Star Wars in 3D

[Saxman]

something tells me that at george's level, producing just means "yeah, i'll call my friend bob and he'll take care of everything.

sad really.  he should be out their directing films.   

Uh, he directed the prequels. What they REALLY need to do is throw George into a padded room with a typewriter. Let him come up with ideas and maybe a first draft, then give it to people who can ACTUALLY write to finish it off.

George has really only ever been one thing: an idea man. When it comes to new ideas or fresh spins on classic genres he's brilliant. Actually give him CONTROL over things and it turns into a mess. That's why Empire is the best film in the series: George's direct control over production was MUCH more limited and the people who knew how to actually make it work on film were allowed to do their jobs.

[DREDIOCK]

the things people get excited about never cease to amaze me.

You know they have been trying to introduce 3-D to movies for almost 100 years now. Still hasnt caught on cept for a several year novelty fad every 20 years or so. This is just the latest incarnation. 20 years from now there will be another.

Was checking out 3D in the store the other day. Really to me looked not so much like a true 3-D reality as it does those cardboard pop up cards.
Pretty cool effect...for about 5 minutes. But nothing that would make me all giddy with "gotta have 3-D in my next TV"

Trust me. 3-D wont truly make it till they come out with true holographic images. And even then only maybe

[Lusche]

the things people get excited about never cease to amaze me.

You know they have been trying to introduce 3-D to movies for almost 100 years now. Still hasnt caught on cept for a several year novelty fad every 20 years or so. This is just the latest incarnation.

This one is way different. The number (and budget!) of 3D movies released is much higher, and the necessary technology has been adopted on a massive scale by movie theaters (at least here). Going all digital made it possible.
 Having worked in that industry for many years (and still with very close ties to it on a daily base) I can't see how it's getting dropped again like the colored glasses of old (or other experimental high-tech stuff we have seen in the fields of projection or sound). Even though there is a kinda fad to it (badly re-edited films with "3d" slapped to them), and technology will not stop where it is right now (that glasses will have to go!)

In "my" old multiplex here, 3d movies make up between 25-35% of all movies, but with a substantially higher share of audience (it's more the smaller, low-budget or 'arthouse' movies that don't offer 3d)

I guess we are witnessing a transformation not unlike going from B/W to color.

[Wiley]

This one is way different. The number (and budget!) of 3D movies released is much higher, and the necessary technology has been adopted on a massive scale by movie theaters (at least here). Going all digital made it possible.
 Having worked in that industry for many years (and still with very close ties to it on a daily base) I can't see how it's getting dropped again like the colored glasses of old (or other experimental high-tech stuff we have seen in the fields of projection or sound). Even though there is a kinda fad to it (badly re-edited films with "3d" slapped to them), and technology will not stop where it is right now (that glasses will have to go!)

In "my" old multiplex here, 3d movies make up between 25-35% of all movies, but with a substantially higher share of audience (it's more the smaller, low-budget or 'arthouse' movies that don't offer 3d)

I guess we are witnessing a transformation not unlike going from B/W to color.

Yes, it's prolific.  However, his point still stands.  It still just looks like a bunch of cardboard cutouts.  I don't find it immersive, if anything I find it a bit jarring.  It reminds me of looking at the old Viewmaster slides.

I don't think 3D's niche is with movies, I think it's with gaming.  Imagine a head mounted display that was just a pair of glasses, or maybe a bit bigger, that gave you a fully 3D field of view when you put it on applied to, oh, I don't know, something like a flight simulator, possibly set in WWII?  Or an FPS/combined arms sim that had that kind of display and head tracking.

I think that's what 3D should be working toward, forget the TV/Movie paradigm.  I don't think they gain nearly as much from 3D as gaming does.

Wiley.

[tmetal]

i figure they are trying to get better at 3D tech through movies and TV, which are entirely scripted; before trying to tackle the much more complex environment of video game play.  That being said I can't wait to sit in the 3D virtual cockpit of a Ju87 or a TIE fighter.

[DREDIOCK]

Wiley and Tmetal. Exactly.
I can see it working with gaming. Particulary with touch screen technology which Im surprised isnt being used more.. Particularly for flight sims.
I just dont see 3-D working on movies for very long.

Yes the budgets are upped. But so were they back in the 50s and again in the 70s (Remember Jaws 3-d)

Soon enough it will fade away on its own. Of that I have no doubt

good article here on why 3-D doesnt work and never will

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/01/post_4.html

[Wiley]

i figure they are trying to get better at 3D tech through movies and TV, which are entirely scripted; before trying to tackle the much more complex environment of video game play.  That being said I can't wait to sit in the 3D virtual cockpit of a Ju87 or a TIE fighter.

Scripted or not shouldn't really make a difference though.  The problem is, the majority is getting sick of it in film, and I'm afraid it will die off without someone in the right spot realizing if they were to bring it to gaming while skipping movies/tv, the audience would (I think) be a lot more receptive to it.

Wiley.

[Reschke]

But how are the tweaking Star Wars to show it in 3D? I thought you had to film it that way in order to show it that way? Heck I don't know just someone tell me.

[Wiley]

But how are the tweaking Star Wars to show it in 3D? I thought you had to film it that way in order to show it that way? Heck I don't know just someone tell me.

Basically they'd digitally modify it to be in 3d.  Apparently when it's done this way, it's not as good as if it's shot in 3D, but it can be done.  I think it's a dumb move personally, but I'm sure there will be people lining up to watch it again.

I am reminded of an episode of South Park...

Wiley.

[tmetal]

scripted absolutely makes a difference in complexity and especially budget costs.  Film and tv makers only have to create the specific part of the environment being filmed at any given scene; a person viewing tv or film doesn't have the option to change the FOV or perspective of the image they are currently watching.  That alone lowers the complexity and cost of building (CGI) or filming a 3D environment for TV or movies.  Think about it like this, if the crew at HTC made it so that players could only look forward from the pilot seat of the plane they were in then they wouldn't have to go to all the trouble and cost of building out the rest of the cockpit for each plane.  Any video game that allows the player to freely look and/or move through the game environment would be exponentially more complex to build in 3D than a similar environment in a movie or on TV.  So some of the questions/potential road blocks to current 3D video game development is this. Would it be cost effective for the developers? Can current graphics/computing equipment even handle 3D gaming environments?  Can our brain even accept 3D gaming environments on a comfortable level, or would it cause massive headaches, nausea, or who knows what else?

I agree that 3D films are a fad that will fade, but for now I think they make a good test bed for current technology/techniques to improve and hopefully crack into the gaming world one day soon.

[Wiley]

scripted absolutely makes a difference in complexity and especially budget costs.  Film and tv makers only have to create the specific part of the environment being filmed at any given scene; a person viewing tv or film doesn't have the option to change the FOV or perspective of the image they are currently watching.  That alone lowers the complexity and cost of building (CGI) or filming a 3D environment for TV or movies.  Think about it like this, if the crew at HTC made it so that players could only look forward from the pilot seat of the plane they were in then they wouldn't have to go to all the trouble and cost of building out the rest of the cockpit for each plane.  Any video game that allows the player to freely look and/or move through the game environment would be exponentially more complex to build in 3D than a similar environment in a movie or on TV.  So some of the questions/potential road blocks to current 3D video game development is this. Would it be cost effective for the developers? Can current graphics/computing equipment even handle 3D gaming environments?  Can our brain even accept 3D gaming environments on a comfortable level, or would it cause massive headaches, nausea, or who knows what else?

I agree that 3D films are a fad that will fade, but for now I think they make a good test bed for current technology/techniques to improve and hopefully crack into the gaming world one day soon.

You're overlooking something though.

The 3d gaming environments are already built.  The only thing required to make it work is to have 2 independent points of view being rendered with an eye-spaced offset to make it 3D.  It is done.  In fact, people already are using 3D displays in AH right now, it's just not that widespread because up until lately the hardware was generally cost prohibitive.

Wiley.

[moot]

Its rumored to come out after all 6 3D movies.

People compained a lot about his second trilogy the he released not being of the same "atmosphere" or space cowboy vibe as the first trilogy.  And then you got all the people complaining about how Han shooting second instead of first "ruined everything".

Those same people, as clueless as ever, multiplied by a factor of 10 - and there's plenty of obvious reasons to start rushing right on with that production.

The last trilogy will "suck" compared to what most people envision it being.  The clone wars series is much closer to anything we'll probabley be expecting to get get in terms of what "the masses" want, and they are already milking that. 

Leah goes politician and beurocrat as we watch her daring adventures of rebuilding the galactic senate.  Han Solo will be played by a younger version of Sean Connery or Patrick Stewart in the ironic twist of his life - drug smugling space jockey wishing that galactic-wide law enforcement didn't exist promoted to grand-puba entrusted with it's complete resurection and future.  And Luke finds nothing that he doesn't get more lost trying to find.

He can take as long as he wants.. I'll take a new trilogy over any re-editing of the previous two.  And IIRC (wikipedia page says so but I'd heard it elsewhere) it's supposed to be a sequel trilogy, not another prequel.  Either way I'm fine with "something different".  I'd rather be disappointed with it than disappointed with it not being made...

[tmetal]

You're overlooking something though.

The 3d gaming environments are already built.  The only thing required to make it work is to have 2 independent points of view being rendered with an eye-spaced offset to make it 3D.  It is done.  In fact, people already are using 3D displays in AH right now, it's just not that widespread because up until lately the hardware was generally cost prohibitive.

Wiley.

I stand corrected.  Anybody on these boards use a 3D setup? I would really like to know if they cause headaches or any other kind of discomfort not normaly seen when using a standard setup and how well 3D graphics pair in game with things like trackIR.

[Wiley]

I stand corrected.  Anybody on these boards use a 3D setup? I would really like to know if they cause headaches or any other kind of discomfort not normaly seen when using a standard setup and how well 3D graphics pair in game with things like trackIR.

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,321293.0.html

Not a whole lot of info, but the impression I get is, if 3D bugs you, it will continue to bug you.

I've got a feeling it may just not be possible to get some peoples' brains to accept artificial 3D.

Wiley.

[DREDIOCK]

I agree that 3D films are a fad that will fade, but for now I think they make a good test bed for current technology/techniques to improve and hopefully crack into the gaming world one day soon.

This would make more sense as eventually if nothing else people ar going ot get tired of loosing those $100 glasses in the seat cushion lol

dont know about  anyone elses house but it can turn into an adventure just looking for the one remote. I can only imagine the nightmare of the family sitting down to watch a 3-D movie and one or more pair of glasses is missing