Re: It Came from Outer Space

[P3D Marvin Jones <72657.3276@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Marvin, I had heard that the 3-D versions of these had come out in the early
> days of video, but I'd never seen them.  When you mention the video
> conversion, are you saying that Universal didn't just transfer the anaglyph
> 35mm print to tape, but instead made the transfer using both left
> and right prints?  Why would they do that?  That sounds rather costly
> and kind of stupid.  It does explain why they're not available on video
> now though...
> 
I don't know how costly, but it doesn't seem really necessary. My theory is that
they knew that anaglyph didn't work very well on TV, and they were trying to
"help" by giving the main subject of each shot as little disparity as possible
-- at least that's what they appeared to be trying to do. I suppose the idea was
to try and "fix" the interocular to place the main point of interest in each
shot more closely at the window.  At the beginning of virtually every shot, the
two images would suddenly be shifted back and forth until the actor or prop that
was the focus of the moment would be overlapping, then in the next shot, the
interocular was altered again ... and again ... and again. After a while your
eyes felt like they were being wrenched out of their sockets.


------------------------------