Newsmeldung von slashCAM:Hier geht es zur Newsmeldung: To poor quality without cinemas on football World Cup in 3D
Antwort von derpianoman:
It's nice that not everything is feasible, we can look forward to a major technical innovation in the future!
Antwort von Johannes:
I do not know what all people find s.3D .... I mean that's the real picture but not synonymous. So I do not think it will prevail in great. However, I think you should have a semi-circle shaped canvas to think so the entire field of view covering Menschlichenauge. If the content is then synonymous to adjust, I see greater opportunities for such technology. We now see just once in 2D and spherical.
Antwort von beiti:
Apart of the current technical problems and the fact that not every movie so much put on a 3-D glasses:
As long as the cameras are installed in the stadium in the usual way (at some distance from the events, usually using a longer focal lengths) should the recoverable 3D effect not be as impressive, with increasing distance loses the stereo base even s.Wirkung. At most, the back-door cameras may occasionally provide a beautiful 3D Picture.
That would only change if one were to use multiple Steadycams on the pitch - but that's from playing for technical reasons rather unlikely.
Antwort von Wiro:
... You should think about a semi-circle shaped screen so the entire field of view covering Menschlichenauge Hmmm -
because you no longer need to think about it.
Such movies I've already visited in the 60s of last century in New York. This was not only a semicircle, but even spherical - so you have seen on the sky are synonymous. And the cinema seats were adjustable, they could if they wanted to bring in "lying" like a dentist chair to look up.
An outrageously expensive way to make movies added.
But one need not reinvent the wheel again.
BTW: 3D Movies gabs synonymous at that time already. One got s.der box office the famous 3D glasses and then had the impression of seeing 3D. But has never really enforced.
Greeting Wiro
Antwort von derpianoman:
With 1nem eye can estimate distances bad.
In the acoustics I know my way better: The position of an object is from the skew, the needs of the sound to the ears, "is calculated. Our eyes are indeed synonymous not the same Picture. So, but D 3??
Whether there is progress to be able to guess in addition to the "Action" in the corner of my eye synonymous nor the whole boring "Drumherung the area" in the film (see true because one does so only occasionally), I do not know ...
Antwort von Gabriel_Natas:
Apart of the current technical problems and the fact that not every movie so much put on a 3-D glasses:
As long as the cameras are installed in the stadium in the usual way (at some distance from the events, usually using a longer focal lengths) should the recoverable 3D effect not be as impressive, with increasing distance loses the stereo base even s.Wirkung. At most, the back-door cameras may occasionally provide a beautiful 3D Picture.
That would only change if one were to use multiple Steadycams on the pitch - but that's from playing for technical reasons rather unlikely. Oh, the two cameras that provide a picture have, spaced just far enough to deliver synonymous in the distance a reasonable 3D Picture;) at 50 meters distance to the pitch, the cameras would then only be counting * * 1.66 m apart (rule of thumb the exact distance for the perfect stereo base is of course of Focal and from sensor:)).
Only then would the whole more, depending on the screen look like a 2-3 meters distant table, running around on the little people (unless you go to his movies).
