|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Solving 3D problems
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 01-26-2010 06:43 AM
There seems to be an opinion that 3D is, de facto, a gimmick. It didn't last in its previous incarnations because of the difficulty in the technical end of it and in the way Hollywood used it, i.e., the PFIYE (Poking Fingers In Your Eyeballs) Syndrom. Both those objections are not intrinsic to the process.
Digital 3D today is technically much less dependent on the expertise of people in the booth "getting it right" than the days of left eye/right eye prints, dual projectors and selsyn motors. As for directors not being able to resist throwing stuff at the audience, Cameron has proved that a movie can be made without exagerated 3D "effects," just like after the very early Technicolor films where it was obvious those bunches of multicolored flowers didn't always have to be in every scene just to show off the color process. Directors learned how to use the technology to enhance the story without drawing attention to it.
Yes, it's the story, stupid....and the characters. That's a given, but when you have a good story and interesting, developed characters, the technical tools can be used to enhance the experience and needn't be thrown out just because you have those other elements. Should we throw out color and stereo sound because we have a good story? Do we make movies in black and white because there is a percentage of people who are color blind or make them in mono because there is a percentage of the population who can't perceive stereo?
I think 3D has its place as a very effective tool that a director can now choose to use to tell that story. And now that presenting a 3D image is finally in a stage where it can be done easily and with repeatable accuracy, I don't think it will be the fad like the other incarnations were. And as we go along here, the technology will get even better, resolving the brightness issues and ghosting, etc.
As for the thing about how there are some people who always whine about "the glasses" and how they can't stand them. Give me a break. Do these people not go to the beach and wear sunglassed for hours on end? Why are the 3D glasses any more uncomfortable? It's all perception and bias. The glasses I've gotten at each of the half dozen recent 3D films I have been to were perfectly comfortable and fit perfectly well over my regular glasses, just the way my sunglasses fit perfectly well over my regular glasses. If Hollywood continues to make popular 3D releases, a whole industry will grow up around making personal 3D designer 3D glasses, even clip-ons for regular glasses for those who prefer them. Theatres could even get in on the act and sell them in the lobby.
Will the 3D "fad" continue....did the color fad, or the wide screen fad or the stereo sound fad continue? Look, given the fact that producers will soon have the huge consumer home video market to sell their 3D product, no reason to believe they won't want to repeat the blockbuster "experience" the size of AVATAR; it's guaranteed they are going to want to do it over and over and over again).
And lets face it, Hollywood is not going to stop making 3D if it remains profitable just because a small minority of the general public is bothered by the process. They don't make blockbusters for a small nitch audience. Sure, they want that cash from the 10% who can't enjoy 3D, but they can still get at their pocketbooks thru other markets, like BluRay and the many other avenues thru which they can sell the 2D versions. They are not going to let their marketing decisions be determined by the minority. Just like the music industry didn't stop making CDs because a small minority of people claimed they hated the square wave sound of digital sampling instead of the smooth roundness of the analog wave (I have a friend who insists he can hear the square wave of a violin note on a CD playback). Neither will the movie industry stop making a film like ANATAR in 3D because a handful of people see temporal anomolies or seem to be incapable of wearing sun glasses.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
let's see what happens.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic