The Science of 3D Films - Real Financial and Emotional and Technical Impact

[NorthSky]

We all know that 3D movies are extremely popular in China; even the latest Jason Bourne movie was presented in 3D in many theaters. Sure it made sick a lot of people but China loves 3D.
• http://movieweb.com/jason-bourne-3d-china-backlash/
_____

In North America we are are a different type of 3D movie audience; us too we follow the movie ticket sales.
• http://motherboard.vice.com/read/why-are-3d-movies-still-a-thing

A little history: https://books.google.ca/books?id=3oKuDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=are+3d+movies+profitable+in+north+america&source=bl&ots=qPZEFKZ_Qp&sig=ljFVHDWjAfu1-EEDyQC7QBjK8Cc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjJ05PvtYPPAhVH5GMKHfWBCNQQ6AEISjAH#v=onepage&q=are 3d movies profitable in north america&f=false
_____

Vinyl is making a comeback, 3D is also making a comeback, music and movies are what men are made of.
The circle of world entertainment rhymes with revenues.
Can 3D movies @ the theaters and @ home subsist in North America's future, is it part of your future?

When is the next big thing in movie money business? Is it in 3D or in 2D?

I have an idea, but it doesn't count; the only thing that counts is real money from surreal ideas, like 3D sci-fi flicks, big blockbuster films making over a billion dollars, USD.

3D is huge in China, not bad in Europe, and lesser in North America. What make different people from different world's regions tick or not with 3D?
_____

I'm dying to see if there is any scientific interest in 3D @ the theaters and on Blu-ray right here @ ASR.
If there is zero interest I will eclipse myself into 3D oblivion, and if there is enough interest; cultural (art form), value (emotional impact), financial (movie studio revenues, TV and projector's manufacturers and stock market prices), technically (higher immersive 3D movie experience...for the senses...eyes), tra-la-la all the pros and cons; then I'll share a thought or two.
____

* I had a conversation earlier with a 2D friend. We had great time discussing the ins and outs of 3D.
Maybe I can expand the discussion right here? If there were two billion members @ ASR I would conduct a poll to see how many are 3D focused versus 2D. No need for a poll, we are nowhere near two billion members.

Bonus:

 

[RayDunzl]

It's not 3D.

It's stereoscopic.

 

[RayDunzl]

Not having watched one since seeing the Captain Eo demo at Disneyworld in 198x...

What happens to to the stereoscopic "3d effect" if you watch lying down with your ear on the pillow?

 

[NorthSky]

Yeah, similar to music...monoscopic and stereoscopic.
If you watch a stereo movie with one ear you see mono.
If you want the full effect just sit tight.
_______

If you have any type of 3D glasses, you might be able to sync.

 

[amirm]

I have only watched one fill 3D movie which was avatar. But then saw tons and tons of horrible 3D at shoes and lost all interest.

 

[NorthSky]

This thread was created for all 3D lovers, and haters too.
It's about 3D...with all the pros and cons.

Our eyes and ears are like dictators to our brain, including our nose (smell), our tongue (taste) and our hands and feet and body (touch). ...All our five senses.

Audio and picture are photographs, real and imagined. In movies 3D imagery and immersive sound are an evolution of cinema in the year 2016.
High resolution multichannel audio (music) and high definition moving pictures (UHD/4K-8K and 3D) are a closer experience to real life.
It is entertainment with a higher emotional impact, in my sincere opinion and experience.

Last night I watched 'X-Men: Apocalypse' in (((3D))), and in multichannel audio. And it helped to create that illusion of that science-fiction flick closer to our 3-dimensional reality. I don't know the exact words to describe that eXcape from reality; I let my eyes and ears be the leaders of my entertaining world in the year 2016. That's me, and 4K is next...but 3D will never die. Both can subsist together, and that, is something the Hollywood movie studios are having a hard time to reconcile...@ this point in time.

Not all humans were created equal with the same affinities and handicaps regarding their visual sense...eye's adaptation to 3D moving pictures on our screens.
And not all 3D movies are equal in their mastering art.
And not all 3D sources and displays are equally superior.
So, all in all there are many variable factors that make the 3D experience better or worst...for each person from their own experience and eyes' tolerance.

It's the same with music; our ears adapt better to some genres more than others. ...And from stereo to multichannel.
2D movies are like mono music. 3D movies are like multichannel music. ...If I can make this type of comparison from my the communication's transfer of my eyes and ears to my brain. It's a reality, closer. 2D and stereo is a more distant imagination; again if I'm permitted to describe in that word's formulation.

What we see @ the theaters and in our homes are not the same; all completely different gear and different screen.
We pick our favorite theaters...2D or 3D, and all the other variations in picture (high frame rate, 2K, 4K) and in sound (Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, etc.).
@ home we build our visual/auditory systems from our own evolution, desires, aspirations, experience and day-to-day living lifestyle.
The goal is always the same: Total immersion visually and auditory. ...A better, more rewarding sensory experience @ the movies, including 3D as a contributing factor.

 

[Thomas savage]

Beyond novelty value I find no actual advantage in watching film via a 3D presentation effect.

Decent sized screen, great sound and best picture quality yes... 3D.. No so much.

