Home / Blog

How Big Will 3D Be?

By Bryant Frazer   /   Apr 23, 2009
Non-working prototype of Panasonic 3D camera

Non-working prototype of Panasonic 3D camera

3D movies, you may have noticed if you spent any time at all wandering around at NAB this week, are a pressure point for new filmmaking technology. That’s because stereoscopic movies have reached a sweet spot where they’re firing the imaginations of Hollywood creatives as well as studio accountants. Digital 3D is leagues beyond its counterpart technologies from the 1950s. Like Technicolor and talkies, it’s an innovation that opens new avenues in storytelling. So I feel like an old fuddy-duddy when I say that I’m getting a little sick of hearing about how it’s going to change the way we see movies. I’m not a 3D-basher. As a kid, I loved stereoscopic technology. I had a Viewmaster, of course, with its round “reels” of 3D slides. I fondly remember a hyped local-television broadcast of The Creature from the Black Lagoon in good old anaglyphic crap-vision 3D sometime in the 1970s. I bugged the local Waldenbooks to special-order me a copy of Fantastic 3D, one of the “photo guidebooks” published in the early 1980s by the recently demised SF movie magazine Starlog, which had lots of 3D pictures as well as an informative look at the history of stereo cinematography. 480_creature And I’m still a big fan of 3D. I’ve trained my eyes over the years to easily fuse side-by-side stereo images (like those seen here). I love experiments with pseudo-3D techniques, like wobbly animated GIFs or the parallax-shift technology developed by V3. The U23D concert film is one of the coolest things I’ve ever seen. But 3D is like good scotch. If you opt for fine-quality bottles, and if you moderate your intake, it will enrich your life. But if you decide that everything goes better with scotch and just go on a bender, sooner or later somebody’s going to have to put you in detox. Simply put, 3D techniques strain not only the ingenuity of production and post-production teams. They demand a dedication and investment on the part of audiences as well, who have to don a pair of glasses in order to make sense of the images on screen. And, despite some assertions to the contrary, they still provoke some physical discomfort. I was, frankly, relieved when Daniel Engber wrote a provocative article for Slate that highlights this problem — having consumed months and years of industry hype claiming that 3D no longer hurts your eyes or gives you headaches, I was starting to think that maybe I was the only one who invariably started to feel a bit punch-drunk in the second hour of a 3D feature movie. 480_coraline Those glasses and a little bit of eyestrain are inconveniences that audiences will happily put up with in exchange for being dazzled. But assuming that cinemagoers will prefer that every new movie experience takes place in that highly demanding 3D realm is dangerous. Everyone in the business is pointing to the expected success of James Cameron’s Avatar right now, but Avatar is not the issue. If ever a movie demanded to be conceived, photographed and released in 3D, a megabudget science-fiction adventure film by a thoughtful techno-maven like Cameron is the one. On the opposite end of the spectrum is something like Jonas Brothers: The 3D Concert Experience, which stole a whole bunch of 3D screens from the leggy, well-liked Coraline and tanked anyway. Maybe that proves mainly that ‘tween groupies are unpredictably fickle, but it also suggests that it’s already too late in the life cycle of digital 3D to make easy money on quick cash-ins. And 3D broadcasts to the home? Don’t get me started. Standards for home delivery of stereoscopic images are still under discussion. But while I can certainly imagine the appeal of a stereoscopic version of a big football game, I have a hard time imagining a group of fans gathered around a big screen with beers and chicken wings engrossed in the TV’s depth effects. I certainly wouldn’t expect the guests at my Super Bowl party to wear those funky glasses for three hours plus. (Might be fun to put them on for the halftime show and/or some highlights reels — it’s a terrific shortform technology.) The one market segment where I think living-room 3D could be a slam-dunk is videogaming. Aside from the risks of eyestrain noted earlier, I can’t really see a downside to playing Killzone 2 in 3D for an hour or so at a time.
<i>Opening ceremony, Beijing Olympics</i>

Opening ceremony, Beijing Olympics

I don’t mean to be a naysayer or contrarian. There’s magic in 3D images, and Panasonic provided me with my single most jaw-dropping moment at the show, including spectacular segments from last year’s Beijing Olympics opening ceremony in the HD presentation at its 3D theater. I get a kick out of the mere existence of autostereoscopic displays (Alioscopy seems to have a good system), although I can’t imagine them enjoying much success beyond the digital signage market. And seeing emerging stereo editorial workflows — like the powerful one for Final Cut shown by Cineform using its Neo3D and First Light 3Dsoftware, which lets you easily adjust depth effects and make other tweaks — makes me think that it must be a blast, if still somewhat challenging, to edit a film in stereo. Watching them is fun, too. But wagering that they’ll become much more than a profitable niche market might be a sucker bet.

27 Comments

Categories: Blog
Tags: , , ,

  • Pingback: Topics about Beijing | How Big Will 3D Be?

  • http://www.americanblackguard.com Clay Stafford

    Informative perspective for those of us contemplating 3D projects.

  • Jeremy Pollock

    “But 3D is like good scotch. If you opt for fine-quality bottles, and if you moderate your intake, it will enrich your life. But if you decide that everything goes better with scotch and just go on a bender, sooner or later somebody’s going to have to put you in detox.”

    well said!

    I like the fact that it’s making a comeback, and we’re getting closer to interacting with what we see on the screen. Today HD 3D….tomorrow the Holodeck!

  • Damon Blalack

    Great article!

    I must be one of the few people that have never experienced the slightest discomfort with 3D, even when it was in its home video infancy, which is probably why I’m such a fan of it. But what I’m not a fan of is the mentality that absolutely every new project demands the treatment. My Bloody Valentine remake? Yes. A concert of all things? No.

