JMP 12 (2) pp.

139156 Intellect Ltd 2011

Journal of Media Practice

Volume 12 Number 2
Intellect Ltd 2011. Article. English language. doi: 10.1386/jmpr.12.2.139_1

SARAH ATKINSON
University of Brighton

Stereoscopic-3D
storytelling Rethinking
the conventions, grammar
and aesthetics of a new
medium
ABSTRACT

KEYWORDS

The film and broadcasting industry is currently at a very exciting and key defining
moment in its evolution: the much heralded third age of Stereoscopic 3D (S3D). This
current resurgence sees a proliferation of S3D film cinema releases, new S3D television
channels, live S3D coverage of sporting events and S3D viewing technologies becoming a viable and affordable option for the home viewing experience. This provides a
timely context in which to re-examine and re-evaluate Stereoscopic 3D in an academic context. Film and cinema studies have evolved significantly in the past century
in their responses to the two-dimensional film-making medium; its production techniques, storytelling capabilities and audio-visual narrative devices. We are now at
the precipice of a pivotal moment in film-making and cinema history, which calls for
new ways of thinking about and articulating this new form of visual storytelling. This
article maps the development of S3D fictional film-making, its technologies, its physiological effects, the discourses that have surrounded it and the division of industrial
opinion that currently concern its future. Interwoven with commentary and reflection
from industry practitioners, the article also investigates some contemporary examples

stereoscopic 3D
film-making
stereoscopic 3D
cinema
stereoscopic 3D
storytelling
stereography
Holographic 3D
depth cues
depth scores

139

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-139

JMP-12-2-Finals

Sarah Atkinson

of S3D fiction film-making in an attempt to provide a contribution to the foundations

for the ongoing study, articulation and documentation of stereoscopic-3D storytelling.

INTRODUCTION
This latest iteration of S3D content has a long history of cinematic antecedents,
most notably within film in the 1950s and the subsequent resurgence of the
technology in the 1980s. The films from these eras were characterized by
their gratuitous effects and gimmickry, and as such failed to launch or significantly advance the form as a result. But historically, there has always been a
sense that S3D film would prevail in the end. Writing in 1968, Limbacher
proclaimed
The dramatic possibilities of 3D have yet to be genuinely explored by film
artists, who have been limited to throwing things out into the audience,
making them more irritated than involved. When depth can be used to
involve rather than to assault the viewer, it will be a most welcome addition to the art of film. When the viewer can see a situation unfolding in
another room with a complete naturalness of spatial dimension, it will
become difficult for him to disassociate himself from the scene and there
will be little doubt that he will derive more pleasure from the scene on
screen.
(1968: 19192)
As technologies have advanced, viewers have indeed begun to experience the
immersiveness within a fictional scene that Limbacher describes, not just at the
cinema, but also on the smaller screen of the television set. Research into this
area has progressed significantly; IJsselteijn, De Ridder, Hamberg, et al. (1998:
207) investigating the effects of 3DTV states that, the boundaries between
observer space and display space become blurred, supporting an illusion of nonmediation. Up until now, they claim that the concept of presence, or the sense
of being somewhere in space and time, has to date largely been applied to
describe the users experience when interacting with advanced media interfaces
such as virtual environments (IJsselteijn, De Ridder, Hamberg, et al. 1998: 207).
Twelve years on from this research, and in the past year, the first 3DTVs have
been released onto the market alongside specialized 3D BluRay Players and
subsequent 3D BluRay film releases. Most mainstream Cinemas had already
invested in the previous two years in the installation of S3D projection equipment. The medium of S3D film-making, and its associated modes of production
are frantically catching up in order to exploit these new delivery platforms and
their subsequent audience reception
This article aims to map the developments of S3D fictional film-making
to date; the technologies, the cinematic apparatus, the evolution of filmic storytelling and the possibilities afforded by spatialized film-making in the third
dimension. It will explore the emerging aesthetics and new visual grammar,
and investigate the central problem of its reception, which is currently dividing both industry and academic opinion. By drawing on both industry practices
and film theory, the articles aims are twofold: to look towards evolving new
techniques of filmic storytelling whilst developing new critical understandings
and articulations of the form.

140

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-140

JMP-12-2-Finals

Stereoscopic-3D storytelling Rethinking the conventions . . .

THE TECHNOLOGY: AN OVERVIEW

Firstly, it is necessary to provide a brief overview of the origins and developments of the technology in order to introduce the subject-specific terminology
and to provide a foundation for discussions of the aesthetics and visual
characteristics of the form.
The principle behind stereography is relatively simple: it replicates human
vision. With 20-20 vision, each of the human eyes sees a different image. Our
eyes then converge at a certain point which provides us with our sense
of depth and three-dimensionality. For individuals who have an uncorrected
visual impairment, or blindness in one eye, the effect of 3D cannot be perceived so effectively, if at all. (If the viewers vision is corrected by either contact
lenses, or glasses, then 3D eyewear can be worn over these.) Charles Wheatstone invented the stereoscope in 1838. Two identical (but slightly offset) still
images could be viewed through this device, which separated the images by
positioning a wooden bar between the eyes; a perceived sense of depth was
therefore created. It was hugely popular in late 1800s photography, but the
obvious restriction with this device was that only one viewer could experience
the effect at a time.
The cinematic effect of creating depth in this way is achieved by using two
cameras to capture two separate moving image streams. The two cameras replicate the two eyes of a person. The cameras are rigged in either a side-by-side
or mirror configuration, whereby a mirror is placed between the two camera
lenses to capture the (almost) identical image (see Figure 1). More recently, the
major camera manufacturers have released S3D camcorders that house dual
lenses within the camera body itself.
When two cameras are used, the lenses are moved inwards and outwards
in order to converge on a defined point in the scene, which is known as the
convergence point. The space between the camera lenses is known as the
interaxial distance, which is the equivalent of the intraocular distance between
the human eyes, the average of which is approximately 63mm. It is not usual
practice to move the interaxial distance beyond this, as unnatural visual effects

Figure 1: A professional mirror-rig on display at the International Broadcasting

Conference (IBC), Amsterdam, 2010.

