How long will 3D movies be around?

[SGOS]

When digital 3D first came out I was pumped.  I loved the old stereoscopic 3D movies as a kid, and then they just quit making them.  I had plans to buy a 3D television and projector for my home theater when this new thing showed up.  I'm happy I didn't, however. 

My local theater is showing San Andreas twice a day in 3D and seven times a day in 2D.  The same for Poltergeist.   When the new digital 3D showed up they were showing 50/50 3D/2D.  Now it seems most people aren't interested enough to bother with it.

The first digital 3D movie I saw was Avatar, and I thought it was breathtaking.  Then I went to a bunch more, and wasn't so impressed.  Now I don't bother.  I'd like to see Avatar again in 3D to see if it still impresses me.  I think it would.  If I get to the theater and have to wait 45 minutes for the next 2D, I'll buy a 3D ticket if the time is right, but I don't think it's really worth the extra 3 dollars.

I'm thinking for the second time in my life, I might see 3D come and go.  I still think the idea is good.  Well, it sounds good, but right now, it sounds better than it actually turns out to be.

[Mike Cl]

When digital 3D first came out I was pumped.  I loved the old stereoscopic 3D movies as a kid, and then they just quit making them.  I had plans to buy a 3D television and projector for my home theater when this new thing showed up.  I'm happy I didn't, however. 

My local theater is showing San Andreas twice a day in 3D and seven times a day in 2D.  The same for Poltergeist.   When the new digital 3D showed up they were showing 50/50 3D/2D.  Now it seems most people aren't interested enough to bother with it.

The first digital 3D movie I saw was Avatar, and I thought it was breathtaking.  Then I went to a bunch more, and wasn't so impressed.  Now I don't bother.  I'd like to see Avatar again in 3D to see if it still impresses me.  I think it would.  If I get to the theater and have to wait 45 minutes for the next 2D, I'll buy a 3D ticket if the time is right, but I don't think it's really worth the extra 3 dollars.

I'm thinking for the second time in my life, I might see 3D come and go.  I still think the idea is good.  Well, it sounds good, but right now, it sounds better than it actually turns out to be.

Yeah, I lived through the first stage, as well.  At first I was eager to see more of them.  But for some reason after 3/4 of them they failed to excite.  This go around I saw Avatar in 3D and was very impressed with the 3D in that movie.  It really enhanced the scenery and made it feel more immersive for me.  Loved it.  Then saw Alice in Wonderland with Depp.  The 3D was okay.  I haven't seen one since.  I think it will fade away and then come back again.   

[Atheon]

I'm too young to have experienced the first wave (1950s), but I was a teenager during the second wave (1980s). That didn't last long; the movies sucked. This third wave has lasted about 6 years now, and has legs. I believe this is because they're actually making GOOD MOVIES in 3D this time.

[SGOS]

What I'm waiting for is virtual reality.  Movies where you interact with charging Rhinos, and fend off monsters.

[Mike Cl]

What I'm waiting for is virtual reality.  Movies where you interact with charging Rhinos, and fend off monsters.

Is that what you really want to have in your virtual reality???? :)

[SGOS]

Is that what you really want to have in your virtual reality???? :)

I actually, printed something else entirely, and then I decided to tone it down. 

[Mike Cl]

I actually, printed something else entirely, and then I decided to tone it down. 

Seems like we are thinking along the same lines. :)))))

[the_antithesis]

I'm thinking for the second time in my life, I might see 3D come and go.

And the third time in, well, my dad's lifetime.

I still think the idea is good.

I disagree and am prepared to back up my position.

First of all, what is called "3D" isn't. It's stereoscopy, placing two slightly different images before each eye to create the illusion of depth. It's not actual depth or else when you lean side to side you would be able to look around objects. Like this shot from the original Rosemary's Baby that got the entire theater to lean to the right.



So, stereoscopy is a 2D image with the illusion of depth. Now, it has been pointed out that this shouldn't matter as motion pictures are a series of still images that provide the illusion of movement in the first place. It would be OK if stereoscopy is just an enhanced form of 2D presentation, but it has a problem with convergence.



If you know someone, and you probably do since about 20% of the population does, who doesn't like stereoscopy because it causes them discomfort, headaches, eyestrain, etc. It's because of convergence.

Look at the figure on the right. See that gap between where the object appears to be and where the eyes should be focused? That's the source of the problem. The eyes automatically focus on an object where it appears to be. Some people can focus on a different point. Some cannot. It's the same as those damn magic eye things.


(Do you see the sailboat? Then, fuck you!)

Which brings us to the big lie of stereoscopy. Know why only 20% of the population is negatively effected? Because all stereoscopy presentations are flattened. They reduce the apparent depth of the image until only an acceptable percentage is negatively affected. If they didn't do this, no one would like stereoscopy. So when you see a featurette on some movie and they start talking about how they used new cameras to capture more depth, don't believe them.

So does this mean that actual 3D is not a viable thing?

I honestly do not know. Actual 3D would be so different from what we're used to, I cannot even predict if it could catch on. It would be everything we know about filmmaking would go out the window. it would be at least as big a change as when they introduced color. (look up Max Factor and how make-up had to change with the advent of color) it'll probably mean loads more changes in how films are made and sold and watched.

Which is why I am sure stereoscopy is a dead end. It changes nothing. It's a marketing gimmick to wring a few more dollars out of the movie-going populous.

[SGOS]

(Do you see the sailboat? Then, fuck you!)

Rising to the challenge, I stared into this image for 4 minutes, and low and behold, I saw a 3D image, but it wasn't a sailboat.  It looked like the inside of a flying saucer or some kind of cavern with a dome ceiling.  But it was most certainly in 3D (or whatever you want to call it).

But your post does describe something I think I experience when watching one of these movies.  My eyes don't seem focused on the screen.  It's slightly odd, but I don't get headaches from it.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

http://www.reelz.com/article/816/a-tour-through-the-history-of-3-d-movies/

[the_antithesis]

Rising to the challenge, I stared into this image for 4 minutes, and low and behold, I saw a 3D image, but it wasn't a sailboat.  It looked like the inside of a flying saucer or some kind of cavern with a dome ceiling.  But it was most certainly in 3D (or whatever you want to call it).

I don't know what it is. I can't see those fucking things. The image name is "Saturn" so whatever.

But your post does describe something I think I experience when watching one of these movies.  My eyes don't seem focused on the screen.  It's slightly odd, but I don't get headaches from it.

Different people feel different amounts of discomfort. Most people feel it, but can get used to it. I can't, which is why I hate 3D.

[SGOS]

I don't know what it is. I can't see those fucking things. The image name is "Saturn" so whatever.

Bingo!  It was Saturn.  Yep that's what it was.  However, it was inside out.  It was like being in a hollow Saturn.  I'm going to look again, now that I know what it was, and see if it might reverse itself.

Nope, I couldn't get it to come in this time.  I'll try again later.

Edit:  It is inside out.  Weird.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Face it. .it's a bunch of colored stars, nothing more,  nothing less. .
Whoever makes that shit needs beat daily and twice on Sunday. .

[SGOS]

Was it back in the 70s or 80s when they figured out how to make those 3D posters?  Seems like almost everyone had one of them on the wall.  Some people could see the images.  To others, they were just a source of hair pulling frustration.

[Hydra009]

Was it back in the 70s or 80s when they figured out how to make those 3D posters?  Seems like almost everyone had one of them on the wall.  Some people could see the images.  To others, they were just a source of hair pulling frustration.

I was/am in the hair-pulling camp.  I briefly considered the possibility that a sizable chunk of the populace might be schizophrenic, a suggestion that has not been assuaged by watching them pray.