Are you sure you want to delete this?
Kind of amusing when I visit the house where the expensive home audio equipment is nerfed by stereo placement without any separation ( sometimes stacked on each other without even acknowledging a directional attempt! )
I would have thought that using an audio stereo analogy as an example where realistic fidelity through the experience of depth ( space ) would be unimaginable to anyone's experience of sound.
But apparently even audio stereo is seemingly a gimmick in many peoples estimation? Or hopefully they simply account for a minority that simply do not care? ( "fideliopaths" )
On the other hand...
It is amusing that even stereo music met with resistance when first introduced! Where one might find listening to a seminal feat of 4 track audio pioneering recording such as the Beatles' Sgt. Pepper's Album unimaginable without stereo speakers or headphone magic. But George Martin and Geoff Emerick's stereo ambitions were met with resistance towards stereo by the musicians themselves! George Harrison's remarks towards the stereo version at the time seem to mirror the knee jerk sentiment that some have towards the bi-ocular visual equivalent: Depth as a cheap gimmick ( as if God gave us two eyes by mistake? ).
Fast forward to today and know one barely thinks twice about wearing bulky headphone cups over one's ears ( some models even garnering reputational awe of their technical achievements reflected in their price tags )
Light disposable polarizing glasses are a gimmick?
I suppose all is not well even with regards to Sgt. Pepper's standing as the new mono remix releases are being touted as the defacto experience fer listening to that music! ( insanity! )
Some even go so far as to claim that no effort was given to the stereo versions! Where they were rushed to market as cheap marketing fluff. In which case, Geoff Emerick had to go on record to set the record straight on George Martin's and His own visionary Stereo aspirations for Sgt Pepper's as recently as one month ago in Variety!
And an awful lot of it has been misinformation that I frankly find both defamatory and disrespectful. I’ve read that we put no time into the stereo mix, which is just inaccurate. We put just as much into the stereo mix as we did the mono mix. And to hear that [producer] George Martin would have loved to have all the tracks we have today to work from, I would say, “No, he wouldn’t.” But of course he’s not here to ask.
( not only re-interpreting mono madness... but apparently audio engineering disrespectful madness as well )
I don't think we can have it both ways.
We have two ears and two eyes!
One version of stereo depth cannot be a valid cumbersome headpiece while the other is magically anointed as gimmick because of tacky marketing considerations that have lingered on from the 50's.
What's infuriatingly difficult is the fervor in antipathy towards stereoscopic depth? As if in the angry internet age it is not enough to simply have one's own personal tastes and preferences...
But it is as if there simply can not be a minority preference as a "valid" experiential medium that is differnet. Where minority numbers equate to invalid/incorrect experiences that have to be openly dismissed and even mocked.
Infuriating because of the 1 out of 30 consumers who no longer have an LG OLED Stereoscopic option... Out of those 30, 29 naysayers who would not be affected one way or the other...
It is the Stereo Enthusiast who has the most avid investment!
( Already resigned to paying insanely disproportionately for that preference. One doesn't simply enjoy 3D... It is an invested interest! Nothing like the death of say, CD or VHS. Perhaps even desktop computing with a mouse for console gaming and tablet finger scrolling! It's more like... being a fan of headphone stereo immersion where one woke up to a world where the sale of all headphones and stereo recording where no longer marketed!
It's devastating. Jimi Hendrix under one ear instead of a good pair of stereo headphones? for all eternity? Devastating! )
The bulkiness and price of admission with the first gen of VR devices seem to add more negativity despite the billions invested into stereoscopic concerns oddly enough?
But all is not lost.
The new depth agnostic ( "essentially" infinitely focusable glass planes. Similar to the lytro "light field" photography technologies )
Glass lenses on upcoming AR glasses and head mounts might bring back depth concerns to the spotlight. Hopefully enough to drive new visually advanced technologies faster!
Many might be perfectly happy with stereo options in a "glassless/HMD-less" future.
But it's an impossible field of dreams with so much negativity towards a technology still in it's infancy.
A sad catch 22 made worse by an arrogant internet:
( make it and the market will come vs the market will come when they make it )
Came here by coincident searching to find out if Roger photographed Blade Runner in Stereo before choosing the right venue for my first viewing. It is awesome that he actively participated in the conversion process. Enough so that I think I will take a chance on that for the virgin experience.
I assume that the American Cinematographer Magazine issue is already out!
Since the Jordan Cronenweth/Bladerunner issue is the highest selling/back-issue requested in their history ( as well as fer Cinefex )...
It will be interesting to see if we have a sequel that can finally do justice to a legend! ( perhaps Godfather II? )
Happy accident either way finding this site! Been a devout fan since Barton Fink. ( still remember being horrified that Sonnenfeld wasn't directing photography. Who is this friggin Deakins upstart anyway? Who thinks he can mess with my exaggerated wide angle POV addictions? ) Though I remember being very excited about the energy caught in Sid and Nancy! ( had I known at that time? )
But ever since it's release...
Hudsucker is still my all time favorite cinematic accomplishment. Grossly underrated motif and montage.