Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Is 3D photography the next step now?

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

edsephiroth
13 Aug 2010 - 12:16 PM

With 3D cameras creeping onto the market now, and Nintendo due to release the 3DS (basically it's a DS handheld console but can take 3D shots which can be seen WITHOUT glasses or any special viewer), is 3D the logical next step in photography?

Other things (PC screens for one!) will need to catch up, but it still seems like that's where things are going now that the technology is coming onto the market, quite affordably, even if its 10yrs until it becomes "normal".

How do people feel about that?

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
13 Aug 2010 - 12:16 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Overread
Overread  63806 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
13 Aug 2010 - 12:21 PM

I honestly don't think 3D is going to take off - at least not yet. I've seen two films in 3D and outside of a few select scenes and the scrolling credits (and the trailer for that 3D CGI Owl film) the 3D effect made little to no difference to my viewing pleasure and annoyed the heck out of me at nearly double the cost of a regular seat (erm just why does 3D projection cost more Tongue) and with those glasses that annoy my nose the whole time they sit on top.

TV 3D might just get in there if only because it will slip in as a standard feature (along with such things as freeview, HD and digital) but I doubt that we will see a massive increase in 3D productions.

Simply put I don't think the display technology is really there to make 3D really stand out against 2D display. As for 3D photography I suspect it will be similar in that it won't really get off the ground in a big way. Oh I expect we will see more 3D lenses, but I highly doubt that we will see a massive increase in them.
Remember we've had 3D capable cameras for a long time now (sterio 3D cameras I think they are called with the 2 lenses and shots at once feature) and they've never gone mainstream.

edsephiroth
13 Aug 2010 - 12:32 PM

Hey Overread.
Well I think you're in the minority as far as the films are concerned - I thought Avatar looked great, although yes, two other films I have seen in 3D - it just seemed like a gimmick. And yeah the glasses are a huge pain and immensely offputtng - I need to wear normal glasses in the cinema, so I have to wear those Blues-Brothers things over the top, which doesn't really work and makes it incredibly difficult to get absorbed into the film, when pushing them back up every few seconds. As for the cost - well no it doesn't cost more to project them but it cost more to make them in the first place, therefore more for the cinema to buy them, and that gets passed on to youWink
iew
I agree 3D TV will be very gradual - HD isn't even "universal" yet, and that 30% or however many of us that do have HDTV's generally have bought them in the last 1-3yrs, so people really aren't going to expect to have to upgrade again any time soon.

Well, all reports on the Nintendo 3DS are that it really does look pretty fantastic (and that's not just from Nintendo's opinion!), so if whatever tech they are using becomes widespread, it may be more appealing to people than you think. Don't forget - unlike the old stereoscopic cameras you mention, you don't need any glasses or additional set-up to view them, and I think that will be a big draw for people (especially considering the leading tech will have a "free" HD handheld console with it - those consoles are popular you know!).

From our POV as photographers - its more about considering how good the lenses will be - it's unlikely to allow for very complex or demanding photography.

davidburleson
davidburleson ePHOTOzine Staff 72390 forum postsdavidburleson vcard United Kingdom
13 Aug 2010 - 12:34 PM

In my opinion, the only thing that's holding back 3D is the glasses. Once they crack it where you can view 3d at any angle without the need of glasses, it will catch on like wildfire.

Pete
Pete Site Moderator 1318456 forum postsPete vcard ePz Advertiser England96 Constructive Critique Points
13 Aug 2010 - 12:36 PM

We've had all kinds of attempts to get us to go 3d. Even as a Kid I was viewing 3d using Viewmaster, but I was never tempted to buy a 3d Viewmaster camera. In the 80s we had Nimslo which was arguably the best made 3d camera of the modern day. And right back to Victorian times we've had 3d cameras and 3d viewing devices.
Anyone remember Vivitar crating the 70-210mm camera with 3d filters built in? I went to the product launch. It was going to be huge....it flopped.

The main thing that seems to have hindered it becoming mainstream is viewing has never been easy (glasses needed or viewer) Unless you go the Nimslo / new Fuji approach where the images are combined in special printing technique...and then it's down to cost.

Maybe this time it will be different. it's certainly had the biggest push we've ever seen for 3d this time. Time will tell. Maybe we expect things we look at to be 2d and don't care about that third level. I've always wanted to embrace the change, but up until now have never though the results view well enough. That is until I saw results from the Fuji camera. They really do work...but I won't be buying one, because the processing is not convenient enough yet.

