Since Avatar is finally out a thread like this could actually have some grounds. So, of course, the question is:
Is 3D (namely new stereoscopic technology) going to become standard for professional and/or consumer-level movie making and, apart from its projected success, would it be beneficial for the art form on a whole?
I have some opinions of my own, but they're still solidifying a bit so I'd much rather hear what other people have to say first. And this thread is just meant to spark a bit of discussion, that's all. We all love film here, and 3D could have the potential to reshape the medium that we're all passionate for.
----------
http://vimeo.com/corax
Throughout the history of film, 3D has been a "gimmick" to get people out of
their homes and into the theaters. In the 1950's TV was a threat to theaters -
in the 1980's home video was a threat to theaters - in the 2010's small, excellent
quality digital files and large, excellent quality home systems are a threat to
theaters. You can only see larger than life 3D in theaters. The technology for
3D on DVD and even the computer is there so it will certainly be used by smaller
projects meant for the home market.
I made a 3D movie for the DTV market in 2001 and several distributors have
contacted me about making my next movies in 3D. I don't know that it will
become the standard like color and widescreen and CGI has, but 3D is here
to stay.
I'm glad to see it being used not as a gimmick but as another tool to immerse
the audience in the experience.
=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)
=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)
Well said CI.
quote:
I don't know that it will
become the standard like color and widescreen and CGI has, but 3D is here
to stay.
That's where I'm at for sure, I suppose it's the relative few examples of the format I have that upset my position for a bit. We don't get tons of 3D showings where I live, but in Avatar the 3D was another element used to create basically a thrill ride, whereas in Monsters vs. Aliens it was used more in a gimmicky fashion. However for a non-strictly entertainment orientated film, I don't know whether 3D would enhance it or not. Basically, I'm trying to imagine the Godfather in 3D and decide whether or not that would be a beneficial hypothetical situation.
----------
http://vimeo.com/corax
Hitchcock shot "Dial M For Murder" in 3D. I had the chance to see it in 1980.
He only used the "outer" dimension (coming off the screen) once, when
Margot is being strangled and reaches for the scissors. It was very effective.
But considering that the film was only released in 3D in about 300 theaters
for two weeks, very few people ever saw it that way. Yet it did well in the
"flat" version most people saw.
I see no reason at all for most movies in most genres to be in 3D. I gotta
tell you I had some issues with the one porn film I saw in 3D. I didn't really
need to see what came flying at me come flying at me in 3D.
Another thing is; to show 3D properly a theater really needs to use 2 projectors.
Few theaters outside of major cities have the means - or the need - to instal
two projectors to really do it right so most people see 3D projected poorly.
But I can see it being used as a gimmick for some DVD releases.
=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)
