In his book, Think in 3D, DeSouza worries about conversion of traditional 2D content into the 3D format. He frets: “Straight over conversions will not work,” suggesting that this is merely wishful thinking--merely “thinking in 2D” about 3D. He explains the possible failure points for such a crossover in this way: “the brain takes a while to ‘take in’ a 3D scene, and although still an illusion, contain such rich visual information that if it were to be combined with 2D cinematographic technique such as fast cuts and pans, rack focus, or depth of field manipulation – it would lead to visual overload for the audiences, who may end up getting a headache as they struggle to make sense of all the visual stimuli being presented. “ Instead, DeSouza values an enveloping “visual narrative… presented…via subtle camera movement rather than a montage like style, frequently changing camera angles, or fast camera motion that is normally used to convey anticipation, excitement, or other emotions in 2D movies.”
DeSouza feels that straight-over conversions of 2D content into 3D format will not reach audiences as well, because “most directors, editors, and cinematographers have grown up with montage style filmmaking, and do not use ‘dwell time,’ which a 3D movie thrives on. Instead, DeSouza postulates that great 3D content requires a necessary “visual grammar change.”
Still, in a recent interview, DeSouza feels that in the education space, there might be room for some doable conversions. He states: "I believe that educational content might perhaps benefit from conversion, because they aren’t produced with camera work at the same tempo as Hollywood tentpole productions, which are notorious when it comes to converting." In our next week’s post, we will tackle the issue of 3D conversions in the educational space.