3D... SONY, SAMSUNG AND PANASONIC ARE ABSOLUTELY WRONG...

[Graeme Hay]

Good to hear that Red is going to define 3D as chances are I will be shooting with their camera (once Scarlet is released of course).

[Graham Foulkes]

Can you explain what your vision for 3D is ?

[Andreas Mendritzki]

For me the question of 3D as the main delivery format of moving-image story telling is two-fold:

First, the technology needs to be seamless. By that, I mean, the technology must not visibly (or otherwise) interfere with the experience of consuming the content. To me, personally, its not there yet. Having to wear an external object (glasses) is the first significant obstacle. But like others have suggested (and like I have seen with my own two non-glass'ed eyes), the future of glasses-less 3d is just around the corner. Add to that whatever Jim has up his sleeve, and it is only a very short matter of time before this issue, that of the 'artifice' of the technology if you will, will be gone. As resolution and fps playback improve, I'm sure the experience will become more and more 'natural'. And thanks to RED, Element Technica, 3ality and the gang, the camera-operator's language is no longer hindered by the size and weight of the rigs.

Secondly, it is a question of language. Although motion-picture has been around for a relatively short time in terms of the history of art, we humans learn (comparatively) fast. In the last 100 years or so we have developed an incredibly sophisticated cinematic language. 3D simply does not speak the same language as 2D. Its going to take some time for our minds (as audience members) and our minds (as directors) to re-learn the language, and adapt it to that which 3D does well (ie. depth). If the trend continues, its not a question of IF, but WHEN. Unless of course you believe the Right Honourable Walter Murch, and his theory that there is an artificiality to stereography that the human mind is incapable of overcoming (to me the Jury is still out on that one... mind you, seems to me Murch has yet to be wrong on just about anything...).

Just my 2cents.

Either way, Jim and Co. seem to me determined to make the technology of the cinema industry more user AND consumer friendly, and either way, THAT is a good thing.

[Tim Whitcomb]

Sony Panasonic and Samsung are my 3 LEAST favorite vendors.

The coolest technology I have seen was in Siggraph 2001.. company called DEEP VIDEO IMAGING developed by a Maori in New Zealand and
was a layered sandwiched transparent LCD display... No glasses and touch screen You could bring background to front and foreground to back with a touch...

I was curious what happened to them... and turns out... IGT gaming bought the tech (or the screens
and now uses it in their VIDEO SLOT GAMES like Wizard of OZ.

Deep Video Imaging was the coolest "GLASS-LESS" Tech I have ever seen...called ACTUAL DEPTH DISPLAY

While it was actually DUAL LAYER 2D - it seemed to be a step in the right direction... if I had $1B - id look into this tech.

The inventor is a mad genius... http://www.elotouch.com/Solutions/CaseStudies/dvi.asp

[Albert Frates]

All I know is Jim just bet his reputation on it, and I agree with him active looks good at the moment because passive cuts the resolution in half in vertical lines....but that is quickly changing :)


That and the 3D Oakleys don't work with active. :(

[Paul Leeming]

Having had a private demonstration of a VERY interesting glassless, any-position-in-the-room stereoscopic monitor prototype at NAB this year, even if Jim didn't grab that particular concept and fold it into Red's plans, I can safely say that the future of glassless stereoscopic monitors is not far away.

I imagine that the principles behind that tech might be modified to use in projection style systems as well down the line, so yeah, I'm fully with Jim on this one.

Can't wait!

Cheers from Japan,

Paul :)

[Jacques Mersereau]

What I don't like about passive system is the 30-42% transmission of the polarized glass that knocks the brightness of my 6500 lumen HD projectors down to DIM
especially when the screen is 16-20ft high by 26 - 35ft wide. So, it isn't just resolution- brightness SUFFER a lot.
10K -20K lumen HD projectors are still just a bit pricey.

[Jannard]

There is a no excuse passive system... coming soon.

Jim

[Stacey Spears]

JVC and Sony are introducing 4k "consumer" priced displays this week at IFA and next week at CEDIA.

Current "consumer" passive displays have half the resolution of the active counterparts. Hopefully this will change with future generation displays. The head placement on the current Vizio passive displays is really poor. If your head is not locked in a vice, you are not going to get a great 3D experience. Forget about two viewers enjoying the image on a Vizio.

The active displays give me a headache and so suffer from more crosstalk, at least in the flat panel displays. The Sony and JVC projectors have much less crosstalk.

[Mithun DSouza]

Hmmm, strong believer in passive for the longest time!!
Just wondering how you'll get over the the resolution and the head-tilt problems :p

Interesting to see where this goes.

Coming soon as in how soon?
Give us something to work with Jim!!!
The suspense surrounding this is killing me, like evry other announcement from Red :)