The Hobbit, the Uncanny Valley, and what it means for 3D
cianclarke.com
The Hobbit, the Uncanny Valley, and what it means for 3D
1–10 of 62 posts
Re: The Hobbit, the Uncanny Valley, and what it means for 3D
#2Isn't the ordering of the Hobbit scenes on the graph backwards? The unfamiliar scenes ("orc-filled battlefields ...") are more acceptable because they are less like the real life we know & love than the familiar ones ("... a character standing in the doorway"). So they are on the less realistic (left) side of the Uncanny Valley, not the more realistic (right) side.
Other than that, I think your argument works.
Re: The Hobbit, the Uncanny Valley, and what it means for 3D
#3Isn't the ordering of the Hobbit scenes on the graph backwards? The unfamiliar scenes ("orc-filled battlefields ...") are more acceptable because they are less like the real life we know & love than the familiar ones ("... a character standing in the doorway"). So they are on the less realistic (left) side of the Uncanny Valley, not the more realistic (right) side. Other than that, I think your argument works.
The graph shows a dip on the rightmost side below the leftmost side before going right up to indistinguishable from reality, that's the basic premise of the old uncanny valley hypothesis, that things which are just short of indistinguishable from the real thing are less desirable than fairly good approximations which could not otherwise be confused, due to the feeling that something implacable about them is a little off.
Re: The Hobbit, the Uncanny Valley, and what it means for 3D
#4Isn't the ordering of the Hobbit scenes on the graph backwards? The unfamiliar scenes ("orc-filled battlefields ...") are more acceptable because they are less like the real life we know & love than the familiar ones ("... a character standing in the doorway"). So they are on the less realistic (left) side of the Uncanny Valley, not the more realistic (right) side. Other than that, I think your argument works.
The idea is as the graph comes 'out of the valley', things become more and more real - so the familiar scenes, which look false to us, stay in the uncanny valley, whilst the less familiar scenes have already climbed up the other side. Just my interpretation / application of the age old theory though, so it's open to question no doubt - thanks for reading :-)
Re: The Hobbit, the Uncanny Valley, and what it means for 3D
#5Isn't the ordering of the Hobbit scenes on the graph backwards? The unfamiliar scenes ("orc-filled battlefields ...") are more acceptable because they are less like the real life we know & love than the familiar ones ("... a character standing in the doorway"). So they are on the less realistic (left) side of the Uncanny Valley, not the more realistic (right) side. Other than that, I think your argument works.
I think the argument is that the valley is further left on unfamiliar scenes, as "can just barely tell it's wrong" is more wrong for those things that stuff we know really well.
Alternatively you could say "Orcs are unreal, so there isn't an uncanny valley at all for them"
Re: The Hobbit, the Uncanny Valley, and what it means for 3D
#6Isn't the ordering of the Hobbit scenes on the graph backwards? The unfamiliar scenes ("orc-filled battlefields ...") are more acceptable because they are less like the real life we know & love than the familiar ones ("... a character standing in the doorway"). So they are on the less realistic (left) side of the Uncanny Valley, not the more realistic (right) side. Other than that, I think your argument works.
I think the argument is that the valley is further left on unfamiliar scenes, as "can just barely tell it's wrong" is more wrong for those things that stuff we know really well. Alternatively you could say "Orcs are unreal, so there isn't an uncanny valley at all for them"
True, in which case I think putting the orcs elevated out of the uncanny valley towards reality is probably a strange thing to do! Can't remember the last time I came across an orc on the way to the shops..!
Same theory still applies for panning through scenery or walking thru a marketplace though.
Re: The Hobbit, the Uncanny Valley, and what it means for 3D
#7Is it possible that the uncanniness of the more mundane in The Hobbit magnifies our affinity for the more fantastical? I don't doubt The Hobbit has improved on the technology and its applications to film. However, if the mundane is relatively more uncanny than in other films, perhaps a more modest improvement is benefiting from comparison to a lower baseline. That is, maybe the lows are slightly lower, and the highs are only slightly higher.
Re: The Hobbit, the Uncanny Valley, and what it means for 3D
#8For those interested in an in-depth look at 48 fps in The Hobbit from an artistic viewpoint, here are two good blog posts discussing its effect on filmmaking:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/18/3780274/48-fps-how-we-acc...
http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2012/12/19/the-hobbit-an-unex...
I've read the first article so far, which suggests that solving problems with 48 fps present in The Hobbit is simply a matter of modifying filmmaking techniques.
Re: The Hobbit, the Uncanny Valley, and what it means for 3D
#9Can we play 48fps on our computers? I mean: is there a common video format supporting 48fps and a common media player (eg VLC) able to play at 48fps?
If so, the following movie would be great: make several types of animations / sequences (both filmed and 3D and, if possible, a mix of both) but... On the left part of the movie you show it at 48fps while on the right part of the movie you show only, say, even frames (hence showing each even frame twice and skipping every uneven frame).
That would be a great "visual explanation" as to what 48fps does.
Re: The Hobbit, the Uncanny Valley, and what it means for 3D
#10Ok, has anyone tried selecting the text on that blog? The effect made me feel as though I was drunk. Why does it do that?