katycake t1_j9uu3yr wrote
Reply to comment by Outrageous-Event785 in Anyone else hate 3D movies? by sadlibra
How did James Cameron turn Titanic 3D, and have it be good? I thought digital 3D sucked because true perspective has to be done with two cameras.
I wouldn't make the odds zero that he actually didn't go out of his way and film Titanic with two cameras. Just to flex.
MrFoxManBoy t1_j9v1ujf wrote
We converted Titanic to 3D. My first gig was 3D conversion and the first two films I worked on were some of the hardest— Jurassic Park and Titanic.
None of it was native like the comment below suggests. We 100% converted it by using a mixture of stereo-painting and compositing. From there I worked on all of Phase 2 of Marvel, Star Wars, Pacific Rim, and my personal favorite, Mad Max: Fury Road. If you care I can explain what we did. If you want the short answer, a lot of fuckin work.
punished_snake15 t1_j9v3gqq wrote
So we have confirmation, the CGI in Pacific rim is native 3d whilst the live action is converted? Because the work on that movie was incredible, in part inspired by the work on Titanic 3d as well
MrFoxManBoy t1_j9v3smn wrote
No. Pacific Rim was also 100% converted. We converted it using 2D plates. We didn’t even have access to the VFX assets back then like we do now.
punished_snake15 t1_ja10ouj wrote
Your entire resume could just hang on pacific rim, I have a 3d tv still, and whilst 3d is regarded as a gimmick usually, it's almost like a revelation to the viewers when I put pacific rim 3d on, quite literally they don't want to watch other 3d movies I own, just that one because it's so grand
MrFoxManBoy t1_ja12fkg wrote
No lie. That was one of the hardest movies we ever did. All that rain and dynamic camera movement. But I am definitely proud of that one. Glad you dig it too!
katycake t1_j9xj3wz wrote
Oh. That's cool. Didn't know it could be done.
MrFoxManBoy t1_j9xm6pj wrote
Little trade secret too. Even most movies that claim they were shot in 3D, a lot of the time have to get converted anyways because something as simple as difference in light entering the two lenses unequally. Meaning if you watched the playback in 3D, it would look like a weird shimmer that only hurts your eyes. So we would have to choose one of the outputs from one of the cameras and convert that plate to 3D.
CorneliusCardew t1_j9uxyjk wrote
I can't find it now but I remember some interview where he said all it takes is time, money, and attention to detail to get post-conversion to like 80% of native 3D quality it's just that no one wants to do that.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments