cjl@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Charles J. Lord) (02/02/89)
OK, no one else asked, so I will. What is the alternate polarized frame process used in the Capt EO film at the Epcot Kodak pavillion? What is the frame rate? Is it a shutter system or twin projectors? MY two cents is that it is the best 3-D effect system I have ever seen and whether you like the main person in the film or not, the film is impressive and is a 'must see' at Epcot. For those unfamiliar, the film is a long music video as such featuring Michael Jackson. Special effects are so-so but the 3-D is very good- any seat in the theater feels that the actors are a few feet in front of them. The viewers must wear special glasses that are polarized in perpendicular fashion. There are a few artifacts of the other image visible at times, but the effect leaves the red/green and the Nuoptix far behind. -- * Charles Lord ..!decvax!mcnc!ecsvax!cjl Usenet (old) * * Cary, NC cjl@ecsvax.UUCP Usenet (new) * * #include <std.disclamers> cjl@ecsvax.BITNET Bitnet * * #include <cutsey.quote> cjl@ecsvax.uncecs.edu Internet *
dave@onfcanim.UUCP (Dave Martindale) (02/02/89)
In article <6313@ecsvax.uncecs.edu> cjl@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Charles J. Lord) writes: > >OK, no one else asked, so I will. What is the alternate polarized >frame process used in the Capt EO film at the Epcot Kodak pavillion? >What is the frame rate? Is it a shutter system or twin projectors? It was shot with two standard 70mm cameras, using a beamsplitter mirror to allow the lenses to get close together. As far as I know, it's 24 FPS, but Disney likes to do things at 30 FPS sometimes so they might have used that for Captain Eo too. I believe projection is done by two 70mm projectors with polarizing filters in front of each, as usual. Any sort of shutter system that showed images for each eye alternately would require the audience to wear glasses that also contained shutters - rather expensive compared to simple polarizing glasses. If you look around SIGGRAPH, it seems that 3-D display vendors have stopped using shutter glasses that require them to be connected to the workstation with a wire, and switched to an active polarizing screen in front of the CRT plus passive glasses on the viewers.
ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) (02/07/89)
In article <6313@ecsvax.uncecs.edu> cjl@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Charles J. Lord) writes: >MY two cents is that it is the best 3-D effect system I have ever seen >and whether you like the main person in the film or not, the film is >impressive and is a 'must see' at Epcot. > If you think Captain $E0 was good, wait until you've seen 3D done properly. According to Michael Starks, an international expert on 3D, Captain Eo suffers from a number of shortcomings, chief among them being the excessive use of negative parallax (used to get things to leap off the screen). Captain Ego tried to club you over the head with enormous parallaxes when it's not necessary. As a result, people as far back as the middle row will have their eyes colliding into each other when trying to focus on anything that attempts to leap off the screen. They also commit the unforgiveable sin of having leap-off-the-screen objects intersecting with the edge of the film frame (whats-her-face's talons reaching into the audience). This causes wildly confusing information to get sent to your brain. I saw the film at DisneyLand, and the only effects that were really effective were the opening shot of the spinning galaxy, and the holographic "video" transmission. There are also a couple of neat added gimmicks, such as lasers in the theatre synchronized to laser fire on the screen. Apart from that, most of the 3D was completely lost on me. Star Tours is much better. _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Leo L. Schwab -- The Guy in The Cape INET: well!ewhac@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU \_ -_ Recumbent Bikes: UUCP: pacbell > !{well,unicom}!ewhac O----^o The Only Way To Fly. hplabs / (pronounced "AE-wack") "Work FOR? I don't work FOR anybody! I'm just having fun." -- The Doctor