Sunday, October 14, 2012

So, that 3D disc of Prometheus...

3:22 PM / Blu-ray / Comments24 Comments

...is kinda lacking on the detail front compared to its 2D counterpart. I wonder what happened there?

Prometheus 3D

Above: 3D (click to enlarge)

Prometheus 2D

Above: 2D (click to enlarge)

To the best of my knowledge, no-one else has commented on this yet. I guess, given that a lot of televisions don't actually display 3D content in full 1920x1080 anyway, it's going to be a moot point for a lot of people, but still I'd have expected at least someone to have spotted the discrepancy by now.

Any thoughts?

And before you ask, it's not just this shot that's affected, or even a handful of shots. It's the whole movie.

 
24 Comments

1. Will Dearborn said:

Oh wow, very strange. Surprised AVSForum or someone else haven't noticed yet, and this is the opposite of what you normally see. (3D version sharpened or 2D version being blurrier)

(Posted on Sunday, October 14, 2012 at 4:41 PM)

2. FoxyMulder said:

Has the 2D edition been sharpened up while the 3D edition hasn't. ?

(Posted on Sunday, October 14, 2012 at 7:32 PM)

3. Author Profile Page Michael said:

FOXYMULDER:

Nah, there's no way you could magic detail like that out of thin air.

(Posted on Sunday, October 14, 2012 at 7:37 PM)

4. FoxyMulder said:

A Darbee Darblet can supposedly do it, people swear it works and does not add edge enhancement, it's supposed to be subtle and makes supposedly invisible changes to contrast that give the illusion of a sharper image, it's not something i'd buy but some people seem to love it.

(Posted on Sunday, October 14, 2012 at 7:42 PM)

5. Author Profile Page Michael said:

I've heard all about the Darblet and what it can supposedly do. Apparently it also turns turds into gold bricks.

:)

(Posted on Sunday, October 14, 2012 at 8:20 PM)

6. FoxyMulder said:

I'll buy one for my cat.

(Posted on Sunday, October 14, 2012 at 10:38 PM)

7. David S.H said:

That is strange, maybe they had to compromise due the the extra space required for left & right eye image.
I think I'm actually going to sell my 3D disc on ebay, the "discs only" listings there are getting a decent amount.

(Posted on Monday, October 15, 2012 at 2:23 PM)

8. Daniel Sardella said:

Color also doesn't look as good in the 3D.

(Posted on Monday, October 15, 2012 at 3:17 PM)

9. FoxyMulder said:

Titanic also by Fox doesn't suffer the same issue although the 3D version might be a tad less detailed, that's longer than Prometheus so space and bitrate shouldn't be an issue.

Link to the Titanic caps below.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/comparison.php?cID=1264

Could this be a problem with a batch of discs only, will the UK discs be like this, could there be a recall if Ridley Scott finds out, after all he did specifically shoot this in 3D so he must want the best possible quality on blu ray for the 3D version.

I'll be keeping an eye on news regarding this problem.

(Posted on Monday, October 15, 2012 at 3:58 PM)

10. Geoff D said:

The 3D version looked wonderful to me. Not saying that there isn't a difference in detail, there clearly is, but if you're not watching both versions side-by-side then you're not likely to go "ah-ha! the 3D version is less detailed!". Unless you're Michael Mackenzie, obviously. ;-)

(Posted on Monday, October 15, 2012 at 4:58 PM)

11. David Mackenzie said:

>> Could this be a problem with a batch of discs only,

No, since this is digital optical disc. Picture quality differences require two separate masters to be made.

(Posted on Monday, October 15, 2012 at 5:57 PM)

12. FoxyMulder said:

@David

I was suggesting something went wrong, they may have a different master specifically for 3D satellite channels where a lower bitrate is required ( for example Sky 3D ) perhaps they released the wrong version to blu ray and a batch of discs are out there, they may fix it for the next batch, i'm well aware of picture differences relating to different masters. ( as you know i am aware )

(Posted on Monday, October 15, 2012 at 6:39 PM)

13. Author Profile Page Michael said:

DANIEL:

The 3D disc is brighter throughout, presumably to compensate for the dulling effect of the glasses.


