As far as I'm concerned, I can see in three dimensions so I don't see why movies shouldn't be in three dimensions. When the technology is right.
When things first went colour, it was all a bit bright and weird looking. Takes a while to get things right. Unfortunately, the 3D equivalent is glasses, headaches, the inability to focus and maybe even some sort of Videodrome type brain tumours. The technology isn't quite there yet.
I think there's a flaw in the system - the points of focus are dictated shot to shot. So, unlike real life, when we cut from one shot to another, the focus distance changes with no warning. I think for 3D to truly work seamlessly, it's going to have to be the case that it all works in 3D. Like, if you wanted to focus on a tree in the background, you could. In fact, maybe the whole art of editing would have to change. I don't know.
Right now, for me, the glasses/price/focus issues mean that 3D isn't all that much of a draw. Even when it's done well.
But in terms of the actual concept, I'm all for it. Maybe in the year 2525. If man is still alive.
When things first went colour, it was all a bit bright and weird looking. Takes a while to get things right. Unfortunately, the 3D equivalent is glasses, headaches, the inability to focus and maybe even some sort of Videodrome type brain tumours. The technology isn't quite there yet.
I think there's a flaw in the system - the points of focus are dictated shot to shot. So, unlike real life, when we cut from one shot to another, the focus distance changes with no warning. I think for 3D to truly work seamlessly, it's going to have to be the case that it all works in 3D. Like, if you wanted to focus on a tree in the background, you could. In fact, maybe the whole art of editing would have to change. I don't know.
Right now, for me, the glasses/price/focus issues mean that 3D isn't all that much of a draw. Even when it's done well.
But in terms of the actual concept, I'm all for it. Maybe in the year 2525. If man is still alive.
Comment