 

[NorthSky]

3D movies have been with us since 1915 (not a novelty in 2016, over hundred years): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_film

* As for screen's sizes, field of view is an important aspect.

 

[amirm]

Do you wear prescription glasses bob?

 

[NorthSky]

Yes.

 

[amirm]

I do too and having to wear two glasses makes it that much more of inconvenience.

 

[Thomas savage]

I do too and having to wear two glasses makes it that much more of inconvenience.

A man of you're standing surly you can get a prescription with 3D capabilities built in???!

 

[fas42]

Bob, the key thing is that the presentation has to feel natural, the mechanism that makes it work has to fade away from your consciousness, allowing you to just feel at one with the experience - how 'bout that good ol' word, "immersive" . Otherwise, it's just a gimmick - people will have different tolerance levels for the constant artificiality of the presentation, depending in part on culture ... for me, I would get irritated, a sense of the machinery whirring all the time would be a turn off ...

Strangely enough, I could say exactly the same things about the current state of audio ...

 

[amirm]

A man of you're standing surly you can get a prescription with 3D capabilities built in???!

Looking for them to miniaturize the connector:

 

[NorthSky]

I do too and having to wear two glasses makes it that much more of inconvenience.

No problem for me Amir, I have two very different style of 3D glasses, one style that covers my eyes all around...even the sides, and another style extremely light.
My prescriptions glasses are the no-frame style with titanium sides...extremely feather light.
The 3D glasses, any design can fit over without a single drop of stress or discomfort...born to be 3D free.

I am not preaching what others don't like. Stick with 4K on Blu-ray...it's the very best 2D picture quality...for most UHD Blu-rays....with true HDR.
Me I'm still enjoying 3D more and more, and my fair 3D BR collection (several hundreds) is a testament of how I also enjoy watching movies.
My screen size is very little tiny, and my eyes are big wide open to the 3D world around me. I love to live a 3-dimensional life, just like in real life.
The sun outside and the political news affect my eyes much much more that my 3D immersive experience from Blu-rays.

What a beautiful day today!

 

[NorthSky]

Bob, the key thing is that the presentation has to feel natural, the mechanism that makes it work has to fade away from your consciousness, allowing you to just feel at one with the experience - how 'bout that good ol' word, "immersive" . Otherwise, it's just a gimmick - people will have different tolerance levels for the constant artificiality of the presentation, depending in part on culture ... for me, I would get irritated, a sense of the machinery whirring all the time would be a turn off ...

Bingo! You've just said it Frank; everything disappears except for the 3D world I'm in in the moment....when watching well executed 3D Blu-ray movies from the masters. ...James, Ridley, Peter, Martin, Michael, ...
There is nothing between me and the illusive 3D world...no glasses, no walls, no ceiling, no floor...I am totally floating suspended into the air in complete disbelief.
...Just like a perfect illusion...my brain has no difficulty adapting to that 3Dimensional state of space in time and in motion and in absolute concentration of total immersion. I am part of the movie playing all around me, I am living inside of it...like Tron: Legacy's master grid.

Strangely enough, I could say exactly the same things about the current state of audio ...

You sure could say that too; no need to be shy. ...And me personally; I found that all perfectly normal...not one ounce of strangeness.
I don't even feel the need to convince anyone...myself included.

 

[NorthSky]

I was just reading a short review on one of the best 4K TVs out there :: http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/tvs-...d-65zd9-review-the-brightest-and-best-hdr-yet

"It’s also notable that the KD-65ZD9 is one of a dwindling number of TVs to ship with two pairs of active-shutter 3D glasses, but in all honesty it’s not an addition worth getting excited about. Besides a dearth of suitable 3D content, the Sony’s biggest asset – its high brightness – becomes an Achilles heel for 3D content. In our testing, the display’s intense brightness caused large amounts of flicker, which quickly led to eye fatigue."

This is the first time that I am reading a UHD TV, the brightness and best adds flicker to its 3D reproduction.
Normally people complain for a too dark picture when viewing 3D material.

I don't know how relevant that short article/review is, but being a big 3D fan I would need to investigate further if the Sony Z9 Series was on my purchase radar.
It is one one the most important features to me on any kind of display.

The reviewer also mentioned that the UHD picture is so bright that it is already 3-dimensional for 4K content. No need to have 3D glasses anymore. Hmmm...that sounds almost too good to be 3D real. I saw some excellent 4K moving images; they add depth, details, contrast, brightness, but they don't spill outside the screen and into your room like 3D does.

Or another image: Music that spills outside the loudspeakers...with a wide soundstage, in front, outside, and even behind the speakers...with falling walls all around. An holographic music listening experience. That's 3D music, from stereo music recordings.

Now, there is multichannel music recordings; some of them done with taste...like Classical music. ...And others.

I am wide open to 2D and stereo if they can render the spooky illusion of 3D.
My eyes and ears are my best friends; they are mine, attached to my own head that I'm wearing on my own shoulders. ...And with all the jazz/brain that comes with it.

 

[amirm]

You can always turn the brightness way down so not sure why he is worried about that.

 

[NorthSky]

Maybe he did that but the flicker was still present?