Forget stereo 3D, holographic 3D is the future

Rick Presas · February 9th, 2011, 12:40 PM

I don't think the blind-out-of-one-eye argument is very valid. Don't get me wrong, I wish your cousin the very best, but i just don't think thats a very valid argument against 3D.

The same could be said about 2D movies and people who are blind in both eyes.
The same could also be said about movies with Audio of any kind for hearing impaired.

...And for Micheal Bay movies and people with no sense of taste!

BA DAP CHING!

Tim Bakland · February 9th, 2011, 01:16 PM

I hear you.

But no, I'm not asking on any moral ground -- I'm asking what will be the implications for those only cannot see with stereo vision. That's all. Will you still be able to watch regular 2D (even as others watch in 3D)? How will it look, etc.?

Rick Presas · February 9th, 2011, 01:40 PM

Basically if he puts the glasses on it will be the same movie in 2-D. It may look slightly distorted for a slipt second here and there, and it will be about a stop darker than a regular 2d movie. But as long as he has the polarizing glasses on, he should be able to watch it just fine.

*edit*

Give it a try. Go see a 3D movie and close one eye for a few seconds.

Brian McKenna · February 9th, 2011, 01:59 PM

i once saw a dance performance in which the 2 dancers were interacting with holographic copies of themselves. the stage also filled with holographic water at one point and there was a pretty cool "floating in space" kind of sequence too.

it was in a normal theatre space but they had installed some pretty fancy stuff. was a very amazing show on many levels, not only because of the amazing tech.

but a holographic movie without the live element... i'm not sure it would be so nice... part of the fun of holograms is being able to move around them, not being stuck in a theatre seat (the live dancers kind of provided that function (to a degree) in the show i saw).

i guess 3D movies are kind of cool, sometimes. i can't remember what author was mentioning that 3D seems to just come and go as a semi-regular fad... and each time it shows up it's supposed to herald the end of history, but then just fades out.

seems to me that Mr. Walter Murch is talking sense. very much. if 3D is going to cause so many limitations and extra hassles it might remove more possibilities for expression than it adds.

personally, i'd rather see things go in the direction of 'Dogville' than towards 'Titanic'.

Sareesh Sudhakaran · February 10th, 2011, 06:28 AM

Brian, I'm not an expert on holography but don't lasers need a medium to project on to? Did they use smoke or some such screen during the course of the dance?

If they have achieved it, it's definitely fascinating. I would appreciate it if you could let me know the name and website of the production team that achieved this if possible. Thanks.

Brian McKenna · February 10th, 2011, 08:48 AM

they held a q&a after their performance,
but were obliged to avoid tech details on the hologram stuff.
quite probably it's still a well guarded secret.
i.e. they would neither confirm nor deny any nerdy theories from the audience.
i had no clue how it was done and neither did anyone else i spoke with.
anyway, this is the dance company:
PPS Danse, Montréal - Page d'accueil - Actualités

Sareesh Sudhakaran · February 10th, 2011, 10:16 PM

Thanks. I'll send them an email and see what I can find.

Peter Moretti · February 18th, 2011, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicholas de Kock

Sounds promising until you watch the video...

LOL! I can't tell what was worse the girl playing Princess Leia or the image that looked like a sonogram of a fetus.

I'm sure things will get better.

Floris van Eck · February 20th, 2011, 01:48 AM

I still think the current 3D technology is simply not there.

- Fuzzy images
- Resolution loss
- Need to wear uncomfortable glasses
- I find it not believable... how can I believe the 3D when I see the cinema, people around me, the sides of the screen... it is the same in 2D but 2D doesn't ask me to believe it is 3D

3D for me still is a Disney attraction... nothing more. I thought Tron was nice, but most of that movie was 2D and the fuzzy images annoyed me. The trailer for Pirates 4 was horrible. I hope in a year or two, I still have the chance to see a 2D movie as theaters are massively switching to 3D... more money to be made.

I will stick with BluRay releases when that happens. It will be another decade or two before the technology is ready... I feel another crash coming in a year or so... when the 3D hype is over.

