1
00:00:00,320 --> 00:00:02,880
Speaker 1: Brought to you by the reinvented two thousand twelve camera.

2
00:00:03,240 --> 00:00:08,959
Speaker 1: It's ready. Are you get in touch with technology? With

3
00:00:09,080 --> 00:00:18,040
Speaker 1: tech Stuff from how stuff works dot com. Hello again, everyone,

4
00:00:18,120 --> 00:00:20,880
Speaker 1: and welcome to tech stuff. My name is Chris Pallette.

5
00:00:20,880 --> 00:00:23,000
Speaker 1: I'm an editor at how stuff works dot com, and

6
00:00:23,040 --> 00:00:26,800
Speaker 1: sitting across from me, as always, is senior writer Jonathan Strickland. Well,

7
00:00:27,120 --> 00:00:30,400
Speaker 1: you know it's that old shark screen, the bubble screen.

8
00:00:30,480 --> 00:00:33,320
Speaker 1: You know, sharks don't like that. It's what they call

9
00:00:33,400 --> 00:00:38,960
Speaker 1: a marine segregation. Okay, then that that quote comes from

10
00:00:39,040 --> 00:00:43,640
Speaker 1: a movie that was in three D, and it leads

11
00:00:43,880 --> 00:00:48,520
Speaker 1: us to our first in a long time listener mail.

12
00:00:53,760 --> 00:00:56,840
Speaker 1: This listener mail comes from Calvin, and Calvin says, I

13
00:00:56,880 --> 00:01:00,240
Speaker 1: was thinking that with movies like Avatar, Yes, I'm ill

14
00:01:00,320 --> 00:01:03,760
Speaker 1: talking about Avatar and other big three D sort of

15
00:01:03,840 --> 00:01:06,760
Speaker 1: c g I movies like Alice in Wonderland. Maybe a

16
00:01:06,800 --> 00:01:09,600
Speaker 1: podcast on that would be fun. Any who, keep up

17
00:01:09,600 --> 00:01:15,200
Speaker 1: the good work. Calvin B. From Minnetonka, Minnesota. All right,

18
00:01:15,880 --> 00:01:17,960
Speaker 1: so we're gonna talk a little bit about three D movies. Now,

19
00:01:17,959 --> 00:01:20,480
Speaker 1: we've talked about three D glasses in the past and

20
00:01:20,520 --> 00:01:24,000
Speaker 1: three D television, but we really didn't go into the

21
00:01:24,040 --> 00:01:28,280
Speaker 1: whole process of making a three D film or or

22
00:01:28,560 --> 00:01:32,000
Speaker 1: three D video. Um and so we thought this would

23
00:01:32,080 --> 00:01:35,759
Speaker 1: kind of fall into our movie making technology series. I agree,

24
00:01:35,800 --> 00:01:38,000
Speaker 1: and I think it would be nice to start with

25
00:01:38,040 --> 00:01:40,800
Speaker 1: a refresher about the three D glasses because that has

26
00:01:40,840 --> 00:01:43,440
Speaker 1: a lot to do with how you make a movie

27
00:01:43,520 --> 00:01:45,400
Speaker 1: and the reason why you make the movie the way

28
00:01:45,440 --> 00:01:47,920
Speaker 1: you do. That's a good point. So let's start with

29
00:01:47,960 --> 00:01:50,440
Speaker 1: talking about what makes three D three D in the

30
00:01:50,440 --> 00:01:53,080
Speaker 1: first place. Okay, So the first thing you need to

31
00:01:53,120 --> 00:01:59,360
Speaker 1: know is that we perceived depth through many different um ways.

32
00:01:59,400 --> 00:02:02,480
Speaker 1: But one of those ways is through what we call parallax.

33
00:02:02,600 --> 00:02:06,280
Speaker 1: And parallax is the difference in viewing angle between one

34
00:02:06,360 --> 00:02:09,680
Speaker 1: eye and the other eye. So, if you were looking

35
00:02:09,720 --> 00:02:12,040
Speaker 1: at an object that's a few feet away from you,

36
00:02:12,040 --> 00:02:13,679
Speaker 1: you know your left eye in your right eye are

37
00:02:13,800 --> 00:02:18,080
Speaker 1: not They're not located exactly in the same spot, otherwise

38
00:02:18,120 --> 00:02:22,440
Speaker 1: you'd be a cyclops. Uh. So that means that your

39
00:02:22,520 --> 00:02:25,040
Speaker 1: your brain is getting two sets of images that are

40
00:02:25,080 --> 00:02:28,560
Speaker 1: slightly offset from each other, and it incorporates those two

41
00:02:28,600 --> 00:02:31,360
Speaker 1: sets of images into a single image in your head.

42
00:02:31,960 --> 00:02:35,080
Speaker 1: And so that's that's one of the ways we perceive depth.

43
00:02:35,080 --> 00:02:37,680
Speaker 1: There are other ways as well, like visual cues of

44
00:02:37,720 --> 00:02:40,320
Speaker 1: the size of something, and judging by the size, you

45
00:02:40,360 --> 00:02:42,200
Speaker 1: kind of figure out how far away it is. And

46
00:02:42,200 --> 00:02:45,400
Speaker 1: parallax only really works to a certain distance anyway. Once

47
00:02:45,440 --> 00:02:47,760
Speaker 1: you get beyond you know, I don't know, I think

48
00:02:47,760 --> 00:02:50,840
Speaker 1: it's like twenty or thirty feet, parallax doesn't play as

49
00:02:50,840 --> 00:02:53,720
Speaker 1: big a role because it's getting far in the objects,

50
00:02:53,720 --> 00:02:55,639
Speaker 1: getting far enough away where your eyes are getting closer

51
00:02:55,639 --> 00:02:58,480
Speaker 1: and closer to being parallel. So if you focus on

52
00:02:58,520 --> 00:03:02,680
Speaker 1: something that is effectly an infinite distance away, and of

53
00:03:02,680 --> 00:03:06,400
Speaker 1: course that's you know, I'm saying effectively infinite. So for example,

54
00:03:06,440 --> 00:03:09,200
Speaker 1: example a star out you know, if you're looking at

55
00:03:09,240 --> 00:03:12,240
Speaker 1: a starry sky, the distance of that object is so

56
00:03:12,280 --> 00:03:14,840
Speaker 1: far away that your eyes are essentially in parallel with

57
00:03:14,840 --> 00:03:19,000
Speaker 1: one another. They're not converging at all. But parallax is

58
00:03:19,000 --> 00:03:22,919
Speaker 1: a very important part of of getting a three D effect,

59
00:03:23,320 --> 00:03:27,400
Speaker 1: especially on film or video and um so, the idea

60
00:03:28,000 --> 00:03:31,280
Speaker 1: is that you have to present two different sets of images.

61
00:03:32,320 --> 00:03:34,960
Speaker 1: Each set of images is going to be perceived by

62
00:03:35,080 --> 00:03:38,680
Speaker 1: only the left or the right eye, and then when

63
00:03:38,840 --> 00:03:41,800
Speaker 1: your brain sees, when your brain senses these two sets

64
00:03:41,800 --> 00:03:44,680
Speaker 1: of images, that combines them into a single image that

65
00:03:44,800 --> 00:03:47,760
Speaker 1: has the illusion of depth. Well, yeah, I mean there

66
00:03:47,680 --> 00:03:50,920
Speaker 1: are there are two different types of of three D glasses,

67
00:03:50,960 --> 00:03:53,880
Speaker 1: of course, the older one being the Anaglyph method and

68
00:03:53,920 --> 00:03:57,720
Speaker 1: the newer one being the polarized version. Anaglyph was the

69
00:03:57,760 --> 00:04:00,120
Speaker 1: one that had the two different colored lenses. Yeah, it

70
00:04:00,160 --> 00:04:02,680
Speaker 1: was either a red or blue, or red or green.

71
00:04:02,840 --> 00:04:06,640
Speaker 1: And now you were saying to me earlier red and cyan.

