Stereoscopic 3D – It’s Lens Flare All Over Again

So I’m a little (very) cynical when it comes to ‘3D’ or Stereoscopic, since, well, it’s not actually 3D, but an optical illusion to provide the appearance of spacial depth. It’s grossly expensive to purchase the equipment, limited content, most varieties require the use of rather goofy glasses and you have to be seated in a ‘sweet spot’ in order to view the effect properly. In essence – a magic trick.

As the title suggest, Stereoscopic is pretty much the new Lens Flare of the digital world. The first time you see it you think ‘Wow!’, it instantly turns your drab and dreary holiday photo into a stylistic masterpiece. Then everyone else starts using it, applying it to anything and everything to give it that ‘magical’ and stylized feel – even when it’s not needed. It’s at this point people get sick of it and consigns it to the evil bin of cheap tricks. Well, the latter part still hasn’t come to fruition for stereoscopic, but one can hope…

One Walter Murch; famous within the movie industry as a sound designer for creating environmental presence, has a bone to pick with 3D too. The problem lies with the optical illusion part, and the havoc it causes with both our eyes and brain.

When we look around, our eyes both focus and converge on an object, bringing it into focus so we can see it clearly. With stereoscopic, our eyes need to focus on the projected media (TV or Screen) but change convergence (eyes tilt in/out) rapidly as objects move closer and further away (it’s a wonder we don’t walk out the theater cross-eyed). In nature, our eyes don’t normally do this, since we are typically staring at one thing at a time, rather than it constantly shifting plain.

The other problem is this rapid processing of constantly changing depth, causing our brains to work overtime – headache inducing overtime. Mixed with a strobing effect as our brains try to catch up with the horizontal panning that often occurs in movies and we have a recipe for a seizure inducing migraine – all for the sake of a nice ‘trick’.

So why is 3D used? To engage the audience? To bring them closer to the story and capture their imagination? Or is it simply done for cheap (expensive) thrills? Only the directors can answer that, but as many will tell you, you don’t need cheap tricks to make an environment or story come alive.

I’ve lost myself in stories through my own imagination, powered by eyes reading words from printed paper. I’ve delightfully wasted days of my life playing absorbing games like Mass Effect, or watching reruns of TV series like Stargate and Babylon 5. Did I need 3D to bring me closer to this imaginary world? Not really. So why are they remaking Star Wars in post processed 3D? Who knows…

Maybe this fad will die soon enough, but in the mean time, it seems to have gripped the world media and movie studios. Films that don’t need it are being converted, TV manufacturers are trying to shove it down our throats without any content to back it up… Yes, I’ll continue to rant about stereoscopic until it goes away, like it did in the 20’s, then the 50’s and again in the 80’s. When real 3D makes its way into our living-rooms, e.g. through holographic displays, then they’ll have my attention.

I received a letter that ends, as far as I am concerned, the discussion about 3D. It doesn’t work with our brains and it never will. The notion that we are asked to pay a premium to witness an inferior and inherently brain-confusing image is outrageous. The case is closed.