Comments on: What exactly did you look at during Avatar, The Movie?

By: Dorina

Dorina — Mon, 09 May 2011 11:46:08 +0000

We have already established that a 3D movie is much more than a pair of 2D animated pictures. It may be useful to repeat that mantra once again. It’s not the existence of these two shots that makes the 3D. It’s not their content. It’s the relationship between the two.

By: M.Hunter

M.Hunter — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 07:48:53 +0000

I saw Avatar in Imax 3D. It was definitely a visual spectacle but I found the “pop out” effect to be lacking. And in fact the feeling of depth going well past the physical screen was what I noticed more often than not. Granted I read somewhere that Cameron didn’t want to go overboard with cheap tricks to wow the audience. My friend had also seen the film in one of the other digital 3D formats (can’t say which) and said he found the 3D to be more impressive there. I definitely enjoyed the movie but I was a bit disappointed having seen Beowulf in Imax 3D and it was absolutely breathtaking all the way through by comparison.

By: 3D Commercials, Different Dynamics | Neuromarketing

3D Commercials, Different Dynamics | Neuromarketing — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:03:20 +0000

[...] elements out of the shots where they want attention to be focused on the actor(s) or product.(Via James Breeze.) Tweet This! Share this on Facebook Share this on del.icio.us Stumble upon something good? Share [...]

By: pilar

pilar — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 22:42:30 +0000

I wonder why watching 3D movies gives such an exciting experience.
Could it be because:
a) It’s new, as the Lumiere films were new and people ran out of the cinema thinking the train may hit them? With time this novelty effect will wear out, and since it’s such a tiring experience will eventually die out.
b) Is it because the brain gets a kick? Because 3D films means double frames per second (2D is 25 in DVD and 24 in 35mm) and more processing? Is this why we are so tired after watching a 3D the movie?
c) Is it because Film Language and Narrative used in 3D is different from 2D and tells the story differently?
I am very interested in this research.

By: HH

HH — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 13:46:19 +0000

I’m sorry, but 3D is a new experiance, and so it is logical that the the viewer is more interessted in viewing the 3D obejcts in and aorund the scene and not so much focused on the actor.

By: Gary Barber

Gary Barber — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 13:25:06 +0000

Wouldn’t this be countered on the 3D side by the fact that you are looking for the usual 3D visual cues as you have been fooled into thinking it is 3D by a presence of a few of them. So for the rest of the time you are visually hunting for the missing cues, working your eyes into overtime. In this case you will never find them.

There is a point of course where your brain stops looking for the missing cues.

By: admin

admin — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 09:59:57 +0000

Ah yes! And were you unusually tired too?

By: Sanaz

Sanaz — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 01:50:22 +0000

That may explain why (well possibly a contributing factor) I thought my house lacked so much colour when I arrived home after watching 3D avatar!