Silver Age 3-D 1966-1997 including the 1980s 3D revival

[Interdimensional]

Originally Posted by jimqk

For sure, it would have been a challenge, but as the old saying goes, no pain no gain. Based on all the information included with the Indicator I, Monster Blu-ray, the fault clearly lies with Weeks. He gets hired to do a job, and when he loses patience with the format in which the producers wanted him to apply to the filming, the guy disparages his bosses, and for years afterward pretended the Pulfrich effect didn't work. In certain scenes it definitely works. Is it as astonishing as the images produced by conventional 3-D filming methods? No, not by a long shot. But there is an illusion of depth when it works.

The producers, in a way, are at fault, too. They should have fired Weeks and brought in somebody who wouldn't cry like a baby. It would have been really something had every scene in the movie been filmed to exploit the Pulfrich effect.

With examples I've seen of Pulfrich 3D, I find it hard to imagine anything stretched out to long format. But I know there are those that argued even conventional 3D wasn't suited to long runtimes, so I won't labour the point.

One example of Silver Age Pulfrich 3D:

Doctor Who: Dimensions In Time - 1993 Children In Need - YouTube

It has also been uploaded in youtube's 3D format using the method I mentioned in my previous post:

Doctor Who - Dimensions in Time (Part 1) (SBS 3D) - YouTube

It's a curiosity. I find certain camera moves can give a very pronounced effect, in isolated cases just as effective as much native stereoscopy. But it's not easily sustained. The depth ramps up or down depending on the speed of the movement, and any movement in the wrong direction causes distortions. I thought this was quite well set up as a demo piece, given the constraints of the technique. The use of foreground props was carefully contrived and achieved the desired effect.

I'm so hungry for 3D, that I'll often squint with the appropriate eye when I notice camerawork that should produce a Pulfrich effect.

[bavanut]

Originally Posted by jimqk

For sure, it would have been a challenge, but as the old saying goes, no pain no gain. Based on all the information included with the Indicator I, Monster Blu-ray, the fault clearly lies with Weeks. He gets hired to do a job, and when he loses patience with the format in which the producers wanted him to apply to the filming, the guy disparages his bosses, and for years afterward pretended the Pulfrich effect didn't work. In certain scenes it definitely works. Is it as astonishing as the images produced by conventional 3-D filming methods? No, not by a long shot. But there is an illusion of depth when it works.

The producers, in a way, are at fault, too. They should have fired Weeks and brought in somebody who wouldn't cry like a baby. It would have been really something had every scene in the movie been filmed to exploit the Pulfrich effect.

I largely agree with your perspective. If the producers clearly explained to Weeks what their expectations were for this picture and he agreed to those requirements, he should have followed through, or at least gotten express permission to abandon the Pulfrich approach.

But... there is good reason to believe he did indeed have such permission from at least one of the producers. Some years ago, I was at a screening of The Curse of Frankenstein at the Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood. Max J. Rosenberg was there in person, and at one point they opened the floor for questions. I was in the balcony and shouted down a question about the 3-D in I, Monster. Rosenberg laughed dismissively-- at the 3-D, not me or my question. He said Subotsky was the only one who could see the effect. Rosenberg couldn't see it, the crew couldn't see it, Milton's own family couldn't see it. So I think the decision was finally made that they did not want to go to the trouble of manufacturing untold numbers of glasses for an illusion that many audience members probably could not/would not perceive.

I haven't kept up with Stephen Weeks, but I hope any "bad-mouthing" he has done about Rosenberg and Subotsky has been done with a wink and a smile. Those two never pretended to be high-minded purveyors of art. They were manufacturing cinematic product, spirited genre films that had a way of finding their audience literally all over the world. At a time when small to mid-sized British films were languishing, Amicus was a welcome success story. And, to be blunt, I am more apt to seek out an Amicus film to watch than a Stephen Weeks film. Sorry, but it is true.

[chrisp32]

Originally Posted by Interdimensional

One example of Silver Age Pulfrich 3D:

Doctor Who: Dimensions In Time - 1993 Children In Need - YouTube

Somewhere I still have the free glasses that were given away for this when it was shown on TV back in the early 90s. There was a whole week of 3D TV (all using the Pulfrich effect) for Children in Need. I don't remember being that impressed as a kid, but I have since seen some pretty good uses of the effect.

I have a DVD of a Thai (I think) horror film that uses the effect. I'll have to see if I can dig it out, have a suspicion it's in my parents' loft. No idea what it was called, or whether it was even Thai.