141

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-141

JMP-12-2-Finals

Sarah Atkinson

can occur. However, in some cases, where the convergence point requires the
interaxial distance to be much further apart than is humaly possible, that is,
when the action is much further away in the distance, the viewer experiences
effects known as dwarfism and gigantism. This can be experienced in the
case of live football coverage, in which the players are a long distance away from
the camera; they appear miniaturized, or dwarfed, in relation to their environment. This is the result of the cameras (and therefore the eyes) being pushed so
far apart; it is as if they were positioned on the face of a giant. Such effects can
clearly be avoided in fiction film production where there is much tighter control
over the set.
In the reception and viewing of S3D content the two separate outputs from
the cameras are overlaid onto the same screen space. The audience members
need to wear special glasses in order to separate the images out so that each eye
views the different image. This has been achieved by using stereo technologies
such as Anaglyph or Polarising. In the case of anaglyph, one lens of the glasses
is red, and the other blue, (or in some cases the combination has been red and
green or red and cyan). Two projectors are then deployed to project and overlay
the two separate image streams onto a single screen. The anaglyph technology
produced images of substandard quality, and bad colour reproduction, since red
was filtered out of view from the right eye and blue/green or cyan was blocked
from view of the left eye. Moving image technology for S3D projection was
developed in the 1930s and the polarizing technology that is in use today was
invented by the Polaroid company in 1937. Dual film projectors were deployed
with polarizing filters, which filtered out horizontal and vertical beams of light.
The audience members wore glasses with matching polarity. This technology
meant that full colour reproduction could be achieved, but that a viewers head
movements were very limited. If they were to tilt their head at an angle, the
horizontal and vertical beams of light would be misaligned and the stereoscopic
effect would be lost. These technologies financial and economical constraints
added to the production budget since double projection needed to be installed
in the cinema.
The superiority of todays viewing technology is a result of the circular
polarizing technology. Real-D are the current market leaders in this technology,
which requires only a single projector with a specialist filter but also a specialized silver or metallic screen upon which to project. Audience members wear
the specialized glasses with polarizing lenses, and are able to tilt their heads in
any direction without the loss of the 3D effect.

THE EVOLUTION OF CINEMATIC APPARATUS

Many commentators have paralleled this recent innovation of S3D cinema to
the introduction of sound to film in the early 1920s, the introduction of colour
in the 1930s and the introduction of widescreen in the 1950s. Lipton notes the
similarities between the intervention of sound and stereoscopic technologies
into cinema:
Both required decades of technology development initially requiring two
synchronized machines; both required studio and exhibitor investment;
both used similar business models for exhibition; both were introduced
to the studios and exhibitors by outside business interests; both justified

142

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-142

JMP-12-2-Finals

Stereoscopic-3D storytelling Rethinking the conventions . . .

an increase in ticket prices; and both required a rethinking of creative filmmaking techniques such as production design, cinematography,
production pipeline issues, and acting style.
(2007: 519)
If we are to believe that we are at a comparably significant moment in cinematic
history, just the shift to digital projection itself, then there is a definite need
to document and track these developments as film-makers start to use and
experiment with this technology.
In the 1950s, at the same time that S3D was being developed, every Hollywood studio also had its on widescreen dimension process; these included
CinemaScope, VistaVision, SuperScope and Technorama. As Lipton stated:
CinemaScope prevailed in the 1950s, because its movies could be projected
by adding a new lens to the projector (and a bigger screen), rather than
the multiple machines required for Cinerama or 3D. The introduction of
CinemaScope initially halted motion picture fluidity. Suddenly, cutting
slowed down and film composition became locked to the proscenium
arch. The dynamism of the cinema was lost for a short period of time
until filmmakers adjusted to the wide aspect ratio.
(2007: 521)
This observation can also be paralleled to the current use of S3D in which filmmakers and directors are uncertain of its capabilities, and how to make the best
narrative use of the new dimension. This was echoed by commentators of the
time regarding the dimensions of extreme widescreen. There were claims that,
the extreme edges of the screen are virtually unusable (Chabrol and Rohmer,
in Barr 1963: 9). Although Barr points to a number of examples of horizontal
effects, whereby the full scope of the frame is utilized by the director through
on-screen action and elements of mise-en-scne. He states that the more open
the frame, the greater the impression of depth: the image is more vivid, and
involves us more directly (Barr 1963: 9). It also enhances the effect of lateral
movement (Barr 1963: 10). As Zone noted:
For a brief time, Hollywood filmmakers worked with the expanded narrative palette of 3-D on the luminous canvas of classics Hollywood
(19391951) with greatly varying results just as that era was ending. Cinemascope signaled not only the demise of 3D movies but also the end of
the classic studio era of sound film production in Hollywood.
(2004: 216)
The lack of investment in S3D projection in the 1950s and the complications of
synchronizing two projectors together in order to satisfactorily screen the films
led to a halt in its development and evolution.
When discussing the current wave of high-quality and technically accomplished S3D cinema content, it is perhaps more appropriate to think of IMAX
as its precursor as opposed to the technically and unsatisfactory cinematic 3D
experiences of the 1950s and 1980s. IMAX, a large-format film company was
first introduced in 1970, and since its inception, has tended to have an educational and documentary emphasis in the high-quality content that the company
portrays as being synonymous with its brand. Standard mainstream cinemas

143

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-143

JMP-12-2-Finals

Sarah Atkinson

and IMAX have actually been converging for some time through the IMAX
digital media remastering (DMR) process, which enables 35mm film prints to
be up-converted to the IMAX format.
It has been noted that the cinematic experience of IMAX 3D compared
with that of standard cinematic 3D is markedly different. Rob Engle from Sony
Pictures Imageworks contrasts these experiences and asserts that the IMAX is
much more immersive as you cannot see the edges of the screen as you can
do in a multiplex cinema its literally as if you were looking through a window and experiencing a deep world [. . .] IMAX will feel like youre more in the
world, and multiplex Real-D will feel like youre watching the world (in Westman 2006). The emphasis on the realness of S3D imagery is a key discourse,
which has shaped its development and deployment within the cinematic realm,
as well as informing the key debates that it has provoked. Harpole has stated
that
for Bazin, cinema is best when it closely imitates his vision of what the
real world is like. This realist/idealist stand thus affirms the quality of the
long take since it presents the world in all of its visible continuity, and
of deep focus which allows all of the things to be clearly seen through
this window on the world that is the cinema screen.
(1980: 11)
When discussing S3D, Mendiburu has celebrated its potential in supporting
fictional storytelling. He states that by reducing the effort involved in the
suspension of disbelief, we significantly increase the immersion experience
(Mendiburu 2009: 3). However, the realist standpoint has been countered by
commentators such as Kroeker (2010: 14) who has stated: one of these issues
is how the human brain perceives simulated 3D differently from how it perceives the natural world. The shortcomings of the form will be discussed in
more depth towards the conclusion of the article.

THE EVOLUTION OF CINEMATIC STORYTELLING

There has come to be a widely acknowledged dicta of on-set production techniques and rules to which most mainstream fictional film-making and drama
production adhere. From script to screen, there is generally a formulaic process of film-making, which constantly acknowledges and compensates for the
flat, two-dimensional mode of its transmission. Set and actor positioning are
a crucial factor in order to carry forwards the illusion of depth on-screen. On
set, items of furniture and props are unnaturally placed in real-world terms,
actors are placed uncomfortably together and characters face each other in
an odd way: their bodies and faces are conveniently tilted in three-quarter
view for the camera (Bordwell, in Anderson and Anderson 2005: 10). The 180degree rule is also rigorously applied, to ensure that there is continuity of actor
and set positioning, and that there are no conflicts in screen direction. This
two-dimensional film-making has also been characterized and aestheticized in
its quest to create a sense of depth and three-dimensionality. This has been
achieved through the use of what have come to be known as depth cues.
These are an integral trope of the form and as Mendiburu (2009: 26) has noted;
Cinema has been relying exclusively on monoscopic depth cues for over a century. Even if we rewrote the grammar and educated the artists overnight, the
audience culture and expectations would remain. As Harpole explains:

144

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-144

JMP-12-2-Finals

Stereoscopic-3D storytelling Rethinking the conventions . . .

Depth illusionism is created in films in several highly specific ways. These

methods are based upon the inescapable fact that spectators perceive
films with the same physiological and psychological equipment with
which they perceive real life. Many of the conventions of perception in
the world carry over into understanding the cinema. The analogy has
been carried very far, even to the point of comparing the eye blink to
the cut and the pan to the turn of the head.
(1980: 14)
Depth cues can include lighting, depth of field (created by manipulation of the
camera lens iris/aperture), focusing, perspective (through the relational positioning of objects) and motion parallax. Motion parallax can be exemplified by
the example of a moving car travelling through a landscape the objects closer
to the camera (e.g. trees and plants in the foreground) move a lot faster than
those in the distance (e.g. mountains and landscape in the background).
Engle highlights a weakness in the translation of depth of field aesthetics
into S3D by stating that
most filmmakers will use depth of field to try to direct the viewer to look
at a specific object, but if the viewer wants to have a true 3D experience,
then depth of field is actually your enemy in that respect.
(in Westman 2006)
As Lipton (2007: 523) has noted, the film-makers challenge has always been
how to make the planar image look three-dimensional using extra-stereoscopic
depth cues. The stereoscopic cinema the cinema of two eyes adds power to
the cinematographers quest to create a three-dimensional world.
And so we enter a new S3D realm of storytelling possibilities and aesthetics. In its previous iterations, discussions of S3D film productions of the 1950s
and 1980s have been reduced to their gratuitous and gimmicky assets. The first
S3D feature-length film released at the cinema was Bwana Devil (Oboler 1952),
which was promoted with the tag line A LION in your lap and a LOVER in
your arms. This early iteration of S3D was characterized by its accompanying
meta-narratives and hyperbolic claims that implied that images from the screen
would literally inhabit the audience and jump out of the screen. In technical
terms, this would be achieved by using the negative parallax of the screen
space as opposed to the positive parallax (where objects, characters, the scene
appear behind the screen).
Oboler (1953: 153) aptly called this trend three dementia, whereby everything will be leaping madly off the screen. This is a great temptation in making
a three-dimensional picture, having objects, from bosoms to zombies, sticking out of the screen into space. Oboler (1953: 153) suggests that S3D is most
appropriately deployed as a frame through which the audience looks into reality [. . .] objects poking through the frame of the screen in a distorted manner
are a special effects touch to be used with discretion. In interviews with Robertson, stereoscopic supervisor at Walt Disney Animation Studio, Robert Neuman
states that S3D had a false start because of the technology and the spectacle of
S3D that seduced early film-makers: The studios would go for the gimmicks,
the throw everything at the audience approach (in Robertson 2008: 12).
Arguably the first example of a feature film to use the medium of S3D for
storytelling purposes was Hitchcocks Dial M for Murder (Hitchcock 1954). The