72
00:04:06,960 --> 00:04:10,360
Speaker 1: It's sort of the the accepted color and uh and

73
00:04:10,400 --> 00:04:13,080
Speaker 1: the polarized ones. What that means is that the lenses

74
00:04:13,120 --> 00:04:16,560
Speaker 1: are polarized to allow light that is aligned a certain

75
00:04:16,600 --> 00:04:19,400
Speaker 1: way to pass through, and light that's aligned and I

76
00:04:19,400 --> 00:04:23,560
Speaker 1: think it's ninety degree um other alignment that that light

77
00:04:23,600 --> 00:04:27,000
Speaker 1: will not pass through the lens. So each lens is

78
00:04:27,080 --> 00:04:32,120
Speaker 1: letting one kind of light through and blocking the other kind. Yeah,

79
00:04:32,120 --> 00:04:34,840
Speaker 1: I think that's probably more sophisticated way of doing at

80
00:04:34,839 --> 00:04:38,200
Speaker 1: The Anaglyph method required a red layer and a blue

81
00:04:38,360 --> 00:04:42,800
Speaker 1: or green layer of the movie so that the glasses

82
00:04:42,839 --> 00:04:46,240
Speaker 1: could interpret the images correctly, because, for example, the red

83
00:04:46,320 --> 00:04:50,520
Speaker 1: lens uh makes the other color appear darker, so you

84
00:04:50,640 --> 00:04:53,760
Speaker 1: see that better through that eye, and then the blue

85
00:04:53,839 --> 00:04:57,360
Speaker 1: lens is the opposite. It makes the red uh frame

86
00:04:57,839 --> 00:05:00,240
Speaker 1: is it? Frame would be the right word? Layer layer, Yeah,

87
00:05:00,440 --> 00:05:03,400
Speaker 1: red layer show up better. Um, So it appears three

88
00:05:03,480 --> 00:05:06,200
Speaker 1: D and because of the spacing between the two images,

89
00:05:06,240 --> 00:05:08,760
Speaker 1: that's what gives the the illusion of depth. Right. The

90
00:05:08,800 --> 00:05:11,360
Speaker 1: two images are offset, and of course that's really important

91
00:05:11,400 --> 00:05:13,560
Speaker 1: because if they weren't offset, all you'd be doing is

92
00:05:13,600 --> 00:05:18,160
Speaker 1: making a really lousy, fuzzy image for no good reason. Yes,

93
00:05:18,200 --> 00:05:19,599
Speaker 1: which is kind of how it looks when you're not

94
00:05:19,640 --> 00:05:22,760
Speaker 1: wearing the glasses. Yes, and there there is one a

95
00:05:22,839 --> 00:05:25,360
Speaker 1: third type of of glasses that we should talk about,

96
00:05:25,400 --> 00:05:29,200
Speaker 1: although this is I don't think it's ever used in films.

97
00:05:29,440 --> 00:05:31,760
Speaker 1: I've never been to a movie where they used this method.

98
00:05:31,839 --> 00:05:35,920
Speaker 1: But that's the shutter lens method, like the active active glasses,

99
00:05:35,920 --> 00:05:38,680
Speaker 1: which are more often used for things like computers or

100
00:05:39,080 --> 00:05:43,240
Speaker 1: sun Television systems are also experimenting with active glasses. Now.

101
00:05:43,279 --> 00:05:46,719
Speaker 1: Active glasses require a power supply and they actually have

102
00:05:46,760 --> 00:05:48,760
Speaker 1: a little l C D shutters in them that shutter

103
00:05:48,880 --> 00:05:51,800
Speaker 1: on and off at incredible speeds. So to you, when

104
00:05:51,800 --> 00:05:54,239
Speaker 1: you're wearing the glasses, it doesn't appear like they're shuttering

105
00:05:54,279 --> 00:05:56,600
Speaker 1: on and off at all, but they really are and

106
00:05:56,720 --> 00:06:02,760
Speaker 1: the images you're looking at are are are Wow. I

107
00:06:02,800 --> 00:06:06,559
Speaker 1: had the word there you go synchronized with each lens,

108
00:06:06,600 --> 00:06:09,520
Speaker 1: thank you. Um yeah, that was my brain gave out

109
00:06:09,560 --> 00:06:12,120
Speaker 1: on me. But yes, like the the left lens would

110
00:06:12,120 --> 00:06:14,440
Speaker 1: be synchronized with one set of images, the right lens

111
00:06:14,480 --> 00:06:16,880
Speaker 1: would be synchronized with the other set of images. They

112
00:06:16,880 --> 00:06:20,640
Speaker 1: would alternate those images at a speed that is uh

113
00:06:20,760 --> 00:06:23,320
Speaker 1: so fast that you can't really tell when you just

114
00:06:23,400 --> 00:06:27,200
Speaker 1: look at it. And um, so again, each eye would

115
00:06:27,200 --> 00:06:30,640
Speaker 1: be getting one set of images at a certain alignment.

116
00:06:30,960 --> 00:06:33,520
Speaker 1: Your brain would be putting all the information together and

117
00:06:33,560 --> 00:06:37,599
Speaker 1: you get the illusion of depth. UM. Projectors have trouble

118
00:06:37,640 --> 00:06:39,320
Speaker 1: with that. You have to have a projector that can

119
00:06:39,520 --> 00:06:42,560
Speaker 1: can run at an incredibly fast frame rate for that

120
00:06:42,600 --> 00:06:47,320
Speaker 1: to work, because you're you're you're shooting two different sets

121
00:06:47,320 --> 00:06:50,400
Speaker 1: of images, um, but not at the same time. They're

122
00:06:50,440 --> 00:06:52,960
Speaker 1: alternating so quickly that you have to you know, you

123
00:06:53,000 --> 00:06:55,360
Speaker 1: have to keep that frame rate up really really high

124
00:06:55,440 --> 00:06:59,040
Speaker 1: in order to maintain that illusion. These other methods, the

125
00:06:59,080 --> 00:07:02,520
Speaker 1: polarized method, the anaglyph method, you can have both sets

126
00:07:02,520 --> 00:07:06,320
Speaker 1: of images on the same strip of film. Uh, you know,

127
00:07:06,400 --> 00:07:08,440
Speaker 1: it's just it's two different layers on a on a

128
00:07:09,160 --> 00:07:11,080
Speaker 1: on one strip of film, so you don't have to

129
00:07:11,120 --> 00:07:16,000
Speaker 1: alternate images back and forth, you know. So, um yeah,

130
00:07:16,120 --> 00:07:18,480
Speaker 1: and your brain is doing all the work here. That's

131
00:07:18,520 --> 00:07:20,960
Speaker 1: the great thing is that once you once you've developed

132
00:07:20,960 --> 00:07:23,720
Speaker 1: the technology, the brain does everything else. All the special

133
00:07:23,720 --> 00:07:27,720
Speaker 1: effects are supplied by you. However, it does mean that

134
00:07:27,800 --> 00:07:31,240
Speaker 1: if you have suffered some vision loss, or if you

135
00:07:31,320 --> 00:07:34,440
Speaker 1: have some other ailments, you may not be able to

136
00:07:34,440 --> 00:07:38,080
Speaker 1: perceive three D in a three D film, right, So,

137
00:07:38,480 --> 00:07:41,880
Speaker 1: but you'll still need the glasses unfortunately, because if you

138
00:07:41,920 --> 00:07:43,840
Speaker 1: don't have the glasses, you're going to get that fuzzy

139
00:07:43,840 --> 00:07:46,200
Speaker 1: effect that Poulette was talking about. It's gonna look like

140
00:07:46,280 --> 00:07:48,960
Speaker 1: two sets of images on one strip of film, and

141
00:07:49,680 --> 00:07:52,760
Speaker 1: that's not a really pleasant viewing experience, as anyone who's

142
00:07:52,760 --> 00:07:56,920
Speaker 1: taken glasses off during a three D film could tell you. Right.

143
00:07:57,320 --> 00:08:00,640
Speaker 1: But the trick is how do you actually make the

144
00:08:00,680 --> 00:08:04,480
Speaker 1: movie so that it will appear in three D? Yeah,

145
00:08:04,520 --> 00:08:08,160
Speaker 1: there's there are three main methods of doing this. Okay,

146
00:08:08,440 --> 00:08:11,840
Speaker 1: There's there's converting a two D film into three D.

147
00:08:12,920 --> 00:08:16,080
Speaker 1: There's shooting a film in three D to start with,

148
00:08:17,000 --> 00:08:20,520
Speaker 1: and then there is using a computer generated film, and

149
00:08:20,560 --> 00:08:24,480
Speaker 1: then you artificially create a second camera within your c

150
00:08:24,640 --> 00:08:28,640
Speaker 1: g I world, and you make your film three D

151
00:08:28,760 --> 00:08:30,680
Speaker 1: that way. Okay, I was kind of I was kind

152
00:08:30,680 --> 00:08:32,960
Speaker 1: of lumping that in my head with the first one,

153
00:08:33,400 --> 00:08:36,800
Speaker 1: which was taking the original and then doing something to

154
00:08:36,880 --> 00:08:38,800
Speaker 1: it to make it three D. Yeah, it's when you

155
00:08:38,840 --> 00:08:40,480
Speaker 1: said three I was going, Okay, I don't know that.