[jimqk]

Originally Posted by bavanut

I largely agree with your perspective. If the producers clearly explained to Weeks what their expectations were for this picture and he agreed to those requirements, he should have followed through, or at least gotten express permission to abandon the Pulfrich approach.

But... there is good reason to believe he did indeed have such permission from at least one of the producers. Some years ago, I was at a screening of The Curse of Frankenstein at the Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood. Max J. Rosenberg was there in person, and at one point they opened the floor for questions. I was in the balcony and shouted down a question about the 3-D in I, Monster. Rosenberg laughed dismissively-- at the 3-D, not me or my question. He said Subotsky was the only one who could see the effect. Rosenberg couldn't see it, the crew couldn't see it, Milton's own family couldn't see it. So I think the decision was finally made that they did not want to go to the trouble of manufacturing untold numbers of glasses for an illusion that many audience members probably could not/would not perceive.

I haven't kept up with Stephen Weeks, but I hope any "bad-mouthing" he has done about Rosenberg and Subotsky has been done with a wink and a smile. Those two never pretended to be high-minded purveyors of art. They were manufacturing cinematic product, spirited genre films that had a way of finding their audience literally all over the world. At a time when small to mid-sized British films were languishing, Amicus was a welcome success story. And, to be blunt, I am more apt to seek out an Amicus film to watch than a Stephen Weeks film. Sorry, but it is true.

You're right - it was Subotsky who was really pushing for this. And it was Subotsky who Weeks largely disparaged afterward. In the booklet that comes with the Indicator Blu-ray, there were transcripts from separate interviews and both Subotsky and Weeks disparaged each other. (As I'm a complete 3-D addict and need a fix of it the same way a smoker needs a cigarette, of course I'm biased and side totally with Subotsky. So, as far as I'm concerned, Weeks is the villain of this story. That's baked into my DNA cake.)

[jimqk]

Originally Posted by Interdimensional

With examples I've seen of Pulfrich 3D, I find it hard to imagine anything stretched out to long format. But I know there are those that argued even conventional 3D wasn't suited to long runtimes, so I won't labour the point.

One example of Silver Age Pulfrich 3D:

[Show spoiler]Doctor Who: Dimensions In Time - 1993 Children In Need - YouTube

It has also been uploaded in youtube's 3D format using the method I mentioned in my previous post:
Doctor Who - Dimensions in Time (Part 1) (SBS 3D) - YouTube

It's a curiosity. I find certain camera moves can give a very pronounced effect, in isolated cases just as effective as much native stereoscopy. But it's not easily sustained. The depth ramps up or down depending on the speed of the movement, and any movement in the wrong direction causes distortions. I thought this was quite well set up as a demo piece, given the constraints of the technique. The use of foreground props was carefully contrived and achieved the desired effect.

I'm so hungry for 3D, that I'll often squint with the appropriate eye when I notice camerawork that should produce a Pulfrich effect.

The Doctor Who stuff is pretty effective in certain scenes. The early scene with Tom Baker standing still with the stars moving fast behind him was very effective.

There are some scenes where characters are moving in the wrong direction (right to left). However, static objects in the foreground pass by the camera left to right, and this creates a 3-D illusion. There were a couple of scenes like this in I, Monster.

[Interdimensional]

Originally Posted by chrisp32

Somewhere I still have the free glasses that were given away for this when it was shown on TV back in the early 90s. There was a whole week of 3D TV (all using the Pulfrich effect) for Children in Need. I don't remember being that impressed as a kid, but I have since seen some pretty good uses of the effect.

I have a DVD of a Thai (I think) horror film that uses the effect. I'll have to see if I can dig it out, have a suspicion it's in my parents' loft. No idea what it was called, or whether it was even Thai.

Realistically, it probably doesn't do the 3-D cause much favours. For whatever reason I didn't see the BBC Pulfrich 3D week at the time. I know there was a similar thing with US broadcasting some years later. I think I still have this somewhere :




I'd be interested if you find out what that movie was.

Originally Posted by jimqk

You're right - it was Subotsky who was really pushing for this. And it was Subotsky who Weeks largely disparaged afterward. In the booklet that comes with the Indicator Blu-ray, there were transcripts from separate interviews and both Subotsky and Weeks disparaged each other. (As I'm a complete 3-D addict and need a fix of it the same way a smoker needs a cigarette, of course I'm biased and side totally with Subotsky. So, as far as I'm concerned, Weeks is the villain of this story. That's baked into my DNA cake.)

