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.
So.
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 ?
-
- -
