Why 3D & IMAX don’t work well together.
After seeing Jurassic World & The Most Recent Star Wars Clip Art Film; i noticed that some of The Shots in augmented 3D looked decidedly off— & in Particular; Some of The Miniatures looked very Miniature.
It wasn’t immediately clear to me what was wrong,
But after thinking about this a little bit;
It occurred to me that The Problem was that When in Jurassic World; There was A Long Shot of The New Island Park & A Helicopter coming in ( in 3D ) —
This should Not have been shot in 3D.
When you’re looking at nearly anything; Your Eyeball 3D Cues are only effective for about 10 feet. 20 Tops.
You might like to test this by looking up from this page or screen & across The Room, picking out some detail in which items are arranged one in front of The other(s. Now wink your eyes; left, right, left, right, left right. It is my prediction that you will Not Notice any difference in The placements of The Items.
If you repeat this experiment with item closer to you, The items will jump from side to side.
When looking from Helicopter (A at Helicopter (B & with a Landscape Background a quarter of mile away; It should appear absolutely flat.
In The Film; There was a distinct 3D Effect & that revealed that we were looking at either a Miniature Set or CGI Fabrication with A 3D Element Layered in, That should Not have been there.
This Same Error is repeated in The Star Wars film when we are watching a fleet of Those Big Honking Star Destroyers drift by— in 3D. Again; That misplaced 3D Effect reveals that we are looking at a set of Miniatures. !
This -Inability to Know what Looks Real- is at The Heart of Modern & Even Classical Film Making. Very often; In many of Our Recently Produced Films reeking of CGI Effects; This Ability to Know What Looks Real Creates Startlingly Real Looking Scenes with Layers & Layers of Remarkable Details that Boggles The Attentive Mind.
This Effect of ‘Reality’ is particularly curious & clever when we ‘Accept’ a Cinemagraphic Reality as More Real than Real Reality. This is particularly True with Explosions. Most people don’t see too many real explosions, & when they do; They’re surprised that they don’t happen in slow motion. ( ? ) !
But— Occasionally; Film Makers will Miss Something, Create a Faux Reality Shot that is Neither Realistic Looking or Fake in A Way that we Readily Accept It —
& When this happens; It Pops !
As a Side Note ( Tangental Observation ) —
i do Not at all understand why film makers are continuing to use, or for that matter; ever used; or at The very least; within The last 40 years or more; Stuntmyn to perform dangerous effects or cranes or other machinery to created visual effects in a 3D Environment. ?
The Alternative; It seems to me; Is to Firstly Recognize that The Final Product of ‘The Film’; Consists of Images on Celluloid.
There is Not; or Should Not be; A =Necessary= Correlation between a 3D Effect & The Flat 2D Images on Film.
For Example ( e.g. )
You want to film a person falling from a great height.
The Usual way to film this is to get a Stuntmyn to jump from a great height & film them falling into a ‘Hidden’ Airbag.
The Considerably Saner way that this Effect should be Created ( Cheaper & Safer ) would be to allow The Principle Actor to Flail away in a Fixed Position; Either on A Flat Surface or on a Podium that hold them from their Waist or Feet or Wherever; Then - - Move The Camera - - to Achieve The Relative Position between the Actor & Camera as The Actor is ‘Ostensibly’ Falling.
This would have been easily available to film makers, even before blue screens if they’d only allowed themselves to make a few elemental assumptions & were willing to ‘Do The Work’, Which again; Would have been much Easier & Cheaper than Creating The Scene ‘In A 3D Volume’.
There has been a Wonderful Machine called ‘A Rotoscope’ that has been available to film makers since just about forever, & is essentially an Animation Desk with a Film Camera that can Shoot Frames from above or below The Animation ‘Plane’ which The Film-Maker/Animator can put anything they want onto. Most ‘Special Effect’ Shots take only a second or two to complete The Effect that is ‘Amazing’. This translates into No More than 60 Frames, which may be reduced by half or more to shave a several second shot to only a few dozen finely crafted frames, with The ‘Good Bits’ taking up only a small portion of The Frame Proper.
You’d be able to create any amazing effect 60 years ago by hiring an artist or small team of artists to ‘Paint’ from whole cloth, anything you wanted.
Nowadays of course; This process is much, much easier, & can be done by children with a tablet film editor. All that is Nominally Required is that The Child has some Elemental or Minimal Sense of ‘What looks ‘Right’’ ?
So why do i still see professional film makers spending millions of dollars ( in The DVD Featurettes ) to create shots that occupy only a few seconds in The Final Film ?
- - -