Allan Black · March 8th, 2011, 12:50 AM

During a visit to Expo in Shanghai last June we saw 3D without glasses in the Siemens pavilion, and while the viewing angle was kinda narrow imo, there was enormous interest in it.

By 11am each day, there was a long queue round the block and folk were limited to 5mins viewing. But it worked and the reps said they have advanced well past that demo set. It's here, like it or not.

Cheers.

Dale Guthormsen · March 15th, 2011, 08:09 AM

Alan,

Yes, 3D is here. It is definitely not new, I watched them as a kid Decades ago.

For someone who wears glasses this becomes even a bigger problem. If you have to wear glasses over glasses it is a joke. Totally ruins the movie experience.

For regular movies I just do not see any real advantage to watching them in 3D.

Watching something like avatar is another matter.

The Green Hornet the 3D really was not an asset in my book. Also if you had to take the glasses off the image totally sucks. That means you have to watch in 3D.

How long until theaters will not run both versions???

If all movies go 3D I would likly not attend the big screen very often, and I know there are more people that think like that than one might guess!!

I think it is great for animated movies like Cartoons and cg movies like Avatar.

what does it add to regular movies???

I personally hope it stays on the fringe, or at least specialized.

I have watched lazer halographic shows, pretty cool, but for movies I suspect thats way off, if ever!!!

Still hard to beat simple OLD film.

Great stories are more than a product of their three dimensional space.

Does this sound like a rant?? not ment to be..!

Ozzy Alvarez · March 15th, 2011, 09:43 AM

I don't think there's any worry about theaters going completely 3-D. Yes, 3-D will be applied to animated films like Toy Story 3, Kung Fu Panda 2, Rango. And to big Hollywood blockbusters and action films from Avatar, to Green Hornet, to Transformers, Green Lantern, Thor, Pirates of the Carribean. But, lesser budgeted films, indpedant films, and seriously dramtic films like the King's Speech, The Fighter, The Social Network, to name a few are not going to be displayed in 3-D. Right now, 3-D is a means for Hollywood to get a greater return on their bigger budgeted films.

Ozzy

Gabe Strong · March 15th, 2011, 11:56 AM

I think debates like this can get a little funny sometimes. People who 'support' or like 3D will
say 'it's here, people are paying for it'. Others who 'oppose' it or dislike it will say that
most people they know hate it and won't go to 3d movies. So who's right? Probably both of them.
you may see people swarming to 3d theatres or refusing to go, but trust me, it's different everywhere.
I've been places (small towns of 20 thousand) that have 3d theatres with plenty of people in them.
I've been in other bigger cities that don't have a single 3d theatre in them......and talked to plenty
of people who both like and dislike it. I think as a 'in the theatre' experience it will probably
stay here, and a certain percentage of movies will be produced in 3d. I think the question is at home.
I am certainly one of those people who does NOT want to wear glasses while watching my tv set
at home. I would guess that 3d is here to stay, but I don't know if it will become as integrated
into all forms of media consumption as some people seem to think. I guess we will see......

Giroud Francois · March 15th, 2011, 01:39 PM

i just purchased 2 samsung 3d screen (one 46 and one 55 inches), plenty of movies and glasses.
i shoot my family movies in 3D full HD (with a pair of sanyo FH1 and before with NuView adapter) and wear glasses all day. I am very happy with stereoscopic.

Giroud Francois · March 15th, 2011, 01:49 PM

and yes stereovision without HD is hopeless and shallow DOF is just an useless concept with 3D.

today a 3D cam cost $1500 and a 3D screen costs not much as 2D screen.
we just need Apple to lauch the first iPad 3d for full acceptance of the concept.

February 9th, 2011, 01:16 PM	#17
Tim Bakland Major Player Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Beverly, MA Posts: 512	I hear you. But no, I'm not asking on any moral ground -- I'm asking what will be the implications for those only cannot see with stereo vision. That's all. Will you still be able to watch regular 2D (even as others watch in 3D)? How will it look, etc.? __________________ Event Videography, New England www.timothybakland.com

February 10th, 2011, 06:28 AM	#20
Sareesh Sudhakaran Trustee Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Mumbai, India Posts: 1,385	Brian, I'm not an expert on holography but don't lasers need a medium to project on to? Did they use smoke or some such screen during the course of the dance? If they have achieved it, it's definitely fascinating. I would appreciate it if you could let me know the name and website of the production team that achieved this if possible. Thanks. __________________ Get the Free Comprehensive Guide to Rigging ANY Camera - one guide to rig them all - DSLRs to the Arri Alexa.

