Omid
Well-known member
It is not as you say. 3D graphics can create all the necessary appearance of the various focus planes and thus give the effect of depth, as naturally happens in film photography (optical shooting).
Really?! Could you please explain how 3D television or 3D cinema (or 3D headsets that use two small LCD screens behind a Fresnel eyepiece) can create multiple focus planes for all the object presented in the scene?
Alexis Powell said:Can't most people adapt to such issues, given a bit of experience using the technology?
It is probably possible to get used to it but it certainly is not desirable. This is somewhat like experiencing jet lag. You would get used to it if you stay in the new location long enough but once you return home you have a new problem: getting used to the previous normal.
Another aspect is that the most likely application of 3D technology -as is being presented now- is in the entertainment industry. Most people learn after one trial that they don't want to pay to get headaches or sit next to their date wearing goofy glasses.
A third aspect -which just occurred to me today - is that it might be that when it comes to art and aesthetics, we humans might enjoy 2D art more than 3D. Stereoscopic vision is more of a "utility" in human life providing extremely valuable capabilities such as tool making and hunting. But factual accuracy is not something we seek in art and entertainment. 3D art has existed in the form of sculpture for thousands of years but it never replaced painting. A 3D representation of you is certainly more accurate but would you prefer to see a beautiful portrait of yourself or a sculpture? I am not a philosopher of art but this certainly is an interesting angle to consider.
Last edited: