"Why 3D doesnt Work"

This is one type of 3D that will be utilized and remastered in the future: http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/40658/amazing_holographic_images/

And here is another form that may hit your home more quickly: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RuHEliwJnA

Two different techs, all leading to possible consumer goods. Of course there is still a ways to go before it's high fidelity, as well as creating a workflow that will tell a story well with this...the way we are used to...but it's the future!
 
Shoot, at the rate science advances we may be watching holographic movies, essentially 3D without glasses, in our lifetime... who knows?
Click to expand...

This is why I won't be buying one of those 3D televisions... I'm waiting for the holographic ones instead. :cheers:
 
I'm making a 3d film now

Gonzo_Entertainment said:
"hopefully this 3D thing is just a fad. again."

It almost certainly is.
Click to expand...

I don't think so this time. Because of auto-stereoscopic technology coming next year. This is the first time in history that people can watch 3d without glasses. Also the first time 3d is marketable to the home.

I think from now on 3d will settle into a place like 5.1 surround. Where it's an optional extra for both filmmakers and audiences. In the 50s when 3d was a big fad, everything was anaglyph, and their was no home market. Today 3d is clear and in full color, and you can just switch it on and off with your remote.

Also as 3d becomes more commonplace, technologies will emerge on both the camera and software sides that allow us all to start getting better effects.

About "why 3d doesn't work". It works, it just doesn't work well with everything. The physical problems of convergence in theaters is real, but I've worked with 3d on home systems, and it's definitely possible to get stunning 3d effects in that context. Maybe 3d is just not for the theaters. I'm getting perfect clarity with 6x the depth effect out of MAX frames.

It's certainly a technical hurdle to produce seamlessly, and transitions are a pain, but it does allow you to make something out of the ordinary, and that should always be an option.
 
It was a fad in the 50's, and the 60's, and the 70's, and the 80's, and the 90's, and the 2000's, this is just it's once every decade or so bubbling up to the surface. MOST people still don't even have HD in their home, much less 3D. It's a gimmick to sell tickets (and TV sets), and when the producers of content realize a point has been reached where the gimmick no longer sells extra tickets, they'll drop it.
 
God, I've been biting my tongue for so long on this one. I was hoping this thread would just die, but I can't take it anymore. :)

People used to say hip-hop was a fad.

This thread is rife with arguments that employ selective-memory. It's been less than a year since Avatar was in the theaters, and it's like we've forgotten it even happened.

I don't know what planet you have to live on to think that Avatar didn't blow a whole lot of people's minds. The 3D works!

Yeah, I've heard from a few friends of mine (and some people on here) that didn't like the 3D aspect, and it didn't look real to them. Their experiences are valid, but guess what? Those people are in the extreme minority.

The entire basis for this argument that 3D doesn't "work" is revisionist popular history at it's worst. The fact that it worked, even once, is proof that it works. And in Avatar, for the vast majority of people who saw it, it worked brilliantly.

Jackass 3D looked pretty damned good, too.
 
Jaws 3D in 1983 was pretty good too, saw it in the theatre, but again, a point comes where the public doesn't buy into it anymore. The producer thinks, "will 3D sell enough additional tickets to be worth the expense", and the answer starts to become "no". It goes away for a while, and then something (Avatar) triggers off a flurry again, lather rinse repeat.
 
That's fair, but I still hold that technology is changing in this area, and we aren't looking at an exact repeat of a past scenario.

Cracker is right. It works great. Gonzo is also right, it costs extra and if the popularity wave dies then we wont see to much more for a while.

But no one is mentioning Imax. Anyone remember that they've been showing working 3d movies every day for 20 years? Some of those movies are fantastic in 3d too, allowing you to see places in the world as they really appear for the first time.

I understand about the smallness issue and like SD, 2d has its set of psych tricks that we are all used to using. Making a face look large on a 2d screen has always been a a way to connect the viewer to a character, and 3d diminishes that crucial effect among others.

I guess what I'm saying is that when selecting a format, you should play to the strengths of your subject material. While 3d isn't right for romantic comedies, there is no other way to experience the Galapagos islands. (travel aside)

It's an especially viable technology for CG film producers like Pixar, because they can produce stereo versions of their films at very little extra cost, and get very solid 3d.
 
Gonzo_Entertainment said:
Jaws 3D in 1983 was pretty good too, saw it in the theatre, but again, a point comes where the public doesn't buy into it anymore. The producer thinks, "will 3D sell enough additional tickets to be worth the expense", and the answer starts to become "no". It goes away for a while, and then something (Avatar) triggers off a flurry again, lather rinse repeat.
Click to expand...

I see your point, and that makes perfect sense. I think in these regards, the future is a little unpredictable. Only safe bet, in my opinion, is that in a couple years, people will be wowed again. Will it sustain proliferation of the new technology? Maybe. Maybe not.
 
Andy Warhol's Frankenstein. I just remember the good Doctor fucking the hole in the Monster's stomach. I don't remember if it was a female or male monster though. I was kid. That was 3D.
 
I have yet to see a 3D film in theatres-only on DVD on my tube screen (saving for Flatscreen to buy later this year), so I don't have that comparison.

The one thing I'm reading about as far as 3D tvs-people don't like wearing the glasses to watch TV it seems. And at 4 grand a pop right now, they don't WANT to have to wear glasses.

Is it a Fad? Well, the box office doesn't seem to shows signs of waning as far as the 3D flicks (and here a while ago I honestly thought cinemas wouldn't evolve-silly me lol). What I AM expecting (and I see it a bit in this discussion and with friends), like CGI, my friends now talk about how "good" the 3D effect was, and scrutinize it like CGI became scrutinized, ect-so the expectation seems to go from "Wow 3D!" to "That 3D wasn't very well done, I wasn't impressed" or "Yea, 3D was good in this film".

I think as long as films continue to rake in 100's of millions at the boxoffice in 3D, it won't fade IMO.
 
3d for everyone, vs 3d for you

I've been working with 3d for many years now, and have a lot of experience with it in the lab, so I was a bit confused by all the talk about how 3d was no good, or didn't add that much.

So I went to a theater and watched Resident Evil: apocalypse

Now, I understand.

When I got my first VR headset, the 3d didn't seem to work well, I was pretty dissapointed. I had to dial the depth down to super shallow, where the 3d effect was at it's weakest. At that point, it seemed almost pointless. I probably would have just taken off the glasses right there and walked away from 3d, but I had just spent a bunch of money on it (well for that time) and couldn't give up that easy.

So I kept using the 3d glasses a few hours a day. I kept messing with the depth settings, and noticed that over a week, I could set the depth higher and higher and still see clearly. At about 2 weeks of multi hour daily use, I could dial it up to 100% depth and see clearly.

Highways in driving simulators stretched out forever into the distance, 3d models looked like you could reach into the screen and touch them. The feeling of immersion was spectacular.

For a movie theater, they have to dial down convergence to where anyone can see it clearly the first 5 minutes you watch. This is why your theater screen looks 70 feet wide and 1 foot deep.

Once you are acclimatized to seeing 3d, and you can set convergence for YOUR eyes (only) you can get some really amazing depth effects that are light years beyond what the current theatrical movies are showing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top