Sorry, Cracker Funk
- Thread starter Dreadylocks
- Start date
I’m curious how those that don’t like it (Headache qualms aside) feel about it outside of narrative use? Like would you think it would be cool to utilize for example with like filmed concerts, where maybe it adds some visual elements to the audio experience?
-Thanks-
-Thanks-
This debate reminds me of the time when Ted Turner started colorizing the classics. I was one of those youths who had a very, very difficult time watching any black and white movie because it didn't draw me into it enough to suspend my disbelief. They didn't interest me in the least regardless of story content. Well now that I'm older and more interested in story as well as entertainment, I revisit those old classics.
Zensteve nailed it. It's all about immersion. And today's high-tech entertainment laden youths need that heightened sense of realism to suspend their disbelief and make it interesting.
One step closer to a holodeck. And digital technology is making it possible. Analog at 24fps is a dying art form. Hate to say it. You can either jump on the progress express or be run over by it.
Zensteve nailed it. It's all about immersion. And today's high-tech entertainment laden youths need that heightened sense of realism to suspend their disbelief and make it interesting.
One step closer to a holodeck. And digital technology is making it possible. Analog at 24fps is a dying art form. Hate to say it. You can either jump on the progress express or be run over by it.
Last edited:
I imagine where it'll sell the biggest is in video games. WoW and the like...
A truce! Noooo!
I wanted like smoke grenades and maybe somekind of battalion of armored battle monkeys, anything really. (A chilli cook off?) It was just too quiet here tonight.
I guess don't rent the cannon Grand Upper.
-Thanks-
Ohhhhhh. Brain fart -- I completely misread your post. Fine then, war's on. I'm gonna need some blue face-paint, with glow-in-the-dark highlights.
Nope; changed my mind. Now that I know that Buddy is endorsing the war, I'm pretty sure you're a nazi.
I feel quite confident that the holodeck will finally be invented, as I reach my twighlight years. I'll finally have the opportunity to step inside and experience one, but I'll get so excited, I'll die of a heart-attack before I can say, "Computer, run Pandora program".
Also, I've been using the suspension of disbelief argument ever since that crazy "Avatar" thread. I'm so glad somebody finally agrees with at least that particular argument.
Well blue face paint is intriguing, especially if just wear it while on line, but otherwise the war was kind of so this morning. (However, if my life long dream of showering on-lookers with broken glass and packs of lit fire crackers (for atmosphere) can be fully realized, and if you can get Goob to like "borrow" a tank or something, then I could get behind it again.
I'll run it by my people, you run it by yours, and lets just see what happens from there.
-Thanks-
I'll run it by my people, you run it by yours, and lets just see what happens from there.
-Thanks-
Says you.
24fps will be around for quite some time, thank you very much. Interlace looks like garbage and always looks like interlace no matter what you do with it. 30fps looks too much like video, the audience has already spoken on that one. 60i wrappers are crap, and 48fps projection isn't gaining any traction with anyone except for Cameron - even then, barely. Sorry friend, but 24fps in one for or another is here to stay for the forseeable.
Analog won't be the mainstream, but it too will be around because people like me will be in dark little rooms processing stills by hand and finding clever ways to originate short works via photochemical means. I love the assumption that because a couple of films find success in 3-D that means 120 years of film technique is suddenly and categorically irrelevant. Hilarious. I'm sure someone said, in the 1950s that 3-D would take over everything, and again in the 80s. I'm sure someone said that there would be no more black and white anything, ever. Hell, I'm sure someone said there'd be no more silent films....
http://www.louisthemovie.com/
To categorically "like or dislike" 3-D is to completely miss the point. I've said it before - a movie that sucks will still suck in 3D and the converse is true as well. There's a time for 3D and a time to skip it. It would be pointless to make a 3-D version of something like "Jack Goes Boating," but Jackass 3-D? Why not? That's all about impact (figuratively) value, so 3-D kinda makes sense. Not gonna make me watch it, nor going to make me a fan of it - but it makes sense artistically.
And whoever said it's like Turner colorizing stuff missed Analogy day in school. 3D would be like the atrocities committed by Turner if someone went and tried to take Double Indemnity and make it into a 3D movie. There are plenty of analogies that work better, like the introduction of sound.
