Bournemouth 3D Week Part Summary
After a nice buffet there was a series of discussions in one of the lecture theatres including a fascinating presentation about the history of 3D. I did not realise that, when cinematography was being developed in the late 19th century, stereoscopy was high on the agenda. In fact, it was presumed people would want to view moving images in 3D as it was believed to be a more natural viewing experience. We were shown several images of historic dual lens capture devices and several examples of historic 3D images. So why did 3D fizzle out? Well we were told that it was because the 2D industry became so big and profitable that 3D was lost on the agenda – there was no real need for 3D as the studios were making so much money from their 2D blockbusters.
There were many attempts to immerse viewers into films but they tended to be experiments with picture formats such as the three projector Cinerama system. Eventually, the industry settled on the 21.9 and 16.9 aspect ratio formats.
Interestingly, the recent 3D juggernaut is likely to have come about because, this time, it appears there is a commercial benefit to 3D due to the increasing ubiquity of digital cinema (although recent reports suggest 3D can no longer be relied upon to boost ticket sales and command a ticket price premium).
We were given a presentation by Harry Blake from the Stereoscopic Society. The Stereoscopic Society has been in existence since 1893 and its objectives are to foster the practice, enjoyment and advancement of stereoscopy.
Harry and Pam Blake put together a selection of 3D slides, often synchronised to music and I have to say it was very impressive. It was really interesting to view well photographed 3D images. Each photograph was produced with two regular cameras and it proved that good 3D photography does not require the latest technology – just a knowledge of what works and what does not.
The stills were shown on a silver screen to allow the images to be viewed using polarised glasses rather than the anaglpyh kind. It was interesting to hear the audience reaction to certain shots such as a giraffe pointing its head through the screen and the nose of a Concorde jet piercing though the silver screen into the auditorium – well established technology which still has the power to impress in this digital era.
Another highly interesting point that stood out during the talks was the fact that all film whether 2D or 3D, is an illusion. The very fact that, as viewers, we are watching moving images on a canvas is itself an illusion – 24 images are quickly bouncing off a screen to dupe us into believing we are part of what is happening in the movie. It was said that 3D can effectivley ruin this illusion. This really got me thinking.
I have always pondered and questioned why people are never really 100% convinced by 3D and I include myself. At best, people are impressed and will pay the extra couple of quid to watch a 3D movie and, at worse, people throw off their glasses and say it is a distraction – why is that? In theory, 3D should be a more comfortable experience as it is a truer representation of real life as we see in 3D. The emphasis during the talk that it is all an illusion might be just why 3D can actually break rather than enhance the illusion. For a start, we never naturally see negative 3D (3D that jumps out of the screen). Our eyes are like a window, which we look though to view the world – Nothing comes ‘out’ of that ‘window’ therefore I believe a 3D film needs to represent that window otherwise it becomes a distraction to the illusion. We can’t help reach out with our hands, to focus on objects flying out the screen, because it is hyper-reality rather than reality.
Of course we have the constant reminder that we are watching 3D when wearing a pair 3D glasses. I do not think that is due to the physicality of the glasses (a lot of us wear glasses in our day to day life) but more so the fact that the image is darker than normal and, in the case of active glasses, we have to tolerate a horrible flicker effect.
In real life we do not view flickering dark images – it is no wonder people are never 100% convinced by 3D – the illusion is being shattered. So, will it change when autostereoscopic displays are of a high enough resolution to match today’s 2D TVs? I think possibly but I believe it will be a long time before we get glasses free high definition large 3D displays that we can watch together and even then, I believe the 3D effect should be kept to a minimum.
Another problem is that 2D content is often filmed and post produced in a way that focusses our attention on a certain area on the screen via devices such as focus pulling, coloring etc. Again, in real life, we focus on selective parts of what we are seeing. Right now, 3D seems to be keen to fully utilise the 3D space it offers which I believe that can be overwhelming which again, can break the illusion.
Those are just my personal thoughts anyway but the talk about illusion at the Bournemouth 3D Week was, for me, very enlightening (and very important).
The next day brought everybody bang up to date with software workshops from Adobe (Adobe software was heavily used on Avatar) and demos of the Foundry’s Nuke and Ocula 3D tools. These were fantastic presentations but there is not much I can write about as they were software walk throughs which I can not go into enough adequate detail here!
The remainder of the Bournemouth 3D Week featured talks from NVidia, a tour of a 3D cinema, a trip a Sky 3D pub (The Westbourne), workshops by Avid, a presentation on 3D sound and a talk about Sky’s 3D producer guidelines (click here to download Sky’s 3D Producer Guidelines).
The rest of the Bourmouth 3D Week looked very interesting but rather than comment on aspects of it I could not attend I would encourage readers to visit http://www.bsma.ac.uk/3dweek/ soon where a full report will be availbale for download.
Thanks again Murray and the other organisers who invited me down and I hope the Bournemouth 3D Week this will be the start of a regular annual event!
FREE WEEKLY 3D NEWS BULLETIN –
Pingback: Leeboxq
Pingback: vibradores
Pingback: Casa Para