Was the 3D from Na'vi point of view?
 

Hello. It's been a long time since I was Avatar in IMAX 3D cinema, and all my later viewings were in other 3D cinemas that totally skewed the depth for me (I literally prefer the 2D version over the non-IMAX 3D ones). If the lenses on 3D are as far as your eyes are, objects seem normal size, if you take them further apart objects begin to seem smaller to the viewer.

The question is... were the outside scenes shot with human or with Na'vi distance between the cameras? I remember that the Na'vi seemed of "natural" size to me, and that Weinfleet seemed like a small kid in the scene with the Sampson, so I assumed that we were looking through the eyes of the Na'vi most of the film, but I never really focused on any of the human characters too much, and my memory is not good on the details, so I'm not sure if I remember that correctly. Am I correct in that observation?

(That's one of the reasons I want more humans in the sequel - to see more humans through the eyes of the Na'vi :D )

The camera system was made to get as close to human eyes as possible.
YouTube - The 3-D Camera Technology Behind James Cameron's Avatar

The CG virtual cameras can shoot from anywhere though.

Cool idea though.

The camera on the other videos behind the scenes I've seen looks different (with the cameras at a right angle and a beam splitter)? They also mentioned that they can move the lenses as far from each other as they want. Or at least the way I understood it. Sure they can mimic human eyes during the scenes with humans, and then unmimic them during the Na'vi scenes, can't they? :)

From my understanding of that, then yes, they could.

I never even thought of that, so if it was done, it was done extremely well :)