I'll have to read those interviews. I bought the disc last year, but it's still in my backlog.

I've read various things about Milton Subotsky over the years. He seems to have been bursting with ideas, both good and bad. Everyone seems to have something to say at his expense. In his autobiography Jim Danforth details a very frustrating experience trying to make a film with Subotsky in the 1970s. Unfortunately a number of his projects at that time didn't come to fruition and fell apart for various reasons.

His plan for a Pulfrich 3D production in I, Monster was ahead of its time and it seems no one took him seriously. Of course it's too bad he never produced a stereoscopic 3D movie. He worked with some great actors, and there was an exciting scene among genre productions for a time.

[Todd3D]

Question: I know Captain Milkshake was shot in 3D, but was it ever actually released that way or is it like Jivaro and Adam and Six Eves, shot but only released in 2D?

[chrisp32]

Originally Posted by Interdimensional

I'd be interested if you find out what that movie was.

I'll post on here if I ever track it down (possibly next time I have cause to venture into my parents' loft!).

[Interdimensional]

Originally Posted by Todd3D

Question: I know Captain Milkshake was shot in 3D, but was it ever actually released that way or is it like Jivaro and Adam and Six Eves, shot but only released in 2D?

That's what it says on 3-D Film Archive's website.

The linked interview about the film gave details about how the 3-D was used in portions of the film to convey a sort of heightened reality to certain scenes. Possibly similar to how the more recent 3D film Billy Lynn cut to some scenes in high frame rate. Unfortunately that link seems to be down. I believe it mentioned that plans for a 3-D release were scrapped.

More recent articles mention remastering the film in 4k, but don't mention the 3-D aspect at all.

https://www.lajollalight.com/lifesty...htmlstory.html

There is a website where you can contact them and buy the dvd:
http://devel.captainmilkshake.com/

[BleedOrange11]

Originally Posted by Todd3D

Question: I know Captain Milkshake was shot in 3D, but was it ever actually released that way or is it like Jivaro and Adam and Six Eves, shot but only released in 2D?

My understanding is that some scenes were shot in 3D, but the film was never finished in 3D, so a final 3D master never existed to be released.

[Interdimensional]

Not 3D, but I just realised Severin Films are releasing one of the Earl Owensby productions. This seems to be the first EO film to hit bluray.

Hopefully Ownesby 3-D films will not be too far behind. Actually they namedrop one of them in the description.

Severin Films Announces September Releases

A Day of Judgment

Description: From Earl Owensby Studios – the South's biggest producer/distributor of '70s/'80s regional horror and exploitation hits – comes what may be the most obscure and bizarre slasher movie of the entire godless genre: In a 1930s small town rife with lust, corruption and sin, a mysterious figure wielding a scythe arrives to cut an unholy swath of murder, madness and moralizing that may lead straight to Hell. William T. Hicks (DEATH SCREAMS), Brownlee Davis (WOLFMAN), Jerry Rushing (FINAL EXAM) and Harris Bloodworth star in this "early '80s oddity worth seeing as something very different" (The Slasher Report) produced by Earl Owensby (TALES OF THE THIRD DIMENSION) and Worth Keeter (L.A. BOUNTY), now scanned in 2K from the IP for the first time ever.

Special Features and Technical Specs:

• NEW 2K RESTORATION OF THE FILM FROM AN INTERPOSITIVE
• The Atheist's Sins: Interview With Author Of NIGHTMARE USA Stephen Thrower
• Tales Of Judgment: Interview With Filmmaker Worth Keeter And Writer Thom McIntyre
• English audio and optional English SDH subtitles for the main feature
• REGION-FREE

STREET DATE: SEPTEMBER 28.

Again, to avoid confusion, A Day of Judgement is not a 3D film, but it is a film from the most prolific producer of 1980s 3-D.

To my knowledge, Severin have not released a 3D film, but perhaps they will follow the example of Vinegar Syndrome.

Pixote mentioned something in the Flesh for Frankenstein thread that suggests a sort of gentlemen's agreement between the labels, so hopefully if Severin don't want the 3-D titles, VS will get them.

