Thank you for your comment. I agree that story is key, and good stories at that! I work in the film industry so I’m a lover of film as a story medium. I don’t think we are going to lose that.

We are well able to produce a cinematic output computationally and use virtual cameras to achieve the same language that we get from a 2d camera.

As you say, we still write novels, but today I think the dominant authoring tool is a word processor rather than a quill, ink, and parchment. Even if a writer chooses to write with pen and paper, if they wish to be published it will need to be digitised for distribution. That distribution might be paper, but it will also be some type of electronic format. With writing applications such as Scrivener or Word, the markup is easily readable by machine. This means it’s able to be adapted and distributed to far greater audiences, including those who rely on assistive technologies such as blind people.

The technology now exists for us to start thinking about filmic stories in this way. The thing is that film as it currently exists excludes many, as listed in the article. We can make films that are accessible to greater audiences. To that we will need to think beyond the 2d camera.

My contention is that it is more a question of the data underneath than the story on top. 2d Cameras produce datasets that are not compatible with what we use and expect today.

Thank you again for your thoughts.