Quote:
Originally Posted by Namekuseijin
Ebert is plain wrong, as usual when he obsesses over some particular pet peeve.
Look at a mirror. Are your eyes focusing on the mirror plane or on the image double the distance from you to the mirror plane?
Just because the image is projected on a plane doesn't mean your eyes are focusing on the plane.
Stereographic 3D is a precise recording of a 3D scene as your eyes would get it from the same viewpoint. Of course, it is static in relation to that viewpoint, as you can quickly check by moving your head to the side and not getting any more 3D info as you would expect. It's good enough while full dynamic 3D isn't available as a hologram...
|
Yeah, I wrote Ebert an email explaining why he was wrong, but he never answered me. If you read his blog frequently, as I used to do, he's very good when he writes about things he knows personally, but he's very bad when he writes about things he doesn't know, like science. He has a bad tendency to embrace any argument that supports his prejudices, such as his hatred of video games and 3D. He also believes anything he sees in a documentary, without checking. I know he was an early adopter of the Internet, but he doesn't seem to know how to use Google to save his life, or he doesn't want to.
The reason 3D causes headaches is actually very simple. In real life, you don't use both your eyes at once most of the time. One eye works while the other rests. You only use your 3D vision when you actually need it. Watching a 3D movie forces you to use both eyes for an extended period, causing eyestrain and headaches. Some people are more prone to this than others, but it can't be worked around because of the very nature of 3D and human vision.
Of course, realistic, eyestrain-free 3D entertainment has been around since the ancient Greeks. It's called 'theater'.