When sound was introduced, production bent over backwards to accommodate the needs of the technology. Cameras stayed in place, everyone huddled around the mic hidden in the flower pot, and great big chunks of everything that made silent films dynamic and interesting went away. Camera movement was virtually gone, blocking became sitting around the microphone, and so on.
Now, folks are going out of there way to add (post-production 3D ala "Alice" "Clash of the Titans, etc) or shoot in 3-D and other aspects of the films fall by the wayside. One of cable series that I work on wanted to do a 3-D episode and the network brought in a whole special crew to do it. Honestly, is a crime re-enactment show really going to benefit from being shot in 3-D?
Add 3-D to a film with a lame story, no tension, no suspense, cardboard characters, and wooden acting and it will still suck. Fix all those problems in the first place, then worry about the "3-D."
Last edited:
You do make some good points. But I am not talking about the Indie artist. I'm talking about mainstream commercial cinema. The digital train is leaving the station. Remember when digital projection was a novelty? That wasn't too long ago. I had to drive 30 miles to find a theater in Texas that had it. Now I have a theater within 10 miles that is nothing but digital projection on all screens, including IMAX. Even Cinemark has stepped up with Extreme Digital (XD).
High-end digital cinematography is not interlaced. And we're not talking 24fps digital. I said 24fps "analog". Hell, my HDTV is 1080 progressive. Remember Captain Eo? I do. Saw it in the '80s. You think that looks as good as digital technology today? Seriously? And it sure wasn't available to the home consumer unlike 3D Bluray is today.
You are saying the same things the industry said to Lucas as far back as his "Edit Droid". Look at non-linear digital video editing today. It's pretty much standard. Furthermore, the consumer now has more power at his/her fingertips than the industry had back then in all things digital (including 3D animation).
You may as well compare a 1953 Corvette with my 2008 Corvette. Same name, vastly different car.
Last edited:
As for 3D specifically, we can achieve today with digital what required two different projectors (dual strip) in the past for analog. Can you imagine trying to produce that today by strictly cutting work prints and negatives? No wonder it didn't take off. Not cost effective to produce. Not enough theaters to present. Cost of a ticket was probably much higher for these films relatively speaking.
Now there is money to be made not only in theatrical release, but also home viewing. It's only a matter of time before 3D Blu-rays start showing up in Red Box.
3D game consoles are also on the horizon. PS3 already supports 3D Blu-ray. It's only a matter of time before the rest follow suit.
Now there is money to be made not only in theatrical release, but also home viewing. It's only a matter of time before 3D Blu-rays start showing up in Red Box.
3D game consoles are also on the horizon. PS3 already supports 3D Blu-ray. It's only a matter of time before the rest follow suit.
Last edited:
3D will always be a niche. It certainly won't be standard across the board.
No argument there. It will be a long time before wide adoption. But innovation begets innovation. Over time, science fiction becomes science reality. Moore's law is still in full swing in semiconductors. How long do you think it will be before your living room TV is replaced by a holographic emitter?
I'll give it 20 years. And it will be interactive. The technology already exists today for manipulating virtual objects in 3D space - full-body, real-time motion tracking and facial recognition. Sounds like something straight out of a sci-fi movie, doesn't it?
That sounds rad, but I'll believe it when I see it. It's 2010 -- where the hell is my levitating car?! Shouldn't we have lazer-guns by now? We're supposed to be in the future, but the only progress I've seen is that our phones have become portable, smaller, and with fancy touch-screens. Otherwise, we might as well be living in the 80's.
This is from 2007:
http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/3DDisplay/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF1vFTQOWN4
2009:
http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/3DTeleconferencing/
Like I said, I give it 20 years before we see commercial application of stuff like this.
These are already in use:
http://www.io2technology.com/
Last edited:
This is a great point! As long as there is a choice, there really isn't an issue. The issue I had was with the idea of it being a universal format. In fact, I saw AVATAR in both formats and it was cool being able to compare.
Likely a lot longer for everyday use.
Wasn't referring to everyday use. My everyday use TV is only 42". Occasional use for movies is 73".
Hell, my Vette isn't everyday use. These are all luxuries. But innovation brings these luxuries within reach of more and more people as costs of manufacturing drop. Remember when cell phones were only for the super rich? CDs? Laser disc? DVDs? Remember when HDTV was just a novelty?
I don't think HDTV was ever a novelty, actually. I consider them to be completely different entities.