And while I really enjoyed Avatar and Streetdance in 3d - the TVs are too expensive at present.

But the manufacturers will also have to think about how they get the early adaptors to adopt. I was in a large electrical store and saw one of the new tvs. It was playing a kids film demo. There was a sign "please ask to see demo". You needed to get an assistant to open a pair of 100 viewing glasses so you could watch the TV. No one was taking them up on the offer. The image looked rubbish...anyone who wasn't aware it was 3d would have said that's a poor out of tune tv.

cameracat
cameracat  108578 forum posts Norfolk Island61 Constructive Critique Points
13 Aug 2010 - 12:38 PM


Quote: In my opinion, the only thing that's holding back 3D is the glasses. Once they crack it where you can view 3d at any angle without the need of glasses, it will catch on like wildfire

Absolutely spot on......Smile

Once the glasses thing is out of the way, 3D everything will take the world by storm......Smile

The whole concept is nothing new, It was around way way back in the cinemas, Even some " Atari " game consoles from the 70's........Grin

But Oh! them stupid glasses......Killed it stone dead.

Wink

RipleyExile
13 Aug 2010 - 12:52 PM

There are examples of 3D photos in the Media Museum in Bradford that are well old, innit. The big brass and wood viewer is a bit of a pain though.

At least the glasses have moved on from those red and blue cardboard efforts from the 80's.

Last Modified By RipleyExile at 13 Aug 2010 - 12:54 PM
User_Removed
13 Aug 2010 - 1:21 PM


Quote: But Oh! them stupid glasses......Killed it stone dead.

Ah! So no point in my uploading some 3D stuff that need glasses to view them then Vince!

Grin

answersonapostcard
answersonapostcard Site Moderator 1012609 forum postsanswersonapostcard vcard United Kingdom15 Constructive Critique Points
13 Aug 2010 - 1:42 PM

Was only a matter of time before designer 3D glasses were brought out although they look at bit 70s to me! Wink

_
_  9535 forum posts Virgin Islands, British4 Constructive Critique Points
13 Aug 2010 - 1:57 PM

Not sure I'd be the best person to judge on whether or not 3D has a future
Colour blind and with only one eye to see things, 3D has never really been my cup of tea.

discreetphoton
discreetphoton Site Moderator 93455 forum postsdiscreetphoton vcard United Kingdom20 Constructive Critique Points
13 Aug 2010 - 5:23 PM


Quote: erm just why does 3D projection cost more

Because the films are more expensive to produce (and subsequently for the cinemas to lease), and there's a high initial outlay for the cinemas to convert to the new technology.

Last Modified By discreetphoton at 13 Aug 2010 - 5:29 PM
vagabond
vagabond  838 forum posts Wales1 Constructive Critique Points
14 Aug 2010 - 7:55 PM

How can you get around the need for the glasses? Perhaps they could do polarised contact lenses but I can't see any way a 2D image can ever be seen as 3D without meddling with your vision in some way.

raasclart
raasclart  4 United Kingdom
15 Aug 2010 - 7:47 AM

good lord I hope not. I flat out refuse to pay extra to see a film in 3D. certainly aren't going to want to for a camera

joolsb
joolsb  927115 forum posts Switzerland38 Constructive Critique Points
15 Aug 2010 - 10:43 AM

I just don't see the need, to be honest. Apart from some occasional cool effects, what does 3d actually bring to the viewing experience? IMO, it's pointless for a lot of TV. What would 3d add to the basic fare of modern TV (soaps, reality shows, news), for example?

Parky2k2
Parky2k2  3 United Kingdom
23 Mar 2012 - 5:08 PM

OK dragging this one from the archives a bit now.

I have recently bought a Sony bloggie 3d camcorder/camera to play with and am getting some great pictures on holiday here in tunisia at the moment.

I was Just wondering now a couple of years have gone by since anyone last posted in this forum what the current take on 3D images is now that there are more 3d monitors and tvs out there and even 3d picture frames you dont need glasses for using the lenticular lenses that the nintendo 3ds uses.

There are also places out there that will run off prints with lenticular lenses so your 3d images can be hung on walls as is and even the same with postcards.


as a side note the polarised glasses are available in different styles now and i have a pair of clip on ones as i wear corrective glasses normally has this changed anyones mind.

Your updated comments below.
Regards
Parky

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.