Comments on: Avatar | The Problem With 3D | Life Through a Lens http://www.kesterbrewin.com/2010/02/19/avatar-the-problem-with-3d-life-through-a-lens/ // __ issues. in code. __ // Wed, 01 Feb 2012 12:30:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Leon http://www.kesterbrewin.com/2010/02/19/avatar-the-problem-with-3d-life-through-a-lens/comment-page-1/#comment-2419 Leon Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:47:50 +0000 http://www.kesterbrewin.com/?p=1188#comment-2419 I thought it was all CG. Maybe I'll have to see it again in IMAX to check. Certainly there were a lot of CG shots where the only characters were human (e.g. the still you included above), and I never got irritated with people's skin transparency changing as they switched between CG and photographed, or people with differing levels of skin transparency talking to each other (and that's something that tends to irritate me) I also have no actual proof that the motivation for a narrow DoF was to prevent people wandering off; it might have been for some other reason (maybe we're so used to it that films with infinite DoF look strange) I thought it was all CG. Maybe I’ll have to see it again in IMAX to check.

Certainly there were a lot of CG shots where the only characters were human (e.g. the still you included above), and I never got irritated with people’s skin transparency changing as they switched between CG and photographed, or people with differing levels of skin transparency talking to each other (and that’s something that tends to irritate me)

I also have no actual proof that the motivation for a narrow DoF was to prevent people wandering off; it might have been for some other reason (maybe we’re so used to it that films with infinite DoF look strange)

]]> By: KB http://www.kesterbrewin.com/2010/02/19/avatar-the-problem-with-3d-life-through-a-lens/comment-page-1/#comment-2417 KB Fri, 19 Feb 2010 11:52:52 +0000 http://www.kesterbrewin.com/?p=1188#comment-2417 Interesting... Surely it's not all cgi though is it? Seemed to be some 'normal' shots - and it was in these that I found it most distracting. Would be interesting to hear their thinking on creating such an immersive film but then opting to narrow the depth of field so that people don't wander... Interesting… Surely it’s not all cgi though is it? Seemed to be some ‘normal’ shots – and it was in these that I found it most distracting. Would be interesting to hear their thinking on creating such an immersive film but then opting to narrow the depth of field so that people don’t wander…

]]> By: Leon http://www.kesterbrewin.com/2010/02/19/avatar-the-problem-with-3d-life-through-a-lens/comment-page-1/#comment-2416 Leon Fri, 19 Feb 2010 11:25:40 +0000 http://www.kesterbrewin.com/?p=1188#comment-2416 When IMAX first appeared, and most of the films were nature documentaries and so on, it was noted that people did look around more because of the immersive experience. And with avatar there isn't a camera; the entire move is CG rendered. This means that if they wanted to they could easily get whatever depth of field they want (in fact infinite depth of field is easiest; they've spent money and effort to create a shallower DoF) I suspect that the shallow DoF is there precisely to prevent viewers from wandering off into the jungle. When IMAX first appeared, and most of the films were nature documentaries and so on, it was noted that people did look around more because of the immersive experience. And with avatar there isn’t a camera; the entire move is CG rendered. This means that if they wanted to they could easily get whatever depth of field they want (in fact infinite depth of field is easiest; they’ve spent money and effort to create a shallower DoF)

I suspect that the shallow DoF is there precisely to prevent viewers from wandering off into the jungle.

]]>