Pirating 3D movies

Printable View

10-08-2010, 05:18 PM
Firehorse

Pirating 3D movies

This is just a theory I thought up during a long car journey, but I think it might be possible.

Theres all this stuff about how 3D movies are hard to copy etc etc, well if you get a 3D camera, cut out the lenses of the 3D glases and place them accordingly over the camera lense then the camera should be seeing the movie like you would, and it would pick up the two separate video feeds separately too which is what is needed for 3D. Once processed anybody could watch the movie in any type of 3D using Nvidia's free 3D video player or even the 3D youtube player.

Just a theory, but would be interesting to test out.

(This ain't about illegality it's about use of technology)
10-08-2010, 05:57 PM
kuzkasate

Ya know, I didnt understand a single thing there, but you wrote it & you made me believe its possible.

It sounds right, but like I said I dont know anything about this, but you convinced me its right lol.
10-08-2010, 05:59 PM
Nemo

Wouldnt the lens just make it record as it sees it? so it'd look 3d, but using a 3d program wouldnt make it 3d since that's just how it looks.

It's like recording a projection, and then saying that i can make it project because i filmed it. Didnt really explain it well but i hope you know what i meant.
10-08-2010, 06:08 PM
Firehorse

Quote:

Originally Posted by NaughtyNemo

Wouldnt the lens just make it record as it sees it? so it'd look 3d, but using a 3d program wouldnt make it 3d since that's just how it looks.

It's like recording a projection, and then saying that i can make it project because i filmed it. Didnt really explain it well but i hope you know what i meant.

no, this is where the 3D glasses come in.

As far as I know 3D works like this: 2 videos (slightly different from each other) are displayed at the same time and sent in different ways and the glasses you wear decodes the video you see. So basically if you close your right eye you will only see the image the left eye is receiving and vice versa. RealD is circularly polarised (effectively spinning the right image in one direction and the left in another).

The concept is turning a 3D camera into a set of eyes, if your eyes see in 3D and so do a 3D camera's, then what's there to stop a 3D camera seeing a 3D movie just like a human as long as it's wearing the glasses?
10-08-2010, 06:11 PM
Nemo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuto

no, this is where the 3D glasses come in.

As far as I know 3D works like this: 2 videos (slightly different from each other) are displayed at the same time and sent in different ways and the glasses you wear decodes the video you see. So basically if you close your right eye you will only see the image the left eye is receiving and vice versa. RealD is circularly polarised (effectively spinning the right image in one direction and the left in another).

The concept is turning a 3D camera into a set of eyes, if your eyes see in 3D and so do a 3D camera's, then what's there to stop a 3D camera seeing a 3D movie just like a human as long as it's wearing the glasses?

Well then that sounds completely plausible to me, but it would need 2 different recievers or something. However, there probably is some reason why this wouldnt work.
10-08-2010, 06:16 PM
Firehorse

Quote:

Originally Posted by NaughtyNemo

Well then that sounds completely plausible to me, but it would need 2 different recievers or something. However, there probably is some reason why this wouldnt work.

If I was rich enough to have a home theatre then I probably would be able to try it out, it's possible someone with a 3DTV and 3D camera could try the theory, but the picture might flicker a little.
10-08-2010, 06:26 PM
Recursion

It wouldn't work. For one thing most movies are moving away from the standard red/blue glasses, and when you wear those glasses, it's actually making your brain merge two different images, just like the two different perspectives humans see real objects in. This is because our eyes are "3 apart" (you can fit another eye exactly between the two you already have).

Hence it wouldn't work on a camera filming a cinema AFAIK.

I'm also not sure these new RealD glasses would work either, seeing as humans get headaches after a while using them, they must be tricking the brain into merging the images or something.
10-08-2010, 06:26 PM
Jack!

what about the new type of 3D? when i went to watch avatar in 3D you don't have the blue and red glasses, it was digital 3D, you still had some sort of glasses, but it wasn't red and blue ones
10-08-2010, 06:27 PM
Firehorse

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2fast2kwl

what about the new type of 3D? when i went to watch avatar in 3D you don't have the blue and red glasses, it was digital 3D, you still had some sort of glasses, but it wasn't red and blue ones

This is the type of 3D we're talking about. Read post number 4.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Recursion

It wouldn't work. For one thing most movies are moving away from the standard red/blue glasses, and when you wear those glasses, it's actually making your brain merge two different images, just like the two different perspectives humans see real objects in. This is because our eyes are "3 apart" (you can fit another eye exactly between the two you already have).

Hence it wouldn't work on a camera filming a cinema AFAIK.

Then setup a 3D camera to work with it.
10-08-2010, 06:32 PM
N!ck

Yes, it would work.

However, you'd need to get the images perfectly aligned with the other which is the tricky part considering the context (ie. doing it discreetly in a cinema).

And Tom, all 3d formats will cause headaches.
10-08-2010, 06:33 PM
Recursion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuto

This is the type of 3D we're talking about. Read post number 4.

Then setup a 3D camera to work with it.

I edited my post.