156
00:08:40,880 --> 00:08:42,600
Speaker 1: It's kind of a bridge between the two when you

157
00:08:42,600 --> 00:08:45,760
Speaker 1: think about it, because you're you're creating a virtual camera,

158
00:08:46,240 --> 00:08:48,880
Speaker 1: so in a way, it's acting like you are actually

159
00:08:48,960 --> 00:08:51,280
Speaker 1: using you like you're filming in three D from the beginning.

160
00:08:51,679 --> 00:08:54,320
Speaker 1: But like you said, it's also incorporating some of the

161
00:08:54,360 --> 00:08:57,320
Speaker 1: elements of conversion of two D to three D. Um

162
00:08:57,400 --> 00:09:00,240
Speaker 1: let's talk a little bit about about the well, which

163
00:09:00,240 --> 00:09:02,320
Speaker 1: one would you like to tackle first? Well, I was

164
00:09:02,360 --> 00:09:05,280
Speaker 1: thinking that one of the things that's important to note

165
00:09:05,320 --> 00:09:08,760
Speaker 1: here is that live action is much more difficult to

166
00:09:08,800 --> 00:09:12,640
Speaker 1: convert to three D than computer graphics for the reason

167
00:09:12,679 --> 00:09:15,240
Speaker 1: that you just brought up, which is in the computer

168
00:09:15,320 --> 00:09:19,000
Speaker 1: graphic version, you can do things with the computers to

169
00:09:19,760 --> 00:09:23,160
Speaker 1: you know, create a different camera angle, uh, you know,

170
00:09:23,200 --> 00:09:24,559
Speaker 1: so that you would be able to do that a

171
00:09:24,559 --> 00:09:26,480
Speaker 1: little bit more readily than you could with live action.

172
00:09:26,520 --> 00:09:28,760
Speaker 1: So I think we should probably start with the traditional

173
00:09:28,800 --> 00:09:31,360
Speaker 1: method of doing live action because three D movies have

174
00:09:31,440 --> 00:09:34,959
Speaker 1: been around for quite some time since you're sure. Yeah,

175
00:09:35,520 --> 00:09:39,560
Speaker 1: like you were saying with the the just to tag

176
00:09:39,600 --> 00:09:41,079
Speaker 1: on what you were talking about with the c g

177
00:09:41,240 --> 00:09:44,199
Speaker 1: I movies, UM, yeah. The wonderful thing about c g

178
00:09:44,360 --> 00:09:46,520
Speaker 1: I movies if you're a filmmaker is that you are

179
00:09:46,600 --> 00:09:49,480
Speaker 1: not limited by the laws of physics, so you can

180
00:09:49,559 --> 00:09:54,719
Speaker 1: create a camera angle that is the ideal angle, uh,

181
00:09:54,760 --> 00:09:57,880
Speaker 1: to go with the other camera shots, so you know

182
00:09:57,920 --> 00:10:00,360
Speaker 1: you can you could create two camera angles where the

183
00:10:00,480 --> 00:10:05,680
Speaker 1: lenses would be the perfect lengths or the perfect distance

184
00:10:05,679 --> 00:10:08,280
Speaker 1: between the two in order to create the three D effect,

185
00:10:08,280 --> 00:10:12,000
Speaker 1: whereas in the real world most cameras are bulky and

186
00:10:12,120 --> 00:10:17,440
Speaker 1: you can't get the lenses physically close enough to uh

187
00:10:17,520 --> 00:10:20,960
Speaker 1: to mimic what you would see if you were standing there. Um.

188
00:10:21,000 --> 00:10:25,440
Speaker 1: It's it's called the interocular distance. It's the distance between

189
00:10:25,480 --> 00:10:29,559
Speaker 1: your eyes. Now, before we get into the actual physics

190
00:10:29,600 --> 00:10:34,520
Speaker 1: of shooting, UM, I was just gonna quickly mention that

191
00:10:34,679 --> 00:10:39,040
Speaker 1: the average interocular distance for a man is about sixty

192
00:10:39,040 --> 00:10:42,559
Speaker 1: five millimeters for a woman, it's about sixty three millimeters

193
00:10:42,559 --> 00:10:45,080
Speaker 1: and for a child it's about fifty one millimeters. So

194
00:10:45,160 --> 00:10:49,199
Speaker 1: the average interocular distance used in three D filming is

195
00:10:49,240 --> 00:10:52,840
Speaker 1: about sixty four millimeters. And most most cameras you just

196
00:10:52,920 --> 00:10:57,200
Speaker 1: can't get two lenses that close together because the camera,

197
00:10:57,320 --> 00:11:00,560
Speaker 1: the physical bulk of the camera prevents it. So, for example,

198
00:11:00,640 --> 00:11:03,520
Speaker 1: if you had two red cameras, which we talked about

199
00:11:03,520 --> 00:11:06,320
Speaker 1: that in the past, those are the really high definition cameras.

200
00:11:06,480 --> 00:11:09,400
Speaker 1: That's a brand name. Yeah, yeah, not a description, right, exact,

201
00:11:09,480 --> 00:11:11,720
Speaker 1: thank you, thank you. Yes. When I'm saying red cameras,

202
00:11:11,720 --> 00:11:14,240
Speaker 1: I'm not talking about the color red, I'm talking about

203
00:11:14,440 --> 00:11:18,559
Speaker 1: a brand R E. D all in caps. Uh. If

204
00:11:18,559 --> 00:11:20,160
Speaker 1: you were to get two of those and set them

205
00:11:20,240 --> 00:11:22,640
Speaker 1: next to each other, the closest you'll be able to

206
00:11:22,640 --> 00:11:25,359
Speaker 1: get the lenses is about a hundred and twenty five millimeters,

207
00:11:25,400 --> 00:11:28,520
Speaker 1: So that's almost twice the distance as what you would

208
00:11:28,520 --> 00:11:30,559
Speaker 1: need if you wanted to create kind of a natural

209
00:11:30,679 --> 00:11:36,439
Speaker 1: looking effect that was easily translatable into stereoscopic vision um

210
00:11:36,480 --> 00:11:39,240
Speaker 1: once you were finished. And uh so that's a problem

211
00:11:39,280 --> 00:11:41,319
Speaker 1: there there, and there are ways around that, but we'll

212
00:11:41,360 --> 00:11:43,120
Speaker 1: get into that. So you were going to talk about

213
00:11:43,280 --> 00:11:46,199
Speaker 1: some of the historical three D films, or at least

214
00:11:46,240 --> 00:11:49,079
Speaker 1: the historical methods were just a little bit of it. Um. Yeah,

215
00:11:49,120 --> 00:11:51,800
Speaker 1: I mean traditionally the way to do this since the

216
00:11:51,800 --> 00:11:56,280
Speaker 1: the least according to Britannica, the typical distances between two

217
00:11:56,280 --> 00:11:58,000
Speaker 1: and a half to two and three quarters inches, which,

218
00:11:58,000 --> 00:12:00,000
Speaker 1: as you were pointing out, is about six point four

219
00:12:00,080 --> 00:12:04,760
Speaker 1: centimeters to seven centimeters. Um. You know, there there are

220
00:12:04,760 --> 00:12:06,920
Speaker 1: a couple different ways of doing this. You could put

221
00:12:06,960 --> 00:12:09,839
Speaker 1: a couple different cameras side by side, although as you

222
00:12:09,920 --> 00:12:12,240
Speaker 1: pointed out, that can be difficult, Or you can use

223
00:12:12,360 --> 00:12:18,600
Speaker 1: a camera with two lenses, um, which seems awfully specialized

224
00:12:18,920 --> 00:12:21,800
Speaker 1: and probably very expensive compared to some of the other

225
00:12:22,120 --> 00:12:26,120
Speaker 1: methods of doing this. Um. Actually, the very first film,

226
00:12:26,160 --> 00:12:29,440
Speaker 1: according to Britannica again to be you made using the

227
00:12:29,559 --> 00:12:35,120
Speaker 1: natural vision process was Buanna Devil in two um. Although

228
00:12:35,120 --> 00:12:38,320
Speaker 1: there there were some experiments uh done in the nineteen

229
00:12:38,360 --> 00:12:43,160
Speaker 1: twenties and thirties using three D, but it was edwin Land.

