Good 3D doesn't mean = constant pop out. But perhaps it's just me.
Of course not, good 3D doesn't mean ONLY depth either.
For me good 3D is a film where they have story boards from the outset on how they are going to shoot in 3D, the camera angles they are going to use and the effect they want for each scene, good 3D is not just shooting in 2D and then deciding afterwards how the 3D will be seen, in my opinion doing so just results in the lacklustre 2 and a half D that i so often see from conversions.
Good 3D has to have consistent quality depth to the image and in my opinion some pop out should be included and does not have to be a gimmick, good pop out could easily be incorporated into the story without it appearing to be a gimmick, that doesn't mean constant pop out every few minutes, it all depends on the film, for an animated title constant pop out and depth can work very well, for example A Turtles Tale and Madagascar 3, constant pop out on a more dramatic film such as Prometheus would probably not work as well, i enjoyed the depth in Prometheus, it had a few moments of pop out near the end, all good and fine, personally i think a few additional deep pop out scenes near the end would have gone down well but nevertheless i enjoyed it.
I often think people misinterpret me when i say i want more pop out, they tend to think i want it every few minutes in the film, not so, i want filmmakers to utilize the 3D format better, to understand that they can have great depth into the screen but they can also have great depth out of the screen, it doesn't have to be a gimmick, use their imagination and plan in advance, use 3D better and entertain your audience, if it's just minor depth then why bother with 3D at all, the director of Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes seems to be suggesting they filmed in 3D for minor depth, well why bother, just shoot 2D.
I just think filmmakers are not using 3D to it's fullest, on most films the depth is not as deep as it could be and, the pop out or to put it another way the depth out of the screen is also minor if seen at all, i just think it's pointless shooting in 3D or converting into 3D unless you really use the format to it's fullest capabilities.
In my opinion 3D would be doing so much better if more animated titles used 3D the way A Turtles Tale and Madagascar 3 do and if more live action films used deeper depth and more aggressive pop out planned for in advance.
In A Turtles Tale you don't just have deep popout, you have seagulls fly into the screen, it looks natural to me, it's like in House Of Wax where Bronson appears to jump from the audience into the screen, so many movies that could utilize pop out in that way but fail to do so, Hollywood filmmakers are lacking in imagination on how to use 3D, that is why minor depth is all we mostly get.
Then again i sometimes have the same complaint about sound mixes, i often wish horror films would use those surround channels to scare us more, but too often they just lack the imagination to provide such sound mixes.
I really have high hopes for new sound formats like Auro, Atmos and the new dts one, Auro 3D ( nothing to do with 3D films ) is already available in some expensive equipment, it has height channels and can provide for 15.1 at the moment and more channels in the future but it would be difficult for most homes to incorporate these height channels but they could really add a new layer to the sound, of course that's only if Hollywood uses it in the sound mix, there are no Auro 3D movie discs out yet, i don't feel they really use the current 5.1/7.1 as well as they could in most films, i guess time constraints when mixing are one of the issues.