Originally Posted by pixote

In Severin’s podcast they said the Museum of Modern Arts did the restoration for Blood for Dracula and provided it to them. Is it safe to assume the material 3DFA is using also came from the Museum of Modern Arts? Apparently VS had both titles but gave Dracula to Severin after they requested it

[Brucewdn]

They have managed to secure the entire Owensby Library including the Six 3-D titles which they have not decided if they are releasing in a box set and have not yet confirmed whether they will release them flat (which is the absolute worst decision they could make for these rarely seen films) A box set would make sense...they cross genres and some people have never heard of the majority of titles...because they have rarely been screened...but they’re all kinda good (at least the ones I’ve been able to screen) and the 3-D is some of the best of this decade! I told them they absolutely have to release them in 3-D.But they have them all...help them out 3-D Archive..don’t let them go out flat! Severin rarely disappoints but this is the only chance we’re ever going to get to get 3-D masters of these! There must have been some sweet talking by both Severin and Vinegar Syndrome to come off of these previously unobtainable properties. On another note-Universal,Warner Brothers,and Paramount have been pretty lax lately in letter other distributors remaster their older titles to both Criterion and Scream Factory...It may be time to try to negotiate once again for Murders at the Rue Morgue,The Man Who Wasn’t There and Spacehunter.

[BleedOrange11]

Great news on Owensby! Hyperspace is "Lost 3D" though, right? Only one eye survives...

[Brucewdn]

Not sure yet that that is indeed a fact.so far it doesn’t seem like anyone has had,well,any access to the actual library beyond Severin...i think they were shot over-under so you would think they’d possess a master in the vault...i don’t know if severin was only limiting their statements to me or if they actually have a plan in motion...I know Rottweiler and tales of the third dimension are coming...hit the road running is great.I have a hard time believing Hyperspace is completely lost in 3-D.Encourage them to release the 3-D versions though...I can’t believe we’re actually finally getting Flesh For Frankenstein personally...bit if we can get those Owensby’s out in 3-D,it would make my year.We’re coming for you next Wade Williams...

[Camps]

Originally Posted by Brucewdn

They have managed to secure the entire Owensby Library including the Six 3-D titles which they have not decided if they are releasing in a box set and have not yet confirmed whether they will release them flat (which is the absolute worst decision they could make for these rarely seen films) A box set would make sense...they cross genres and some people have never heard of the majority of titles...because they have rarely been screened...but they’re all kinda good (at least the ones I’ve been able to screen) and the 3-D is some of the best of this decade! I told them they absolutely have to release them in 3-D.But they have them all...help them out 3-D Archive..don’t let them go out flat! Severin rarely disappoints but this is the only chance we’re ever going to get to get 3-D masters of these! There must have been some sweet talking by both Severin and Vinegar Syndrome to come off of these previously unobtainable properties.

Well this is significant news indeed.

A box set of "all" Owensby titles would be a tall order. Presumably more than a dozen films, fewer than half of which would be his (available) 3D productions. Were a distributor to insist on the box set approach, the sensible and customer-friendly option would be a standalone set of the 3D titles, possibly inclusive of the 3d-compatible (both stereoscopic and anaglyph, which 3DFA has pretty much perfected) format.

Which brings me to my broader point, and echoing you (and virtually everyone): NO 3D NO SALE!!!!!

[the13thman]

Originally Posted by Camps

Which brings me to my broader point, and echoing you (and virtually everyone): NO 3D NO SALE!!!!!

That's right. If Severin release the Owensby films flat, the likelihood of me buying them drops to zero. But my money is down day one for a 3D box set...

[pixote]

Originally Posted by Brucewdn

They have managed to secure the entire Owensby Library including the Six 3-D titles which they have not decided if they are releasing in a box set and have not yet confirmed whether they will release them flat.

Probably false hope, but maybe they traded some of these for Blood for Dracula?

[Camps]

Originally Posted by the13thman

That's right. If Severin release the Owensby films flat, the likelihood of me buying them drops to zero. But my money is down day one for a 3D box set...

Amen, sir! A distributor should not even bother going to the trouble of issuing a Golden- or Silver-Age 3D title flat. The fact pattern consistently supports that sales suffer -- and that the relatively modest additional investment in a proper 3D release not only turbocharges sales but provides a brand lift for the distributor. Just look at the loyalty Kino Lorber and Vinegar Syndrome have garnered for making the commitment to 3D.

[Energy Crisis]

If they do indeed have the Owensby films, I hope they're taking the right steps and knocking on Bob's door right now. It would be an absolute disaster to release them flat. We can't let that happen.

[worthkeeter]

Hyperspace was single strip, so both right and left exist