Transformers 3 IS not Being Shot in 3D [Updated]

Published 5 years ago by , Updated October 21st, 2010 at 1:45 pm,

Transformers 3 not shot in 3D Transformers 3 IS <del>not</del> Being Shot in 3D [Updated]

UPDATE: After digging deeper, it appears 3D cameras were used throughout production.

Once we contacted sources closer to production, it appears Michael Bay did not ditch the 3D cameras for Transformers 3. If anything, the 3D technicians likely found alternative ways to effectively use the 3D rigs while filming in Chicago. The information from our source was apparently four to five weeks old and very well may have changed between then and when we spoke.

Further discussions reveal that while 3D cameras were used throughout production, not every camera shot is native 3D. While some of the footage may be converted in post-production, there were always 3D cameras somewhere on set. Rest assured, Michael Bay’s Transformers 3 will still be a 3D movie.

I apologize for running with information that was not fully formed, as the intention was to simply present a newsworthy topic for discussion. Nothing was fabricated, but rather information from the source was outdated. We can admit we were wrong in this post (me especially), but know that we always approach stories with good intentions to deliver timely news as accurately as possible.

Since the start of production a few months ago, Michael Bay’s Transformers 3 has made a number of unfortunate headlines. Now, we have learned from a source close to Bay that the movie is not being shot in 3D as originally believed.

Instead, next summer you will see yet another product guilty of a post-production 3D conversion. Apparently, filming did begin in 3D, but Bay opted out when the production moved to Chicago.

Considering how open the Chicago sets were to the viewing public, it’s surprising there haven’t already been more definitive answers regarding the lack of 3D camera rigs on set. I took some photos and video of the downtown shoots and each time I scoured the set for a 3D rig – but there were none to be found. Today’s news would explain the absence of the mammoth cameras.

It was revealed two months back that Transformers 3 would be shot in 3D but it’s sounding as though nobody followed-up on that report. The film’s rushed production should have been fair warning that a full 3D shoot would be extremely difficult to pull off.

The misdirection should come as no surprise – considering Bay’s penchant for releasing false information. We’ve already been thrown for a loop regarding the appearance of the infamous twin Autobots in Transformers 3. In case you need to be caught up to speed on that rumor, the Twins are definitely in the movie. Couple that news with the Megan Fox fallout and Transformers 3 has been one confusing shoot.

Michael Bay Shia LaBeouf Transformers 3 Transformers 3 IS <del>not</del> Being Shot in 3D [Updated]

It’s unfortunate that Bay changed his mind during production. Shooting using stereoscopic cameras is about the only way to create a truly immersive 3D final product. I might argue that the only truly effective mainstream 3D film to date is Avatar. Of course, accountants would say otherwise, since the last three films to gross $1 billion each were 3D. That said, we’ve yet to see really great post-production 3D – and it’s doubtful that Transformers 3 will be the first.

If you are wondering why Bay would cut 3D cameras (a drastic decision), it’s probably related to his aggressive filming style. Bay has never been shy about throwing a car through a building or running a camera alongside his actors. The intensity of his filming style requires a lot of handheld camerawork and multiple angles. Those multiple angles may have been the deciding factor, as filming using a 3D rig is very restrictive.

Transformers 3 Optimus Prime Transformers 3 IS <del>not</del> Being Shot in 3D [Updated]

While money may be a non-issue considering the massive budget of Transformers 3, it still costs a lot to shoot using five 3D cameras at once. Bay’s shots are constantly moving and require multiple rigging systems. Add everything together and it seems it just wasn’t worth the price and trouble. In addition, Bay is known for his on-the-spot directing and 3D rigs are less maneuverable and could have slowed production.

To be fair, it is possible that Bay shot certain scenes in 3D and the rest in 2D, with a post-production conversion. Even if that is the case, Transformers 3 just isn’t going to be the 3D robot action movie we hoped for.

What do you think about a post-production 3D retro-fit for Transformers 3?

Transformers 3 hits theaters July 1st, 2011.

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. well now it’s another reason why this movie will STINK UP THE PLACE

  2. If those twin robots are in the movie, I will definitely not being seeing this trash. Michael Bay can go straight to H@#$.

  3. Well, this is another movie I can comfortably avoid.

  4. Not surprised that he didn’t film Chicago scenes in 3-D, but it’s already been revealed that only most of the film would be shot in 3-D. So, it’s nothing new.

    • He shot “most” of the film in Chicago. So it’s got to be one way or the other. Heck, even if that was the case, why would you shot action scenes in 2D and dialogue in 3D? Seems backwards to me.

  5. But a few 3D rigs WERE spotted in chicago…

  6. 2D or 3D, I have no faith that this will be worth watching.

  7. GOOD!

  8. He may not be the best story teller but bays style is really neat. I like his camera movements and aggressive aproach. I’ll see in either format im not picky.