230
00:12:43,360 --> 00:12:46,400
Speaker 1: You know that name. It should sound familiar to you. Uh.

231
00:12:46,800 --> 00:12:50,600
Speaker 1: It's not ringing any bells. He he created a polarizing

232
00:12:51,280 --> 00:12:55,120
Speaker 1: material in nineteen thirty two. That the natural vision method

233
00:12:55,160 --> 00:12:58,120
Speaker 1: is based on And that's the kind that of glasses

234
00:12:58,120 --> 00:13:00,920
Speaker 1: that we were talking about earlier, not the anaglyph blue

235
00:13:00,920 --> 00:13:04,079
Speaker 1: slash green slash san um. These are the lenses that

236
00:13:04,160 --> 00:13:07,520
Speaker 1: look almost like their sunglasses, but they are not sunglasses.

237
00:13:07,760 --> 00:13:10,080
Speaker 1: They're not do not wear them as sunglasses. Is their

238
00:13:10,200 --> 00:13:15,080
Speaker 1: polarized And he was the inventor of the polaroid land camera.

239
00:13:16,160 --> 00:13:18,720
Speaker 1: Got you, Um, but yeah, I mean he was. He

240
00:13:18,800 --> 00:13:20,360
Speaker 1: was one of the people who were working on this

241
00:13:20,440 --> 00:13:22,880
Speaker 1: and that that was you know, a long long time ago.

242
00:13:23,000 --> 00:13:26,680
Speaker 1: But you know that's uh, that sort of water under

243
00:13:26,679 --> 00:13:28,760
Speaker 1: the bridge, and there were a lot of people trying

244
00:13:28,800 --> 00:13:32,240
Speaker 1: to do this. Um. You know, back when the Natural

245
00:13:32,320 --> 00:13:35,000
Speaker 1: Vision System came out. Three D became big for a while,

246
00:13:35,679 --> 00:13:37,400
Speaker 1: and a lot of people made a lot of very

247
00:13:37,400 --> 00:13:40,040
Speaker 1: bad three D movies. It seems to move in cycles.

248
00:13:40,080 --> 00:13:41,640
Speaker 1: We talked about this, I think in our three D

249
00:13:41,720 --> 00:13:46,000
Speaker 1: Glasses podcasts as well, about how three D films seemed

250
00:13:46,040 --> 00:13:49,640
Speaker 1: to come up as a gimmick for like every twenty

251
00:13:49,720 --> 00:13:52,480
Speaker 1: to thirty years because they were they got really big

252
00:13:52,480 --> 00:13:54,679
Speaker 1: in the fifties and then they kind of, you know,

253
00:13:55,040 --> 00:13:59,280
Speaker 1: the processes just were not refined enough for it to

254
00:13:59,360 --> 00:14:02,600
Speaker 1: really take off. Um, it just it came across as

255
00:14:02,600 --> 00:14:06,120
Speaker 1: a gimmick. And then they had another resurgence in the eighties. Uh,

256
00:14:06,200 --> 00:14:11,559
Speaker 1: which that's the era from which my quote uh derived.

257
00:14:12,440 --> 00:14:14,679
Speaker 1: But then the quotes don't stop at the edge of

258
00:14:14,720 --> 00:14:18,840
Speaker 1: the podcast, that's right. Uh, so the nice So they

259
00:14:19,040 --> 00:14:22,480
Speaker 1: the the eighties had another little resurgence of of three D.

260
00:14:22,600 --> 00:14:27,200
Speaker 1: But again the techniques still weren't truly refined, and so

261
00:14:27,280 --> 00:14:29,280
Speaker 1: there were some problems. And I guess we'll talk about

262
00:14:29,280 --> 00:14:31,720
Speaker 1: that in a little bit too. Uh. And then now

263
00:14:32,120 --> 00:14:35,160
Speaker 1: we've got some point where digitally we're able to uh

264
00:14:35,320 --> 00:14:38,200
Speaker 1: to correct some of those problems and and and head

265
00:14:38,240 --> 00:14:40,800
Speaker 1: off some of those problems, so that we really have

266
00:14:40,920 --> 00:14:46,040
Speaker 1: reduced the the the factors that made viewing three D

267
00:14:46,280 --> 00:14:51,200
Speaker 1: less than a pleasant experience for some people. Um. And

268
00:14:51,320 --> 00:14:53,840
Speaker 1: I guess I guess I can hit that really quickly

269
00:14:53,920 --> 00:14:58,240
Speaker 1: right now. If since your brain is is creating this

270
00:14:58,320 --> 00:15:02,640
Speaker 1: picture in your head and creating this illusion of three D, uh,

271
00:15:02,680 --> 00:15:06,520
Speaker 1: if stuff is not aligned properly on the screen, your

272
00:15:06,560 --> 00:15:09,000
Speaker 1: brain has trouble with that, right, So it has to

273
00:15:09,000 --> 00:15:11,280
Speaker 1: be done just right or it's not gonna it's going

274
00:15:11,360 --> 00:15:13,680
Speaker 1: to not work. In the opposite way, it's not not

275
00:15:13,720 --> 00:15:15,840
Speaker 1: just going to be not convincing, it's going to actually

276
00:15:15,840 --> 00:15:18,560
Speaker 1: be upsetting. Yeah, kind of like the way for example,

277
00:15:18,600 --> 00:15:20,440
Speaker 1: here's here's a very simple way where it can it

278
00:15:20,440 --> 00:15:23,640
Speaker 1: can really mess with your brain. Uh, we're not We

279
00:15:23,680 --> 00:15:27,600
Speaker 1: can handle horizontal differences, you know, where you're shifting the

280
00:15:27,640 --> 00:15:29,440
Speaker 1: image to the left or to the right a little bit.

281
00:15:29,440 --> 00:15:31,640
Speaker 1: In fact, that's what three D is all based on.

282
00:15:32,080 --> 00:15:34,960
Speaker 1: If we didn't shift the images, then you wouldn't get

283
00:15:34,960 --> 00:15:39,200
Speaker 1: the three D u vertically, not so much. You shift

284
00:15:39,240 --> 00:15:41,720
Speaker 1: an image so one image set of images is slightly

285
00:15:41,840 --> 00:15:45,200
Speaker 1: higher than the other. That's gonna create a really weird

286
00:15:45,280 --> 00:15:48,200
Speaker 1: distorted field for your brain to handle, and that can

287
00:15:48,200 --> 00:15:52,200
Speaker 1: actually make audiences uncomfortable and and sick or give them

288
00:15:52,240 --> 00:15:55,920
Speaker 1: eyestrain or headaches and a lot. And because the early

289
00:15:55,960 --> 00:15:59,480
Speaker 1: early methods of creating three D films didn't always have

290
00:15:59,520 --> 00:16:02,040
Speaker 1: everything stuch up just perfectly. I mean you're talking about

291
00:16:02,080 --> 00:16:05,360
Speaker 1: using physical cameras and physical film to create two different

292
00:16:05,480 --> 00:16:09,320
Speaker 1: versions of the same image. Um that that meant that

293
00:16:09,440 --> 00:16:13,120
Speaker 1: just a tiny misalignment could cause an entire audience to

294
00:16:13,120 --> 00:16:19,360
Speaker 1: start yakking, very much like the stand by Me infamous scene. Anyway,

295
00:16:19,520 --> 00:16:22,480
Speaker 1: So you don't want that to happen. As it turns out,

296
00:16:22,880 --> 00:16:25,800
Speaker 1: it's not great publicity to say that, Hey, audiences have

297
00:16:25,880 --> 00:16:29,360
Speaker 1: been throwing up at this film for for for weeks now.

298
00:16:29,680 --> 00:16:32,520
Speaker 1: Did you work for the Blair Witch Project? It worked

299
00:16:32,520 --> 00:16:36,760
Speaker 1: for me anyway, So, but that wasn't the three D film.

300
00:16:36,960 --> 00:16:40,040
Speaker 1: Don't write us so. Yeah, but but there was emotion

301
00:16:40,240 --> 00:16:43,160
Speaker 1: remember the camera, Yes, yes, the idea was it was

302
00:16:43,160 --> 00:16:46,400
Speaker 1: supposed to simulate somebody walking around with a handheld video

303
00:16:46,480 --> 00:16:50,720
Speaker 1: game and the motion made people sick because we're bouncing around.

