philip lelyveld The world of entertainment technology

Most companies charge a premium for 3D, but here's an inexpensive DIY alternative for just $5. All you need are transparency film, a regular 1,200dpi printer, and a monitor that's 24 inches or smaller.

(Phil Lelyveld addendum) A 7 minute explanation of what parallax barrier is and how this $5 solution works is here.  The full tutorial for creating this $5 solution is here; look for the Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:53 am post.

The original story is here: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20029530-1.html?tag=mncol;2n

Phil Lelyveld comment: Roger Ebert takes one letter from Walter Murch describing his personal experience with the vergence-accommodation conflict (the basis of stereoscopic 3D display) and projects his views onto all of humanity to make the logical leap that S3D will never work.  There is much work currently underway in the studios, among production crews and post houses, in the game development community, and elsewhere to understand how to manage this conflict for long-duration viewing experiences and avoid the issues that Walter Murch raises.  There is much academic research underway to understand how to manage the conflict relative to the human visual system.  There is also work underway to educate professionals and the general public about the usefulness of S3D as a diagnostic tool for vision problems that vision therapy may correct.   Identifying children who have vision problems that surface when watching S3D content, for example, is the first step toward helping them potentially become better students and athletes (story here).  Many of the problems Mr. Murch and Mr. Ebert mention will fade with advances in the technology (ex. better editing tools, faster frame rates, brighter lamp houses / projectors) and the art (e.g. developing the language) of S3D.  Others are generational.  As Alan Kay said, technology is what was invented after you were born.  Older people must adjust to S3D if they chose to, but kids will just accept it.

Ebert post

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.

Read the full Roger Ebert post here: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/01/post_4.html

Andrew Woods, an individual working in 3D in Australia, maintains this excellent reference site:

http://www.3dmovielist.com/list.html

(Phil Lelyveld comment: This positive view of 3D and Health is one I have been advocating in my non-ETC communications for months.)

In fact, the optometrists group said 3-D viewing for children might actually help uncover subtle disorders that, left uncorrected, often result in learning difficulties. In this context, it is not enough to have 20/20 visual acuity. Eye muscles must be coordinated well enough to experience single, clear and comfortable vision by maintaining alignment of both eyes.

Original post here