Re: 3rd Rock from the Sun

[P3D Larry Berlin <lberlin@xxxxxxxxx>]

This was a whole lot more interesting, well thought out and planned than any
aspect of the ABC fiasco!!!  Though I had trouble figuring out where the 1.5
Million dollars went. I decided it probably went to shooting the feathers
scene. It must have been a herculean task to make all those feathers drift
at just the right rate in the right directions. Any other movement in the
room or the thermal effects of lights could ruin the effect necessitating
collecting the feathers and trying again!  It's obvious that 3D is by nature
most capable of surreal effects. Now for a spin-off that is Surreal enough
to support a fully 3D program!

It wasn't at all clear why they had you take the glasses off just because
you exit a special sequence. As we all know, Pulfrich depends on relative
motion and the other parts of the show, including commercials had about the
same percentage content of movement, though didn't have the *specially
intended 3D* scenes. They could have included far more movement sequences
without raising their budget or spoiling the artistic effect. Try explaining
that to the show's director though...

One possible reason for removing the glasses - a friend complained of eye
strain from leaving the glasses on too long (she didn't remove them at the
suggested times because I wasn't doing so... Plus, she occasionally
experiences eye strain at other times anyway. Sensitive eyes.). Such a thing
doesn't bother my eyes and is likely something one could get used to and be
able to wear them for long periods of time.

I liked the sunflower scene, but my favorites were the feathers and the
garden scene. All their special segments could have had much more 3D, but in
seeing what was there, I could hear the producers arguing that they wanted
to make it *artistically appealing*, *not overdo it*, and that it *wasn't
necessary to have 3D at every moment*. Perhaps they intended for the moments
of 3D to stimulate you into believing that the moments without it were also
3D? They were a long ways from overdoing it!


>From: P3D Martin Simon comments:
>Subject: 3rd Rock--No Bravo here
>..........
>I must not have seen the same show.  I could barely detect any 3-D effects
>and most very mild effects were almost accidental and lasted only a few 
>seconds.  There was mostly flat time and even some pseudo during the "3-D
segments".  

******** It helps to have become familiar with the idea of Pulfrich 3D
before seeing the show.  Yes, they did use some pseudo movement/3D, but I
found that to be interesting since it was so artistically managed. It had to
be totally intentional. The good scenes were not at all accidental!!! I
agree there was more flat time than there should have been. I was also
impressed how effective very slow movement was in scenes with several rates
of motion.

>............ every segment did have something like a rotating platform
>as the camera spiralled outwards, but these effects were weak.  Sad to
>say that as poor as the ABC 3-D was, it was better than this.  IMHO

********  ABC made no effort at all by comparison to this show!!! Regardless
of the small amount of 3D, the show had it's other production values intact
and we didn't get *pie in the face* attention to the actual camera. The
usual 3rd Rock humor remained, surrealism not only fit the show, but let the
3D be rather spectacular for the moments it existed. I wanted more but
didn't feel offended with the methods that were used. It seemed that ABC was
ridiculing the audience for even having an interest in 3D. At a minimum the
flat times in 3rd Rock  were still pertinent to the show and interesting to
watch. The dance scenes I had anticipated weeks ago, and the results were
better than I had imagined they might be.

I am planning to purchase the video and I have to agree most with Marvin and
Chuck's comments:
______________________________
>Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 
>From: P3D Marvin Jones  comments:
>....................
>As for the 3D elements of 3rd Rock, they were frequently impressive and my
>only major criticism is that they didn't do ENOUGH with it -- which is a
>far cry from my criticism of the ABC shows!

_______________________
>Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 
>From: P3D Chuck Field writes:
>
Received: by bobcat.etsu.edu; id AA09848; Mon, 19 May 1997 20:26:28 -0500
Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 20:26:28 -0500
Message-Id: <v02130501afa6b4a0921c@[198.53.172.40]>
Errors-To: 3d-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reply-To: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Originator: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
From: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: Multiple recipients of list <photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: PHOTO-3D digest 2065
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment:   The Stereoscopic Image (Photo-3D) Mailing List  
Status:   

>I really liked the 3rd Rock from the Sun episode.  Even though the 3-D 
>effect went in and out as the camera movement changed or stopped, I thought 
>that the entire episode made better story use of the medium.  The dream 
>sequences were truly surreal... and everything fit the continuity of the 
>show.  I'd rather see half effective 3-D (like this) that fits the storyline,
> than ANYTHING that was done on ABC.
>  I liked the Sunflower scene the best.  What's everyone else think?
>
_________________


Larry Berlin

Email: lberlin@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.sonic.net/~lberlin/
http://3dzine.simplenet.com/


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