Mailinglist Archives:
Infrared
Panorama
Photo-3D
Tech-3D
Sell-3D
MF3D

Notice
This mailinglist archive is frozen since May 2001, i.e. it will stay online but will not be updated.
<-- Date Index --> <-- Thread Index --> [Author Index]

RE: Why 3-D?


  • From: P3D Larry Berlin <lberlin@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: Why 3-D?
  • Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 15:09:08 -0700

>Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997
>From: P3D Greg Marshall  writes:
>.........
>The problem with doing only parts of a film in stereo is that the change
>from flat to 3D and back destroys the immersiveness.  

******  True. Though at times it could fit into a script.

>And the problem
>with feature-length, full stereo is that nobody wants to be "immersed"
>that long with all these problems. 

******  I have to disagree here. There are a number of folk who wish that a
good feature length film was really available in 3D. If I'm going to be
*immersed* into any movie, I'd rather it be 3D. Any perceivable problem with
the *idea* is just that, a problem with the idea. Let's get half a dozen
good feature length movies going and see if the experience really is such a
problem. Right now you have an uneducated audience. They don't know what to
expect, other than relatively poor examples. Any problems with being
immersed *too long* is a relative problem. It goes away with greater
exposure to something new. Audiences in some future time will no doubt enjoy
full feature length 3D immersion and wonder why it took so long for people
to accept it. I see no problem with starting full length 3D ASAP. The sooner
the better.

> So the answer is to make the best
>possible stereoscopic movies of appropriate lengths.  If they're done
>right they'll be successful, and that (and only that) will encourage the
>development of improved techniques (and "improved" audiences).

*****  Agreed. It is an educational proposition. There's a lot of territory
to cover and new things to introduce. BUT let's not short change ourselves
by assumptions which have misguided previous attempts. We need to proceed
full steam ahead, total immersion in many ways, and new forms. Perhaps a few
shorter features to begin with, but *Feature length* isn't really all that
long a time frame. We can and will get used to it. I contend that a time
frame of 3 to 4 hours isn't really out of the realm of possibility, though
maybe there is a need to work up to that, and maybe provide an intermission
or two.

Larry Berlin

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


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