Tuesday 14 May 2013

artefact 3

Artefact 3 involved showing participants two separate 3d films. A comedy and an action/adventure.

Journey 2: The Mysterious Island (2012) - Action/Adventure
A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas (2011) - Comedy

For fair non bias results two movies were used that had been released approximately the same period and were both filmed for 3D instead of a 2D post conversion.

Results:

Journey 2 -
3D visual effects really contribute to Storyline
Able to explore scenery
Better than films they'd seen that were post converted. i.e. Titanic

Harold  and Kumar-
Works well because 3D not just used to add depth but also to fly objects out of the screen
More for novelty effect. i.e. Pingpong ball etc coming out of screen

These results made me realise how there are more aspects to 3D than I first thought. Earlier in my own childhood, around 15 years ago, I remember watching a 3D Disney film in America that was purely used as a novelty effect, ‘shooting’ objects out the screen at the audience and this was how the production was branded and marketed (people were always saying how they’d been to see this 3D movie etc, one where the person said it felt as though spiders were sitting on her shoulder). However, this latest ‘wave’ of stereoscopic 3D  has primarily been used to enhance scenery and atmosphere. Although the success of A Very Merry Harold and Kumar has proven there still is a place for productions that use 3D as a form of shock/novelty factor.
            I do feel though, this is by no means the future of 3D. The majority of participants prefer the 3D visual effect for enhancing the scenery instead of novelty.

            Potential areas I’m taking forward are how an audiences engagement into a the storyline is manipulated through 3D, whether post-converted 3D can compare to ‘real 3D’ in terms of productivity and end quality and finally, how complicated it is to converge cameras while filming anaglyph 3D in order to manipulate the on screen parallax. 

No comments:

Post a Comment