Coraline

Features, Shorts, Live-Action and Direct-To-Video
AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 45
Joined: January 23rd, 2009
Location: colton, ca
Contact:

how do i reuse the real 3d glasses?

Post by Cinderallaboi » February 8th, 2009, 4:18 am

so i went to see the movie Coraline in 3D and i got the free 3D glasses and now im trying to figure out how i can reuse them. Is there anyplace on the internet or any place where i can use the real 3d glasses i got when seeing the movie?

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19955
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » February 8th, 2009, 9:27 am

Not that I know of. Usually I think you have to give these back at the end of the screening for re-use later (at least that's what we have to do here at a 3D movie), but it's cool that you get to keep them.

The only one we got to keep the specs on was Chicken Little...I now use them as shielders when I use my hedge cutter!


BTW, I merged your post with this Coraline one since it lead on from your last message and we really don't need a redundant thread on 3D glasses!

AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 7288
Joined: October 16th, 2004
Contact:

Post by James » February 8th, 2009, 10:14 am

Except for the IMAX movies, they don't require you to give them back here. I have a bunch of pairs in a drawer here at the house! Thankfully they started putting a 3d glasses recycling box outside a lot of theatres lately.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 338
Joined: October 31st, 2008

Post by Darkblade » February 8th, 2009, 2:47 pm

I enjoyed this movie... It was really impressive and I think that stop-motion was the right choice for this movie. But however I cant stand that the fact some people think Tim Burton did this movie....

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 442
Joined: November 22nd, 2006
Location: Boston, MA

Post by Rodney » February 9th, 2009, 3:19 pm

Cinderellaboi, you should keep at least one pair. I think TV is going to be experimenting with these. There will always be some 3D glasses offer, but you can't always count on them. I know the last episode of Chuck was in 3D as were some commercials during the superbowl. Otherwise, you never know what they'll come up with next.

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19955
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » February 9th, 2009, 3:28 pm

Very true...and don't forget that 3D will eventually come into the home via LCD screens in some format. You could have quite a stack of 'em by then! ;)

AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 7288
Joined: October 16th, 2004
Contact:

Post by James » February 9th, 2009, 6:30 pm

From what I understand, those NBC 3d things used different glasses.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 26
Joined: February 13th, 2008

Post by Rosengeist » February 9th, 2009, 8:07 pm

I don't know much about this, but is it possible to transfer 3d films to DVD? I don't live anywhere near a 3D theatre and I would love to see the film presented in this way, I'm sure there are many other people who have this problem.

I think it might be an excellent marketing gimmick for DVD sales in this strapped economy, of course, you'd have to have the 3D and non 3D version together, but I don't think that would be to difficult since many films now have DVD's with multpile versions of the film on them.

AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 7288
Joined: October 16th, 2004
Contact:

Post by James » February 9th, 2009, 9:42 pm

Again from what I understand, 3D movies in theatres now use a special screen that is required for viewing the film with the new glasses. Whatever version is being prepped for home use (this for example) will have to be somewhat different.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 261
Joined: November 15th, 2005
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank

Post by Sullivan » February 9th, 2009, 10:56 pm

The 3d glasses used for this film will not do anything at home. Well, they might be passable as sunglasses.



Rosengeist wrote:I don't know much about this, but is it possible to transfer 3d films to DVD?
Yes, but they wouldn't work on your television set, or with your DVD player.

There are ways, but currently it's very expensive, and will necessitate you getting an entirely new system in your house.


Eventually these things will get less expensive, and you may see them offered as options. Right now, you're talking major cash outlay, and currently there are no studios pursuing home 3D exhibition, as there's no installed market. You may see a roll-out of Blu-Ray 3D or some such about five years or so from now. Expect it to not be cheap, and to require you throw away your current tv set.


I don't live anywhere near a 3D theatre and I would love to see the film presented in this way, I'm sure there are many other people who have this problem.

I think it might be an excellent marketing gimmick for DVD sales in this strapped economy, of course, you'd have to have the 3D and non 3D version together, but I don't think that would be to difficult since many films now have DVD's with multpile versions of the film on them.
If it were that easy, you WOULD have a theater near you doing it.

But no, it's expensive. Expensive in a movie theater, and expensive in your house.

As James said, Rodney, the NBC thing used different, very sub-par color-filter glasses. The effect in the movie theater projecting in Real-D is phenomenally better than anything they could do over normal tv sets. I don't think the filmmakers have any desire to show their 3d movie in a sub-par format like the NBC process. I think they understand that eventually there'll be proper 3d home exhibition, and they want to be able to (re)sell you the movie (NOW IN 3D!!!) at that time.

Ben wrote:
and don't forget that 3D will eventually come into the home via LCD screens in some format
Perhaps so, but there's no guarantee that it will use the same polarization scheme as Real-D. In other words, they might not turn out to be compatible. And anyway, these glasses are phenomenally cheap. You'd pay thousands upon thousands for the tv screen. These glasses are about a buck a pair.


James wrote:
Again from what I understand, 3D movies in theatres now use a special screen that is required for viewing the film with the new glasses.
Partly true, depending on which system is installed at your theater. The Real-D format indeed uses a special silver-screen that is used for polarized light. The competing Dolby 3-D does not use a silver screen. But IMO the quality is inferior, and the glasses are large, cumbersome and very expensive... they make sure to collect those when you leave the theater. Not that you'd want them.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 442
Joined: November 22nd, 2006
Location: Boston, MA

Post by Rodney » February 10th, 2009, 3:58 pm

Thanks for the explanation. I have not seen either glasses mentioned.

AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 5804
Joined: October 23rd, 2004
Location: SaskaTOON, Canada

Post by Randall » February 10th, 2009, 10:44 pm

Saw the film tonight. I paid a $3 premium for it being in 3D, but Tuesday nights are cheaper anyway, so it was a wash. We had to give back to the glasses at the end, which was fine with me.

Now, as for the film...

Amazing. The 3D didn't do a whole lot for me (it was more impressive in the Ice Age, Up, and MVA trailers), but the movie itself was fantastic. Like many of Gaiman's works, it felt like a great fairy tale you think you heard a long time ago. At the risk of sounding too Hollywood, I'd call it a cross between Spirited Away and Pan's Labyrinth.

The animation was almost too fluid, if you can believe it. It looked practically CGI, which lost a bit of the charm of stop-motion animation. That's hardly a criticism, though, just an observation. Overall, this film's destined to be a classic.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 261
Joined: November 15th, 2005
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank

Post by Sullivan » February 10th, 2009, 11:03 pm

Was it the Dolby 3d process or the Real-D?

If you had to give back the glasses, it's usually the inferior Dolby process. But I'm just checking. Were the glasses light, big and plastic, or heavy little letter-slots made of metal?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 261
Joined: November 15th, 2005
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank

Post by Sullivan » February 10th, 2009, 11:09 pm


User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19955
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » February 11th, 2009, 8:36 am

I saw the film of Gaiman's Stardust last night and, while I thought it was a fairly nice little story, the film did little for me. I thought the performances were good, but that the effects, bar a couple of nice touches, were nothing we hadn't seen better before.

I'm gagging to see Coraline - anyone know of a UK release? - and agree from the trailers that the animation is so super smooth I did wonder, when I saw it, if this wasn't a Flushed Away scenario where the animation was CG based on stop-motion design. I know it's not, but this looks even smoother than Corpse Bride, which I thought was insanely fluid.

I like the sound of the story too...while Stardust (and Mirrormask, he wrote that too didn't he?) were a bit too close to recycling old fairytale ideas, this one seems to have that feel but conjours up a world and concept of its own.

Post Reply