Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Newsweek (Ebert): Why I Hate 3-D (And You Should Too)

Like Anson, I thought Avatar was amazing in 2D as well. The Bluray is stunning.

But there was just something special a lot of people felt in the theater watching it in 3D... a sense of having "traveled" to that planet and "experienced" it....which would not have happened to such a degree with only 2D.
 
Clearly the consumer public was willing to pay the massive ticket premium to watch Avatar in 3D and many of them watching it for 2nd and 3rd time.

-michael zaletel
 
Nir Shelter said:
3D is just another little tool in the storyteller’s arsenal just as stereo sound was.
Click to expand...

3D is a totally different approach to visual storytelling. It is NOT just a little tool, a tool which you "just use" and do everything else as before. This is like saying sculpting is a just another little tool for painting. It is not a "tool" at all.

This is a new electronic art form, which requires a lot of changes starting from the ground up. Many storytelling techniques in this craft are based and developed for a canvas type of art. This is not a canvas type of art and a lot of rules aren't the same as in 2D plane storytelling.






Some of 3D issues Ebert writes about are disadvantages of current approach to 3D, which he's attributing to the medium. Kind of like saying that sculpting generally sucks because most artists he saw sculpted poorly (while trying to paint).

Also, he's not visualizing new options, convinced that what exists now is all there is.
 
Hrvoje Simic said:
3D is a totally different approach to visual storytelling. It is NOT just a little tool, a tool which you "just use" and do everything else as before. This is like saying sculpting is a just another little tool for painting. It is not a "tool" at all.
Click to expand...

No matter the delivery of it story telling has always been and always will be story telling. Camp fire, stage, screen, TV, WEB, 2D, 3D are only tools that serve to deliver the story.

Hrvoje Simic said:
This is a new electronic art form, which requires a lot of changes starting from the ground up. Many storytelling techniques in this craft are based and developed for a canvas type of art. This is not a canvas type of art and a lot of rules aren't the same as in 2D plane storytelling.
Click to expand...

3D requires post pipe-line over halls of many of the traditional ones and presents new forms of coverage. In fact I don't think we have seen the last or even the beginning of 3D development yet.
Convergence points may not be fixed and could be adjusted according to viewer distance and angle to the center of the screen. Who knows what developments will come about but when it comes to story it doesn't matter.

Hrvoje Simic said:
Some of 3D issues Ebert writes about are disadvantages of current approach to 3D, which he's attributing to the medium. Kind of like saying that sculpting generally sucks because most artists he saw sculpted poorly (while trying to paint).

Also, he's not visualizing new options, convinced that what exists now is all there is.
Click to expand...

Even if the future of film is holograms the story with in them should be a good one and well told regardless. If a story doesn't work in 2D the "magic effect" of 3D wont make it work any better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top