Prime Day 2020: Get An Amazon Prime 30-Day Free Trial

Is 3D photography the next step now?

edsephiroth 14 169 9 United Kingdom
13 Aug 2010 12:16PM
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?
Overread 12 4.1k 19 England
13 Aug 2010 12:21PM
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 14 169 9 United Kingdom
13 Aug 2010 12:32PM
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
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 13 3.0k 3 United Kingdom
13 Aug 2010 12:34PM
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 Plus
19 18.8k 97 England
13 Aug 2010 12:36PM
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 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 16 8.6k 61 Norfolk Island
13 Aug 2010 12:38PM

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.

RipleyExile 17 1.6k 17 England
13 Aug 2010 12:52PM
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.
User_Removed 16 17.9k 8 Norway
13 Aug 2010 1:21PM

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!

13 Aug 2010 1:42PM
Was only a matter of time before designer 3D glasses were brought out although they look at bit 70s to me! Wink
_ 15 535 4 Virgin Islands, British
13 Aug 2010 1:57PM
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 Plus
15 3.5k 20 United Kingdom
13 Aug 2010 5:23PM

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.
vagabond 14 39 1 Wales
14 Aug 2010 7:55PM
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 10 9 United Kingdom
15 Aug 2010 7:47AM
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 15 27.1k 38 Switzerland
15 Aug 2010 10:43AM
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 9 13 United Kingdom
23 Mar 2012 5:08PM
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.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.