Why is 3d so popular

For instance, if the artist were able to display a falling ball, then in the second slide he would drag the ball a little lower and in the third one even lower.

The illusion of the moving ball was created when the slides were viewed at a particular pace. The problem with this technique was that it took time and was boring. As the machine could be configured to build frames between the original and final location of objects, the amount of time needed for frames is soon decreased. The artist can only make corrections or add additional elements to the frames if necessary. The choice of pasting the copy also guaranteed that a significant part of the work can be completed easily.

Character sketching is the first step of 3D animation. In order to create a 3-deck model, the artist creates photographs of characters from as many perspectives as possible. Nearly in the same way the character modeler uses clay or stone for creating a real sculpture, he chooses a number of methods for carving the carved model. Log in Sign up Newsletter. Previous Next Magazine topic:. Monday, 20 February, - That is the question. Becca Eustis. Language level:. Discussion Have you seen any film in 3D?

What did you think? Tell us about your experience! I have seen a lot of films in 3D. It was fantastic! I havent seen any film in 3-D. I don't watch 3D film.

I sometimes go to the 5D. Because 5D more interesting 3D. I want watched 3D film. I've watched 9 D. The boom and bust of 3D television may contain a warning to cinemas that consumers are largely ambivalent about the third dimension and vote with their feet when faced with paying much more for it. Or maybe 3D is still too dimensionally deficient.

The rise of 4D experiences could be the next big thing …. You have it the wrong way round. It boils down to artistry, to stereography, to all the myriad differences in the language of cinema. The differences are fundamental, and something post-conversion can never alter. A movie shot for 2D remains a 2D movie, and all post-conversion can do is hand prescription glasses to the one-eyed man.

Real 3D movie no longer exists. What remains has nothing to do with the artistry of 3D, and all to do with studios having an excuse for charging a premium price for tickets.

You hit the nail on the head! All movies designed for and shot in real 3D are fantastic and audiences love them. I refuse to go the the cinema and watch a 2D movie. Any insights in how that is related to the production flows eg 2D-to-3D conversion? We call it an artifact of 3D depth mapping process. Again it only happens in extreme depths and most movies no longer have that artifact as often.

It kinda sucks that so many people just gave up on the art form. I never wanted the movie to end. Shooting in 3D and shooting for 3D are two different things, and the industry knows what they are doing on that.

One of the big factors is the terrible experience of 3D cinema in most theatres. Then IMAX Laser opened up — that thing has deep blacks, enough light output to overcome the glasses and no cross talk. Nothing compares to that experience. Technology for technology sake.. Now we are past the hype period, people are choosing to avoid the extra weight of watching 3D in general.. Unless a film is likely to greatly take advantage of 3D.. Very few do. Here in Australia, after the first week, 3D is off screen, and during the first week you still talking a low number of sessions.

A mature cinema market has moved on already. Tho it will have its huge hype and bump in regions new to it, after 5 years its very much heading into the doldrums.. But the conversion Fake 3D has become cheap.. All cinemas have the tech installed already… And it does pull a higher ticket price initially.

It still seems commercial to release 3D in many regions. I think 3D movies are better than 2D one. Because, in a 3D movie, we can really feel that the events are occurring just in front of us. There were also occasional syncing issues with the TV. That gave initial users a bad experience. And early adopters can act as either evangelists for a new technology or vocal detractors.

Studios could compensate for that by doing a slight reconversion in post-production before releasing it for home video. But few wanted to pay that expense, given the fledgling sales of the sets.

Sky TV in the U. Other major production studios generally took a wait and see attitude. That opened the gates for smaller groups to shoot content. The smaller production budgets of those companies, though, resulted in subpar 3D effects.

The very early days of 3D were costly, with extended crew, production shoot times, and more. But by the time 3D TVs and films arrived, those costs were fairly minimal. Those lower costs are why so many films incorporated 3D at the beginning of the decade. It was studio heads and marketing officials, who felt they could convince certain audiences to pay extra to see a 3D version of the film.