October 11, 2011
The newest and latest trend is 3D movies. I went to see Avatar when it was released and had a choice to see it in regular 2D at regular price of $14 or, for $3 more, I could watch it in the new sensation of 3D.
Of course, I spent the additional cash.
Now, you can have 3D in your home or yacht with 3D LED televisions and even projectors. Is this new trend a novelty, or is it here to stay?
I’m not so sure it’s not just a phase, and it’s not because of the silly glasses or the lack of content. It's not even that we all kind of just hate it. No, we still watch it because of the cool factor.
3D’s primary failure is our eyeballs. Specifically, how millions of years of human development have taught them to focus.
A big problem with 3D is the convergence/focus issue, but the bigger problem is that the viewer must focus at the plane of the screen. This is constant, no matter what.
But the eyes must converge at perhaps 10 feet away, then 60 feet, and so on, depending on what the illusion is. So 3D films require us to focus at one distance and converge at another.
Millions of years of evolution have never presented this problem before. All living things with eyes have always focused and converged at the same point, not multiple points as 3D films require us to do.
It's not that we're incapable of this optical trick, which is like patting your head and rubbing your belly at the same time. It's that it's really hard. It gives us headaches. It makes us queasy.
Every time we encounter a 3D effect, our brains need a few milliseconds to figure out the dimensions of each shot and eventually our eyes and brains just get tired. It’s like watching home videos and the camera keeps moving and bouncing around, or like being on a roller coaster for 90 long minutes and looking for a trash can when you finally get off.
Remember when making any buying decision to do your research first and, if possible, take it for a test drive to see how you like it.
Comments
3D Images
Hi There Mike. I have been producing 3D in many forms for 35 years , holograms, video , even view masters. I appreciate your comments about trying it out first However , I must argue with the broad brushstrokes you applied with the "problems" some people encounter. The accomodation issues you refer to are quite natural as we are constantly converging our eyes at one point or another in the real world and never are seeing everything at the same time in 3d.Surely after 100 years or more of cinema and photography we have growna ccoustomed to having everything in focus at the same time in a theatre or on tv. Frankly, that is the unatural experience and the other way around. As for the fatigue , musch of the issues people encounter are the fault of the shooters and editors not the medium. In actuality, some of the best experiences in 3d are quite static shots where the viewer can really take the time to peruse the scene in 3d before an edit juts them into another scene only to have to re-accomodate. I would go blaming the medium or format for faults originating from the production values. Unfortunately, as the so called playing field has been leveled syndrome of have a very low enty price for the equipment, many perfectly competant videographers and directors think that merelt owning a 3d camera makes them stereographers. That takes some experience. Cheers . Mark Diamond, www.Diamond Images.com