304
00:16:50,960 --> 00:16:53,440
Speaker 1: Clover Field did the same thing there. They're quite a

305
00:16:53,480 --> 00:16:56,080
Speaker 1: few handheld films out there now and I think people

306
00:16:56,120 --> 00:16:57,560
Speaker 1: are starting to get a little more used to them.

307
00:16:57,600 --> 00:16:59,120
Speaker 1: But yeah, you might want to take a drama mean

308
00:16:59,160 --> 00:17:00,840
Speaker 1: before you go into the getter for that kind of thing.

309
00:17:00,920 --> 00:17:04,000
Speaker 1: That is not medical advice, by the way. That's just

310
00:17:04,359 --> 00:17:08,680
Speaker 1: me making a joke. Um anyways, just heading off the emails.

311
00:17:09,320 --> 00:17:13,840
Speaker 1: Uh so, yeah, if now that we have the digital approach,

312
00:17:14,119 --> 00:17:16,199
Speaker 1: it's a lot easier to correct for these problems. So

313
00:17:16,240 --> 00:17:20,199
Speaker 1: that we've really reduced the factors that create things like

314
00:17:20,240 --> 00:17:24,960
Speaker 1: eye strain and make people nauseated. We've managed to maybe

315
00:17:24,960 --> 00:17:30,080
Speaker 1: not eliminate them, but dramatically reduce those elements. So yeah,

316
00:17:30,119 --> 00:17:32,200
Speaker 1: so you're talking about the having two cameras next to

317
00:17:32,240 --> 00:17:35,320
Speaker 1: each other or a camera with two lenses. Um, there's

318
00:17:35,359 --> 00:17:38,080
Speaker 1: also there are also other ways that you can try

319
00:17:38,119 --> 00:17:41,240
Speaker 1: and get to additional ways that you can try and

320
00:17:41,240 --> 00:17:43,520
Speaker 1: get the three D effect. So let's say you're using

321
00:17:43,520 --> 00:17:46,359
Speaker 1: two cameras and you cannot get these two cameras close

322
00:17:46,480 --> 00:17:51,440
Speaker 1: enough to get to that ideal interocular distance. So what

323
00:17:51,480 --> 00:17:53,520
Speaker 1: you might want to try and do is you'd have

324
00:17:53,560 --> 00:17:56,120
Speaker 1: to find a way to direct the image the light

325
00:17:56,200 --> 00:17:58,080
Speaker 1: in such a way so that it looks like the

326
00:17:58,160 --> 00:18:00,800
Speaker 1: two lenses are next to each other. So you might

327
00:18:00,840 --> 00:18:05,840
Speaker 1: have to use prisms and mirrors and a really really

328
00:18:06,840 --> 00:18:12,600
Speaker 1: elaborate camera by camera rig Uh. These things are are bulky.

329
00:18:12,640 --> 00:18:15,120
Speaker 1: They make shooting much more difficult. So shooting in three

330
00:18:15,200 --> 00:18:19,560
Speaker 1: D is a difficult and expensive process. Yes, you know,

331
00:18:19,640 --> 00:18:22,560
Speaker 1: you're either going to need specialized equipment so that's gonna

332
00:18:22,600 --> 00:18:25,240
Speaker 1: cost more, like you said before, or you're going to

333
00:18:25,280 --> 00:18:27,880
Speaker 1: need twice the equipment that you normally would need because

334
00:18:27,880 --> 00:18:30,040
Speaker 1: you're gonna need, you know, two cameras instead of just

335
00:18:30,119 --> 00:18:32,199
Speaker 1: one for every single kind of camera shot that you're

336
00:18:32,200 --> 00:18:34,800
Speaker 1: going to be doing uh, and you're gonna need specialized

337
00:18:34,880 --> 00:18:38,600
Speaker 1: rigging or mirrors or whatever, and those all have to

338
00:18:38,640 --> 00:18:41,080
Speaker 1: be set up just right, because if you have a

339
00:18:41,119 --> 00:18:43,440
Speaker 1: mirror that's not aligned properly, you're not going to get

340
00:18:43,440 --> 00:18:46,960
Speaker 1: that stereoscopic effect. And then, of course there's a further

341
00:18:47,119 --> 00:18:50,520
Speaker 1: argument you can have. Do you have both cameras shoot

342
00:18:50,600 --> 00:18:53,200
Speaker 1: in parallel, so in other words, both cameras are facing

343
00:18:53,200 --> 00:18:55,800
Speaker 1: directly forward, or do you arrange it so that the

344
00:18:55,840 --> 00:19:00,760
Speaker 1: cameras converge slightly Because our eyes converge, true, so if

345
00:19:00,800 --> 00:19:02,960
Speaker 1: you want to have the cameras converge, you have to

346
00:19:03,040 --> 00:19:07,000
Speaker 1: set that up. And it's a really exacting, precise process,

347
00:19:07,040 --> 00:19:09,480
Speaker 1: and if you get it wrong, the effect is going

348
00:19:09,520 --> 00:19:12,320
Speaker 1: to be ruined. So shooting in three D is really

349
00:19:12,359 --> 00:19:16,200
Speaker 1: complicated and really expensive. There are those who will argue

350
00:19:16,240 --> 00:19:20,560
Speaker 1: that it's the only way to get three D, right, Yeah,

351
00:19:20,600 --> 00:19:23,000
Speaker 1: And the thing is really when when you get right

352
00:19:23,040 --> 00:19:26,000
Speaker 1: down to it, there's nothing inexpensive about three D because

353
00:19:26,040 --> 00:19:28,840
Speaker 1: the conversion process is also very expensive. Yeah, it can be.

354
00:19:28,920 --> 00:19:31,440
Speaker 1: Up to the general rule of thumb in the industry

355
00:19:31,520 --> 00:19:34,359
Speaker 1: for converting a two D film into three D is

356
00:19:34,560 --> 00:19:39,440
Speaker 1: one hundred thousand dollars per screen running time. So yeah,

357
00:19:39,480 --> 00:19:42,159
Speaker 1: a hundred and twenty minute movie is gonna cost a

358
00:19:42,200 --> 00:19:45,359
Speaker 1: hundred thousand dollars times a hundred and twenty and so

359
00:19:45,600 --> 00:19:48,400
Speaker 1: that's yeah. You start you start adding up and you're like, wow,

360
00:19:48,440 --> 00:19:51,400
Speaker 1: that's really expensive. It's still cheaper than shooting it all

361
00:19:51,440 --> 00:19:54,639
Speaker 1: in three D, assuming that you again that you're shooting

362
00:19:54,640 --> 00:19:58,399
Speaker 1: live action. Well, because again c g I, we've already

363
00:19:58,400 --> 00:20:01,240
Speaker 1: mentioned that you could just create a a virtual camera

364
00:20:01,640 --> 00:20:06,760
Speaker 1: and get that effect all on its own. So c

365
00:20:06,880 --> 00:20:10,000
Speaker 1: g I is easy. Comparatively speaking, It's still gonna take

366
00:20:10,000 --> 00:20:11,280
Speaker 1: a lot of time. It's gonna take up a lot

367
00:20:11,320 --> 00:20:13,600
Speaker 1: of hard drive space, and it's not like, you know,

368
00:20:13,680 --> 00:20:15,280
Speaker 1: it's not like it's a walk in the park. But

369
00:20:15,720 --> 00:20:17,960
Speaker 1: compared to the problems you face from doing live action,

370
00:20:17,960 --> 00:20:20,199
Speaker 1: it's it's fairly simple. But let's talk a little bit

371
00:20:20,200 --> 00:20:24,440
Speaker 1: about the conversion process of two D to three D. Okay, Yeah,

372
00:20:24,440 --> 00:20:27,919
Speaker 1: I was actually gonna to uh mentioned, especially to your

373
00:20:27,960 --> 00:20:30,639
Speaker 1: point about how much it costs um the company that

374
00:20:30,720 --> 00:20:34,119
Speaker 1: did the conversion for Alice in Wonderland, as that company

375
00:20:34,119 --> 00:20:37,680
Speaker 1: called in three and uh, it can charge. It charges

376
00:20:37,720 --> 00:20:40,960
Speaker 1: something along the lines of fifty thousand two hundred thousand

