Or would he? If you believe Dr. Margaret Livingstone, a well known Harvard neuroscientist and author of Vision and Art: The Art of Seeing, Rembrandt might have preferred the 2D version of Hugo. Apparently, after careful study of 35 of Rembrandt’s self-portraits, Dr. Livingstone concluded that his eyes were unilaterally misaligned, making Rembrandt stereo blind. Yes, one of the most revered artists in history appeared to have one eye that deviated to the side, which if true, would have made it impossible for him to see Hugo in 3D because he could only use one eye.
Strabismus Can Be An Asset To The
Artist
Then
how is it he could have created the exquisite simulation of accurate depth and
volume in his paintings? If he were in fact stereo blind, he would have been
forced throughout his life to become a master in the use of monocular depth
cues. If true, and monocular vision is
all he ever experienced from birth, this visual anomaly might actually have proven
to be an asset in his creative work.
Rembrandt
wasn’t the only famous artist thought to have misaligned vision. According to
Dr. Livingstone, the list includes realist artists Edward Hopper, Andrew Wyeth,
N.C. Wyeth and landscape painter Thomas Moran among others. These artists clearly demonstrate in their
work the proper use of monocular cues to simulate both depth and volume
It’s
self-evident that artists, particularly those portraying realism, rely 100% on
2 dimensional cues to create the impression of depth and volume. However, what
is intriguing is Dr. Livingston’s postulate that some forms of strabismus from
birth or that develop in early childhood, might actually be an asset to an
artist.
Binocular Vision Is A Liability to
A Landscape Artist
On
the other hand, binocular vision is of little help to the painter. If you’ve ever seen a landscape artist
attempting to capture a scene in watercolor or oils, you may have noticed the
artist closing one eye or even looking at the scene through a single tube. These strategies force the artist to observe
and employ monocular depth cues to create the illusion of depth and
volume. The tube places the subject
matter on a relatively flat surface, the retina of one eye.
The
oil painting, Waterfall in Yosemite
by Thomas Moran, is a fine example of how monocular depth cues provide a wealth
of information regarding relative depth between objects as well as absolute
depth between the objects and the painter. Moran’s use of linear perspective,
relative scale, shadow, desaturation, luminance, atmospheric blur, gradient
texture and detail create a scene that clearly has a three dimensional
aspect. The possibility that Moran might have been stereo blind certainly shows
no effect on his spatial interpretation of this spacious landscape. Indeed, if
he had a form of strabismus this is how he would have perceived the world. If
Thomas Moran only had monocular vision, it clearly did not hinder his ability
to effectively portray depth and volume in oil.
A
popular contemporary artist who uses monocular depth and volume cues to create
a very unique stereo illusion in 2D is Julian
Beever, The Pavement Chalk Artist.
Julian’s chalk art is nothing short of astounding. Unlike Rembrandt’s questionable binocular vision,
Julian’s eyes are aligned and he has perfect stereovision. In his process of
creating amazing illusions, he must view them through the wide-angle lens of a
2D camera. The perspective through his
camera provides Beever with a 2D reference for the accurate simulation of 3D. Consequently, to fully appreciate his art as
3D you would have to view it from the same angle as the camera that served as
Julian’s 2D guide. I suggest visiting
the very interesting and entertaining YouTube
video in which Julian shows just how he creates amazing images like those
below.
Justifying The Upcharge.
Some
might conclude that referencing Moran and Beever’s effective use of monocular
cues to create a sense of 3D is clear proof that stereo adds nothing to a
well-crafted 2D film. However, I contend
that the extra dimension adds greater realism and a special sense of immersion
to a scene that cannot be portrayed in the same qualitative manner in 2D. In my blog Engaged in 2D and Immersed in 3D, I
discuss how disparity and convergence can create an entirely unique experience
for the movie going audience. Indeed, in the hands of an experienced conversion
stereographer, Moran’s Waterfall in
Yosemite provides sufficient monocular depth information to create a believable
and immersive stereo enhancement of the scene through the proper use of
disparity and convergence. Likewise, a
filmmaker can ‘paint’ the impression of a third dimension with 2D cameras via
the creative implementation and interpretation of monocular cues, but it takes
the addition of disparity to create a truly immersive experience.
Removal of the Fourth Wall
We
study and appreciate Moran’s composition as a creative piece that expresses a
sense of realism, separate and apart from the observer. It engages us as art lovers, but does not
immerse us as participants. If we were to convert Moran’s work to 3D, it would
take on a uniquely personal perspective.
Indeed, the same composition converted to 3D includes us as part of the
image and therefore immerses us in the scene.
Similarly, in a 2D movie we become engaged through a compelling story,
believable acting and skillful cinematography.
But in a 2D feature film void of disparity, the visual experience
undeniably exists only on the screen.
However, the addition of disparity in a feature film removes the fourth
wall, enveloping the entire theater, including us as audience members, in the
story and transforming the space in front and in back of the screen into part
of our personal space.
Real-time Conversion Removes
Creative Interpretation From The Process
There
exists automatic 2D to 3D conversion processes that attempt to create the
sensation of stereo in the absence of subjective human intervention. To me this is analogous to automatic color grading
or cropping of a feature film in postproduction. Can it be done? Sure, but can it be
accomplished while staying true to the creative intent of the filmmaker? Of
course it cannot. Creating depth and volume with camera rigs and conversion are
creative processes that simply cannot be automated. Indeed, our brains are hard wired with
inherent expectations when it comes to stereovision. When real-time conversion
invariably violates those expectations, it causes confusion and disrupts our
suspension of disbelief.
Conclusion
Monocular
cues are essential to 3D moviemaking. The more a director and/or stereographer
focuses on the creation and placement of monocular depth and volume cues, the
more precise and refined the desired stereo will be, enhancing the storytelling. This is true whether the film is captured in
3D with camera rigs or converted from 2D to 3D.
Indeed, the effective use of monocular cues in realistic paintings,
sidewalk chalk art or in stereo filmmaking is dependent on the subjective and creative
interpretation of the composition rather than the other way around.
