3D - is the party over?

[Matt Timson]

Anything less than a fully functioning holodeck is bullshit.

That is all.

[Steve Green]

Even a sporadically malfunctioning holodeck would do me.

[SmallBlueThing]

I'd argue it has been perfected- as far as most people are concerned. The glasses arent an issue- it's part of it. No one expects 3D without them, that's just black magic and sci-fi nonsense. It'll happen eventually; probably about the same time my flying car and silver jumpsuit arrive by transmat.

Oh, i know it's the 'holy grail', and apparently they're 'close' to acheiving it, but we've all heard that before. We're 'close' to going to mars too, but that wont happen yet either.

As for the brightness, i really dont think anyone other than that oily-quiffed tv movie critic who likes to pretend he's working class, and film nerds, has even noticed. Ive never once heard anyone come out of a movie moaning it was too dark. Oh, yes i have: when i saw watership down back in the seventies.

There are issues with some 3D films appearing as a series of 'flat layers'; both thor and captain america suffered from this to some extent. Did it ruin my experience any more than the odd boom shadow or the rubbish hairstyles in star wars, or the ape makeps in the original p.o.t.a not convincing our modern eyes? No, of course not. It's just the limits of the tech and the skill with which its used, as always.

SBT

[Steve Green]

Obviously not perfected enough to justify the extra expense and the subsequent drop off in 3D over 2D ticket sales though...

[JOE SOAP]

Id like to see a breakdown of exactly how much money has been spent by the major chains, installing 3D projectors. And also the studios on 3D cameras, training of technicians, etc. I think it's more likely that, rather than disappearing, the format will become the norm to recoup the investments made at all stages of production and distribution/ screening, and 'flat' movies will see their ticket price increased to bring them more in line with 3D.

So increasing the price of all cinema tickets to recoup investment in a prolonged time of increasing contraction and no growth will encourage more people to go to the cinema? There'll be a lot more home downloading if they do.

I think it's here to stay, and 'flat' movies while maintaining their presence, will increasingly be seen as niche, cheap and 'old fashioned'.

Most films will remain 2D simply because shooting proper stereoscopic 3D almost doubles the amount of shooting time for those certain films that are the 'spectacles' -the post-conversion process is costly too- and more pertinently the majority of films don't lend themselves to the 3D process. Why make the Guard, the Change Up, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, Friends with Benefits and the usual day in, day out fodder of regular cinema in 3D? 2D will not be niche.

The only real market for 3D is video games since total immersion is a major part.

[Mardroid]

The glasses arent an issue- it's part of it. No one expects 3D without them, that's just black magic and sci-fi nonsense. It'll happen eventually; probably about the same time my flying car and silver jumpsuit arrive by transmat.

Perhaps not as long as that considering the 3DS. I also saw a laptop on The Gadget Show yesterday which had a 3D screen that didn't require glasses. It's not as affective as the glasses, but it was quite impressive for what it was and I think things will improve, although I think the glasses will be around for a good while yet.

I think you're right that 3D will be around to stay, although it's popularity may wane a bit. A lot of investment seems to be going into 3D televisions. The glasses aren't all the coloured lens jobs either, they've got infra red and bluetooth digital jobs with flickering shutters, etc. (I didn't realise there was that much mechanical malarkey going on in the glasses.) Apparently the major companies are talking about making a universal interface for the glasses too. (They're all different at the moment.)

I'm not all that fussed by 3D, although I don't dislike it either. I haven't really experienced it much beyond a big gimicky underwater/rollercoaster show thing at an Imax cinema in Vancouver some years back. (I think many would scoff at that and go 'meh', but I found it a lot of fun. Then again, I'm easily impressed.)

The closest thing I came to watching a 3D film relatively recently was a bit of a horror film (I think it was My Bloody Valentine) at a mate's house a few months back. She doesn't have a 3D television, but the film achieved a similar effect using strange colour tints and yellowy outlines and utilised the old-school different coloured lensed glasses. Despite the funny colouring I found it quite effective. If I found that impressive* I'd like to experience the proper digital 3D at the cinema. How well they will work over my ordinary glasses (I need them for the cinema as I'm short-sighted) is another thing...

I'm in no rush to get a 3D telly though. They're way to expensive for one thing, and for another, I'm happy with a decent widescreen telly for most of my viewing. I would like to get a widescreen LCD or plasma HD TV soon, though. I'm still using a CRT telly at the moment. It's done me well, but there's something wrong inside as everything has a slight pinkish tint. (Curiously it doesn't really bother me. It's a wonder what the mind will cancel out after a while.)

*The colour tint was a bit of an issue for me.

[SmallBlueThing]

With regard to wearing 3D glasses over normal glasses- i wear specs for the cinema and have no problem slipping the black ones on over the top.

As for 'being easily impressed'- best way to be, mardroid! i find i enjoy a lot more that way.

SBT

[Matt Timson]

Mrs SBT: Also easily impressed. Probably.

I realise that we're not best mates or anything but, frankly, it was too good to pass up.

[Matt Timson]

Also: slightly pissed, but reasonably aware that I might have misread my audience.

[SmallBlueThing]

Also: slightly pissed,

It's okay Matt, I get the impression you spend a lot of your time in that state.

EDIT: Actually, no- just fuck you, you twat.

SBT

[Goosegash]

Id like to see a breakdown of exactly how much money has been spent by the major chains, installing 3D projectors. And also the studios on 3D cameras, training of technicians, etc. I think it's more likely that, rather than disappearing, the format will become the norm to recoup the investments made at all stages of production and distribution/ screening, and 'flat' movies will see their ticket price increased to bring them more in line with 3D.

The difference here is that THIS gimmick works for 90% of its audience. Unless your eyesight is problematic in some way, digital 3D is so far removed from the old red and green as to make it almost a shame it has to be referred to by the same term. The use of red and green for home release of digital 3D movies further muddies the water. But 3D has been 'perfected'. It works. And moans about 'artistic merit' aside, it enhances the experience of watching the type of movie it naturally belongs to. It's still a gimmick, but so are colour and sound, you could equally argue.

The current 3D tech is not "perfected" by any stretch of the imagination, because if you try and watch any 3D movie for certain length of time(say an hour and a half), it stops working. See, after a while your brain cottons on to the fact that you're trying to trick it into seeing depth which isn't there, and adjusts your perception so that what you're watching appears "normal". So unless you are specifically concentrating on the 3D effect, you will eventually stop noticing it. This has been true for every 3D film I have ever seen - after a while you forget you're watching it in 3D, because your brain has helpfully adjusted to the discrepancy.

This is a hurdle that I can't see the current generation of technology being able to get past.

[SmallBlueThing]

I don't know about that, Goosegash- that's the first time I've ever heard that particular complaint. Sure it's not just you? For example- the spacey scenes at the end of THOR, which I mentioned earlier, were among the most effective, 3D-wise, in the whole movie. But it's interesting all the different effects it throws up- when you start messing around with ways to fool the brain into seeing what's not there, you're going to run up against a whole bucketful of variables that are going to make it a different experience for different people. You just hope that MOST of them will go along with it.

SBT

[Mangamax]

Re the darkness issue, when it happens in a screen with a Digital Projector, its usually one of two things:

If its a 2D film and its too dark, that's usually the Projectionist forgetting to move the 3D Polariser away from the front of the projector. Usually also results in an out of focus image as the Polariser is combining two images into one when it shouldn't be.

If its 3D and too dark, that's usually the lamp not being set up properly. Its a completely new way of doing it and, unfortunately, comes at a time when Projectionists are leaving in droves, being replaced by "Technicians" who're usually recruted from the floor staff, and very often given little or adequete training, making for a "that'll do" attitude.

Its very sad. And ironic too that, with all the Blu Rays and huge tellys becoming more and more the norm, the publics awareness and quite rightly expectation of top notch picture and sound quality, can often not be provided as the folks that were responsible for that are becoming fewer and fewer

[Matt Timson]

Also: slightly pissed,

It's okay Matt, I get the impression you spend a lot of your time in that state.

EDIT: Actually, no- just fuck you, you twat.

SBT

I really do hope we meet one day- should be fun!

[JOE SOAP]

"I really do hope we meet one day- should be fun!"

Glad I'm not SBT.