377
00:20:41,000 --> 00:20:45,040
Speaker 1: dollars per minute of time needed to do that. So

378
00:20:45,080 --> 00:20:47,679
Speaker 1: you think about that in terms of you know, per screen,

379
00:20:48,640 --> 00:20:52,840
Speaker 1: you're thinking this is really not cheap. Yeah, yeah, I

380
00:20:52,880 --> 00:20:55,399
Speaker 1: mean you can. I guess you do it once for

381
00:20:55,440 --> 00:20:58,840
Speaker 1: a master and then you run copies. But at any rate,

382
00:20:58,880 --> 00:21:03,680
Speaker 1: the uh, yeah, it's expensive and the processes is complicated

383
00:21:03,720 --> 00:21:05,440
Speaker 1: because what you have to do is, let's say you've

384
00:21:05,480 --> 00:21:07,720
Speaker 1: got someone gives you a film and by the way,

385
00:21:08,240 --> 00:21:10,359
Speaker 1: you can do this yourself. I'll tell you at the

386
00:21:10,440 --> 00:21:13,240
Speaker 1: end of the podcast about a program that will allow

387
00:21:13,280 --> 00:21:15,720
Speaker 1: you to convert two D movies into three D movies

388
00:21:16,320 --> 00:21:21,879
Speaker 1: UM using some some open source software. It's pretty cool stuff.

389
00:21:21,920 --> 00:21:23,480
Speaker 1: It takes a lot of time and it takes a

390
00:21:23,480 --> 00:21:26,040
Speaker 1: lot of processing power. So if you've got an older computer,

391
00:21:26,560 --> 00:21:29,120
Speaker 1: this is probably not something you want to try because

392
00:21:29,359 --> 00:21:31,480
Speaker 1: unless you don't you know, need your computer for three

393
00:21:31,560 --> 00:21:35,000
Speaker 1: or four weeks um. But converting two D to three D,

394
00:21:35,080 --> 00:21:36,760
Speaker 1: the first thing you do is you've got this flat

395
00:21:36,800 --> 00:21:40,159
Speaker 1: image because you know it wasn't filmed in three D,

396
00:21:40,960 --> 00:21:44,560
Speaker 1: so you have to divide that image into a series

397
00:21:44,600 --> 00:21:50,000
Speaker 1: of layers, and it's generally between two to eight layers Okay,

398
00:21:50,040 --> 00:21:52,160
Speaker 1: two layers would be the bare minimum because of course,

399
00:21:52,359 --> 00:21:54,800
Speaker 1: you know, you need to have that those two layers

400
00:21:54,840 --> 00:21:57,359
Speaker 1: to create that that sense of depth, and really the

401
00:21:57,440 --> 00:22:01,600
Speaker 1: number of layers you have per frame depends upon how

402
00:22:01,680 --> 00:22:05,760
Speaker 1: much stuff is on screen at that time. Yeah, that

403
00:22:05,840 --> 00:22:09,119
Speaker 1: makes sense. So there was a great example, uh I

404
00:22:09,200 --> 00:22:13,280
Speaker 1: read about this uh on on slate. Actually there's a

405
00:22:13,280 --> 00:22:16,080
Speaker 1: great example of talking about a guy standing in front

406
00:22:16,080 --> 00:22:19,040
Speaker 1: of a brick wall. That might just be two layers

407
00:22:19,040 --> 00:22:23,239
Speaker 1: that you create there, or two or three. And so

408
00:22:23,280 --> 00:22:25,719
Speaker 1: once you've figured out what the layers are, next an

409
00:22:25,840 --> 00:22:30,840
Speaker 1: artist has to go in an outline the object that is,

410
00:22:31,119 --> 00:22:34,120
Speaker 1: you know, that's going to be at a specific depth. Um,

411
00:22:34,160 --> 00:22:36,399
Speaker 1: So every single object in the image has to be

412
00:22:36,440 --> 00:22:38,720
Speaker 1: outlined so that the computer program that you're going to

413
00:22:38,800 --> 00:22:42,439
Speaker 1: run this through will be able to to calculate what

414
00:22:42,600 --> 00:22:45,320
Speaker 1: depth each image needs to be in. And then you

415
00:22:45,400 --> 00:22:49,080
Speaker 1: kind of turn every single image that's on that or

416
00:22:49,119 --> 00:22:51,719
Speaker 1: every single object that's in that image rather into kind

417
00:22:51,760 --> 00:22:55,280
Speaker 1: of a topographical map that makes yeah. Yeah, so this

418
00:22:55,359 --> 00:22:58,400
Speaker 1: is what's telling the computer which parts of that image

419
00:22:58,440 --> 00:23:01,480
Speaker 1: are should be closer to the eye of the viewer.

420
00:23:02,359 --> 00:23:04,560
Speaker 1: Because of course, in the three dimensional objects some bits

421
00:23:04,600 --> 00:23:06,520
Speaker 1: are going to be closer to you than others. So

422
00:23:06,560 --> 00:23:09,439
Speaker 1: let's say that you're looking at an airplane head on,

423
00:23:10,359 --> 00:23:12,320
Speaker 1: the nose of the airplane is going to be closer

424
00:23:12,359 --> 00:23:15,280
Speaker 1: to you than the wings of the airplane, right, So

425
00:23:15,320 --> 00:23:18,639
Speaker 1: you need to make sure that you you design this

426
00:23:18,680 --> 00:23:22,320
Speaker 1: topographical map so that the computer realizes, oh, the nose

427
00:23:22,560 --> 00:23:25,000
Speaker 1: is the front, that's what that's what needs to be

428
00:23:25,480 --> 00:23:28,800
Speaker 1: closest to the eye. So we're gonna shift that this

429
00:23:29,119 --> 00:23:32,280
Speaker 1: much for the two images, whereas the wing is further back,

430
00:23:32,359 --> 00:23:36,720
Speaker 1: we're going to shift that a different distance to create

431
00:23:36,720 --> 00:23:40,159
Speaker 1: the proper illusion of depths. You have to do this

432
00:23:40,560 --> 00:23:44,160
Speaker 1: frame by frame, yes, And it's that's why it gets

433
00:23:44,240 --> 00:23:47,920
Speaker 1: really expensive because it it's a process that requires both

434
00:23:48,080 --> 00:23:53,439
Speaker 1: manual work and computer programs. It's it's not something that

435
00:23:53,480 --> 00:23:55,200
Speaker 1: you can just you know, you can't just chunk a

436
00:23:55,280 --> 00:23:57,480
Speaker 1: two D movie into a what you can, but it

437
00:23:57,480 --> 00:23:59,720
Speaker 1: doesn't necessarily work. You can't just chunk a two D

438
00:23:59,840 --> 00:24:01,959
Speaker 1: move into a computer program and expect a great three

439
00:24:02,040 --> 00:24:04,120
Speaker 1: D film to come out. Now. It's it's it's got

440
00:24:04,119 --> 00:24:07,960
Speaker 1: to be done slowly and carefully, which is probably why

441
00:24:08,000 --> 00:24:12,600
Speaker 1: it's so expensive. Um, the the inn three process UH

442
00:24:12,800 --> 00:24:17,800
Speaker 1: starts with their previous pre visualization or previous program and

443
00:24:17,800 --> 00:24:23,600
Speaker 1: then they actually use a technique they call dimensionalization, which well, okay,

444
00:24:23,640 --> 00:24:28,640
Speaker 1: it's pretty self descriptive, but um, during the process they

445
00:24:28,680 --> 00:24:32,119
Speaker 1: get the directors involved, and what they'll do is they

446
00:24:32,160 --> 00:24:36,000
Speaker 1: basically can control the depth, shape, and perspective of different

447
00:24:36,000 --> 00:24:42,960
Speaker 1: objects to tailor the image what's there now, to the

448
00:24:43,000 --> 00:24:46,160
Speaker 1: screen size that it's going to be shown on, and

449
00:24:46,160 --> 00:24:49,159
Speaker 1: and to give people, you know, for example, IMAX versus

450
00:24:49,240 --> 00:24:52,760
Speaker 1: a regular size, regular ish sized movie screen. Not like

451
00:24:52,800 --> 00:24:57,400
Speaker 1: there's anything that's particularly regular about that, um, but yeah,

452
00:24:57,400 --> 00:24:59,679
Speaker 1: I mean it's they have control over over that. And

453
00:24:59,720 --> 00:25:04,359
Speaker 1: maybe one scene doesn't need so much three dimensionalization to

454
00:25:04,560 --> 00:25:07,120
Speaker 1: make it a peer three D and another requires more.

