|01 January 2009||#1|
Fmr Editor, CGSociety
3DWorld/CGSociety poll :: Stereo 3D futures
The latest issue of 3D World (issue 113) looks at the forthcoming growth of stereoscopic 3D gaming and the opportunities it could create for 3D artists. Although the focus in recent times has been on stereoscopic cinema, a new generation of more affordable technology, combined with efforts to support games consoles, could see stereo 3D make inroads into the home.
We'd like to know where you think the future of stereoscopic 3D lies, and where you think 3D artists should be focusing their attention. Cast your vote in our poll and see the results in 3D World issue 114.
In which market sector will stereoscopic technology really make its mark in 2009?
Cinema: Blockbuster movies like Monster vs Aliens will be where the technology really shines
Games: More accessible equipment for home gaming will bring stereo displays to the masses
Both: Stereoscopic 3D is gaining ground in both markets. It will simply become taken for granted
Neither: Stereoscopic 3D is overhyped. Traditional display formats will still rule the roost in 2009
For Editor and features writer, CGSociety; Global Artist Liaison, Ballistic Publishing. Freelance writer, media consultant & digital producer.
|01 January 2009||#2|
Christopher James Ford
CG Generalist / Shader Artist
Johannesburg, South Africa
Join Date: Oct 2006
I think the technology is great , unfortunately for some of us we cannot see it to its full potential.
Common for all stereoscopic 3D viewing methods :
* One eyed people cannot see 3D
* People where the 2 eyes don't work together cannot see 3D
* People using glasses with a huge difference between the prescription for Left and Right eye cannot see 3D
* People with some difference in vision for Right- and Left eye will have problems or cannot see 3D
My right eye is a lot weaker than my left eye and it doesn't work with , or recieve light at the same rate as my left eye. So for me, when something on screen goes really 3D and is meant to give that bulging out effect, regardless of whether I'm wearing contacts or not under the stereoscopic glasses, the image splits into a horrid flickering double image.
I don't know how many people out there experience this same problem, we're definitely in the minority so it wouldn't have a significant impact on this technology growing at all.
However I'm pretty cetain it will be more prominent in the cinema industry than that of the games over the coming years.
Last edited by LinchpinZA : 01 January 2009 at 01:01 AM.
|01 January 2009||#3|
Stealthy Tea Monkeyportfolio
Join Date: Jun 2002
I think it will only get stronger in cinema, but personally I really don't like it. I'm already very well absorbed when I go to the cinema and I don't really need that extra gimmick.
Gaming I can understand as there is a level of immersiveness that is required of the player and stereoscopy can only make that experience stronger, but film to me doesn't really makes sense. Perhaps if I go and see a few more my mind will be changed.
|01 January 2009||#4|
Gluing captions to cats
I don't see the content available, nor the desire, stereoscopic 3D has been the next big thing in video games since the Voodoo2. I don't see any huge market for it in games, as it essentially requires twice as much GPU power, and probably a new monitor depending on the technique... and that seems a bit frivolous during the current economic situation.
For movies? I live in Australia, and honestly don't see the cinemas here rushing out to invest in the technology either. Perhaps elsewhere the story is different.
Get off my lawn.
|01 January 2009||#5|
Join Date: Nov 2008
I like how you don't have to wear any glasses anymore with the special monitors.
At first I thought it was wiggle animation style 3d, switching viewpoints
between frames, which would be pretty ugly maybe.
So I guess you'll still need the glasses in the theater,
but I seem to remember a James Cameron interview where he said you wouldn't
because the frames are now able to move so fast.
I read that James Cameron was chiding Tim Burton about the
red and green style (or some other comparitively inferior) 3D for 'Alice'
because he has a lot invested in new 3D technology and doesn't want it it
to go back to the 1950's style 'goofy scifi movie' mentality 3d .
Last edited by andycircus : 01 January 2009 at 01:24 AM.
|01 January 2009||#6|
ArtDirector at INDG Amsterdam
I think stereoscopic imaging is the next step in entertainment, be it film or gaming.
The 3d technology it's as old as my grandma' and they used it alot especially in the 70-80's. The only crappy thing about it is the red-cyan glasses, which make your eyes bleed after half an hour. That's why the 3d movies back then wouldn't last more then 20-30 minutes.
But I went to see Beowulf last year and I was amazed by the new polarized glasses. You just forget about them, no headache no nothing.