February 10th, 2011, 10:16 PM	#22
Sareesh Sudhakaran Trustee Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Mumbai, India Posts: 1,385	Thanks. I'll send them an email and see what I can find. __________________ Get the Free Comprehensive Guide to Rigging ANY Camera - one guide to rig them all - DSLRs to the Arri Alexa.

March 8th, 2011, 12:50 AM	#25
Allan Black Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Sydney. Posts: 2,927	Re: Forget stereo 3D, holographic 3D is the future During a visit to Expo in Shanghai last June we saw 3D without glasses in the Siemens pavilion, and while the viewing angle was kinda narrow imo, there was enormous interest in it. By 11am each day, there was a long queue round the block and folk were limited to 5mins viewing. But it worked and the reps said they have advanced well past that demo set. It's here, like it or not. Cheers. __________________ Drink more tap water. On admission at Sydney hospitals more than 5% of day patients are de-hydrated.

March 15th, 2011, 08:09 AM	#26
Dale Guthormsen Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Saskatchewan Posts: 3,048	Re: Forget stereo 3D, holographic 3D is the future Alan, Yes, 3D is here. It is definitely not new, I watched them as a kid Decades ago. For someone who wears glasses this becomes even a bigger problem. If you have to wear glasses over glasses it is a joke. Totally ruins the movie experience. For regular movies I just do not see any real advantage to watching them in 3D. Watching something like avatar is another matter. The Green Hornet the 3D really was not an asset in my book. Also if you had to take the glasses off the image totally sucks. That means you have to watch in 3D. How long until theaters will not run both versions??? If all movies go 3D I would likly not attend the big screen very often, and I know there are more people that think like that than one might guess!! I think it is great for animated movies like Cartoons and cg movies like Avatar. what does it add to regular movies??? I personally hope it stays on the fringe, or at least specialized. I have watched lazer halographic shows, pretty cool, but for movies I suspect thats way off, if ever!!! Still hard to beat simple OLD film. Great stories are more than a product of their three dimensional space. Does this sound like a rant?? not ment to be..! __________________ DATS ALL FOLKS Dale W. Guthormsen

February 9th, 2011, 12:40 PM	#16
Rick Presas Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Brownsville Texas Posts: 74	I don't think the blind-out-of-one-eye argument is very valid. Don't get me wrong, I wish your cousin the very best, but i just don't think thats a very valid argument against 3D. The same could be said about 2D movies and people who are blind in both eyes. The same could also be said about movies with Audio of any kind for hearing impaired. ...And for Micheal Bay movies and people with no sense of taste! BA DAP CHING!

February 9th, 2011, 01:40 PM	#18
Rick Presas Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Brownsville Texas Posts: 74	Basically if he puts the glasses on it will be the same movie in 2-D. It may look slightly distorted for a slipt second here and there, and it will be about a stop darker than a regular 2d movie. But as long as he has the polarizing glasses on, he should be able to watch it just fine. edit Give it a try. Go see a 3D movie and close one eye for a few seconds.

February 9th, 2011, 01:59 PM	#19
Brian McKenna Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: canada Posts: 57	i once saw a dance performance in which the 2 dancers were interacting with holographic copies of themselves. the stage also filled with holographic water at one point and there was a pretty cool "floating in space" kind of sequence too. it was in a normal theatre space but they had installed some pretty fancy stuff. was a very amazing show on many levels, not only because of the amazing tech. but a holographic movie without the live element... i'm not sure it would be so nice... part of the fun of holograms is being able to move around them, not being stuck in a theatre seat (the live dancers kind of provided that function (to a degree) in the show i saw). i guess 3D movies are kind of cool, sometimes. i can't remember what author was mentioning that 3D seems to just come and go as a semi-regular fad... and each time it shows up it's supposed to herald the end of history, but then just fades out. seems to me that Mr. Walter Murch is talking sense. very much. if 3D is going to cause so many limitations and extra hassles it might remove more possibilities for expression than it adds. personally, i'd rather see things go in the direction of 'Dogville' than towards 'Titanic'.