455
00:25:07,560 --> 00:25:10,640
Speaker 1: So they go in and scene by scene, frame by frame,

456
00:25:10,680 --> 00:25:14,760
Speaker 1: they have an opportunity to take control of that. UM.

457
00:25:14,840 --> 00:25:18,520
Speaker 1: They actually have a soft particular software package that they use,

458
00:25:18,560 --> 00:25:22,879
Speaker 1: their own homegrown stuff called Intrigue UM. But yeah, I

459
00:25:22,920 --> 00:25:25,399
Speaker 1: mean it allows them to stay consistent shot to shot,

460
00:25:25,840 --> 00:25:29,720
Speaker 1: and then they go through a depth grading process that

461
00:25:29,800 --> 00:25:33,320
Speaker 1: you know, it allows them to do the screen size things,

462
00:25:33,359 --> 00:25:36,439
Speaker 1: so they can have control over everything. And that's just

463
00:25:36,840 --> 00:25:39,920
Speaker 1: another reason why it takes so long. But the studios

464
00:25:39,960 --> 00:25:43,119
Speaker 1: that do this um uh in three and there's another

465
00:25:43,119 --> 00:25:47,399
Speaker 1: one called Prime Focus that's based in Mumbai. They're the

466
00:25:47,400 --> 00:25:49,920
Speaker 1: ones who did Clash the Titans, by the way, cost

467
00:25:49,960 --> 00:25:56,119
Speaker 1: about four point five million dollars according to the Hollywood Reporter.

468
00:25:56,160 --> 00:26:00,199
Speaker 1: I read an article by A Carol and Giardina, and so,

469
00:26:00,280 --> 00:26:03,040
Speaker 1: I mean, they all have their own proprietary way and

470
00:26:03,040 --> 00:26:04,840
Speaker 1: they sort of tell you what's going on, but they

471
00:26:04,880 --> 00:26:07,800
Speaker 1: don't really get into, if you will, in depth on

472
00:26:07,840 --> 00:26:09,760
Speaker 1: the matter. But let's talk about some of the problems

473
00:26:09,800 --> 00:26:12,240
Speaker 1: of converting two D to three D, because there are

474
00:26:12,320 --> 00:26:16,359
Speaker 1: some quite a few, uh, and there are directors out there,

475
00:26:16,440 --> 00:26:21,600
Speaker 1: James Cameron among them, who are adamant that this approach

476
00:26:21,760 --> 00:26:26,080
Speaker 1: is flawed and results in bad movies, or at least

477
00:26:26,200 --> 00:26:29,320
Speaker 1: technically bad movies. Not necessarily that you know, the script

478
00:26:29,359 --> 00:26:32,399
Speaker 1: is bad or whatever, but technically it is. Visually. Visually

479
00:26:32,520 --> 00:26:36,760
Speaker 1: yes it is. It is an inferior product. And Cameron

480
00:26:36,800 --> 00:26:39,520
Speaker 1: will argue that shooting in three D is really the

481
00:26:39,560 --> 00:26:42,400
Speaker 1: only way to go right now because our conversion process

482
00:26:42,480 --> 00:26:45,359
Speaker 1: just isn't good enough. And some of that is understandable

483
00:26:45,400 --> 00:26:47,640
Speaker 1: because some movies have been converted to three D. Were

484
00:26:47,680 --> 00:26:50,800
Speaker 1: never intended to be in three D in the first place.

485
00:26:51,119 --> 00:26:53,800
Speaker 1: But actually he uh, it's kind of ironic in a

486
00:26:53,800 --> 00:26:58,119
Speaker 1: way because he's partially to uh to blame, not blame,

487
00:26:58,200 --> 00:27:01,119
Speaker 1: but he's he's partially the reason why everybody is rushing

488
00:27:01,119 --> 00:27:03,879
Speaker 1: to make three D movies right now because the successive Avatar.

489
00:27:04,000 --> 00:27:05,480
Speaker 1: Well yeah, I mean when you think about it, that

490
00:27:05,520 --> 00:27:09,280
Speaker 1: makes it makes perfect sense from Hollywood's perspective, because shooting

491
00:27:09,320 --> 00:27:12,480
Speaker 1: and releasing a three D film means you can charge more,

492
00:27:13,520 --> 00:27:16,320
Speaker 1: and it's it's capitalizing on the three D craze right right.

493
00:27:16,480 --> 00:27:19,960
Speaker 1: Everybody's excited about it, so they wanted so it's do

494
00:27:20,000 --> 00:27:22,200
Speaker 1: another one. It's easier to make a lot of money

495
00:27:23,200 --> 00:27:24,960
Speaker 1: because you don't have to sell as many tickets to

496
00:27:25,000 --> 00:27:28,200
Speaker 1: make as much to make a huge box office. But

497
00:27:28,320 --> 00:27:29,919
Speaker 1: as well as the fact that it's cashing in on

498
00:27:29,960 --> 00:27:33,120
Speaker 1: a craze. Uh So, some of the problems with converting

499
00:27:33,119 --> 00:27:35,359
Speaker 1: two D to three D is is if it wasn't

500
00:27:35,520 --> 00:27:38,280
Speaker 1: shot meant if it wasn't meant for three D, you

501
00:27:38,359 --> 00:27:40,840
Speaker 1: may not be getting that. You know, the three D

502
00:27:40,880 --> 00:27:42,840
Speaker 1: effects that you see may not be that that good.

503
00:27:42,920 --> 00:27:45,359
Speaker 1: The sense of depth may not really be there because

504
00:27:45,400 --> 00:27:47,639
Speaker 1: it wasn't intended to be there, that wasn't part of

505
00:27:47,640 --> 00:27:51,439
Speaker 1: the original vision. Another problem is that sometimes if the

506
00:27:51,520 --> 00:27:54,640
Speaker 1: if the conversion process is a poor one, and sometimes

507
00:27:54,720 --> 00:27:57,159
Speaker 1: it is, you end up with what looks like a

508
00:27:57,160 --> 00:28:00,680
Speaker 1: bunch of cardboard cutouts that are at different in depths.

509
00:28:00,720 --> 00:28:02,280
Speaker 1: So there is a sense of depth, but there's not

510
00:28:02,320 --> 00:28:05,600
Speaker 1: a sense of three dimensions. And I've seen this happen

511
00:28:05,720 --> 00:28:08,960
Speaker 1: with a lot of software that converts two D photos

512
00:28:08,960 --> 00:28:11,840
Speaker 1: to three D photos in real time, and it looks like, yeah,

513
00:28:11,880 --> 00:28:14,040
Speaker 1: it looks like, hey, that's not Bill, that's a cardboard

514
00:28:14,080 --> 00:28:16,399
Speaker 1: cut out a bill. But the cardboard cut out a

515
00:28:16,400 --> 00:28:18,800
Speaker 1: Bill is closer to the camera than the cardboard cutout

516
00:28:18,800 --> 00:28:23,520
Speaker 1: of Sarah. It's not at all convincing, and it's actually distracting.

517
00:28:24,000 --> 00:28:25,879
Speaker 1: That guy always left me a little flat to begin with.

