Hello. I do not know if I'm here in the correct forum with my question. Anyway, I'm confused by all the hype pretty 3D. Of course I'm interested in the new 3D movie camera. And of course I would love to shoot in 3D. I have but still no 3D Television. And as long as those stupid 3D glasses to be used, I will not buy me synonymous 3D Television. I would therefore like to wait with the purchase of a 3D TV until there are models in which no3D goggles must be used anymore. Now to my question. How future-proof because the 3D image format, with what are today's camcorder record? If I have to buy a 3D camcorder: Will I look at these 3D movies synonymous on future TVs, which will be equipped with perhaps another look at technology, can? Thank you for your help
Antwort von domain:
3D norevolution and is already noEvolution but even a periodically emergent phenomenon. The first 3D film, which reached a significant audience, appeared in 1922, premiered in Los Angeles and was called "The Power Of Love".
There is an old story and yet it is always new and if it just happened Then she shares opinions in two.
I say that 3D is becoming once again have a future. But less by two or more images, but through the use of dollies, cranes, Spidercam or sliding rails. A really strong spatial impression one gets in fact only if, for example whiz past the railway down the power poles s.Fenster just so, while the mountains in the background is almost. A good stereo effect of two images is clear, however, with relatively static images without camera motion. But many want to stop the spatial effect achieved easily. Therefore, synonymous the great current interest for Steadycam and slides etc.
Antwort von carstenkurz:
As far as with 3D 'stereography' is meant noBedenken I had. Even without glasses method so far are all stereographically. You can play 3D movies or even 100 years on today's 3D hardware.
If there someday give another 3D process, which is not based on stereography it is possibly more difficult. However, there will by then probably as much stereographic content, that there will be some certainty with conversions of 'cheap' stereo 3D in 'better 3D'.
There are now half a dozen methods, stereographic 3D display and all with two parallel video streams are compatible, so I would make of me noGedanken provisionally there.
Antwort von Axel:
If 3D is not already back to sleep (which I would leave a sealed envelope with my bet in a time capsule after 2015), so it should because of where it is right now (s.Einschlafen) to spread next, I would with an improvement in the technology in recording and playback page count.
2015 you could then your 3D video on some backward-compatible, semi-transparent display show and tell the relatives: "These were the beginnings."
2020 hologram is converted into a video, I real-time, just like all the old 2D video synonymous. Of course they are not technically satisfactory state, so that you can not. They look more like the holograms in the 25th Century, with the Jedi Obi Wan R2D2 to the analog interlaced disturbed plays to call for help from Princess Leia ...
Antwort von domain:
True, often the idea directly connected with Stereoscopic 3D, or even confused. I too only recently become clear that the stereography is just one of many means to summon a spatial impression on the viewer, but probably the most important. But anyway, lives of the film art of exaggerated reaction in a limited medium. Sun synonymous, the DOF design support (almost foreign to the human eye) is a spatial effect. Sharp object, before and after that everything blurred, but the already placed the object in space. But the synonymous relation of known sizes help each other. A great example fuzzy dandelion leaf in the foreground suggests close, many small horse chestnut leaves in the background but the distance is synonymous for all other known objects in size.