Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Off Topic: The Pollantir:
When you see the Hobbit for the first time, which format will you choose?
Poll: When you see the Hobbit for the first time, which format will you choose?
3D HFR (48 fps)
View Results (59 votes)


Nov 14 2012, 5:10pm

Post #1 of 22 (1503 views)
When you see the Hobbit for the first time, which format will you choose? Can't Post

2D? 3D? 3D HFR? IMAX? IMAX 3D?

I've bought my tickets for 3D HFR. Although I have no idea how much I will enjoy 48 fps, I would like to first see the movie as Peter Jackson intended it.


Nov 14 2012, 5:12pm

Post #2 of 22 (742 views)
I'm seeing it in normal 3D first [In reply to] Can't Post

There isn't a cinema near me that will be showing it in 48fps. But the cinema does have 4K projectors, so I will still get to see some of its awesomeness!

wendy woo

Nov 14 2012, 5:16pm

Post #3 of 22 (753 views)
Probably regular 3D [In reply to] Can't Post

I'd have to go about two hundred miles or so to see it in an IMAX theater. At Christmas time, this kind of travel is not in the cards. Frown

Grey Havens

Nov 14 2012, 6:18pm

Post #4 of 22 (762 views)
2D, thank goodness... [In reply to] Can't Post

... I'm the one out of ten people who can't watch 3D.


Nov 14 2012, 7:10pm

Post #5 of 22 (747 views)
2D 24fps [In reply to] Can't Post

I want to watch it in a format that's familiar to me first so that I am not focused on the effects or frame rate. I'll be able to focus on the story and adaptation first.

Then, I want 3D 48FPS in all it's glory! I'm not sure I'll like it (I don't normally like 3D), but I'm surely going to give it a try.

Aunt Dora Baggins

Nov 14 2012, 8:32pm

Post #6 of 22 (713 views)
2D [In reply to] Can't Post

I'll probably see it in 3D once, but 2D is by far my preference. Not because I don't love 3D (I take stereo photos as a hobby) but because the clunky glasses really distract me, especially when I have to hold them up with my hands as they slip off my nose.


Nov 15 2012, 12:10pm

Post #7 of 22 (782 views)
2D [In reply to] Can't Post

As mentioned elsewhere, the mere thought of three hours 3D makes me want to run for the woods.
Also, the Hobbit is now confirmed to be shown in my local cinema, where I'm allowed to take any seat not occupied by a paying customer whenever I wish.Sly So I can watch it over and over again *yay* The only drawback is that I will have to watch the dubbed version.


Nov 15 2012, 3:14pm

Post #8 of 22 (688 views)
I will choose what my local theater offers [In reply to] Can't Post

They recently went digital so that they could offer 3D, and I believe "The Hobbit" will be the first movie they show in that format.

Would love to see it in IMAX 3D, but that means the two-hour trek to Seattle.


Nov 15 2012, 3:18pm

Post #9 of 22 (688 views)
me too... although it will be what my theater offers at the time I want to go [In reply to] Can't Post

It will have to be a time that works for the family so I'm not going to insist on some format and exclude family members. There will be time to see other formats if I want.

I think we will all want to catch 3D and as for the other bells and whistles... I don't know how much I care. It would be interesting to compare not interesting enough to spend gobs o' money doing that.


Nov 15 2012, 3:22pm

Post #10 of 22 (707 views)
Hopefully more theaters will be adding 48 fps if it proves popular [In reply to] Can't Post

Either later in AUJ's run or for TDOS. I hope everyone who would like to see it in this format gets the chance.

I am fortunate in that I have a theater within walking distance showing it in 48 fps. I'm stoked.


Nov 15 2012, 3:28pm

Post #11 of 22 (732 views)
Stereo Photos Hobby [In reply to] Can't Post

What does taking stereo photos entail? A special camera I imagine? How do you view and display them?

On occasion, I've gotten spectacular views in my binoculars and wished I could have taken a stereo photograph.

I wear glasses, so I have to do the glasses-on-top-of-glasses thing at the theater, but this doesn't really bother me at all. Well, I much prefer RealD to IMAX 3D since IMAX 3D had a lot of problems with ghosting the one time I saw a film in that format. I'm guessing the polization might have been less advanced - I know the glasses were different. I've never had a similar problem with RealD.


Nov 15 2012, 4:20pm

Post #12 of 22 (680 views)
2D.// [In reply to] Can't Post


Aunt Dora Baggins

Nov 15 2012, 4:29pm

Post #13 of 22 (722 views)
No special camera needed. [In reply to] Can't Post

We use whatever camera we have on hand. You take one photo, and then move over a few inches and take another photo of the same scene. You'll want to use a vertical orientation ("portrait" rather than "landscape"). We used to mount the photos on cardboard and view them in an old stereoscope that was my great-grandmother's. But later we found some cheap plastic viewers online. I've lost the original website, but it was something like this one: http://www.3dstereo.com/viewmaster/svn-lorg.html. We've also taken to putting two digital photos side-by-side using Paint-shop Pro and viewing them online.

I'm able to make my eyes go wall-eyed and view stereo slides without any equipment at all, but the plastic viewers work well and only cost $3 or so.

I don't have any examples of my work in the computer; it's been a long time. I'll have to scan some of my old photos and put them up. Maybe over Thanksgiving break I'll get that done.


Nov 16 2012, 7:54am

Post #14 of 22 (761 views)
my first two viewings are 3D 24fps [In reply to] Can't Post

then one viewing in 4k 3D 48fps Angelic

(This post was edited by Chopsta123 on Nov 16 2012, 7:55am)


Nov 16 2012, 9:32pm

Post #15 of 22 (654 views)
If I can find the High frame rate 3D at a theater near me, I'm in for that. [In reply to] Can't Post

I'll be seeing it in 2D for long enough after--my first glimpse I want to be a big event'

Aunt Dora Baggins

Nov 17 2012, 6:12pm

Post #16 of 22 (631 views)
I've scanned an uploaded some of my 3D photos. [In reply to] Can't Post

I've been meaning to do it for some time. These are all old, pre-digital age. If you're curious, here's a link.


Nov 19 2012, 5:50pm

Post #17 of 22 (573 views)
Thanks [In reply to] Can't Post

Those are pretty cool. I can easily shift my eyes to view them without glasses. I might have to try a similar process sometime.

The only main limitation I see is that this can't be used for subjects that move outside of your control. I've wanted to take stereo photos of animals in their native habitats before and the only way to do that would be to find one that stayed in the same position or moved back to the same position. Should be a fun little expiriment in any case, though!

Aunt Dora Baggins

Nov 19 2012, 6:07pm

Post #18 of 22 (607 views)
Yeah, our photos of waterfalls are an example. [In reply to] Can't Post

The trees and rocks look great, but the water is funny. We also have a few where a family member moved and those look funny too.

There are special 3D cameras where you have two cameras and one trigger. Or you could hold two cameras and try to press the trigger on both of them at the same time, I suppose, except those doggone digital cameras have a time lag.

Aunt Dora Baggins

Nov 19 2012, 6:26pm

Post #19 of 22 (627 views)
Addendum, and a remark about 3D movies [In reply to] Can't Post

When I posted these elsewhere, someone mentioned that a modern trend is to make a moving gif file that alternates between the two views. The motion gives an impression of 3D. This page has several examples. And I replied that that's why video can give a pretty good impression of 3D even when it's 2D. If you move past a landscape while taking video, the background moves more slowly than the foreground, giving a pretty good 3D effect. Which in turn is why I feel like 3D in movies isn't that important. If they ever come up with a really good method, I think it would be fun, but right now I prefer 2D movies.


Nov 20 2012, 3:51pm

Post #20 of 22 (573 views)
I love good 3D movies, myself [In reply to] Can't Post

But there have been several I've seen that haven't been good. I also don't have much hope for 3D conversions - if Cameron can't do it well (Titanic), I'm not sure anyone can. Not that I think Cameron is a great filmmaker, but he certainly seems to understand how to make 3D movies (Avatar).

It's interesting that we've broken down almost 50/50 in terms of 3D vs. 2D. I wonder if this means that The Hobbit will have a 50% split between the two? I'm guessing it'll be higher if the 3D is good, which I expect it will be. We'll see, though.

As for gifs - I've noticed this effect when paging through my photos sometimes. I prefer a stereogram to an animated gif, though - maybe that's part of why I love 3D movies? I just wish there were more good movies in 3D. I fear I'm in the minority, though.


Nov 20 2012, 5:24pm

Post #21 of 22 (789 views)
The Hobbit adaptation [In reply to] Can't Post

As for me I intend to see it in RealD 3D. That's the technology they use here in town and in the city which I'll probably go (if things go as planned) to see it in English original version. I had a cool 3D experience seeing Avatar in RealD and if The Hobbit can be in that level I'll be satisfied. If the film is good, I consider a second viewing this time in 2D in my local town.

(This post was edited by sam90 on Nov 20 2012, 5:25pm)


Jan 1 2013, 10:29pm

Post #22 of 22 (870 views)
Doesn't matter [In reply to] Can't Post

As much as I hate even regular 3D it doesn't matter as long as I get to see the movies as quick as possible LOL.
So for the UEJ I watched 3D 48 and hated it, but I got to see the movie. So I saw the movie in 2D a week later.


Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.