145

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-145

JMP-12-2-Finals

Sarah Atkinson

film, its style, feel and staging was that of a theatrical play (the script was an
adaptation of the successful stage play of the same name written by Frederick
Knott in 1952). There were many instances of objects inhabiting the foreground
dimensions of the screen, the aesthetics of which could be likened to the flats
on the wings of a theatres stage. These objects included a lamp, a flower vase
and a keyhole. All action was framed within the style of a proscenium arch.
This was quite an unconventional use of the form given that all other examples of the time were using the techniques of throwing images out into the
audience. In the case of Dial M for Murder, these foreground effects, which
inhabited the negative parallax area of the screen, were saved to heighten the
effect of dramatic moments in the plot such as the hand of the character played
by Grace Kelly reaching out of the screen as the murderer attacks her, and
the door key being passed out of the screen, which is an object of narrative
significance within the plot.
In the 1980s there was a reoccurrence of S3D films using the anaglyph
technology. The gratuity and gimmickry of protruding imagery in negative parallax persisted in releases such as Jaws 3D (Alves 1983) and Friday the 13th 3D
(Miner 1982). Again, this period of mainstream S3D activity was short lived;
the unsatisfactory quality of the technology and also the content that exploited
it was yet to shake off its cheap reputation as a fad, and a novelty.

FILM-MAKING IN THE THIRD DIMENSION

As previously discussed, two-dimensional cinema has always been preoccupied with composing images for the flat screen, utilizing only the x (width)
and y (height) space. Film-making in three dimensions brings the z (depth)
space into play, which calls for a complete rethinking and replanning of the
composition on set by the director and film crew. No longer is there a need to
compress the set into an unnatural space in order to accommodate the mode
of two-dimensional reception. There is therefore a need to rethink the relationship between the actors and the set and to reconfigure the production design
that is the set and lighting design. There is also the need to consider how the
depth space will translate on-screen, planning which objects and actors are
going to appear in negative and positive parallax, and where the convergence
point of the scene is going to be positioned. The mechanism, which is used
to communicate the use of the z space to the cast and crew, is known as a
depth score or depth script. The depth score (see example in Figure 2) horizontally plots the dynamic relationship between the point of attention (POA) (the
red line) and the static screen space. The vertical dotted lines show the cuts
within the sequence. The orange line depicts the object or character closest to
the audience. The blue line plots the object furthest away from the audience.
The distance between the lines therefore indicates the amount of depth in a
scene. Therefore, the greater the distance between the orange line and the blue
line on the score, the greater depth that is perceived by the audience within the
image.
From this sample image, it can be seen that depth and spatialization in the z
dimension is choreographed in much the same way as movement of characters
from left to right on the flat screen in relation to the configuration of the pieces
of set and scenery and the observation of the 180 degree rule. New on-set practices and protocols will therefore evolve as a result of the directors use of the z
space.

146

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-146

JMP-12-2-Finals

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-147

JMP-12-2-Finals

Figure 2: A sample stereoscopic-3D depth score/depth script.

Sarah Atkinson

Phil McNally, stereoscopic supervisor at Dreamworks animation, I talk

about stereo 3D now as spatial moviemaking [. . .] the difference is like comparing painting to sculpture. We have the potential to conceive the whole
storytelling art form as a spatial art form (in Robertson 2008: 14). Robertson
uses the example of the film Bolt (Howard and Williams 2008) to illustrate his
point: The environment is fully stretched for action scenes, but when the dog
Bolt talks with the cat Mittens, and its a lighthearted moment, the crew tones
down the depth (Robertson 2008: 14). Clearly, this new visual tool in the filmmakers palette does provide the potential to add another level of storytelling
depth to a narrative; as Harpole (1980: 15) commented in 1980 when discussing
two-dimensional depth cues in traditional cinema, These cues have been used
in mainstream films to express interpersonal and intrapersonal states of characters via proxemics the spatial relationship to people and/or of people to
objects in their environment..
Talking during the production of his new film, The Invention of Hugo Cabret
(Scorcese 2011) the director states
Every shot is rethinking cinema [. . .] rethinking narrative how to tell
a story with a picture. Now, Im not saying we have to keep throwing
javelins at the camera, Im not saying we use it as a gimmick, but its liberating. Its literally a Rubiks Cube every time you go out to design a shot,
and work out a camera move, or a crane move. But it has a beauty to it
also. People look like [. . .] like moving statues. They move like sculpture,
as if sculpture is moving in a way. Like dancers [. . .].
(in Kermode 2010)
These observations from the industry specialists capture the true narrative and
storytelling potential of the form, and the excitement that these possibilities are
generating. As Mendiburu (2009: 25) has commented When you make your
movie 3D, you are deeply changing the visual experience, and you will be telling
your story in a radically changed visual medium.
McNally also states you dont expect a painting to be a photograph [. . .]
you expect to see the medium. What does it mean when were in a full
three-dimensional spatial delivery of a story? Thats so exciting. We have an
undiscovered medium (in Robertson 2008: 19).
These points of view need to be tempered by an acknowledgement of the
current limitations of the form, which are yet to be ironed out. One particular
characteristic is the cardboard cutout effect, as Cutting (2005: 8) observes: With
typical stereo there is a coulisse effect (objects can appear relatively flat with
startling spatial gaps in depth between them). Neuman also notes Lets say
you want to use a long lens [. . .] that gives you an unsatisfactory result in 3D:
there is a large separation in depth between the characters from foreground to
background, but each character looks like cardboard (in Robertson 2008: 16).
Clearly, there are restrictions that hamper the realness of the results that can
be achieved, and technological developments are needed in order to ensure
rounded images and actors.

