When 3D Falls Short

In my previous posts in this series, I took time to translate many of the powerful creative thoughts of Clyde Dsouza into the context of classroom learning. In this sequel, I will draw upon Dsouza’s expertise to answer the countervailing question: “Why is some eS3D content so darn lackluster?”

3D falls short in classrooms when:

Clyde Dsouza,
author of Think in 3D

It’s too flat. In his book, Think in 3D, Dsouza proposes that [when viewing 3D] “the screen really is a stage for all purposes. It is no longer a flat wall.” Dsouza accurately understands that, whenever 3D educational content is so close in appearance to flat movies, it loses its appeal. Think about it. Why would schools pay for the extra costs of 3D if they are only a little bit better than a 2D classroom video? It’s so obvious! He concludes, “A subtle look 3D film may as well be 2D.” So, too, in classroom 3D. In education, depth ‘rules’ and flat ‘drools’. (Please excuse my use of middle school vernacular).

It’s too subtle. Dsouza believes that is a mistake to assume that "subtle 3D is good 3D." He warns that “subtle 3D at all times  creates safe – [and] boring 3D. I agree. Anyone who knows educations is well aware that ‘boring’ ushers in an“irreversible kiss of death.”

It moves too fast. According to Dsouza, “the familiar montage like style , made up of rapid cuts, frequently changing camera angles, or fast camera motion that is normally used to convey anticipation, excitement, or other emotions into 2D movies” just doesn’t work in 3D film. I can say the same for the classroom. The classroom is different than the movie theater or entertainment ride.

3D content still has a long way to go. Some companies—like zSpace, CubeDigiCo, and Sensavis—are leading the way. Hardware and software companies alike would be wise to pick up Dsouza's book, connect with his ideas, and start to really think in 3D.