‘Avatar’ Sequels Will Feature Underwater Performance Capture

Producer Jon Landau revealed that they will be using the filming technique at this year’s NAB Technology Summit on Cinema.

Avatar sequels will feature underwater performance capture
Avatar sequels will feature underwater performance capture
Producer Jon Landau revealed that Avatar 2 and Avatar 3 will be using Underwater Performance Capture during his keynote speech at this years NAB Technology Summit on Cinema.

He had this to say about the underwater filming technique.

"We have kept a team of digital artists on from Avatar in order to test how we can create performance capture underwater. We could simulate water [in computer graphics], but we can't simulate the actor's experience, so we are going to capture performance in a tank."

He goes on to talk about how they brought the first film together.

"We are looking at [techniques including] what we did before with reflective markers, how we record reference photography so that as we are going through the editorial process and the postproduction workflow, we can see what the actors did and make sure that the final performance up on screen represents that.

He also discussed the 3D aspect of the movies.

"3D is evolutionary not revolutionary, and it will take time to come to market. But look at Russia and China, where the 3D screens market is phenomenal. In emerging markets, communities are going to theaters for the first time and are experiencing film in 3D - that's what they think of as a cinema experience. To show them a 2D presentation is a step back for them. [Conversion] will never be a comparable choice to native 3D shooting. As good as conversion can get, it's two and three quarters 3D and never true 3D."

Avatar 2 comes to theaters November 2017 and stars Stephen Lang, Zoe Saldana, Sam Worthington. The film is directed by James Cameron.

Avatar 3 comes to theaters November 2018 and stars Stephen Lang, Zoe Saldana, Sam Worthington. The film is directed by James Cameron.

Share this story yet?

24 24 1 0 3


Comments (15)

  1. Sean

    @2movieguys I'm over it as well.

    2 years agoby @themoviefanaticFlag

  2. CelluloidDreams

    So over "Avatar"!

    2 years agoby @2movieguysFlag

  3. the Narrator

    @rojodiablo Sorry to say this, man, but not only was Retaliation converted at the cost of even more money and a six month release delay, but judging by general consensus, a pretty crappy sequel to a crappy first installment. Then again, to each their own and sorry for raining on your parade.

    2 years agoby @narratorFlag

  4. RojoDiablo

    I have enjoyed all the 3D films I have seen so far (which have only been a handful) and I think every one of them were shot in 3D and not converted, with the latest being the GI Joe sequel, which I thought was done VERY well!!

    2 years agoby @rojodiabloFlag

  5. Replicant

    @undeadslayer4 I prefer my movies in 2D, but if they INSIST on 3D then yeah, at least it looks better than converted 3D.

    2 years agoby @felipe-11Flag

  6. undeadslayer4

    @felipe-11 they should shoot all movies in 3D

    2 years agoby @undeadslayer4Flag

  7. Bawnian©-Dexeus

    @felipe-11 Meh, I wouldn't know about Avengers. Not exactly a movie meant for 3D

    2 years agoby @bawnian-dexeusFlag

  8. Replicant

    @bawnian-dexeus Exactly. And The Avengers a great conversion.

    Still, like Landau says, it's never true 3D unless you shoot it in 3D.

    2 years agoby @felipe-11Flag

  9. Bawnian©-Dexeus

    This shouldn't be news to anyone. We knew Cameron spent millions just to shoot underwater to mold a new world, so underwater motion capture was the obvious logical move for him. You don't get to promote underwater in all news articles without the fans speculating

    2 years agoby @bawnian-dexeusFlag

  10. Bawnian©-Dexeus

    @felipe-11 Clash of the Titans should be a perfect example of a bad conversion

    2 years agoby @bawnian-dexeusFlag

  11. Replicant

    Nice, Cameron's always pushing the limits. I can't even imagine the logistics of getting actors underwater in mocap suits.

    @jasonkat A Blu-ray 3D will always look the same as it's theater 3D counterpart, regardless of whether it was shot in 3D or converted. You probably won't be able to tell the difference between real 3D and converted (unless it's a really bad conversion).

    The best way to know for sure whether a specific movie was shot or converted is finding out online (Wikipedia usually says "shot in 3D" somewhere, or IMDb's spec page, or the official web). If you can't find anything that says "shot in 3D" then it was probably converted.

    2 years agoby @felipe-11Flag

  12. SoksoV

    @CoreyB : So confused lol

    2 years agoby @SoksoVFlag

  13. CoreyB

    I liked Avatar it was good...but I really just dont care.

    2 years agoby @CoreyBFlag

  14. Titon

    Sounds Great.

    2 years agoby @TitonFlag

  15. JasonKat

    Sounds kool. Loved the first film. looking 4ward to 2-3. not in 3d tho.
    By the way im not sure which moviw is true 3d and which is Conversion. I understand older films are converted to 3d, but in todays time which is really shot in 3d, or how do i tell the diff?
    is theater 3d the same as bluray 3d films?

    2 years agoby @jasonkatFlag

From The Web