TOWARDS A NEW AESTHETIC AND NEW VISUAL GRAMMAR

There is the widely held view that cinematic film-making has its own set of
codes, conventions, visual grammar and language. This has evolved through

148

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-148

JMP-12-2-Finals

Stereoscopic-3D storytelling Rethinking the conventions . . .

techniques such as continuity staging, whereby a combination of different shot

sizes are taken from different camera angles in order to build sequences that
deploy continuity editing, and other techniques such as montage, shot juxtaposition and jump cutting. Each of these techniques tends to be used to convey
or imply dramatic moments and effects within the context of a learned and
widely known cinematic system.
The development of cinematic conventions of framing, camera movement, and editing has tended to facilitate the construction of narratives.
Cinematic meaning is derived through the combination of images rather
than from a single frame. The juxtaposition of two images to create a third
meaning is a central concept of film.
(Sturken and Cartwright 2001: 136)
The notion of a universal cinematic language has been problematized by
authors such as Thomson-Jones (2008), who in identifying the five features of
natural language (productive, conventional, recursive, molecular and contextual) argue that although film language is productive and conventional, that it
is not recursive, molecular or acontextual (Thomson-Jones 2008: 66). Although
their case is convincing in a literal sense, the analogy of a filmic language does
provide critics with a useful tool with which to articulate its characteristics, as
Nichols (1975: 35) states we cannot construct an ungrammatical sequence as
we can write a nonsense sentence unconventional perhaps but not ungrammatical. Whilst acknowledging that cinema is not a language in itself, we will
continue to assert that there are universal and familiar cinematic codes and
conventions.
This leads us into rethinking whether the currently used codes are applicable to the new visual techniques of S3D. In mainstream cinema, it has been
noted that there is currently a formulaic approach to S3D, which is nothing more than adding a depth veneer to an existing film, and as such, the
storytelling potential of the form has not yet been fully realized and exploited.
The opportunity to develop and to author the codes and practices of
this new medium is unrivalled. Only since the previously cited historical
landmarks of the introduction of sound, colour and widescreen to cinema,
respectively, has such an opportunity been afforded. That is not to say that
the gratuity and gimmickry has not persisted into this new era of S3D. Films
such as My Bloody Valentine 3D (Lussier 2009), Piranha 3D (Aja 2010) and Saw
3D (Greutert 2010) are all examples of big budget blockbusters that have centralized and accentuated the spectacular aspects of the form. However, we are
starting to see a rethinking and reconfiguration of the filmic form in a number
of notable commercial releases; arguably the exemplar of this new movement is
Avatar (Cameron 2009), which mixed live action and CGI in order to construct
the mythical and immersive world of Pandora. In Coraline (Selick 2009), the use
of S3D paralleled the narrative use of colour of in The Wizard of Oz (Fleming
1939) when Dorothy enters Oz, which was clearly a celebration of the new
technology of Technicolor. Coralines world is depicted in S3D, as a narrative
device, but its use could also be seen as a celebration of a new medium. Coraline was really the first 3D movie to explore soft focus through shallow depth of
field, which was considered a big no-no in 3D (Gardner 2009: 9). In Up (Docter
2009) the use of S3D mirrors the narrative arc of the central protagonist, Carl.
The S3D becomes deeper as Carl progresses further into his global adventure

149

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-149

JMP-12-2-Finals

Sarah Atkinson

and also deeper into his own psychological self-discovery. Each of these examples relies wholly or heavily upon CGI content, thus limiting the discussion
of their production techniques and principles that are afforded by live action
films. The films also share the fact that the exploration of the new technology
of S3D is intrinsic to the films narrative and is therefore reflected thematically in the film. The stories are all centred upon the exploration of a particular
environment or world by the key protagonists. That is not to reduce these
examples purely to this single denominator; of course there are also further
plots, subplots and character development.
Further experimentation with the medium is apparent in the example of
Street Dance 3D (Giwa and Pasquini 2010), since it is all live action. The film is a
UK production, based on the creation of a theatrical window into a performing
world. In this example, we see a return to the staged approach of film-making
as previously discussed in the case of Dial M for Murder. As Cutting notes:

Characterised by a proscenium arch approach where we start at the

beginning of the evolution of film; early films were shot as theatre
productions, with an unmoving camera in mid-audience.
(2005: 11)

Other notable recent independent S3D films include The Foundling (Cokeliss
2010), The Mortician (Roberts 2010) and Creeping Zero (Behl 2011), which are
all also live action. If the former, commercial examples were characterized by
their intrinsic focus upon the fictional CGI environment, these examples are all
focussed upon the exploration of character and plot through the creative use of
S3D.
The Foundling is a captivating short film about the abandonment of a human
unicorn. The story is set within a traditional travelling circus where the child
grows up to become a performer in a sideshow. There are a number of striking S3D visual effects that inhabit the negative parallax, for example, a ball is
thrown through the coconut shy and out of the screen, a knife thrower also
throws a knife out into the cinema space. As an adult, the man/unicorn is
momentarily reunited with his mother. This engaging and emotional encounter
is conveyed and communicated through the aesthetics of the S3D. Longer
lenses are used to set depth and to accentuate distances between the characters. Within the example of The Foundling, the S3D is successfully used as a
narrative device, accounting for the fact that there are only six lines of spoken
dialogue within the film.
The Mortician is a feature-length psychological drama, an urban noir, in
which the central protagonist embarks on a cathartic journey. The film is characterized by its mood, and incredible intensity which are both accentuated by
the lighting, sound and S3D. The detailed sequence of the main character stuffing a clients pet dog is depicted through a series of detailed tableaux, with no
dialogue or voice-over. Similarly, in a high-action chase scene, the story is told
through a series of accomplished S3D shots, which use both foreground and
background vistas to great effect.
Creeping Zero is a science fiction narrative, which is currently in the form
of a 10-minute short film pilot, and an adaptation of Jeff Noons novel of the
same name. The final feature film is yet to be completed, but the creative use of
S3D in this example is most notable in its use of special effects. These include

