The medical training is a very interesting idea. Have you experienced this first hand on projects? I'd be very wary of a brain surgeon wearing 3D glasses when he comes in to operate. Perhaps the 3D would aid in gaining a better grasp of the spatial relationship of the various body parts.
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "ksirul" <kenavid2@...> wrote:
>
> There will be 3D theatrical films for a few years anyway. It won't be as big as some expected, however I believe there is a huge future market for 3D in the Medical and Corporate arenas. Certainly in Medical for training purposes. This will be a huge market. I also think corporations will use 3D for large presentations.
>
> KEN
>
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Ian Johnson" <ijohnson2@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Well, I wouldn't be fine with the absence of 2D. The difference is of
> > course the glasses, and some people's inability to process it. We don't
> > need LR Stereo Audio Only theaters because surround is a seamless addition
> > to the experience. If a viewer went to a movie without it, they would
> > definitely notice that it didn't sound as good, or big as it should have,
> > even if they don't know why.
> >
> >
> >
> > If 3D could work the same way without glasses, headaches, and the other
> > drawbacks, and no premium ticket, then I wouldn't mind it always being
> > there. As it is, I seek out the 2D shows because I don't want to pay extra.
> > If it is a free 3D screening (which happens sometimes thanks to being a
> > Disney employee) and I remembered to wear contacts, then I don't have a
> > problem watching 3D. Even a 3D conversion is fine, so long as I didn't pay
> > more for it.
> >
> >
> >
> > Ian
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> > Jay Mahavier
> > Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 3:25 PM
> > To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Not looking good fro 3D theatrically
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Oh! For you it's all about the $4. So if they didn't charge any extra at the
> > theater for the 3D then you would be totally fine with it? Because I thought
> > you were making an argument based on the merits or lack of merits of 3D
> > itself. Now I understand. You are perfectly fine with 3D as long as you
> > don't have to pay any extra for it. So then if they just got rid of all 2D
> > screens and only showed 3D and charged just one single price for all movies
> > you would be cool with that. Very interesting.
> >
> > Jay
> >
> > On Sep 17, 2011, at 4:49 PM, Ian Johnson wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >> If you notice the editing then you are not inside the story. And if
> > you're
> > > not noticing the editing, then what's the point?...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Of paying an extra $4 because it was cut on Avid?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> If you notice the cinematography then you are not inside the story. And
> > if
> > > you're not noticing the cinematography, then what's the point?...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Of paying $4 for something shot on RED?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > If you notice the sound design then you are not inside the story. And if
> > > you're not noticing the sound design, then what's the point?..
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Of paying $4 for SDDS?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The thinking is that if you are paying a premium for the movie, then there
> > > needs to be a perceived added value. Once your are immersed in the movie
> > > you tend not to notice that thing you paid extra for. If I have to become
> > > less engaged to notice the 3D I paid a premium for, then it doesn't seem
> > > worth it. If the 3D is used in such a way that the 2D version suffers for
> > > its lack, then it is worth the premium. I think it is fair to say that no
> > > 3D conversion qualifies.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com>
> > [mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
> > Behalf Of
> > > Jay Mahavier
> > > Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:41 PM
> > > To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Not looking good fro 3D theatrically
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > and just how does that make sense? Let's replace 3D with something else.
> > >
> > > If you notice the editing then you are not inside the story. And if you're
> > > not noticing the editing, then what's the point?
> > >
> > > If you notice the cinematography then you are not inside the story. And if
> > > you're not noticing the cinematography, then what's the point?
> > >
> > > If you notice the sound design then you are not inside the story. And if
> > > you're not noticing the sound design, then what's the point?
> > >
> > > If you notice the writing then you are not inside the story. And if you're
> > > not noticing the writing, then what's the point?
> > >
> > > How far do you want to go with that? I'm not trying to defend 3D, but I
> > just
> > > want to know how that thinking makes sense.
> > >
> > > Jay
> > >
> > > On Sep 17, 2011, at 1:35 PM, David Dodson wrote:
> > >
> > >> I disagree about AVATAR. If you've had the chance to watch it on Blu ray
> > > in 2D, it's even more spectacular and more immersive. The world seems
> > > somehow bigger, probably because you're making the imaginative translation
> > > into the story world, with all its artifice, rather than the stereo world,
> > > what with its "real" objects are now much smaller than real life. In other
> > > words the "literal" nature of stereo presentations makes the physical
> > > objects smaller than life, which is no good at all.
> > >>
> > >> And agreeing with Ian, if you notice the 3D then you're not inside the
> > > story. And if you're not noticing the 3D, then what's the point? It's that
> > > inherent paradox that makes 3D pointless except for theme parks.
