Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

Premium Member
67 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi Guys, am might totally be in the wrong place to start this thread...but has any one been able to watch a 3-D movie in their HT? besides the special glasses, do I need a better/special projector?
I'd like to see if it is possible to watch a 3-D movie in the confort of home... any thoughts. Thanks

Moderator Emeritus
3,772 Posts
Hi Guys, am might totally be in the wrong place to start this thread...but has any one been able to watch a 3-D movie in their HT? besides the special glasses, do I need a better/special projector?
I'd like to see if it is possible to watch a 3-D movie in the confort of home... any thoughts. Thanks
It seems like the right place to bring up the general topic. As specifics are defined you might need to start posting in the projector or screen forums, but we ain't there yet. ;)

Yes, you can do 3-D at home with your projector, but you will be limited with the type of 3-D movies you can watch if you only use a single PJ. Basically, you should be able to watch the old Anaglyph 3-D movies that require the viewer to wear the glasses with red and blue lenses in them. These are almost always Black & White movies since the colored glasses play hob with a color image.

From Wikipedia:
"Anaglyph image

Anaglyph images have seen a recent resurgence due to the presentation of images on the internet. Where traditionally, this has been a largely black & white format, recent digital camera and processing advances have brought very acceptable color images to the internet and DVD field. With the online availability of low cost paper glasses with improved red-cyan filters, and even better plastic framed glasses, the field is growing fast. Scientific images, where depth perception is useful, include the presentation of complex multi-dimensional data sets and stereographic images from (for example) the surface of Mars, but due to recent release of 3D DVDs, they are increasingly used for entertainment. Anaglyph images are much easier to view than either parallel sighting or crossed eye stereograms, although the latter types offer bright and accurate color rendering,particularly in the red component, which is muted, or desaturated with even the best color anaglyphs. A compensating technique, commonly known as Anachrome, uses a slightly more transparent cyan filter in the patented glasses associated with the technique. Process reconfigures the typical anaglyph image to have less parallax."

If you are willing to go to the expense of using a two-projector system you might be able to go with a 3-D system that uses image polarization and special glasses, but I have no idea how many movies are available for home use with these systems. One projector for each eye, the left PJ plays the left eye image and the right PJ plays the right-eye image; these are superimposed on a single screen. The glasses allow only the correct image to be seen by the relevant eye.

A good beginning link for understanding 3-D movie stuff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-D_film

22,577 Posts
You can watch movies like recently released Journey to the Center of the Earth in 3-D. It even comes with glasses, although I believe they are red and green lens. My Bloody Valentine will be released in 3-D. They will be releasing more as it takes off.

Nothing special is required on the display side... just pop the DVD in your player and the glasses on your face and you are all set.

Premium Member
67 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Thanks guys... I watched core center of earth...not what I expected in 3-D, colors were not there (almost black & white) it was not clear so I went back to 2-D...I read somewhere that they are going to start making more movies 3-D so am sure the tech will change in our projectors in a near future... thanks for you input, as always this is the best forum to get answers....thanks.

Senior Shackster
792 Posts
Well I know something about 3-D since I made the 1995 film, "Run for Cover".
In my case I shot it with the StereoVision lens in 35mm. A standard 35mm frame
is four sprockets high. This lens splits the four sprocket frame into two wideframe
two sprocket images. The top image is the left eye and the bottom the right eye.
When superimposed with polarized filters it generated a 3-D image in the 2.35 x 1
format (but it is not anamorphic).

Here's the basics of 3-D...

If you put your index finger in front of your face and then close your right eye and
then close your left eye you'll see what's known as the 'parallex'. Namely, the slightly
different angles your two eyes see of any object or person that gives you the dimensional image.

So...how can you photograph something with the same illusion.

Well basically, it's as simple as filming the same image with the same parallex which
is what your left and right eye see simultaneously that is from a slightly different

They discovered this concept when photography was invented in the 19th Century.
The Civil War was photographed in 3-D among many other things.

The question is...how to get your left eye and right eye to see the separate images
to trick the brain into thinking it's a dimensional image. The simplest way is through
some kind of goggle. In the 19th century they had the stereo pairs on a hand held
device combined with goggles that allowed the viewer to look through them and see
each appropriate image. You can still find them in flea markets. This was later adapted
into the Viewmaster toy. In both cases you could see either black and white and color
images in 3-D.

For projected motion pictures this became more difficult. The simplest way was to tint
each image with a complimentary color and superimpose them on the same piece of film
and have glasses with the same complimentary colors. Red/green or Red/blue worked.
The dimensional image did give the illusion of depth but eyestrain set in very quickly
and your eye began to absorb the tint after a while reducing the dimensional illusion.
There were shorts and features in the silent era and sound era that used this type
of 3-D which was known as 'anaglyph'.

It obviously wasn't appropriate for a longer movie so in the 1939 and 1940 World's Fair they developed the polarized 3-D. The two separate images were filmed with two cameras and shown with two interlocked projectors (in either B&W or 3-D) with each
projector containing a polarized tint. 3-D glasses with the same polarized tints were
given to the audience and they experienced the short "Motor Rhythm" in the process
to great success. Then World War II kicked in but after the war it was re-introduced
for 35mm theatrical release prints in the same system with "Bwana Devil" and "House
of Wax". The process worked great...providing the audience didn't have a stigmatism
or the system didn't give them a splitting headache. I'm not sure what the percentage
of people is but some people cannot see 3-D without gettin a headache. Doesn't bother
me but I know from personal experience it bothers some people. But...at least the polarized 3-D system of interlocked prints allowed both color and 3-D images to be
projected....providing the prints didn't break and throw the show out of synch.

In the mid-sixties into the seventies they developed a system that split the frame in
half with the left eye on top and right eye on the bottom to have a single frame/single
film 3-D format in the polarized system. "The Bubble", "Andy Warhol's Frankenstein"
and my own movie, "Run for Cover" used this system.

Then Imax developed a shutter glass system in the eighties but the process proved
too cumbersome. They later returned to the polarized system of the fifties but with
a much larger negative for sharper images.

Now comes the problem. How to adapt the 3-D formats to video. Attempts at anaglyph
(superimposed red/blue or red/green) images in anaglyph (video, broadcast) didn't work
because the image wasn't sharp or distinct enough to generate a dimensional image.
It worked a bit better in DVD with the shaper digital image but still had problems with
ghosting. Obviously, black and white worked better than color because when you add
the red/blue or red/green tints to a color image it undermines the color design. And of
course your eyes start absorbing the color tints as you watch it (approximately after
20 minutes) and the dimensional illusion is reduced.

Polarized 3-D requires two separate images projected through tints and with the same
polarized tints on the glasses. It's possible but thus far they haven't come up with a
cost efficient or viable method. Few consumers want to buy two DLPs to show a 3-D
movie and a single strip dual image format with a lens to combine them probably wouldn't be bright enough or at least they haven't developed a projector yet.

Anaglyph DVD projector will work...for a brief time but then the dimensional appearance
will disappear for the reasons stated above.

The Japanese developed an Imax variation which is the shutter glass system. You need
a non-progressive scan DVD player to see them and they can only be seen on standard
tube monitor with a shutter glass box and glasses. It does work providing the lights are
off in the room you screen it in but it does flicker. You can reduce the flicker by adjusting the brightness and contrast but that also alters the color or black and white
imagery. Better than nothing but not the ideal format.

So...there is no quality 3-D system on DVD at the moment. There is on film but not
for home entertainment. That's not to say there won't be some day but I would wait
before spending too much money on the existing systems.

22,577 Posts
I got about 5 minutes into the 3-D version of Journey to the Center of the Earth and also went back to 2-D. 3-D was pretty bad.

Good explanation Richard.

Senior Shackster
792 Posts
Thank you.

In theory...

You could have a DVD of the stereo pairs on top of each other in widescreen or in 1.33 next to each other and a lens placed in front of your digital video projector to superimpose them with polarizing tints. And then you would watch them projected
on a silver screen with the same polarized tints in the glasses. You need a silver
screen to reflect the polarizers. A white screen would absorb them.

But...the light loss is a problem. You basically need double the amount of light
coming through the projector (video or film) to compensate for the polarizing
tints on the projector lens and your glasses.
1 - 7 of 7 Posts