    • Thinking I’m ganna go with 2D. You know ticket prices are just nuts as they are. Wouldn’t want to take out a loan just for the 3D.

  9. @Spud, Where did you hear/see these? I was at Fletcher Camera, the main camera house in Chicago before production and they had 3D cameras for Transformers 3, but according to my source he bailed on them almost instantly.

    • they were in some of the on-set photo links on Can’t find the exact link, but they were definitely spotted.

      • okay, I’m pretty dang sure I saw a few in this video:

        • I’m sorry, but where is there a 3D rig in that video? I definitely don’t see one.

          • close to the 3:00 mar if I’m right. I see something that looks awfully close to a Arri Alexa Pace.

          • Hey Mike, how bout an article about the history of cameras in film? That’d be dope to see the evolution of film technology! 0

            • Haha. The 50 pages would be great for advertising. I’ll just do a Master’s thesis and then copy/paste it onto the site.

              • You get college credit for that? :)

  10. All ya’ll need to chill out. Don’t watch it then. I don’t think you all are real transformer fan anyway. STOP!!! Like you could do better at making this movie.

  11. While the last 2 movies weren’t masterpieces of cinema, I did enjoy watching the giant robots and letting my mind stop thinking for 2 hours. Sometimes that is all it takes for me to enjoy a film. Yes, there was a LOT of stupid stuff (twins, for example), but the visuals were good and there WAS alot of action. I wasn’t going to see the new one in 3-D anyway, and it if comes out only in 3-D I won’t be going to see it.

  12. Aren’t you guys sick of this 3D bs yet?

    The only way to stop it is to stay far away from this movie opening weekend. See it a week later or on dvd. It would send such a huge message against 3D, if Trans3 tanked at the theater,,,

  13. 790

    I know you’re gonna think less of me for this but i like 3d movies. It like pink floyd live to me. Visual extacy!

  14. Sully,,,,,,, Sully, Sully,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,


  15. 790

    I’m not saying every movie should be done in 3D. So don’t get me wrong. Some should definitely be left to 2D. If they converted older movies into 3D It’d be p.o.’d. As long as they shoot it with 3 D cameras i’m fine with it. But like the article said, Bays shooting style can’t adapt to those cameras. I actually like his camera work too. Note i said camera work and not the overall product.

  16. The funny thing Sully is that movies, tv shows are already percieved as 3D, when we see them on the screen or at home.

    The term 3D, is an old 50′s term for gimmick. This gimmick has been refined into a marketing/mind influencing medium.

    Its bad enough that watching CNN, gives you a headache,,, 3D takes it up the mind hole bigtime.

  17. 790

    Weird i just read an article about that. About how we actually really do veiw things in 3d and that’s what gives us the depth as apose to cartoons or old school nintendo games that are on that 2d plane. I totally know what you’re saying for sure. I just like the stoner laser light show part of it!

  18. @Sully,,,
    Yeah well, the masses are clearly under a stoner laser light show part of it!

    Couldn’t have typed it better. ;-)

    DoublePlus Good!

  19. 790

    You know the difference between me and the masses? I know its a gimmick! But it wont stop me from enjoying it stoner stylee! Cheers yo! Virtual shot!

  20. I have a problem with those that don’t see the truth that’s right in front of them, and act accordingly.

    Snap for me, I’m seriously outnumbered…

    Thanks for the YeagerMiester, shot.
    Did I spell that write?

  21. Its jagermeister but who cares!

  22. Ah thanks for the spell check Sully.


  23. No prob 790, that says a lot that i would know that right off the bat lol!

  24. Sully, I’ve had lots of encounters/photos with various J-ger girls.

    Man the late 80s were the best.

  25. Without Megan Fox theres no reason to watch anymore…….

  26. Not that I was planning on seeing this in 3D anyway… I’m dubious about seeing it at all.

  27. “wont get fooled again” fitting lyrics since i wont be seeing this POC

  28. First of all this movie is gonna suck like transformer 2 in terms of story and shooting some part in 3d and rest of it in 2d doesn’t make any sense.They should have made the movie in 2d only.Unless someone shoots the whole movie in 3d like Avatar or Tron then only I will be excited to watch it in 3d. I’m not going to watch a post converted 3d movie.This movie gonna suck even if it is in 2d or 3d .I will go and watch if it is as good as the first one if turns out to be transformer 2 then this is definitely a money grabber movie.

  29. One film, just one film has worked in 3D. And that made by a fanatical director who spent years making sure the process would work with his vision.

    Post conversion 3D just doesn’t work. It’s a fact, it looks terrible and cheap. Not surprising, considering they do it in the space of a month or two. It’s essentially redoing all of the effects in the movie. And ruining them in a short space of time.

    I hate to think of the tech guys who spent months making sure the sfx are top notch, only to let 3D conversion ruin their hard work.