Prometheus

[Lutz]

No. Part of the point was that those were such huge advancements by their very nature rather than as a result of how they were used. What they represented in terms of possibilities is beyond comparison with 3-D.

Of course the fallacy in your argument is that you were the one who decided to frame your opinion of 3D based on it's ability to advance filmmaking. Any of the advocates you speak about who strain to make a comparison for you do so because it was a tenuous leap to make to begin with.

[Corvus T. Cosmonaut]

Of course the fallacy in your argument is that you were the one who decided to frame your opinion of 3D based on it's ability to advance filmmaking. Any of the advocates you speak about who strain to make a comparison for you do so because it was a tenuous leap to make to begin with.

No, I responded directly to Deadpool regarding the comparison of 3-D against sound and color (a very, very common comparison between those pushing the technology), speaking more explicitly in terms of what each represents and, only briefly, the additional limitations of 3-D. You then replied noting sound and color became a big deal after experimentation (i.e., 'possibilities' yet unexplored), to which I pointed out that this isn't the case and such a point was implicit in my original complaint. Judging our current 3-D 'based on its ability to advance filmmaking' is not a frame I chose or one I would favor, and those who promote the tech on those speculative terms are carefully vague to ward off specific criticism.