3D camcorders

[col lamb]

Full Details Released on the World's First 3D Consumer Camcorder The Panasonic HDC-SDT750

http://www.camcorderinfo.co.uk/content/ ... -37844.htm

I found this whilst I was checking out some of my regular review sites.

Another new toy to put on your wish list?

[Dave Watterson]

John Dvorak the columnist in the American "PC World" magazine recently suggested that 3D will probably not take off. He pointed out that the majority of the cinema releases are designed to be compatible in 2D for general use and that means not making the most of the third dimension. That's not counting the many 2D films being tarted up as 3D.

I was told decades ago by Scottish film maker Ron Miller, FACI - an optician by profession - that a large proportion of the population cannot see in 3D.

So ... is this to be another brief flurry of excitement like all the previous attempts to popularise 3D movies ... or will it become the norm within a few years?

- Doubting Dave

[granfer]

"worlds first 3-D camcorder"... I don't think so!!!! Toshiba made one many years ago, and this isn't a 3D camcorder anyway.
It's a normal camcorder sold with an add on "3D" LENS ATTACHMENT producing non compatible results in its own specific format.
Bolex did this many, many years ago with their H16 attachment... and this idea is only a marginal improvement on that because it splits 16:9 in half to give 8:9 instead of splitting 4:3 in half to produce 6:9.
The blurb then dresses this up with mention of "jiggery-pokery" in post processing software(supplied) to produce a final result "viewable on a 3-D television"... not exactly "consumer level"!!!
Now, if they were to incorporate an Anamorphic element into their "Add-On", and the necessary video processing WITHIN the camera to convert the two simultaneous side by side compressed images into one alternate frame (16:9) video stream....then they might be talking "consumer"....just!!!

[Dave Watterson]

Col - our negative responses are NOT a complaint about your message !

The majority of readers are technophiles and we love hearing about the latest ideas, kit and gadgets ... even if we pooh-pooh them. Please keep drawing our attention to such developments because they are too easy to miss nowadays. So much is changing so rapidly - and we do not have a monthly commercial magazine to help us keep on top of the news.

But we do have Col !

-Dave

[tom hardwick]

I think it's another flash in the pan. It'll keep re-appearing every 25 years and there'll be lots of hoo-harring about it being 'here2stay' but a good story doesn't need it, any more than a good book need pop-out cardboard pictures every other page.

[col lamb]

Just pointing developments out, i'll continue to do so as I see anything that may be of interest.

I agree with Tom on 3D, personally I cannot see any use I could have for 3D within our activity.

Its the content of what we make that matters not some gimmick of an actor, bug or moveable object apparently coming out of the screen.

Presently the thought of watching the current England football team playing in 3D fills me with dread, they cannot control the ball in 2D never min 3D

[ned c]

I agree that 3D serves no real purpose but unfortunately we are likely to have it rammed down our throats like it or not. The reason? The electronics manufacturers need an expanding market and the agreement of the broadcasters to provide 3D programming means more sets to be sold. Our only hope is that as suggested in a recent publication sitting watching 3D TV for hours wearing the glasses may produce some undesirable health effects. I hope it will go away as far as TV is concerned, OK in ther movies; I saw Avatar in 3D but after about 30 minutes the 3D effects become irrelevant; a pretty moronic movie, more a video game , but than that's just my view - judges for you!!

ned c

[Brian Saberton]

It's probably only a matter of time before someone from the amateur scene has a go at making a 3D movie and won't that be fun for projectionists at competitions!

I've seen a couple of 3D films in the cinema namely Avatar and Clash of the Titans. I also have the Blu-ray version of Avatar which is 2D. Now in the cinema I thought that 3D had been used intelligently and to good effect in Avatar but Clash of the Titans was a different story. Apparently Clash of the Titans was filmed in 2D and converted to 3D in post production which may explain why it didn't work very well and in my opinion added nothing to the film. The main problem seems to be getting enough light on the screen to counter the effect of the polarising glasses and this is something on which James Cameron comments on the Avatar web-site. I have to say that although I enjoyed seeing the film in 3D (I am a fan of Avatar) I prefer the 2D version. I think it's fair to say that the success of Avatar has encouraged the Hollywood studios to put more 3D films into production, as if 3D in itself is any substitute for a good story. Having said that I note that Martin Scorcese's next film is being filmed in 3D so maybe the format will be more popular this time around. As far as we amateurs are concerned we seem to be having enough trouble getting to grips with HD, so the last thing we need right now is yet another complication in an already confused market place.

[granfer]

My contact with 3D commenced with the Telekinema at the Festival of Britain exhibition in 1951 and continued through the 3D revolution of the 1950s. The brief resurgence in the 1960s was lost to me as by then I was married and unable to afford cinema visits.
I can assure those that did not themselves experience it that the 3D productions from the Majors were superb works of either the Cinematic Art or of Technical artistry... or BOTH. There were low budget gimmicks of doubtful to appalling merit, simply designed to cull money from the vulnerable idiot (no change today, then!), but the REAL film-makers pulled out all the stops to produce 3D results that were an integral part of the cinematic experience, not just a gimmicky add-on seat filler. They realised from the start that 3D could only be accurately achieved by mimicking the actions of the human depth perception mechanism when capturing the images and correctly employing human brain functions to re-create the full experience.
The concept that one can create a realistic 3D presentation from a 2D original using computer manipulation is a total fallacy... there is no computer on earth that can equal the power of the human brain... and even the human brain cannot produce stereoscopic vision for a one-eyed man.
3D might be a force in the cinema again when films are produced using "solid" subjects, either live action or animation, a genuine binocular capture method and a presentation method that accurately reproduces the functions of the human eye and brain. It was done successfully 50-60 years ago... and it can be done successfully again... WHEN the film-makers remove their blinkers.