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!

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139392 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
23 Mar 2012 - 5:14 PM


Quote: what the current take on 3D images is now

Same as before I imagine: an irrelevance to 99.99% of photographers - and that's probably understating it! Wink

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
23 Mar 2012 - 5:14 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

keith selmes
23 Mar 2012 - 5:26 PM

I do remember a bit of a splash about 3D in LCD on mobile phones.
Seems to have gone quiet though.

As for anywhere else, a lot of people enjoyed avatar, but the films that were converted to 3D haven't gone down so well, and I thought it was really all over.

I'm not sure what difference it would make to photography, since paper is still 2D and a print is my end product.
On the computer and the tablet, there is not much sign of 3D at the moment, and it will take years to introduce it.
I have seen 3D on a a laptop about a year ago, but I think it was only software demonstrating how they sould run a video filmed as 3D.
Not an actual 3D LCD panel.

newfocus
newfocus  8644 forum posts United Kingdom2 Constructive Critique Points
25 Mar 2012 - 9:32 AM

Maybe it's because I'm used to seeing scenes as a photographer but I find 3D films uncomfortable, particularly when looking at them from a close distance. I think one of the main reasons is that the effect only does half the job of replicating a 3D scene. For instance - yes, it does look like parts of the image are floating in space but if you 'look at' the closer parts, the background doesn't suddenly go out of focus, and vice versa. The whole thing just feels really unnatural to me.

I've no doubt the system will improve (and I hope it does) but at the moment you can't get away from the fact that no matter how well the 3D effect is done, your eyes are still focusing on the distance of the screen at all times, not on objects much closer or further away. At a cinema, it seems less of an issue but on a much closer device I think that's going to feel really, really odd.

Cagey75
Cagey75  340 forum posts Ireland
2 Apr 2012 - 9:35 PM

I sincerely hope not.

collywobles
3 Apr 2012 - 4:15 PM


Quote: 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

I think your statement is correct from the few 3D films I have seen as you say only a few scenes in the films are of 3D effective viewing. any wide shot of a scene in the film has little effect. I went into a Sony store recently and asked the guy to put a 3D TV on. He put on a 3D football match and initially I could not see any difference between 2D and 3D --- until a low shot behind the goal had the ball coming in towards the camera(s). General field shots were little difference to normal 2D.

NoveltyPhotoStudio

Lenticular prints are fairly popular in the US for both the souvenir concession market and with event vendors. There is a bit of a learning curve but it's not terribly difficult to understand in principal. I am referring to faux 3D (pre-interlaced backgrounds used in conjunction with green screen) and not processing live stereo images. It's definitely a niche, but one worth investigating if you want to offer something different. I think the big caveat in the UK, as least as I've been told, is that lenses are not readily available. They are already somewhat expensive without factoring in shipping. However for attractions/exhibitions where photo products are sold per-piece and can command a premium, it is a very nice option. Anyone wanting more information feel free to PM or post questions.

KarenFB
KarenFB Junior Gallery Team 84255 forum postsKarenFB vcard England162 Constructive Critique Points
7 May 2012 - 8:55 AM

Hi NPS, welcome to EPZ! Smile Just to let you know, the Private Message facility cannot be used by you until you have been with us for 1 month! Smile

davewaine
davewaine  7115 forum posts England3 Constructive Critique Points
7 May 2012 - 11:00 AM

I can only say I hope not. I can't abide 3D at the cinema and will go to a 2D screening, given the choice. Aside from the sore eyes, headache and dim image, I think that the main problem with artificially. produced 3D is that it doesn't match the real thing. Anyone with properly functioning eyes can see in 3D, but only over a limited range. Artificial 3D is 3D all the way to the horizon and it just looks wrong. At worst, things look like flat cardboard cut-outs set at different distances from the camera. It has been tried several times and failed. Hollywood has invested, not a king's ransom - more like a god's ransom - in it this time and a lot is riding on its success. I can't help feeling that the money would have been more wisely spent on better films. As for its application in still photography, the ability to produce a 3D image has been around since the 1840s and it never achieved more than a niche interest. I can think of no reason why that should change - but that might be wishful thinking on my part.

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139392 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
7 May 2012 - 1:45 PM

3D cinema has been around, commercially, since the 1950s. It never caught on then, and I suspect it won't now.

digicammad
digicammad  1121988 forum posts United Kingdom37 Constructive Critique Points
10 May 2012 - 9:11 AM

3d photography isn't new, but has never made it beyond the realms of 'novelty value'. Given the fact that it limits the viewing options I'm not convinced it will get beyond novelty for a while yet.

collywobles
10 May 2012 - 10:34 AM


Quote: 3d photography isn't new, but has never made it beyond the realms of 'novelty value'. Given the fact that it limits the viewing options I'm not convinced it will get beyond novelty for a while yet.

Spot on!

keithh
keithh  1022797 forum posts Wallis and Futuna29 Constructive Critique Points
10 May 2012 - 10:39 AM

Surely the arrival of 3D and 3D cameras will make this more accessible and more popular especially with the spectacle free TV's.

I can see a public area advertising application for a start.

digicammad
digicammad  1121988 forum posts United Kingdom37 Constructive Critique Points
10 May 2012 - 11:03 AM

As costs come down you could be right about that one Keith, but I would class that more as a specialist application rather than mass appeal. Another potential application would be 3D endoscopy for tricky operations.

triumphv8
triumphv8  6450 forum posts United Kingdom
10 May 2012 - 11:15 AM

Someone showed me a HTC phone with 3d picture capability last week.

Dave's description fits exactly :-


Quote: At worst, things look like flat cardboard cut-outs set at different distances from the camera.

Grin

keith selmes
10 May 2012 - 12:57 PM


Quote: At worst, things look like flat cardboard cut-outs set at different distances from the camera.

I've seen that on a laptop. It was a demo purportedly showing a 3D capability. Of course it wasn't a 3D display, it only was software for running videos that had bee converted to a 3D format.

Last Modified By keith selmes at 10 May 2012 - 12:58 PM

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.