CNN article "3-D invades home movies, photos"

[Marlton Mom]

One day we will be talking about the demise of 2 dimensional photographs like we talk about the demise of film today.....

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/01/08/ces.3d.trends/index.html?hpt=C2

~ Marlton Mom

[seashoreCM]

3D pictures have been around for over 100 years.

They have had things called stereoscopes (one is in the Carousel of Progress)
They have had things called Viewmasters (There are several about including a giant replica in Buzz Lightyear).
They have made "stereo" cameras (have two lenses and some use ordinary 35mm film.
Now all of these devices ultimately have each eye looking at a different photograph or screen. It is when we have one screen (Muppetvision or 3D TV set or whatever) that both eyes are looking at that we need some kind of optical barrier (accomplished by the special glasses) so the images destined for each eye are not seen by the other eye.
There are "molded plastic" 3D pictures where the picture is divided into thin stripes where the odd stripes combine to make the picture for the left eye and the even stripes are for the right eye and the molded plastic cover sheet is really a lens of sorts that lets each eye see only the stripes intended for that eye. The overall sharpness of the picture is limited by the fineness of the stripes. Rear projection TV's also have such a molded ribbed plastic cover sheet and that may become the basis of 3D TV sets not needing special eyeglasses.

[photo_chick]

Yes, 3D images have been around for a long time. But never has it been so easy for the average person to create a 3D image. Now that the process is so accessible I do think we'll be seeing more of it.

[bicker]

Everything changes, and ends.

Typically, though, the ending, itself, takes place pretty far down the road from the point where the vast majority of people no longer care.

Maybe the 2D photography will be made irrelevant during our lifetimes, but I suspect not.

However, surely we'll travel further down the path, away from where we are now, in some direction, at least.

[coloneldebugger]

The demand for 3D television by consumers is so minuscule that area is bound to vanish or continue to be virtually non-existent for a long time. You just had most of the country migrate to HD television at a cost of $1000s, followed by the great recession. There won't be another big migration to new TV technology anytime soon.

3D photo have been around for a while, but I don't see this being anything more than a niche market for a while as well. Probably not as along as the television market. As long as there are first adopters and hobbyists out there this medium will stick around.

[MarkBarbieri]

I've been playing with 3D a lot this year. I've shot 3D pictures and videos. I've really enjoyed it. That said, I don't see 3D replacing 2D for a very, very long time. It'll continue to be a niche for a long time. I suspect that the niche will grow a little larger than it was, but it will still be a niche.

[bicker]

In a way, SLR is a niche, albeit a larger one.

[coloneldebugger]

In a way, SLR is a niche, albeit a larger one.

I dunno, I see it more status symbol than niche. I know more than a few people who were so excited and so proud to get their DSLR, but months and years later they use it the same as a point and shoot.

[bicker]

Ack, even worse. :eek:

[MarkBarbieri]

I dunno, I see it more status symbol than niche. I know more than a few people who were so excited and so proud to get their DSLR, but months and years later they use it the same as a point and shoot.

Even used as a point and shoot, a DSLR will take much better pictures than most point and shoots in most circumstances. Their much larger sensors capture more light, which helps them deliver significantly better image quality. The larger sensors also require larger lenses. Because the images taken with smaller sensors need to be enlarged more, lens flaws and compromises made in lens designs are magnified more with a point and shoot. Another huge advantage is that DSLRs usually have much less shutter lag than point and shoots (although that advantage has decreased in the last several years). I can't comment on the motivation of the people that you know, but they are almost certainly getting better pictures with their DSLR than they would be if that still had a point and shoot, even if they are shooting in full auto mode.