Avatar

[matt35mm]

A short film about James Cameron's addiction to special effects.

[The Perineum Falcon]

I don't see any point in watching this at home. If the film was truly designed for IMAX 3d, then how can the home experience even remotely accomplish that?

3Dtv is, I think, a bad idea. A VERY expensive fad. I heard that football games could eventually be broadcast in 3D, but what's the fucking point? Are you REALLY going to think you can catch the ball?

[Stefen]

Are you REALLY going to think you can catch the ball?

MARQUEE.

[Derek]

I think it's more than a fad, I think 3D will be looked back upon akin to when tv's went from black and white to color. Some may think that's drastic or overstating it, I don't. Imax or not, done well, 3D can be a more immersive experience no matter the size or format.

[Stefen]

I think it's more than a fad, I think 3D will be looked back upon akin to when tv's went from black and white to color. Some may think that's drastic or overstating it, I don't. Imax or not, done well, 3D can be a more immersive experience no matter the size or format.

No way. You didn't have to wear special eye-wear that hurt your eyes to enjoy color.

[Gold Trumpet]

On his Twitter page, Roger Ebert quoted a study that asked people if they want all films to be 3D or not 3D. 99% of participants sided with not. I think 3D has some promise, but no 3D film is going to have an Avatar effect again with the public. Even if there is a film better visually, people's eyes will be too light adjusted to 3D for the upgrades to be appreciated.

I mentioned how 3D has artistic promise in another thread, but the last thing to do now is to start rolling out every film in 3D. Filmmakers will just use the technology in the most obvious ways. The onslaught of awfulness will make people turn their back on the technology. If 3D is every going to become truly a mass product, it will need to slowly evolve.

[matt35mm]

I think it's more than a fad, I think 3D will be looked back upon akin to when tv's went from black and white to color. Some may think that's drastic or overstating it, I don't. Imax or not, done well, 3D can be a more immersive experience no matter the size or format.

No way. You didn't have to wear special eye-wear that hurt your eyes to enjoy color.

Actually, the cutting-edge technology that's being developed now is on screens that will display 3D without the need for glasses.  As far as I can figure, it's not talked about as much because it's still not quite there yet.  I'm not totally sure how it works (something to do with "directional blacklight technology," which I read about here).  It only seems to work with small screens right now.  There is a large 3D TV that exists, but you need to look at it from sweet-spots to get the effect, such that if you moved your head, the effect wouldn't work, so that technology is still a while away, but it's coming.

James Cameron does discuss the small 3D screens here toward the end, and makes a prediction that in in 10-15 years, things like iPhones will be "in stereo."

In fact, I would go so far as to say that 10 or 15 years from now, stereo displays will be ubiquitous, from cinemas to open-air advertising, to home screens and down to handheld devices. IPhones will be in stereo. Small displays will especially benefit from stereo because the small size of the screen can be offset by using Z-depth to stack information, which will reduce visual clutter, or conversely increase the density of information held within a single visual field. It may be that eventually all of our news and information, as well as our sports and entertainment, will come to us in stereo.

In the future world shown in "Avatar," all display devices, including handheld devices and even photos, are all in 3-D.

Basically what this all points to is that, in the next 10-20 years, we'll be seeing TVs and personal handheld devices delivering 3D images without the need for glasses.  And apparently this technology doesn't strain your eyes.  His notion that you can "stack" information by depth, effectively packing more information onto smaller screens, is especially mind-blowing to me.

Considering how much technology has developed in the past 15 years, it's hard not to believe that this sort of stuff is inevitable, and we'll probably be taking it as much for granted as we do iPods/iPhones, powerful laptops, and HDTV now.  There's no way that we've peaked because it's still imaginable to achieve a more realistic image.  We won't peak at least until we actually get to an image that is as convincing as seeing it in real life, at which point it'll probably begin to develop into virtual reality technology where you can actually see, touch, smell, hear, taste whatever you want, and it won't feel like anymore of a gimmick than HDTV does to you now.  Not only is it imaginable, but rough forms of this kind of technology already exist.  They just need to be refined.  It's just a matter of time, assuming that there will be a market for this sort of stuff.  I'd imagine there would be a market, but maybe it won't be for movies.  We might all decide that 3D is as far as we want to go with movies, but what about video games, porn, The Food Network, etc.?  People will definitely want a complete virtual reality experience when it comes to that stuff.

So the 3D TVs that they're working on now where you need glasses are an obligatory phase (because companies want to capitalize on suckers who are anxious for 3D in their homes ASAP) of a much longer journey.  I think that the discussion of the serious viability of these kinds of 3D TVs with glasses is probably short-sighted.  I don't think James Cameron even gives that much of a fuck about these 3D TVs where you need glasses.  They're merely a small step on the way to something much bigger.

[Derek]

Wearing glasses would be the only thing to hold the technology back, I think. It changes constantly, I think every tv made now is widescreen, LCD LED or plasma pretty well. I'm not sure, but do they even make tube tv's anymore? Only ten years ago, these tv's were considered as luxuries.

[The Perineum Falcon]

The only future for 3Dtv is in porn. Think about it.

[Neil]

[Pubrick]

they could at least spell Pocahontas correctly if they're gonna do a joke about an observation that was made by the real EVERYONE months ago.

the only way that would be funny is if it were actually from his facebook page. which it isn't. it's just a fail.

why did you post it? did you think it was real too?

[Stefen]

I thought it was funny.

[Pubrick]

I thought it was funny.

then you're either being nice to neil or you've fallen off your game

that joke was abysmal.

[RegularKarate]

Avatar jokes in general have been pretty disappointing really.
I expect more from the internet.

[Ravi]

Avatar jokes in general have been pretty disappointing really.
I expect more from the internet.

You do?  Have you been to the internet lately?