150

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-150

JMP-12-2-Finals

Stereoscopic-3D storytelling Rethinking the conventions . . .

motion blurs, which inhabit and move dynamically through the z space of the
shots.
These films have key tropes in common; the first most notable observation
is in their use of the sound track, and the fact that there is minimal dialogue.
The directors all rely heavily on the visual aspects as the main mechanism by
which to convey the story, and the characters emotions and relationships. The
shots contain much more foreground and background detail in which we are
immersed in the beauty and detail of their construction and their rich visual
imagery. They also tend to be held on-screen for longer periods of time, encouraging a prolonged indulgence with the image. This in turn could be seen to
inhibit audience engagement with the characters, since we are constantly presented with vistas and tableaux, and the use of the close up (CU) and the
extreme close up (ECU) are limited. In order to counter this potential character
disengagement, Neuman states that we might increase the depth until we get
a nice, round, full character for an emotional beat. A second literal metaphor
we use is equating emotional separation to depth (in Robertson 2008: 16).
An alternative solution to the problem of the distance that the audience
may feel between themselves and the characters is through the placement of
a floating window. That is a black frame created and composited in negative
parallax space around the edge of the cinema screen, thus changing the perceived location of the theatre screen. This allows the image, and therefore the
character to be brought forwards into the space and the minds of the audience.
As Gardner states:
They thought that the window changing so much would be too distracting to the audience [. . .]. The discovery of Dynamic Floating Windows
suddenly opened this whole range of possibilities for 3D storytelling. It
gave us the ability to get rid of all the window violations, and gave us a
tool for dynamically controlling how we use depth in a scene.
(2009: 14)
Similarly, visual issues that are caused by the edge of the frame are known in
the industry as window or edge violations this is an uncomfortable visual
experience caused by an object in negative parallax space being cut in two by
the edge of the frame. All objects in negative parallax have to be framed in their
entirety to avoid this problem.
Such creative solutions exemplify the experimental nature of the medium
and the exciting transitory period that this technology currently inhabits.
Through trial and error, experimentation and risk-taking, the medium is
beginning to take shape, developing its own ways of working, establishing its
taxonomies of terminology and to setting its boundaries and limits.
Currently, so much of the discussion and experimentation centres on the
visual characteristics of the medium. Very little attention has been afforded to
the sonic aspects of the form; and whether and how these will evolve alongside.
The attention afforded to the sound design in the previous three independent
film examples that were discussed were characterized by minimal use of spoken dialogue and the use of voice-over and music. Audio equivalents to visual
depth cues can and have been carried by a complex surround sound track, and
diffused sound fields that are created using the surround sound system within
the cinema. Chion (1994: 150) referred to this sonic arena as the superfield,
that is

151

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-151

JMP-12-2-Finals

Sarah Atkinson

The space created in multi-track films, by ambient natural sounds, city

noises, music, and all sorts of rustlings that surround the visual space and
that can issue from loudspeakers outside the physical boundaries of the
screen.
(1994: 150)
As the medium progresses, it will be interesting to observe how this will be
utilized, developed and enhanced.
As well as spatial aesthetics, techniques and narrative device, stereoscopic
brings with it a temporal influence over the flow and pace of shot content.
In contemporary two-dimensional film-making, we see much shorter shots
(approximately 3 seconds) cut together rapidly to form sequences from a variety of different camera angles. This approach is not so well received in S3D,
since the depth effect takes a moment for the audience to adjust to as the convergence point will shift from shot to shot, therefore a constant readjustment of
the eyes is required every time a cut is made. Consequently, the narrative pace
of S3D is forced into slowing down, by holding shots on-screen for a longer
period of time.

THE CENTRAL PROBLEM

This brings us to the current division of opinion in the industry as to whether
this issue can be satisfactorily resolved in order to secure the future and
widespread acceptance of S3D film-making. We have thus far heard much from
the evangelists of the medium who have embraced and celebrated its potential.
However, there are those critics who are skeptical about the mediums sustainability and integrity as an artistic cinematic medium. For example, Cutting has
stated that
I think stereo films fail as an important medium because stereo in the real
world enhances noticeable depth differences only nearest to the viewer
[. . .] this is not a region of space that is important to most filmmakers.
(2005: 8)
Aside from the artistic limitations, there are others who believe that the experience of viewing an S3D film is unnatural and therefore an uncomfortable
experience for the viewers. In a recent letter from Walter Murch to Robert
Egbert, Murch states that in watching a 3D film, audiences eyes
[. . .] must converge at perhaps 10 feet away, then 60 feet, then 120 feet,
and so on, depending on what the illusion is. So 3D films require us to
focus at one distance and converge at another. And 600 million years
of evolution has never presented this problem before. All living things
with eyes have always focussed and converged at the same point [. . .]
consequently, the editing of 3D films cannot be as rapid as for 2D films,
because of this shifting of convergence: it takes a number of milliseconds
for the brain/eye to get what the space of each shot is and adjust [. . .]
lastly, the question of immersion. 3D films remind the audience that they
are in a certain perspective relationship.
(Murch in Egbert 2011)

152

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-152

JMP-12-2-Finals

Stereoscopic-3D storytelling Rethinking the conventions . . .