> > >>
> > >> David
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sep 17, 2011, at 10:25 PM, Andi Meek wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> If it's done well, by filmmakers who understand how to use it, it can be
> > > amazing. Avatar worked considerably better in 3D than in 2D because of the
> > > immersive world Cameron built and the way he used that space. Scorsese is
> > > doing it with Hugo. Just watch the trailer, you can see how it will work
> > in
> > > 3D and i reckon it will look great. Unfortunately these films seem to be
> > > pretty few and far between, I agree though, 3D doesn't have a wide enough
> > > range of instances when it will significantly improve the story, like Ian
> > > says, limited to spectacle. Check out the trailer for Hugo;
> > >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQNkETGfA6k
> > >>>
> > >>> Andi
> > >>>
> > >>> To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com>
> > <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com>
> > >>> From: ijohnson2@ <mailto:ijohnson2%40earthlink.net>
> > <mailto:ijohnson2%40earthlink.net>
> > >>> Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 09:45:36 -0700
> > >>> Subject: RE: [Avid-L2] Not looking good fro 3D theatrically
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I avoid 3D whenever I can (unless it's a free screening) but I am
> > looking
> > >>>
> > >>> forward to A Harold and Kumar Christmas in 3D BECAUSE of the stupid 3D
> > >>>
> > >>> gimmicks. They have an excuse to use it for comedy and mockery of 3D.
> > For
> > >>>
> > >>> most movies it needs to avoid calling attention to itself so as not to
> > >>>
> > >>> distract from the story. If I am engrossed in the story, I'm not
> > noticing
> > >>>
> > >>> the 3D so there doesn't seem to be much point. If I admire the quality
> > of
> > >>>
> > >>> the 3D and what it adds to the image, I am only looking at the movie
> > > rather
> > >>>
> > >>> than experiencing it.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> It would be ok to notice 3D if it is used in a way that helps tell the
> > >>>
> > >>> story, like the way camera movement, focus, composition, etc. are used
> > as
> > >>>
> > >>> storytelling tools. Or in the case of Harold and Kumar, as gags. If it
> > is
> > >>>
> > >>> only an overlay to subtly enhance the realism of the experience, then it
> > > is
> > >>>
> > >>> more in the category of surround sound, and I don't remember ever paying
> > >>>
> > >>> extra for a movie because it was shown with DTS.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I think 3D as a premium is better suited to documentary subjects of the
> > > sort
> > >>>
> > >>> where the selling point is spectacle rather than story.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Ian
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com>
> > <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > [mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com>
> > <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
> > > Behalf Of
> > >>>
> > >>> Mark Myers
> > >>>
> > >>> Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 8:50 AM
> > >>>
> > >>> To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com>
> > <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com>
> > >>>
> > >>> Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Not looking good fro 3D theatrically
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Good.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Maybe filmmakers will have to actually create good stories instead of
> > >>>
> > >>> relying on stupid 3D gimmicks to put butts in the seats.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Can we borrow Bill Clinton's sign and amend it to say "It's the STORY
> > >>>
> > >>> stupid!"
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Oh what am I saying. I want a pony too.... or maybe a Porsche.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Mark
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Owner, Director
> > >>>
> > >>> SR Film & Video Productions
> > >>>
> > >>> 195 W Broad St
> > >>>
> > >>> Salunga PA 17538
> > >>>
> > >>> 717-393-5333 ex 142
> > >>>
> > >>> www.SR-Pro.com <http://www.sr-pro.com>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Follow us on Facebook
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >
> > <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Salunga-PA/SR-Film-Video-Productions/13200182
> > >>>
> > >>> 0445>
> > >>>
> > >>> Linked In <http://www.linkedin.com/pub/mark-myers/8/488/746>
> > >>>
> > >>> Twitter <http://twitter.com/SRProductions>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On 9/17/11 10:00 AM, Terence Curren wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2011/09/3d-is-fcked-basically
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ------------------------------------
> > >>>
> > >>> Search the offical complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > >>>
> > >>> If you want to donate to Red Cross quake relief, you can do so through
> > > your cell phone. Text redcross to 90999 to make a $10 donation. It will be
> > > on your next cell bill.Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> David Dodson
> > >> davidadodson@ <mailto:davidadodson%40sbcglobal.net>
> > <mailto:davidadodson%40sbcglobal.net>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ------------------------------------
> > >>
> > >> Search the offical complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > >>
> > >> If you want to donate to Red Cross quake relief, you can do so through
> > > your cell phone. Text redcross to 90999 to make a $10 donation. It will be
> > > on your next cell bill.Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Search the offical complete Avid-L archives at:
> > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > >
> > > If you want to donate to Red Cross quake relief, you can do so through
> > your cell phone. Text redcross to 90999 to make a $10 donation. It will be
> > on your next cell bill.Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
If you want to donate to Red Cross quake relief, you can do so through your cell phone. Text redcross to 90999 to make a $10 donation. It will be on your next cell bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment