Tweet
Hi Bern,
In regard to increased depth with content in front of the screen- negative parallax- I generally have no problem with it depending on why it is being used. In fact, when used in the PROPER CONTEXT it can tremendously add to the realism and immersive experience.
Several years back, I recall some intense exchanges on another 3D content creator forum with those whom I characterized as "3D purists." They were very much hung up on the traditional dogma that 3D content MUST ALWAYS stay behind and never in front of the screen window, and that "windows violations" were sacrilege. I, of course, disagreed. Most of my experience shooting 3D has been underwater. It took a couple of years to really perfect a good 3D workflow which was intended to maximize the immersive experience of actually being underwater in a three dimensional environment. This at times meant swimming in schools of fish where some of them were a foot or so from the lens. Or, being very close to sharks doing close swimmbys. When watching later in 3D, the subjects were often well in front of the screen plane at times where you felt like you could actually reach out and touch them. This, of course, created a much more realistic presentation of what it was like actually being down there. If I had followed the purists dogma, the viewing experience would have been more like a trip to the aquarium- looking at them through a window, rather than being with them.
Again, just my own opinion, but I STRONGLY believe after reading comments and talking to a lot of people, that one of the main reasons 3D flopped- besides the obviously flawed rollout issues in both hardware and content- was not because there was too much "popout," to use the layman's term, but because there was too little. Rightly or wrongly, the general public wanted their 3D movie experience to be more 3Dish, and not less.
In regard to increased depth with content in front of the screen- negative parallax- I generally have no problem with it depending on why it is being used. In fact, when used in the PROPER CONTEXT it can tremendously add to the realism and immersive experience.
Several years back, I recall some intense exchanges on another 3D content creator forum with those whom I characterized as "3D purists." They were very much hung up on the traditional dogma that 3D content MUST ALWAYS stay behind and never in front of the screen window, and that "windows violations" were sacrilege. I, of course, disagreed. Most of my experience shooting 3D has been underwater. It took a couple of years to really perfect a good 3D workflow which was intended to maximize the immersive experience of actually being underwater in a three dimensional environment. This at times meant swimming in schools of fish where some of them were a foot or so from the lens. Or, being very close to sharks doing close swimmbys. When watching later in 3D, the subjects were often well in front of the screen plane at times where you felt like you could actually reach out and touch them. This, of course, created a much more realistic presentation of what it was like actually being down there. If I had followed the purists dogma, the viewing experience would have been more like a trip to the aquarium- looking at them through a window, rather than being with them.
Again, just my own opinion, but I STRONGLY believe after reading comments and talking to a lot of people, that one of the main reasons 3D flopped- besides the obviously flawed rollout issues in both hardware and content- was not because there was too much "popout," to use the layman's term, but because there was too little. Rightly or wrongly, the general public wanted their 3D movie experience to be more 3Dish, and not less.
Comment