As Lelyveld (2009: 3) states: That inescapable distance between how we

naturally see the real world and how we see 3D movies is called the vergenceaccommodation conflict.
Whether or not these points will inhibit and prevent audiences from watching and appreciating S3D is difficult to predict. Clearly, if audience members
experience physical discomfort from viewing a film, they are unlikely to return
to do so unless improvements are made, but it is unclear what percentage of
the viewing population this might affect. Research into the physiological effects
of S3D is in its infancy, the results of which have been unquantifiable and
reduced to generalized statements. For example, Lelyveld (2009: 4) has surmised that an audience members ability to deal with this conflict over the
duration of a movie is impacted by how flexible the lenses of their eyes are and
how well his/her brain reacts to the conflict. It has also been noted that new
research has found, for example, specific physiological reasons for the visual
fatigue that viewing stereoscopic 3D media sometimes causes (Kroeker 2010:
14). It is widely known that repeatedly causing the viewers eyes to diverge,
to move apart, as a result of the convergence point frequently being in negative parallax out of the screen will eventually cause unnecessary strain and
headaches in all viewers, so these effects tend to be limited in films. As yet,
there are no large-scale published research reports that have exclusively investigated the physiological and neurological effects of stereoscopic viewing upon
an audience.

CLOSING COMMENTS
There is clearly much research to be undertaken and many challenges to
overcome, particularly in relation to the convergence point anomaly and its
related undesirable physiological side effects. Some believe that this will only
be resolved through the introduction of full holography, that is, Holographic 3D
(H3D). Paul Forrest, a Director of Photography and steadicam operator, states
One of the most dramatic changes H3D brings about is the functionality,
which allows several users watching the same set to focus on different
scene points concurrently. The easiest way to imagine this is to think of
the difference between viewing a film versus being at the theatre. With
the viewer having total control over what they actually focus on is one
thing but the subtlety of H3D is that when each viewer picks their point
of focus in the scene, the rest of the scene naturally blurs much the same
as it does in the real world.
(High Definition Magazine 2010: 33)
This innovation, which is currently in development, according to industry insiders is eight to nine years away from commercial inception (High Definition
Magazine 2010: 33). Questions are raised regarding the fact that what we gain
in the quality of vision and the amount of visual information that is carried
with these media, we may well be losing in the imagination and the emotional
engagement of the audience. When all visual elements are displayed on-screen,
the characters, the locale, the elements of the set and, for longer periods of
time, the director faces many challenges. The techniques that were previously
deployed to exploit the power of suggestion and implication have been irreversibly altered. Is the gratuitous characteristic of S3D even in its subtlest sense
so intrinsic to the medium, that it becomes unavoidable?

153

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-153

JMP-12-2-Finals

Sarah Atkinson

The huge investment by the film and cinema industries in both S3D acquisition and projection technologies is a clear indication that it is here to stay
(Hancock, Damaschke, Costeira, et al. 2010: 32) for the time being at least,
judging by the major new cinematic releases that are to come this year and
beyond. What is also clear is that the field of S3D film-making, its techniques,
principles and practices are yet to be fully defined and explored. They are in
their infancy; and we face an exciting and pivotal moment in the study of film
and cinema.
The possibilities of 3-D are endless and they will become a permanent
part of all films sometime in the future. Of this there is no doubt. All that
is needed is the man to solve the depth equation.
(Limbacher 1968: 192)
Stereoscopic 3D is the latest addition to the ever-expanding palette of tools at
the film-makers disposal, which also include sound design, surround sound,
colour manipulation, grading and special effects. S3D clearly affords further
creative opportunities in an already sophisticated audio-visual medium though
I would argue that it should remain at the discretion of the director, as to
whether it is an appropriate tool for the story that is to be told.
As the technology is further refined allowing the creative and artistic application to be extended, industry insiders predict that in the not-so-distant
future, all films will be produced in S3D to the point where there will no longer
be a need for the 3D suffix in the films title. Subscribing to this position will
mean that we will soon be looking back nostalgically at two-dimensional flatties, which will take their place in the evolution of cinema as an outdated and
historic mode of production.

REFERENCES
Aja, Alexandre (2010), Piranha 3D, Dimension Films, USA.
Alves, Joe (1983), Jaws 3D, Universal Pictures, USA.
Anderson, J. D. and Anderson, B. F. (2005), Moving Image Theory: Ecological
Considerations, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Barr, C. (1963), CinemaScope: Before and after, Film Quarterly, 16: 4, pp. 424.
Behl, Goldie (2011), Creeping Zero, Dan Films, UK. http://www.danfilms.com.
Accessed 10 January 2011.
Cameron, James (2009), Avatar, 20th Century Fox, USA.
Chion, M. (1994), Audio-Vision: Sound on Screen, New York: Columbia University Press.
Cokeliss, Barney (2010), The Foundling, RSA Films, UK. http://www.cinema.
philips.com/gb_en/index.html. Accessed 10 January 2011.
Cutting, J. E. (2005), Perceiving scenes in film and in the world, in J.
D. Anderson and B. F. Anderson (eds), Moving Image Theory: Ecological
Considerations, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Docter, Peter (2009), Up, Walt Disney Pictures and Pixar Animation Studios,
USA.
Egbert, R. (2011), Robert Egberts journal: Why 3D doesnt work and never will.
Case Closed, http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/01/post_4.html. Published 23 January 2011, Accessed 25 January 2011.
Fleming, Victor (1939), The Wizard of Oz, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, USA.