February 10th, 2011, 08:48 AM	#21
Brian McKenna Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: canada Posts: 57	they held a q&a after their performance, but were obliged to avoid tech details on the hologram stuff. quite probably it's still a well guarded secret. i.e. they would neither confirm nor deny any nerdy theories from the audience. i had no clue how it was done and neither did anyone else i spoke with. anyway, this is the dance company: PPS Danse, Montréal - Page d'accueil - Actualités

February 20th, 2011, 01:48 AM	#24
Floris van Eck Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 993	I still think the current 3D technology is simply not there. - Fuzzy images - Resolution loss - Need to wear uncomfortable glasses - I find it not believable... how can I believe the 3D when I see the cinema, people around me, the sides of the screen... it is the same in 2D but 2D doesn't ask me to believe it is 3D 3D for me still is a Disney attraction... nothing more. I thought Tron was nice, but most of that movie was 2D and the fuzzy images annoyed me. The trailer for Pirates 4 was horrible. I hope in a year or two, I still have the chance to see a 2D movie as theaters are massively switching to 3D... more money to be made. I will stick with BluRay releases when that happens. It will be another decade or two before the technology is ready... I feel another crash coming in a year or so... when the 3D hype is over.

March 15th, 2011, 09:43 AM	#27
Ozzy Alvarez Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Kenilworth, NJ Posts: 85	Re: Forget stereo 3D, holographic 3D is the future I don't think there's any worry about theaters going completely 3-D. Yes, 3-D will be applied to animated films like Toy Story 3, Kung Fu Panda 2, Rango. And to big Hollywood blockbusters and action films from Avatar, to Green Hornet, to Transformers, Green Lantern, Thor, Pirates of the Carribean. But, lesser budgeted films, indpedant films, and seriously dramtic films like the King's Speech, The Fighter, The Social Network, to name a few are not going to be displayed in 3-D. Right now, 3-D is a means for Hollywood to get a greater return on their bigger budgeted films. Ozzy

March 15th, 2011, 11:56 AM	#28
Gabe Strong Major Player Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Juneau, AK Posts: 814	Re: Forget stereo 3D, holographic 3D is the future I think debates like this can get a little funny sometimes. People who 'support' or like 3D will say 'it's here, people are paying for it'. Others who 'oppose' it or dislike it will say that most people they know hate it and won't go to 3d movies. So who's right? Probably both of them. you may see people swarming to 3d theatres or refusing to go, but trust me, it's different everywhere. I've been places (small towns of 20 thousand) that have 3d theatres with plenty of people in them. I've been in other bigger cities that don't have a single 3d theatre in them......and talked to plenty of people who both like and dislike it. I think as a 'in the theatre' experience it will probably stay here, and a certain percentage of movies will be produced in 3d. I think the question is at home. I am certainly one of those people who does NOT want to wear glasses while watching my tv set at home. I would guess that 3d is here to stay, but I don't know if it will become as integrated into all forms of media consumption as some people seem to think. I guess we will see......

March 15th, 2011, 01:39 PM	#29
Giroud Francois Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: switzerland Posts: 2,133	Re: Forget stereo 3D, holographic 3D is the future i just purchased 2 samsung 3d screen (one 46 and one 55 inches), plenty of movies and glasses. i shoot my family movies in 3D full HD (with a pair of sanyo FH1 and before with NuView adapter) and wear glasses all day. I am very happy with stereoscopic.

March 15th, 2011, 01:49 PM	#30
Giroud Francois Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: switzerland Posts: 2,133	Re: Forget stereo 3D, holographic 3D is the future and yes stereovision without HD is hopeless and shallow DOF is just an useless concept with 3D. today a 3D cam cost $1500 and a 3D screen costs not much as 2D screen. we just need Apple to lauch the first iPad 3d for full acceptance of the concept.