And I can barely wait to see Cameron's new 3d epic: Avatar
So yeah, 3D rocked since the beginning, everyone knew it's the future. And now, without the headaches, we can enjoy the new dimension freely
P.S. it's such a long discussion about it...I've seen the rabbit whole from Gnomon and I was amazed by the potential.
|01 January 2009||#7|
Warp Gate Studios CEOportfolio
Warp Gate Studios.
Buenos Aires, Argentina
i voted both.
Because Cinema and video games are both in the Entertaiments tab. So basicly they share the same goal.
But i dont know if you can stand more than a few hours seeing 3d.
One weekend i went with my gf to the imax and we saw beowolf 3 times, and i end with a huge and terrible pain in my head, and she ended with a 2 hour crying eyes.
|01 January 2009||#9|
Lyttelton, New Zealand
Join Date: Jan 2004
Originally Posted by salmonmoose: For movies? I live in Australia, and honestly don't see the cinemas here rushing out to invest in the technology either. Perhaps elsewhere the story is different.
it's the same down in New Zealand,I'd love to see James Camerons next movie as he intends it to be seen..but not at the expense of flying over to sydney or some other major center just to see it.
3d will appeal to me more when there's no glasses involved & the majority of theaters can offer it.'till then it's just a gimmick.
I voted 'neither'
|01 January 2009||#10|
Join Date: Aug 2008
When you live in a small or remote city, I'm sure you get used to not having all the things that larger cities get. If it becomes popular, I'm sure it will spread all over. If it proves to make money, you can bet on it. You have to start somewhere I guess...
I personally love 3D movies. If a movie would be shown on two screens, one in 2D and the other in 3D, I would choose the 3D version in a second. I think getting headaches with the new technology style is pretty rare. The theatre seems to be still filled with people at the end of the show. I figure if a lot of people were in pain, they would have left. I don't take exit polls there, so I really don't know
Also if It does get popular, they will figure out pretty quickly the best way to use the depth for the greatest effect. People saying that it's not perfect right now is a silly argument about not supporting it.
>>Maya and Zbrush
|01 January 2009||#11|
Join Date: May 2008
I played through Castle of Wolfenstein in glorious OpenGL Quad-buffered Stereo several years ago, and although my shutterglasses suffered from slight ghosting, it did add another dimension (pardon the pun) to the game. I've also tried stereo with a couple of racing games. I think stereo gaming probably looks better the more detail you have in the textures, but most modern games are already quite good in that respect.
Stereo viewing can be hard on the eyes, but better technology makes for easier viewing. After all, most people see in stereo all day long without ill effects! ;-) It is true that this technology will be useless for some people, but that will hardly effect it's poplularity (just like my deaf ear didn't stop stereo in music).
|01 January 2009||#12|
Join Date: Aug 2008
My personal opinion is that the current stereoscopic technology will not catch on. However, its great to see that people are pushing it as hard as they are. All advancing technology, such as this, need bridges and motivation to help lead to new breakthroughs that will bring itself to a more advanced state. But, the current adaption is just too finicky for me. The glasses seem to me, to be a somewhat of a "cheat". Very limiting. I dont know what the next adaption of this technology may be like. But, whatever it is, I think it will have a stronger chance at catching on.
|01 January 2009||#13|
Lead TD / Artist / Film Maker
Join Date: Apr 2002
Cameron and others interested in 3D are in some trouble according to this report:
|01 January 2009||#14|
Join Date: Dec 2002
LinchpinZA: Great points you added there, we did few 3d jobs here with stereoscopic
3d and I was the only one having problems while finding the right distance between
object and camera. When it was too close I was the only one eye crossing while looking
|01 January 2009||#15|
Visual Communication designer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Originally Posted by Neuro69: It is true that this technology will be useless for some people, but that will hardly effect it's poplularity (just like my deaf ear didn't stop stereo in music).
I'm another guy who has one "healthy" eye and the other "weaker". Yes, if I had a deaf ear I wouldn't have any major trouble with stereo sound (with some exceptions: those "funny" unbalanced stereo mixes). But if stereo 3D imagery would be the norm with the current technology, it would be a nightmare. And yes, we hope for the advancement of the "real 3D" display technology. Wearing glasses (red/blue or polarized), helmets, gloves or spacesuits for viewing and interacting with media is not the way to go for everyday use, IMHO.
.:: "The Jackal may follow the Tiger, but, Cub, when thy whiskers are grown,
Remember the Wolf is a hunter -- go forth and get food of thine own." ::.
|Thread Closed share thread|