154

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-154

JMP-12-2-Finals

Stereoscopic-3D storytelling Rethinking the conventions . . .

Gardner, B. (2009), Perception and the art of 3D storytelling, Creative Cow

Magazine, June 2009 Stereoscopic 3D issue, http://magazine.creativecow.net/
issue/stereoscopic-3d. Accessed 29 January 2011.
Giwa, Max and Pasquini, Dania (2010), Street Dance 3D, Vertigo Films and BBC
Films, UK.
Greutert, Kevin (2010), Saw 3D, Twisted Pictures, USA.
Hancock, D., Damaschke, B., Costeira, M., et al. (2010), The truth about 3D,
MovieScope, 18, pp. 3237.
Harpole, C. H. (1980), Ideological and technological determinism in deepspace cinema images: Issues in ideology, technological history, and aesthetics, Film Quarterly, 33: 3, pp. 1122.
High Definition Magazine (2010), Holographic 3D: The ultimate 3D, 46,
pp. 3236.
Hitchcock, Alfred (1954), Dial M for Murder, Warner Brothers Pictures, USA.
Howard, Byron and Williams, Chris (2008), Bolt, Walt Disney Animation
Studios, USA.
IJsselteijn, W., De Ridder, H., Hamberg, R., et al. (1998), Perceived depth and
the feeling of presence in 3DTV, Displays, 18, pp. 20714.
Kermode, M. (2010), Martin Scorsese: 3D is liberating. Every shot is
rethinking cinema, The Observer, Sunday 21 November 2010, http://www.
guardian.co.uk/film/2010/nov/21/martin-scorsese-3d-interview-kermode.
Accessed 17th January 2011.
Knott, Frederick. (1952) Dial M for Murder, London: Samuel French Ltd.
Kroeker, K. L. (2010), Looking beyond stereoscopic 3Ds revival, Communications of the ACM, 53: 8, pp. 1416.
Lelyveld, P. (2009), Executive briefing: Basic visual perception concepts related
to 3D movies, Entertainment Technology Center Paper, June 2009.
Limbacher, J. L. (1968), Four Aspects of the Film: 3D, Colour, Sound, Widescreen,
New York: Brussel and Brussel.
Lipton, L. (2007), The last great innovation: The stereoscopic cinema, SMPTE
Moving Imaging Journal, Volume 116, Number 11-12, pp. 51823.
Lussier, Patrick (2009), My Bloody Valentine 3D, Lionsgate, USA.
Mendiburu, B. (2009), 3D Movie Making: Stereoscopic Digital Cinema from Script
to Screen, Oxford: Focal Press.
Miner, Steve (1982), Friday the 13th , Paramount Pictures, USA.
Neuman, R. (2009), Concurrent Monoscopic and Stereoscopic Animated Film
Production, SIGGRAPH, August, New Orleans, Lousiana.
Nichols, B. (1975), Style, Grammar, and the Movies in Film Quarterly, Volume
28, Number 3, Spring 1975, pp. 33-49.
Oboler, Arch (1952), Bwana Devil, Gulu Productions, USA.
(1953), Three-Dementia: Stereo Pictures Must Become More Than a Circus
Novelty in The 1953 Yearbook of Motion Pictures, New York: Wids Films and
Film Folk.
Robertson, B. (2008), Rethinking moviemaking: Animation and visual
effects studios discover creative possibilities in three dimensions, CGW,
November, pp. 1019.
Roberts, Gareth Maxwell (2010), The Mortician, Full Circle Films, UK,
http://www.fullcirclefilms.co.uk/. Accessed 10 January 2011.
Scorcese, Martin (2011), The Invention of Hugo Cabret, GK Films, USA.
Selick, Henry (2009) Coraline, Focus Features, USA.
Sturken, M. and Cartwright, L. (2001), Practices of Looking: An Introduction to
Visual Culture, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

155

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-155

JMP-12-2-Finals

Sarah Atkinson

Thomson-Jones, K. (2008), Aesthetics & Film, New York: Continuum.

Westman, H. (2006), Making it real: The future of stereoscopic 3D film
technology, http://www.siggraph.org/publications/newsletter/volume-40number-1/makingitreal. Accessed 17 January 2011.
Zone, R. (2004), A window on space: Dual-band 3-D cameras of the 1950s,
Film History, 16, pp. 21628.

SUGGESTED CITATION
Atkinson, S. (2011), Stereoscopic-3D storytelling Rethinking the conventions, grammar and aesthetics of a new medium, Journal of Media Practice 12:
2, pp. 139156, doi: 10.1386/jmpr.12.2.139_1

CONTRIBUTOR DETAILS
Dr Sarah Atkinson is principal lecturer in broadcast bedia at the University
of Brighton, UK. She is also an audio-visual arts practitioner, undertaking
practice-based explorations into new forms of fictional and dramatic storytelling in visual and sonic media. She is particularly interested in multi-linear
and multi-channel aesthetics, her own multi-screen interactive cinema installation Crossed Lines has been exhibited internationally, as has her surround
sound and hypersonic installation auditoryum (a collaboration with Marley
Cole).
Contact: Sarah Atkinson, University of Brighton in Hastings, Havelock Road,
Hastings, TN34 1BE, UK.
E-mail: s.a.atkinson@brighton.ac.uk

156

September 5, 2011

19:17

Intellect/JMP

Page-156

JMP-12-2-Finals