James Cameron’s New 3-D Epic Could Change Film Forever • Hacker News Board

Re: James Cameron’s New 3-D Epic Could Change Film Forever

#51

Post by electromagnetic » Tue, Dec 15, 2009, 12:35 AM UTC

duhprey wrote: post #31

StrawberryFrog wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. still pictures are a lot further than moving ones.

I don't think it's that stills are "further" as much as that the error doesn't accumulate.

This is actually noted in much of the 'uncanny valley' predictions, in that the positive and negative effects are less severe. A static picture can look human enough to fool you, however a video doesn't take long before something clues you in and at 24fps you're likely to clue in fast.

However zombies don't look as horrifying in still pictures as they do in animation. Catching the bottom of the uncanny valley can have its benefit for directors as well.

Re: James Cameron’s New 3-D Epic Could Change Film Forever

#52

Post by anigbrowl » Tue, Dec 15, 2009, 12:51 AM UTC

mtalantikite wrote: post #36

I don't know, not to be nit-picky, but how am I supposed to believe a future human society can fly special forces to a far away planet and mind-control a genetically modified species, but still can't get a paralyzed dude to walk again on the cheap? Maybe health care just sucks that bad in the future?

That's like asking why the people in Star Wars speak English :) Although this obvious plot query is nominally handled in the film, the real reason is that Cameron is using his epic canvas to present an exciting metaphor for how he sees the world, hence the object of desire (over which the conflicts take place) being dubbed 'unobtainium'.

Re: James Cameron’s New 3-D Epic Could Change Film Forever

#53

Post by spicyj » Tue, Dec 15, 2009, 1:03 AM UTC

vaporstun wrote: post #25

Damn, nobody liked it when I submitted the exact same link with the exact same title 2 days ago. :( http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=991197 Oh well. Still glad to see that people get to read it. I was especially impressed by push in technology that Cameron has made. I had no idea he was behind a lot of the push to get 3D projectors installed in theaters and how much he did to influence the creation of the 3D camer…

Yours used a straight apostrophe. ;)

Re: James Cameron’s New 3-D Epic Could Change Film Forever

#54

Post by anamax » Tue, Dec 15, 2009, 1:54 AM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #37

anamax wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a new camera that has already changed film making http://www.red.com/ will make more of a difference. You can buy one for what it costs to rent others for a week or so.

No. I'm a big fan of RED, and commend them to the study of anyone interested in hardware hacking to commercial ends, but what they (and others) are doing is making high-quality digital image acquisition affordable. The actual photography part is fundamentally the same as with any film camera. Almost all 3d work made up to now has consisted of taking two good cameras and mounting them next to each other, then setting…

You're assuming that 3D will be significant. I don't.

We'll know soon enough.

Re: James Cameron’s New 3-D Epic Could Change Film Forever

#55

Post by elatedrobot » Tue, Dec 15, 2009, 2:18 AM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #34

Although the article mentions the topic, it has such a broad sweep that it obscures the real takeaway, which is the way that 3d is employed. All the stuff about the incredibly detailed CG, backstory etc. is valid and interesting, but epic levels of such are not really new - Star Wars has a very detailed alternative universe, and any Tolkien nerd above a certain age can remember the vast level of supplementary data on…

That very same deep focus technique in video games makes me nauseous on an hd tv. I wonder if it will be more or less puke-worthy in 3d. I'll report back on friday.

Re: James Cameron’s New 3-D Epic Could Change Film Forever

#56

Post by byrneseyeview » Tue, Dec 15, 2009, 2:28 AM UTC

sketerpot wrote: post #47

byrneseyeview wrote: post #11

As a sign of his commitment, Cameron agreed to give up his entire directing fee and any profit participation in the movie. He showed his commitment by giving up a financial stake? It would have shown more commitment if he'd given up any flat fee in order to get a higher percentage of the profits.

I think the idea was to show that he's in it for the art, not for the money.

If I were in it for the money (i.e. if I were a major studio), that would not be a good sign.

Re: James Cameron’s New 3-D Epic Could Change Film Forever

#57

Post by dmix » Tue, Dec 15, 2009, 2:36 AM UTC

mbrubeck wrote: post #20

axod wrote: post #2

I don't see why this "Could change film forever". This is just an advert for a movie.

This (long) New Yorker profile of Cameron might be more interesting to some Hacker News readers. It focuses less on the tech, and more on Cameron's personality and career: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/10/26/091026fa_fact_... It paints him as a sort of Steve Jobs figure, with a really incredible drive to create and succeed, often at the expense of all else. > She wanted to get married, but Cameron, she says…

This article is much better than Wired's.

