More on 3D

3D Not So Bad, Maybe
Walter Murch's comments about 3D reprinted in Roger Ebert's column have, of course, provoked a reaction. Several people have questioned whether Murch has the science right, including David Newman, CTP of CineForm. He posted a response on Ebert's original article, as well as reprinting it in CineForm's blog:
While there are issues with 3D presentation, the claim that the "convergence/focus" issue makes 3D unsolvable is false. There is an error made in the assumption that "the audience must focus their eyes at the plane of the screen", while that is generally true for objects close to a viewer in space, it is not true for a movie screen "80 feet away."
[...]
With various ways of computing the hyper-focal range of the eye suggests that objects from around 15 feet to infinity will appear in focus. That means a 3D presentation that has objects appearing no close than 15 feet and beyond will appear in focus whether the audience is focusing at the screen plane of not -- the eye is free to convergence and focus anywhere within the volume of space projected, just as it naturally would.
I don't know enough about the subject to know who is right or wrong, though I have been to enough 3D presentations to know that there are extremes that you have to avoid because you will cause discomfort for the viewer. Having things coming too close to the viewer is one of them.
CineForm Insider: Another overstatement that 3D won't work.


The Rules of 3D Cinema
Meanwhile, Stuart Heritage at The Guardian lists the ten "3D Movie Conventions" that seem to be cropping up again and again, and creating a sameness to the 3D movie landscape.
2 Floating credits
4 Gratuitous slow motion
TheGuardian: The rules of 3D cinema



Another Sony Video - Maybe - Answers Some Questions
Sony has put together some self-generated video reports from CES. The latest one answers some viewer questions, including a couple to do with the upcoming Sony 3D Handycam HDR-TD10. Specifically they explain why, though Sony Vegas will edit 3D, it can't edit the video files created by the HDR-TD10 - yet.
See also: More On Consumer 3D Cameras

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sony GV-D200 review

Image
Sony GV-D200 I've been using a Sony GV-D200 deck to transfer old Video8 and Hi8 tapes. Some of these tapes are over twenty years old, and no longer having a Hi8 camcorder that worked I was concerned that if I didn't do something about transferring them to a more modern format soon, I might never be able to. While Sony no longer make camcorders that use these tapes - that I know of - Sony does still sell the GV-D200 deck (or Video Walkman, as it's sometimes labelled.) They also offer the GV-D800, which is almost identical but adds a small LCD screen for about $120 more. I didn't think I'd need a screen since I was using this to capture to the computer, but you will need an external monitor when you first set it up. Physically, the device is small. At 5 7/8" wide, 5 3/8" deep and 2" high, it's the smallest video deck I've encountered. I used to have a Video8 deck that I thought was small; and it was twice as deep and twice as high. The t...
Read more

Response: Which iPhone to Get?

Image
In response to my iPhone musings, I got the following reader email which actually sums up a lot of my second and third thoughts too: You might have a point about the fancier camera, but otherwise I would buy the smaller model. Its screen is about the same size as that of my Nexus 4, and I don't feel at all like it limits me with a too-small screen. But I do sometimes stretch to get my thumb the reach to the other corner of the screen. It is plenty big for a phone. A phone is a pocket thing. (Well, in my case it lives an ancient REI soft sunglasses case that I have on my belt.) Ubiquitous, handy, convenient, almost always with me. Small is crucial for all of that. Certainly a large screen is cool, but you need a place to put it: don't break a fundamental feature of a pocket phone by getting too big. That is what your small tablet is for. I have my phone with me almost always. I have my Nexus 7 tablet with me nearly as much. The bigger screen is great, yet it fits in some...
Read more

Should you buy the Sony NEX-FS100 Kit Lens?

Image
The Sony NEX-FS100 is available in two configurations: B & H : NEX-FS100U Camcorder only $4,999 B & H : NEX-FS100U (with 18-200mm lens) $5,599 But what does that extra $600 get you? It get's you this: Sony 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Zoom Lens for NEX Camera This lens is also available separately for $799.99, so at $200 off you'd think everyone would be jumping on it. But not so fast... In his article about switching from the Canon 5D Mark II to the Sony NEX-FS100 , Paul Antico  at Need Creative says of the kit lens: 7) Its 18-200 F3.6-6.3 kit lens absolutely sucks and should be avoided (thankfully, you can order it without one) [ 1 ] But is it that bad? At B & H 's site, 43 reviews give it an average of 4.6 out of 5 stars. That's not a bad rating, though many of these people are using it for stills, and the most common complaint noted is how large and heavy it is. Of course this feeling of size would be exacerbated when you put it on a tiny camera ...
Read more