lucas to make the original version of Star Wars unavailable is just wrong. It may be his movie, but it's also an important part of movie history. By making the original 1977 cut unavailable he is effectively removing a piece of film history. That's wrong.

 |  IP: Logged
Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000

- posted 11-06-2010 02:14 PM      Profile for Darryl Spicer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Joseph L. Kleiman
Mr. Cameron seems to have forgotten that three of his four 3D films (Ghosts of the Abyss, Aliens of the Deep, Avatar) had scenes that were shot in 2D and then converted to a stereographic image in post.
Do you have a link or anything that would show this to be true? Why would he deviate from shooting with his 3-D cameras and use 2-D cameras on certain scenes of Avatar?

 |  IP: Logged
Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

- posted 11-08-2010 11:17 PM      Profile for Tom Petrov     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Darryl Spicer
Do you have a link or anything that would show this to be true? Why would he deviate from shooting with his 3-D cameras and use 2-D cameras on certain scenes of Avatar?

You make a good point. I doubt Avatar was ever 2D and then converted. The others, I am not familiar with.

 |  IP: Logged
Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

- posted 11-09-2010 04:54 AM      Profile for Frank Angel   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Angel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I know Ted Turner has been vilified for many years for his foray into the "colorizing" of many of the films in his library when he owned the MGM titles. BUT, he never colorized FILM....he only colorized video, and let's face it, if people were watching his colorized VHS tapes and thinking they were seeing our film history the way the filmmaker indended, they might as well have been wading around up to their eyeballs in a cespool.

Yes, Turner made lots of money selling rights to broadcast/cable outlets and from retail tape sales. The thing that most people overlook is the fact that with those profits, he quietly went about striking new 35mm film prints of many of the bigger MGM titles in that library -- he WAS preserving film history and giving more people the chance to see the filmmaker's ACTUAL historic work.

That colorization process got art houses new film prints; we would have been running battered old warehouse prints if he didn't go about using the colorization process and its profits for film restoration. No one in the arthouse end of exhibition thinks coloriztion was bad at all; as far was we were concerned, he could colorize as many VHS tapes as he wanted. It meant that we were able to book those titles with spanking new 35mm film prints and show them on a big screen in a MOVIE THEATRE [thumbsup] Ted Turner, our hero; James Cameron, looking to 3D-ize TITANIC....not so much.

 |  IP: Logged
Pravin Ratnam
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 844
From: Atlanta, GA,USA
Registered: Sep 2002

- posted 11-23-2010 02:02 PM      Profile for Pravin Ratnam   Email Pravin Ratnam   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Avatar was 3D well done and let me just tell you that the visuals actually look eye poppingly brighter in 2D on a good big hidef tv. TV 3D is useless to me because i multitask at home and 3D glasses get in the way. Plus what if I have guests and people are walking in and out of the room wanting to check out a few scenes ? Do they have to keep putting on and removing the 3D glasses? TV cant even do 2D right with the amount of compression used.

 |  IP: Logged
Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

- posted 11-23-2010 03:24 PM      Profile for Frank Angel   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Angel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Rules of thumb in my house -- if we are watching a MOVIE, we watch the movie -- we don't TALK, we certainly don't WALK IN AND OUT, and we keep the lights at a low, this-is-not-walking-around light level. If anyone isn't cool with that, they go to their rooms. If guests come over, they know me well and they know that we either socialize or we watch a movie. Never EVER the two at the same time. Simple rules and they work. They also significantly reduce the number of visitors to only the most tolerant and best of our friends. [thumbsup]

 |  IP: Logged
Pravin Ratnam
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 844
From: Atlanta, GA,USA
Registered: Sep 2002

- posted 11-23-2010 09:57 PM      Profile for Pravin Ratnam   Email Pravin Ratnam   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
When you watch a few movies a week at home like I do, it is tough to treat each movie as an experience. Most movies are not worth my undivided attention.

 |  IP: Logged
Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

- posted 11-24-2010 12:03 AM      Profile for Tom Petrov     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Avatar was 3D well done and let me just tell you that the visuals actually look eye poppingly brighter in 2D on a good big hidef tv. TV 3D is useless to me because i multitask at home and 3D glasses get in the way. Plus what if I have guests and people are walking in and out of the room wanting to check out a few scenes ? Do they have to keep putting on and removing the 3D glasses? TV cant even do 2D right with the amount of compression us
I have seen parts of Avatar on 3D in the home. It looks outstanding!

 |  IP: Logged


All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
- Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.