Literature Review
Following on from my learning plan I am developing a focus on the viewer, which is fascinating to me. The viewer’s role will be dependent on its consideration during storytelling, production and post production process. Can 3D as a medium enhance the viewer’s experience?
Placing the viewer at the centre of the work
How to effectively position the viewer in relation to art/film?
I researched current text around 3D and wanted to understand the viewer and how they related to the characters on screen with the addition of depth and volume.
'We naturally prefer the fine details of flesh structures, the volume and movement of underlying bones and muscles. The increased realism of human figures in 3D movies positively affects the identification and projection processes.' (Mendiburu, 2009 pg. 3)
Is there any validity in this, does volume add more realism?
‘With 3D, we no longer have to rebuild the volume of objects in the scene we are looking at, because we get them directly from our visual system. By reducing the effort involved in the suspension of disbelief, we significantly increase the immersion experience.' (Mendiburu, 2009 pg. 3)
While viewing 3D, is less effort involved in the suspension of disbelief? Is it immersive? At this stage I was keen to investigate the validity of these assumptions. As a lecturer I have access to colleagues and students, therefore I used my immediate community as a resource to test my ideas.
'Research is a process of testing a stated idea or assertion (the hypothesis) to see if the evidence supports it or not.' (Davies, 2007 pg.17)
Suspension of disbelief
When I think of suspension of disbelief, a film that comes to mind is The Sixth Sense (The Sixth Sense, 1999, film.) This is mainly attributed to the storytelling. Does the change in the way that we view promote immersion, as a result of 3D technology?
'3D cinema creates the illusion of volume by projecting two pictures, one for each eye.' (Mendiburu, 2009 pg.9)
The process of reconstructing the 3D image requires more work on behalf of the viewer,
'First, the stereoscopic depth reconstruction relies as much on cognitive processes and learned associations as on the visual stimuli. We can fool it to a great extent, but we can't expect the audience to be passive in its experience. Second, we are reaching the moviegoers on a deeper level. Even if visual gimmicks like flying objects trigger survival reflexes, most of the additional mileage provided by 3D images will be in the emotional sphere.' (Mendiburu, 2009 pg. 25)
This is certainly an area that requires more understanding and research; the physiological process of constructing the 3D image; cognitive process, learned associations, survival reflexes and emotion.
'Some scholars say that it isn't so much a question of the researcher deciding which route to go down, but what kind of knowledge he or she is seeking to make, uncover or construct.' (Davies, 2007 pg. 10)
To add to this it is also important to take into consideration that,
'Not everybody sees 3D and stereo blindness is estimated to affect 3 to 15 percent of the population, mostly due to poor binocular vision. It means that 1 in 30 persons will not see 3D at all, and one in six has some sort of stereoscopic vision impairment.' (Mendiburu, 2009 pg. 24)
This is an important area of consideration especially during any qualitative research that involves interviews. I need to be mindful that not all adults/children can see 3D.
In a yet to be peer reviewed study by Professor L Mark Carrier, the Guardian newspaper has selected and published a portion of his findings that reflect a less than favorable effect of 3d viewing:
‘Carrier's study did, however, suggest that watching films in stereoscope increased threefold the risk of eyestrain, headache or trouble with vision.’ (Child (2011)
www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/aug/11/3d-no-better-than-2d. pg.1
No comments:
Post a Comment