| Kaizar said: Almost every 4K HD TV is a glasses-free 3D TV. Anyways I hear you are ask for the first 1 to 3 seconds if you want to watch the 3D content in 3D and if you don't respond before it is gone, it will show the 3D in 2D for all 3D TVs & 3D Blu-Ray players, plus you can respond no as well. Plus you will always have the 2D option in theaters that continues to be play the last few weeks when they no longer show the 3D version, so it has always been like there is 0% 3D movies in theaters because everyone can see the 2D version instead, but 3D screenings for less then 10% of movies will always make up more then 40% of the box office totals because of people who see it as solid as it feels. This year has around 70 3D movie premieres, and 2014 has around 100 3D movies. But it seems that independence 2 has been push back to 2015, so I guess the 3D re-release of the first one will be in 2014. Anyways with 100% of movies being shown in 2D and less then 10% of 2012 movies also being shown in 3D while the 3D screening themselves make up 40% to 60% of box office totals, and with 3D TVs being as common as color TVs became, and with everything electronic getting cheaper with every single year that goes by, and with sales of 2D TVs on a dramatic decline & 3D TVs on a year-on-year increase, it seems 3D is here to stay. Clearly more then most foreigners love 3D and clearly the majority of Americans like 3D. So if 3D becomes the norm, then just look at it this way: You will automatically see 3D content in 2D if you don't respond, and you can turn it off on computers & Handheld Consoles that actually get sold (Nintendo 3DS) & so fort. So 3D becoming the norm doesn't change your life style at all. But I would suggest you someday see The Great Gatsby in 3D. |
You keep repeating the same things over and over.
I find 3D a fascinating subject so I wanted to post 2 interesting articles about the differences between 2D and 3D viewing.
The first one shows that movies made for 3D should be made differently then made for 2D, and consequently 3D becoming the norm will hurt the 2D experience, and vice versa post process converting 2D to 3D makes bad 3D.
http://3dperfection.blogspot.ca/p/psychology-of-3d.html
Some excerpts:
THE PROBLEM
My biggest objective to the current use of 3D is that movie-makers are still thinking in 2D and still filming using 2D techniques. What they end up with is a 2D movie + depth.
THE SOLUTION
For a 3D movie to work, it has to be conceived from start to finish with 3D in mind. 3D is such a powerful tool (as much as colour, sound or even visiual perception itself) that I feel a whole new approach to movie-making is needed.
1) The 3D depth must be deep, immersive and consistent throughout the movie
2) Every single shot needs to be conceived with 3D in mind with the idea that the audience is the camera and a part of the environment.
3) The 3D camera should be thought of as an invisible character moving within the movie. Therefore it is more important than ever that the camera is seen to be the audience's eyes.
4) The composition of each shot is more important in 3D and there should be an obvious sense of background, middle and foreground so that we remain "within" the movie.
5) Fast MTV style editing has no place in a 3D movie but may be used fleetingly for effect e.g. for flashbacks or if a character is watching a 2D monitor or similar etc.
6) A slow tracking camera that moves within the world, especially going down tunnels or roads would work well in 3D and should be used to good effect.
7)The camera should always make us feel a part of the world, so positioning of the camera and its movement is crucial to make us always feel immersed.
8) The 3D depth must never change. Sudden changes of 3D depth will draw the audience out of the movie. A constant 3D depth will allow the audience to settle within the 3D world and stay within that space throughout the duration of the movie.
CONCLUSION
For 3D movies to be successful in the future, a whole new approach to both making and viewing a 3D movie is needed. For this reason, personally I don't want all future movies to be shot in 3D because 2D movies still have their place and importance. No, instead, 3D movies should be made sparingly and with a totally different approach to that of making a 2D movie. I believe that if a 3D movie is done well and gives the audience a real sense of being immersed in the environment, the audience will be willing to sacrifice certain elements that they are used to in 2D movies...i.e. fast editing between scenes. When making a 2D movie, the 3D element can't just be "added on" as an afterthought, it should be as important an element as the storyline and characters because essentially the audience becomes the 3D camera and we become an invisible character sharing the onscreen space of the world that we are watching. A whole new approach is needed for this to work.
The next one is from the founder of Legend3D, inventor of digital colorization and responsible for many 2D to stereographic 3D conversions. It is fairly technical, very interesting too.
http://bsandrew.blogspot.ca/2012/02/3d-movies-and-primal-brain.html
Conclusion
We know that our highly evolved frontal cortex mediates cognitive functions that normally inhibits or controls the amygdala and consequently evoked emotions. I contend that our brain’s reaction to a 2D movie is more of a top down cognitive process involving the higher order frontal cortex. The greater our suspension of disbelief, the more these higher cognitive functions come into play, releasing emotions mediated by the lower order amygdala. On the other hand, in a 3D movie, emotionally packed visual information more directly affects these lower order emotional areas of the brain in a bottom up fashion, evoking a more primal subconscious response.
I can't say I agree with his further conclusions that 3D heightens the story telling. Maybe that's because of focus / convergence, edge problems, and everything feeling hollow getting in he way. People don't all experience things the same, for some the top down process might work more strongly, and for others the bottom up process.
Anyway there is no reason for the 2D art form to go extinct, or take a minority role, ever.
For now 3D still has too many downsides, for the one upside, feeling you are part of the scene in correctly done 3D.