518
00:28:26,080 --> 00:28:30,399
Speaker 1: Ha ha, such a two dimensional character. Uh. The Another

519
00:28:30,480 --> 00:28:33,280
Speaker 1: problem is that these films are shot. The two D

520
00:28:33,359 --> 00:28:35,760
Speaker 1: films may be shot with a certain idea of what

521
00:28:35,800 --> 00:28:39,280
Speaker 1: the level of light needs to be. Well, when you

522
00:28:39,320 --> 00:28:41,480
Speaker 1: converted to three D, one of the problems is that

523
00:28:41,600 --> 00:28:43,840
Speaker 1: if you're using the polarized lenses, that means that the

524
00:28:43,920 --> 00:28:45,360
Speaker 1: image you're gonna see is already going to be a

525
00:28:45,400 --> 00:28:50,240
Speaker 1: little darker than what was necessarily intended originally, so you

526
00:28:50,360 --> 00:28:53,440
Speaker 1: end up with scenes that are darker than the director

527
00:28:53,480 --> 00:28:56,520
Speaker 1: had intended. This was a big problem, one of many

528
00:28:56,600 --> 00:29:00,360
Speaker 1: for Avatar The Last Airbender. There were scenes or shot

529
00:29:00,400 --> 00:29:02,360
Speaker 1: at night that you could not you couldn't tell what

530
00:29:02,440 --> 00:29:04,240
Speaker 1: was going on because by the time you had the

531
00:29:04,240 --> 00:29:06,800
Speaker 1: glasses on, it made the shots so dark that you

532
00:29:06,800 --> 00:29:11,240
Speaker 1: couldn't see anything. Right. Um, now I'm going to wrap

533
00:29:11,320 --> 00:29:14,440
Speaker 1: this up really quickly. We've pretty much covered how this works. Yeah,

534
00:29:14,680 --> 00:29:16,120
Speaker 1: I did mention that I was going to talk about

535
00:29:16,120 --> 00:29:18,520
Speaker 1: how you could convert your own like convert two D

536
00:29:18,640 --> 00:29:22,000
Speaker 1: movies to three D movies. Sure, there's Uh, there's this

537
00:29:22,080 --> 00:29:26,120
Speaker 1: great program called avicynthe A v I S y n

538
00:29:26,160 --> 00:29:29,080
Speaker 1: t H and it's it's free, you can get This

539
00:29:29,200 --> 00:29:32,840
Speaker 1: is actually kind of a codec more than anything else. So, uh,

540
00:29:33,040 --> 00:29:36,400
Speaker 1: it's which means it plugs into U to something like

541
00:29:36,480 --> 00:29:38,920
Speaker 1: Windows Media Player and allows you to read files that

542
00:29:38,960 --> 00:29:41,320
Speaker 1: have been encoded with right. Right, it's not it's not

543
00:29:41,360 --> 00:29:43,840
Speaker 1: its own it doesn't have its own user interface. It's

544
00:29:43,840 --> 00:29:45,680
Speaker 1: not like you would run this program and something would

545
00:29:45,720 --> 00:29:47,560
Speaker 1: pop up. Um, I got this, by the way from

546
00:29:47,600 --> 00:29:50,560
Speaker 1: maximum pc so if you want, did you Yeah, it's

547
00:29:50,640 --> 00:29:53,640
Speaker 1: an article by Alex Castle at maximum pc UM. The

548
00:29:53,720 --> 00:29:56,440
Speaker 1: article title is how to upgrade your two D movies

549
00:29:56,480 --> 00:29:58,360
Speaker 1: to three D, So if you want to look into

550
00:29:58,400 --> 00:30:01,440
Speaker 1: it in detail, I recommend checking out that article. But

551
00:30:01,480 --> 00:30:05,200
Speaker 1: in general, what does is it provides you a uh

552
00:30:06,040 --> 00:30:09,760
Speaker 1: so the ability to to create three D films. You

553
00:30:09,800 --> 00:30:13,040
Speaker 1: have to grab some code UH and the article tells

554
00:30:13,040 --> 00:30:14,880
Speaker 1: you where to go to get the code. It's from

555
00:30:14,920 --> 00:30:18,000
Speaker 1: a three D vision blog. And when you put this

556
00:30:18,120 --> 00:30:21,560
Speaker 1: code in, you can actually convert a two D film

557
00:30:21,600 --> 00:30:24,200
Speaker 1: into three D. It will create two sets of images. UH.

558
00:30:24,520 --> 00:30:27,840
Speaker 1: It's a designed to work with Nvidia's three D system,

559
00:30:27,920 --> 00:30:30,680
Speaker 1: so you need the Nvidia UH graphics card and a

560
00:30:30,760 --> 00:30:33,520
Speaker 1: Navidia glasses and or if it leads to work. But

561
00:30:33,600 --> 00:30:35,720
Speaker 1: it also has a setting where you can switch it

562
00:30:35,760 --> 00:30:38,800
Speaker 1: to anaglyph if you want to, so you wouldn't in

563
00:30:38,840 --> 00:30:40,480
Speaker 1: that case if you just switch it to anaglyph, you

564
00:30:40,520 --> 00:30:43,240
Speaker 1: just need the anaglyph glasses in order to view it.

565
00:30:43,920 --> 00:30:46,120
Speaker 1: But keep in mind that when you're viewing stuff with

566
00:30:46,120 --> 00:30:48,440
Speaker 1: anaglyph glasses, that means that the color is going to

567
00:30:48,480 --> 00:30:50,880
Speaker 1: seem a little off. It's not going to be as

568
00:30:50,960 --> 00:30:54,120
Speaker 1: vibrant again. Um, so there are some issues. And just

569
00:30:54,200 --> 00:30:56,400
Speaker 1: like we were talking about with the three D conversion thing,

570
00:30:56,400 --> 00:30:59,800
Speaker 1: if you're using polarized glasses or really it's the act

571
00:30:59,800 --> 00:31:02,800
Speaker 1: of shutter glasses, it may be a little darker than

572
00:31:02,840 --> 00:31:05,480
Speaker 1: what the movie was originally intended to be, so you

573
00:31:05,480 --> 00:31:07,520
Speaker 1: may have to adjust your brightness settings in order to

574
00:31:07,640 --> 00:31:11,000
Speaker 1: be able to see everything properly, and that may affect

575
00:31:11,000 --> 00:31:13,520
Speaker 1: the quality of the film. But yeah, check that out

576
00:31:14,080 --> 00:31:16,400
Speaker 1: if you are interested in doing this yourself, Remember that

577
00:31:16,440 --> 00:31:18,520
Speaker 1: it's going to take a lot of processing power and

578
00:31:18,600 --> 00:31:21,440
Speaker 1: a lot of hard drive space if you want to

579
00:31:21,520 --> 00:31:25,560
Speaker 1: save these, and they actually go into another open source

580
00:31:25,760 --> 00:31:28,880
Speaker 1: program that will allow you to save the films. Because

581
00:31:28,960 --> 00:31:33,120
Speaker 1: avicynthe is really a real time conversion thing. It's not

582
00:31:33,240 --> 00:31:37,640
Speaker 1: designed to save the movie that you've converted. It's just

583
00:31:37,720 --> 00:31:40,520
Speaker 1: designed to to kind of do the conversion on the fly.

584
00:31:41,240 --> 00:31:42,560
Speaker 1: If you want to save it, you're gonna need to

585
00:31:42,640 --> 00:31:46,360
Speaker 1: use a separate set of programs and codex. But maximum

586
00:31:46,360 --> 00:31:49,040
Speaker 1: PC spells that all out, and the three D Vision

587
00:31:49,040 --> 00:31:53,200
Speaker 1: blog also does so if you're interested, check that out. Okay,

588
00:31:53,400 --> 00:31:56,600
Speaker 1: all right. That sums up our movie making Technology three

589
00:31:56,680 --> 00:32:00,640
Speaker 1: D podcast spectacular. I hope you guys enjoyed it. If

590
00:32:00,680 --> 00:32:03,640
Speaker 1: you have any questions or you want to hear more

591
00:32:03,720 --> 00:32:06,400
Speaker 1: about the stuff, or you've got a totally different topic

592
00:32:06,440 --> 00:32:08,440
Speaker 1: you would like to hear us talk about, you can

593
00:32:08,480 --> 00:32:11,480
Speaker 1: write us our email addresses tech Stuff at how stuff

594
00:32:11,520 --> 00:32:13,320
Speaker 1: Works dot com and Chris and I will talk to

595
00:32:13,360 --> 00:32:20,120
Speaker 1: you again really soon if you're a tech stuff and

596
00:32:20,200 --> 00:32:23,120
Speaker 1: be sure to check us out on Twitter text stuff

597
00:32:23,320 --> 00:32:26,000
Speaker 1: hs wsr handle, and you can also find us on

598
00:32:26,040 --> 00:32:29,320
Speaker 1: Facebook at Facebook dot com slash tech Stuff h s

599
00:32:29,480 --> 00:32:33,280
Speaker 1: W for more on this and thousands of other topics.

600
00:32:33,440 --> 00:32:35,880
Speaker 1: Does it how stuff works dot com and be sure

601
00:32:35,880 --> 00:32:38,000
Speaker 1: to check out the new tech stuff blob now on

602
00:32:38,040 --> 00:32:44,840
Speaker 1: the how Stuff Works home page, brought to you by

603
00:32:44,840 --> 00:32:48,320
Speaker 1: the reinvented two thousand twelve camera. It's ready, are you