dashdotcomma

http://theplaylist.blogspot.com/2010/06/christopher-nolan-tested-3d-conversion.html

While Nolan told the audience that “I’m not a huge fan of 3D,” he did go on to reveal, “We did tests on “Inception” to look at the post conversion process, and they worked very well. It’s quite easy to do, in fact. But it takes a little time, and we didn’t have the time to do it to the standard that I would have been happy.” Furthermore, the director won’t shoot in 3D — he prefers to shoot on film, and using prime lenses (fixed focal length lenses), which aren’t possible with 3D cameras. But don’t worry about the film lacking visual pizazz. As was revealed earlier this year, Nolan has already used a variety of film formats on “Inception” to try and create a grand, immersive experience shooting in 35mm, 65mm and VistaVision.

But even if Nolan toys with 3D for the next installment of the Batman franchise, he has some fundamental issues with the format he’ll need to get over, saying that “on an experiential level, I find the dimness of the image extremely alienating” and that “the truth is, I think it’s a misnomer to call it 3D versus 2D. The whole point of cinematic imagery is it’s three dimensional… You know 95% of our depth cues come from occlusion, resolution, color and so forth, so the idea of calling a 2D movie a ’2D movie’ is a little misleading.” Which is perhaps the best defense of traditional projection we’ve heard in a long time.