Even still, how are you going to stitch the two images together correctly? You're not going to know which positions the images would need aligning in to.

I'ma let someone else take over, I still don't think it's easily possible.

EDIT: As N!ck said, the trouble also is how discreet the setup would be, it'd be fairly hard to hide two cameras at various distances.
10-08-2010, 06:38 PM
Firehorse

Quote:

Originally Posted by Recursion

I edited my post.

Even still, how are you going to stitch the two images together correctly? You're not going to know which positions the images would need "stitching".

I'ma let someone else take over, I still don't think it's easily possible.

Have you seen a 3D movie file? You don't even stitch the files together, just put them side by side in the right resolution, most 3D cameras and processing software would probably do this for you anyway.

(For those who are still confused)
Here's an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDZfa9oBsoA pause at about 10 seconds in, then click left image on the 3D menu, then click right image only... flicking through the two shows a slight difference in perspective. Without the 3D movie tags this is a single movie file with the aspect ratio of 42:9 (two videos running side by side).

original movie file: http://http.download.nvidia.com/vide...Quest_576p.wmv

Quote:

Originally Posted by Recursion

I'm also not sure these new RealD glasses would work either, seeing as humans get headaches after a while using them, they must be tricking the brain into merging the images or something.

circular polarisation, every 3D is tricking the brain, but it's more about how your eyes receive the image. The glasses are only to put the images back together after they've been separated, putting them back together at the screen means no 3D, but putting it together where your eyes are makes use of the space between you and the screen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealD_Cinema
10-08-2010, 06:40 PM
kk.

I don't see why it's not possible. You'd just need to set it up how the human eyes are set out as mentioned. Then just put the two cameras together when you get home or something. The tricky part would be getting it in the cinema
10-08-2010, 06:42 PM
Firehorse

Quote:

Originally Posted by kk.

I don't see why it's not possible. You'd just need to set it up how the human eyes are set out as mentioned. Then just put the two cameras together when you get home or something. The tricky part would be getting it in the cinema

Thats not a problem for piraters anymore, the good ones just bribe a small individual cinema to setup a camera in the projection room. Especially easy if it's a family owned business.
10-08-2010, 06:44 PM
N!ck

The alignment of the cameras would be as close together as possible. Theoretically, the place where the cameras should be is the exact same spot but obviously you can't do that. Plus a small difference in position isn't going to be noticeable considering the size and distance to the screen.
10-08-2010, 06:57 PM
Recursion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuto

Have you seen a 3D movie file? You don't even stitch the files together, just put them side by side in the right resolution, most 3D cameras and processing software would probably do this for you anyway.

(For those who are still confused)
Here's an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDZfa9oBsoA pause at about 10 seconds in, then click left image on the 3D menu, then click right image only... flicking through the two shows a slight difference in perspective. Without the 3D movie tags this is a single movie file with the aspect ratio of 42:9 (two videos running side by side).

original movie file: http://http.download.nvidia.com/vide...Quest_576p.wmv

circular polarisation, every 3D is tricking the brain, but it's more about how your eyes receive the image. The glasses are only to put the images back together after they've been separated, putting them back together at the screen means no 3D, but putting it together where your eyes are makes use of the space between you and the screen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealD_Cinema

Wait, either I'm being ******ed or that wouldn't be the aspect ratio surely? The images don't run side by side, they are both offset from the centre only slightly.
10-08-2010, 07:06 PM
Firehorse

Quote:

Originally Posted by Recursion

Wait, either I'm being ******ed or that wouldn't be the aspect ratio surely? The images don't run side by side, they are both offset from the centre only slightly.

When you're viewing the video then they're slightly offset, but the 3D video player does that bit, all you need to do is produce a video like the one downloadable from that link. And the videos aren't offset from the centre, they're placed ontop of each other perfectly and then the filters are applied, it's the actual videos which are different.
10-08-2010, 07:06 PM
kk.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Recursion

Wait, either I'm being ******ed or that wouldn't be the aspect ratio surely? The images don't run side by side, they are both offset from the centre only slightly.

He means that when the 3D tag isn't applied, it would just play the two different video streams next to each other. Cinema aspect ratio is 21:9, thus making it 42:9
10-08-2010, 07:09 PM
Firehorse

Quote:

Originally Posted by kk.

He means that when the 3D tag isn't applied, it would just play the two different video streams next to each other. Cinema aspect ratio is 21:9, thus making it 42:9

ah, typo there, meant to have said 32:9 (being half of 16:9 in the case of the video I used as an example)
10-08-2010, 07:11 PM
Recursion

That makes a bit more sense ;)
10-08-2010, 07:22 PM
kk.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuto

ah, typo there, meant to have said 32:9 (being half of 16:9 in the case of the video I used as an example)

Ah. Well I didn't click the link so yknow :P but it still stands if it was cinema display aha
14-08-2010, 08:33 AM
lRhyss

I have a 3D telly? well my Nanna does Ill test this out :)
14-08-2010, 11:32 AM
Firehorse

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gerb

I have a 3D telly? well my Nanna does Ill test this out :)

Do you have a 3D camera too?