Is 3D definitely dead ?

[rackaouy]

Hello everybody ! Am I the last dinosaur enjoying 3D with the tremendous EDIS X tools ?
Since a few days (after an unavoidable Windows update) I cannot any longer export a 3D Full HD project like I used to do.... Obviously everything still works in 2D but that do not help me...
I clearly need help from Grass Valley but the Help system is now difficult to reach. My version was bought less than one year ago but I would be OK to pay for assistance. Anyone knows how to proceed with Grass Valley as an end customer ?
Thank you for helping ! Ido not even know how to send them the Status Report...
--> I can still save 2 files separately but the very convenient AVCHD 3D exporter does not work any more...

[GrassValley_SL]

Maybe you can post what the exact issue is? The steps we nee to take to reproduce it.

You should contact you reseller if you need direct support.

[rackaouy]

I will but if you have a 3D project and want to export it using AVCHD 3d Exporter you cannot any longer. That means the end of Full HD. We keep only Side By Side...

[David Clarke]

I thought you could only make full interleave 3D in the preview version of EDIUS 3D. When it came out and was in EDIUS proper this was not in there for licencing reasons. However, I could be remember incorrrectly,

[rackaouy]

This is why I save the project using AVCHD 3D exporter as L/R dual stream. Then I use Vegas to create a Full HD disk. I do not know if this is a change in Windows 10 or EDIUS X...

[David Clarke]

Nothing has changed as far as 3D is concerned. 3D is big in movies but not for most "regular" users.

[rackaouy]

This is why I am afraid. If (as I guess) the problem comes from Windows I am not big enough to solve it ! I would be forced to move back to Windows 8 !!! Only a giant like Grass Valley could help !

[Jerry]

When Edius 6.5 came out George Dame and I took our little road show to Tampa. A wedding business was contemplating doing 3D weddings.
This version could actually output true 3D dual stream. The catch was you had to have a Storm 3G and one of the Bricks, the ADVC G3, and then a
3D TVv that supported true dual stream. This setup was extremely expensive.

Within months, Sony had standardized the .mvc codec and if you wanted to use it, you had to pay dearly. GV then went with a Full Side by Side
format. As the OP has learned, you output Full SBS and import that into Vegas or the authoring software. From there the files are converted to dual stream
.mvc files. It's a long process.

I never used the AVCDHD 3D writer. Edius 6.5-7 was in the heyday of 3D. After that, it started to die down when 4K and higher frame rates began
showing up.

To answer your question if 3D is dead, too me it is. To you, obviously not. Don't fret, 3D will rear it's ugly head again....just as it has done for decades.

[John Lewis]

I re set my system today and in Side by Side i re rendered an old project and everything worked properly
Took a bit of time to dig deep into the old memory box to set all the required side by side settings

[createmedia]

There is still a stereoscopic society supporting 3D

http://www.stereoscopicsociety.org.uk/WordPress/

Mike

[DigitalDave]

There is still a stereoscopic society supporting 3D

http://www.stereoscopicsociety.org.uk/WordPress/

Mike

There are also fans of 9.5mm Pathe film.
Sky and BBC dropped 3d like a brick. I know someone who had £100k worth of 3d post kit doing Post Prod for Sky. That's a lot of door stops!
If you need any more proof go into Currys and ask for a 3d TV ?
Btw I'm proud to have been a 3d luddite.

[rackaouy]

Any ways the cause of my problem is known and I have officially be told to move back to the previous version...

[antonsvideo]

do none of the attached options work?

AVP-0412.png AVP-0411.png

[rackaouy]

I always used the AVCHD 3D Exporter Plug In but I will let you know...

[rackaouy]

It would work but it writes on a memory card, not in a file like AVHD 3D exporter Plug In...

[Barry C]

It's not dead, but back in hibernation. About every 15 or 20 years or so, it comes out of hibernation for awhile. It is alive to some extent in the headset VR world, and this might continue to grow. Once in awhile, I get licensing requests from VR developers for 3D underwater content. I have a 4790 I7 running Windows 8 and Edius 8 which is only used for the little bit of 3D I still occasionally do. The monitor used is a 3D capable Asus- long ago discontinued model which uses Nvidia 3D Vision and Nvidia 3D glasses, also long since discontinued and no longer supported in current Nvidia drivers. But, it works great and allows me to work with 3D which isn't that silly anaglyph.
Maybe in 10 years from now 3D will come roaring back- for a year or two. ?
Another 3D luddite here! Started with it in the 1970s with a 35mm 3D Realist.

[dpalomaki]

Maybe in 10 years from now 3D will come roaring back- for a year or two. ?

AMEN, the fad lasts for a while until people get tired of having to wear something extra to view it. Then it quietly fades away. I have a 3D attachment that came out for Pentax still cameras 55mm lens back in the 1970s or so. Viewing material is a pain to deal with.

[rackaouy]

I do understand people are tired wearing heavy expensive glasses (for me the only right system is the polarized inexpensive always ready glasses). As long as the TV studios do not jump on it 3D will be useless for people who did not acquire a 3D camcorder and the commercial movies are ot here to make us change our mind...

[JohnnyD]

It's not dead, but back in hibernation. About every 15 or 20 years or so, it comes out of hibernation for awhile.
Maybe in 10 years from now 3D will come roaring back- for a year or two. ?
Another 3D luddite here! Started with it in the 1970s with a 35mm 3D Realist.

Yep, had Realist too. I later shot 35mm and had 4 Ektagraphics 2+2 with polarizers in front of the lens,, all sync with AVL dissolve units..It was my art form. A client saw it and he wanted to use 3D on a big dancing show in a Atlantic City hotel. Jeff Kutash Dancing Machine. Fun days.

[dpalomaki]

I went to the Disney demo at EPCOT in the 1970s. Fun to see the butterfly landing on one's nose. The 1950s experiments in theaters didn't last, nor did the red/blue line attempts in comic books. But one of the B&W grade B horror films extended the gimmick a bit. Not 3D on the screen but 3D in the theater; a skeleton came out of a coffin at the side of the stage and was pulled over the orchestra on a wire then returned to the box. Thus they could claim 3D action. DIdn't the NFL experiment with some technique to add "depth" to the 2D flat screen image 15 or so years back? Having seen a few recent 3D on the big screen it is OK, but IMO not necessary to enjoy a good film.

[Barry C]

I think it can add a lot to some films. Last night, my son and I started watching the extended,-extra scenes- version of Avatar, on a bluray I just bought. We've watched the 3D version several times on our projector, 10' screen home theater. We both agreed that it was weird to see it in 2D, as it looked flat as day old beer. ? It was nowhere near as enjoyable of an experience as watching it in 3D. Huge difference!! Cameron designed and intended the movie to be a 3D experience. He was right! I can also say- IMO- underwater films are MUCH BETTER, when properly filmed' in 3D. It's a much more realistic and immerse experience. I dove for almost 50 years and made underwater films, and 3D greatly adds to the viewing experience. However, there are also some films where it really wouldn't matter much.

[BernH]

I think it can add a lot to some films. ...... However, there are also some films where it really wouldn't matter much.

Agreed Barry, I am not a lover of 3D most of the time because it is usually nothing more than a gimmick used to get asses in the seats of the theaters or a "novelty" used to drive sales of TV's and Blu-Rays.

Most dramas, comedys, actions, kid's movies, etc. don't really benefit from 3D, in that it doesn't do anything to really add to the story or experience. I can see it's benefit in some fantasy/sci-fi, maybe some action, and some documentary work if trying to immerse the viewer in the environment is the goal, but I actually find it distracting the way it is used a lot of the time, because the depth is often over exaggerated or they are trying to use those "poke you in the eye" gimmicks. Essentially my view is that if it adds to the experience or helps immerse me in the story I'm ok with it. Over exaggerated depth and gimmicks that are trying to poke me in the eye don't immerse me in the story, but instead throw me out of it.

The best 3D example I ever saw was at the Sony booth at NAB one year when 3D was on one of it's resurgences. I can't remember who was doing it, but he showed what good 3D should be like, adding just enough depth to make it look natural and feel real. He then contrasted it with the way most are using it, where the depth is exaggerated, and I must say the "real" setup was comfortable to look at and felt right, while the common setup made the brain work a little too hard to make sense of it because it didn't look natural.

I will also add, that my take on 3D, just like most things, is best summed up by a favorite saying of mine.... Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.