It also has some inconsistencies, the New Yorker said is was Space 2001 not Star Wars that inspired him to create films.

Re: James Cameron’s New 3-D Epic Could Change Film Forever

#58

Post by henrikschroder » Tue, Dec 15, 2009, 2:51 AM UTC

anamax wrote: post #54

anigbrowl wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. I'm a big fan of RED, and commend them to the study of anyone interested in hardware hacking to commercial ends, but what they (and others) are doing is making high-quality digital image acquisition affordable. The actual photography part is fundamentally the same as with any film camera. Almost all 3d work made up to now has consisted of taking two good cameras and mounting them next to each other, then setting…

You're assuming that 3D will be significant. I don't. We'll know soon enough.

It's highly interesting for the entire movie industry, because it's an experience you currently have to go to the cinemas to get, you can't get it from buying some cheap consumer electronics and downloading something off the internet.

If Cameron has made something that makes 3D integral to the cinema experience instead of just something that feels tacked-on and not necessary, that can definitely change cinema forever, whether we like it or not. :-)

Re: James Cameron’s New 3-D Epic Could Change Film Forever

#59

Post by jonny_noog » Tue, Dec 15, 2009, 4:05 AM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #34

Although the article mentions the topic, it has such a broad sweep that it obscures the real takeaway, which is the way that 3d is employed. All the stuff about the incredibly detailed CG, backstory etc. is valid and interesting, but epic levels of such are not really new - Star Wars has a very detailed alternative universe, and any Tolkien nerd above a certain age can remember the vast level of supplementary data on…

Great to read such an in depth analysis. I had read about Cameron's integration of CGI with live action at production time, but had not found anything that explains this different kind of 3D as well as you just did.

I've had this hunch for a while that there are show biz executives out there hoping against hope that Cameron's new 3D technology - which as you say can only be fully appreciated in the cinema - will magically save the industry from the evils of content piracy. Will be amusing to see how that pans out.

As much as I'm looking forward to seeing Avatar, a lot of the conversations that I've had with people about the movie revolve around the concern that the movie its self will be overshadowed by the technology. E.g. when Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within was released, my friends and I went to see it solely because the CGI looked so state of the art (we're geeks, what can I say), and it surely had pretty graphics. But the story (what there was of it) and just about everything else sucked pretty hard. It seems like they were really counting on the CGI to carry the movie. Either that or they were just in denial of how crap the other aspects of the movie really were.

So I'm really just hoping that they've ended up putting more into Avatar than the new technology alone. A story line more original than that which has been hinted at would be good.

Re: James Cameron’s New 3-D Epic Could Change Film Forever

#60

Post by anigbrowl » Tue, Dec 15, 2009, 5:22 AM UTC

jonny_noog wrote: post #59

anigbrowl wrote: post #34

Although the article mentions the topic, it has such a broad sweep that it obscures the real takeaway, which is the way that 3d is employed. All the stuff about the incredibly detailed CG, backstory etc. is valid and interesting, but epic levels of such are not really new - Star Wars has a very detailed alternative universe, and any Tolkien nerd above a certain age can remember the vast level of supplementary data on…

Great to read such an in depth analysis. I had read about Cameron's integration of CGI with live action at production time, but had not found anything that explains this different kind of 3D as well as you just did. I've had this hunch for a while that there are show biz executives out there hoping against hope that Cameron's new 3D technology - which as you say can only be fully appreciated in the cinema - will magi…

I'm fairly confident about this...partly as a fan of Cameron, but also because story/plot, although fundamentally important, need not be so complex or original to be good. As a quick tongue-in-cheek guide to previous work of his:

The Terminator: Robot from the future menaces woman from the present to protect own existence, future career as CA governor. Aliens: return to th planet of the Aliens. Even with bigger guns, they are still dangerous. The Abyss: Undersea explorers find intelligent life at bottom of sea, panic. Terminator 2: Robot from the future menaces woman from the present to protect own existence, future governor of CA switches sides. True Lies: Future CA governor is mild-mannered computer salesman by day, fights terrorists by night (should be familiar life situation to many HN readers). Titanic: pretty heiress enjoys shipboard romance with handsome peasant until angry fiance catches her. Boat sinks, panic ensues.

Seriously, the fact that you can summarize a story easily tells us little about the process of working it out on screen for an audience. So while Avatar can be summed up as 'greedy humans want space oil buried under village of fighting smurfs, conflict ensues', the real story (as with most of his work) is what happens when an individual's experience of the world places them in conflict with the status quo, perhaps one that may not even exist yet. Critics may deride this as formulaic, but Cameron's main theme is the conflict between the individual and the social, which does not yield to simple analyses of good vs. evil.