|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
 Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2017 01:37 Post subject: quick question re: 3d movies |
|
 |
started playing around with 3d movies courtesy of samsungs gear vr, and i have a question about them 3d movies..
why are movies half-side by side or over under instead of full?
am i misunderstanding how 3d is supposed to work? My expectation was that the media player will take the half-sized left eye image, stretch it up to full size for the left eye, and then do the same with the right side image for the right eye..
and if thats the case, full sized images will obviously offer better clarity, so yeah.. whats the damn points of half sized instead of full?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2017 02:22 Post subject: |
|
|
I might be wrong but I think it's to save space.
Half-size == half the file size.
| chiv wrote: | | don't quote me on that |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2017 02:50 Post subject: |
|
|
Yes. Space, bandwidth, ability to handle playback real time..
3D Blu-rays are full size (2x 1920x1080), no loss in quality compared to their 2D counterparts (depending on bitrate and quality of encode, of course; some are a little worse, others are even better).
TWIN PEAKS is "something of a miracle."
"...like nothing else on television."
"a phenomenon."
"A tangled tale of sex, violence, power, junk food..."
"Like Nothing On Earth"
~ WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY CAN ONLY BE SEEN ~
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHTUOgYNRzY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
| Posted: Sat, 5th Aug 2017 02:56 Post subject: |
|
|
well i initially thought that as well - it made sense to me that to get the same quality out of a full sized release, it'd have to be double the filesize.
when i got my gear vr i went on a 3d movie downloading spree (as one does), and heres what ive consistantly found:
ive taken full sized movies (1920x2160) and compared them to half size movies (1920x1080) in photoshop by taking screen grabs, taking the 'left eye' image, and scaling up the half sized version to match the full sized.
one would naturally expect the half sized image to look worse than the full sized, which of course they do.
-------------
but heres the kicker.. even when the overall movie size is the same (or in often cases, the full sized version is a SMALLER filesize), the full sized always looks better than the stretched version.
is there something wrong in my testing or what? Why would someone make a 15gb half sbs release, when a 10gb full size looks better.
the only possible reason i can fathom is playback problems... though i cant imagine any 3d capable system struggling when a mobile phone can play back full sized at no problem.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
