Fact: Post-Conversion 3-D Sucks… and So Does Prime Focus

If you could see me right now, if you were sitting right next to me you’d see that I’m bright red with smoke shooting out of my ears. No, this isn’t a cartoon, this is real life. And because this is real life you can turn off garbage whenever you so desire. So stop being used, stand up and put your foot down. Post-conversion 3-D processing is dog sh*t, it’s garbage, it’s thievery, although Prime Focus will lead to you believe otherwise. Read on for the latest 3-D rumbling and don’t become a fool. Spread the good word by teaching everyone around you why they shouldn’t see films like Clash of the Titans in 3-D. In fact, maybe it’s time to start boycotting them altogether?
There are a lot of different techniques,” said Chris Bond, president of Prime Focus, North America, and developer of the company’s View-D 2D/3D conversion method to the Hollywood Reporter. “I invite filmmakers to come and test their material, and to see ‘Clash.’ We have a lot of creativity and artistic drive to make sure the results look fantastic. I think it looks great.

Either this guy is blind or he’s a narcissistic liar. How many of you have seen Clash of the Titans or Alice in Wonderland in 3-D? How many of you have seen one of the aforementioned films and something like Avatar, Up or even Monster House? Then you should know without a shadow of a doubt that REAL 3-D is the ONLY 3-D. Why? Let’s have the New York Times’ Manohla Dargis explain:

The 3D in the Clash of the Titans remake, which was added after it was shot, has none of the immersive quality of Avatar and instead segments the image into discrete planes, bringing to mind the unintegrated levels of a pop-up book.

A pop-up book. That’s exactly what I’ve been whining and complaining about on my Twitter page. Open up your head and think about it. How can you make something shot in 2-D and turn it into 3-D? I mean REALLY think about it guys. If the camera only captures the image right in front of it, how can some company like Prime Focus play God and create alternate angles of a flat image? Can you wrap your head around the idea of that poster on your wall being converted to 3-D?

Some of you will say yes, but you’re not understanding. You can create DEPTH OF FIELD, but you cannot create actual 3-D. What these studios are doing is adding LAYERS to a film (blacks in the back, reds and greens in the front) and claiming that it’s authentic 3-D. Why? So they can charge you nearly DOUBLE for ticket prices.

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

Said Roger Ebert, a 3D skeptic: “One word of consumer advice: Explain to kids that the movie was not filmed in 3D and is only being shown in 3D in order to charge you an extra $5 a ticket. I saw it in 2D, and let me tell you, it looked terrific.

These studio execs are foolish, absolutely foolish. While they think they’re being smart by making some extra cash off the fake 3-D, what they are doing is what I like to call the “Lionsgate” syndrome (although, recently the home entertainment department has been doing quite well).

In my little circle of friends, there was a time where we’d flip over a DVD box to see what company was releasing the film. Lionsgate was a no-brainer, at least until the shelves became cluttered with crap. It’s called consumer confidence. Provide a crappy product and eventually the consumer will catch on and turn their backs on you. We stopped renting every Lionsgate DVD release and became quite weary of what was on the shelf.

Post-conversion 3-D is Lionsgate syndrome in that all of the studios collectivly will screw over enough moviegoers to where they’ll turn their back on the process and we’ll lose 3-D forever. It’s hard work to do it right, but if you don’t it can even make the audience SICK.

3D is a different medium and requires thinking a different way,” Sony Pictures Imageworks senior stereographer Rob Engle said. “For instance, (the animated) Monster House was originally planned as 2D, and in some shots they added camera shake. For the 3D version, we dialed it back — because we were able to dial it back in animation. In live-action, you can’t take out the camera shake. There are photographic styles that don’t lend themselves as well to 3D.

The bottom line, he said, is “conversion is really hard. You are taking shots that were not intended as a VFX shot and making them a VFX shot. That is neither easy nor cheap. If you don’t have the appropriate amount of time, money and technical and creative talent, you are going to receive a result that is not satisfactory.

Dave Walton, assistant vp marketing and communication at JVC Professional, cautioned: “No 3D is better than bad 3D. Those who view bad 3D can get headaches and nausea within a few short minutes. So conversion has to be accurate, and you have to pay attention to the brain’s ability to process the images without fatigue.

I want 3-D, I love 3-D and I’m so so so so down with 3-D. Obviously, I wouldn’t want to see Hostel or Paranormal Activity in 3-D, but who wouldn’t mind something along the lines of Drive Angry or Piranha? Oops, did I say Piranha? FAKE 3-D. GARBAGE. But man, it would have been cool to see that in real 3-D.

Anyways, you can read more about this war over at THR, but please, please, please start spreading the word.

If enough of you stand up, bitch, moan, tweet, blog, etc etc about the injustice in the system, people will take note. We can make a difference.

I wish I could send Chris Bond a pop-up book in the mail so he can wrap his mind around it. Oh wait, he knows, he just wants to make money off YOU.