GEOFF:

I must admit, I stuck the 3D disc in first, took one look at the slightly blocky-looking opening credits text, thought "Uh-oh", popped the 2D disc in and breathed a sigh of relief. Not saying this is going to be something that ruins people's viewing experience, but it was significant enough for me that I spotted it within seconds of hitting Play.

(Posted on Monday, October 15, 2012 at 9:51 PM)

14. David Mackenzie said:

@Foxy
Good theory, but the lowpass filtering and other shenanigans are done in the encoder, not the master. If there had been a deliberate attempt to reduce detail for compression, it'd be much more obvious.

Sky 3D would need a side-by-side 50hz master anyway.

(Posted on Monday, October 15, 2012 at 9:54 PM)

15. David S.H said:

Well as the 3D disc doesn't even allow you to get to the menu without a 3DTV, I sold that disc on ebay. After fees etc. I ended up with £8, pretty good I thought. So I basically got the 2D + Extras discs for £7 :p

I have no 3DTV plans. I'm pretty unconvinced by the benefits of the technology, my experiences with 3D have been underwhelming.

(Posted on Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 1:16 AM)

16. FoxyMulder said:

I'm taking flak for suggesting there is a difference between the 2D and 3D editions of the film, many are saying there is not, are you sure. ?

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/t/324314/prometheus-3d-blu-ray-review/90#post_3990086

(Posted on Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:05 AM)

17. Kram Sacul said:

I think the problem is posting that on HTF. Stuff like screen capture analysis is too alien to them at this point.

(Posted on Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 2:43 AM)

18. Author Profile Page Michael said:

FOXYMULDER:

I'm sure, though there's not much I can do to prove it other than post more screen captures, which as Kram Sacul says many of the HTF crowd would be likely to dismiss out of hand anyway.

(Posted on Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 10:34 AM)

19. FoxyMulder said:

Thanks anyways for the information, i'll be buying the film soon and next month will have a 3D television so i will check both versions out and no doubt i will spot exactly what you did when i compare specific scenes.

Some people at these forums are just unwilling to accept what is put in front of them and they always put screencaps down.

(Posted on Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 6:40 PM)

20. Author Profile Page Michael said:

Thing is, I struggle to imagine what they could consider to be more conclusive proof than images captured straight from the disc. If they have more faith in the written word, then I'll do it in text form:

"The 3D disc is noticeably softer than its 2D counterpart and suffers from mild stair-stepping on diagonal edges throughout."

Did anyone find that more convincing than the visual evidence? ;)

(Posted on Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 6:47 PM)

21. Kram Sacul said:

Can you confirm that both the left and right eye are softer?

(Posted on Friday, October 19, 2012 at 12:27 AM)

22. Author Profile Page Michael said:

I'm afraid I don't have any means of decoding the right eye file. None of my usual methods - VLC, Media Player Classic Home Cinema, DGAVCIndex (which I used for these captures) work.

(Posted on Friday, October 19, 2012 at 12:32 AM)

23. FoxyMulder said:

If the right eye is under 13GB and the left is just over 28GB, then i think if anything, the right eye will be as soft or softer, of course smaller file size doesn't always mean inferior image quality but in this case it probably does.

(Posted on Friday, October 19, 2012 at 8:52 AM)

24. Author Profile Page Michael said:

It's standard on 3D discs for the right eye file to be significantly smaller than its left counterpart. As I understand it, the right eye file doesn't actually include data that is shared with the left eye but only the data that is unique to the right. If so, the fact that it is reliant on the left eye file to draw a complete frame would potentially explain why I've been unable to decode the right eye file on its own.

(Posted on Friday, October 19, 2012 at 9:06 AM)

 
To combat spam, commenting is automatically disabled on entries older than 30 days.

Did a comment you tried to post accidentally get eaten by the spam filter? It happens from time to time. I get upwards of 200 spam comments every day and unfortunately don't have the time to weed through all of them in case something genuine ended up there by mistake. If one of your posts gets incorrectly flagged as spam, email me at m.r.mackenzie[at]gmail[dot]com and I'll do my best to retrieve it.

 
Navigation