  • Timber

    I have no idea what will become of all the very snazzy 3D gear shown at NAB. The size of the actual market compared to the presumed market is about 1:1000. And most that does exist is in IMAX, for which there were no credible solutions on display, other than NHK’s 8K (2D) projection system, which wasn’t _that_ amazing.

    From what I can tell, no-budget indies and corporate AV will latch on to it, but very few others, besides cartoons.

  • http://reelwebdesign.com Peter Marino

    I think 3-D will be tremendous in the near future (10 years or so) but will be used in a newer format such as holography which means every film in the future will need to have several or dozens of camera’s in every seen! Movies will once again become magical at that point, fully immersing us into the scenes like nothing we know of today. It probably won’t be as expensive as we may think as technology becomes so inexpensive. So 3-D does have a major role in the future just in a better format, like holography.

    Peter M
    All in One Low Cost Web Design and Marketing

  • Jim Turner

    Not right for everything but how about going to your local theater to see a “live” 3D broadcast of a hit Broadway play? Or showing shorts again before films but in 3D?

  • Jim Krisvoy

    Enjoyed the article. FYI, the 3D book you are referring to in your article is called “Amazing 3D” which has been out of print for awhile, although would expect it will make a comeback.

    Also, there is at least one autostereoscopic 3D monitor, that among its many potential applications due to its accuracy, may find a foothold in 3D editing suits because it will enable editors to view theier work without the distraction of the glasses (although the films themselves will require it for quite some time in theatres and at home).

    Expect to hear more about this within the coming year.

  • http://www.myottebellamy.com John-Michael Bellamy

    I find this article kind of bogus. It comes off as more of a rant than a decent overview of “how big 3d will be”.

    No one has proclaimed that 3D productions are going to take over TV\Film making as it is or that it should even be a current concern since its JUST another format. Maybe what you are noticing…is coincidently a desire to produce more material in this format because it IS uncommon. We have more personal devices on the market…some which can attach to stereo headsets (http://www.myvue.com/) that can be used in conjunction to watch games\films in 3D.
    So….great! Will this technology improve…yes…yes it will.
    Will it the others survive…ask a VHS machine. Its really about whether the format is needed anymore.

    Since the holographic TV has not set itself within homes as of late…and I have not seen ads for them…and its not on the news…maybe, just maybe you are just seeing more development in that format. Will stereoscopy\virtualisation ever fully replace the other formats…maybe.

    I consider your frustrations…stem from the Jonas Bros. but making sweeping statements around the stereographic 3D format…well…if people really want their comfort mixed with 3D, they simply have to walk into a lightpost every once and a while. Now thats real 3D.

  • Kathleen Bergeron

    I recall seeing the original “House of Wax” in 3-D, and it was a wonderful film, but it and others suffered from another problem that’s actually non-technical: Filmmakers seem to be worried that viewers are so focused on the 3-D aspect that it’s necessary to include scenes that have little to do with the actual storyline, but are inserted, literally for the effect. In House of Wax, for example, one scene has a guy in front of a theater with two yo-yo’s, flinging them at the camera. Its tie to the storyline was very flimsy, but obviously put there to show off 3-D’s capability. But those little exercises disrupt the flow of the story and break the relationship between story and viewer. It’s much like the distractions produced from overuse of digital special effects or in musicals when an actor awkwardly bursts into song in the midst of a dramatic scene. I think filmmakers need to use the technology more judiciously. I’m waiting for a movie with a great story with great actors with 3-D used sparingly.

  • http://www.myottebellamy.com John-Michael Bellamy

    One thing for sure, I find it very exciting how Gaming, VFX and visual computing technologies will evolve other sectors such as Medicine & Engineering with respect to multiple collaboration and interactive datasets.

  • Steve R

    Seems like every few years we find ourselves on the brink of a 3D revolution as some new product promises to eliminate one or more shortcomings of 3D…then nothing, until the next newest gaget heralds the end of 2D media. I remember near the end of the eighties when virtual reality was the next big thing…as soon as the computers could generate more than a handful of crude objects. Fast foward 20 years and: nada.

    It’s not the technology that’s holding it back. It’s that it’s always going to be a harder/costlier/longer process for a smaller market than a 2D movie. As long as it costs more and attracts a smaller audience, it’ll remain a niche/gimmick/experimental medium.

  • Mike Ballew

    Respondent Jim Krisvoy offers a “correction” which is actually in error. You, Bryant, are correct in remembering “Fantastic 3-D,” edited by the late great David Hutchison, as the Starlog Press publication. “Amazing 3-D” was a completely different book, written by Hal Morgan and Dan Symmes. It was published by Little Brown & Co.

  • Aaron

    This article is STRAIGHT ON. How long have we been hearing about 3D now? This is just the latest “wave.” Every time there’s some new technology that is supposed to make it “easier” to watch these things, exec talk about it like everyone’s going to want to see every movie in 3D. You know what? NO. Stop it. 3D is a gimmick, people. Come out from your Hollywood isolationism and smell the lagoon. 3D is great for novelty things, just like it always was. And I’d be happy to see a few more titles released in the format than have been in the past 20 years or so. It might even put a few more behinds in theater seats. But to say it’s going to completely revolutionize (again) the industry is stretching it quite a bit. Yes, it does hurt your eyes. But the bottom line is this — go on over to your favorite movie website and take a look at the current list of movies that are out. Now how many of those would you actually really want to don 3D glasses for? Two? Three?

  • http://www.pharis-video.com Chuck Pharis @ Chuck

    I was quite impressed with the Sony 3D display in their booth. Not perfect, but the best I have seen so far!
    The others in the 3D pavilion were soft and did not do much for me. One was actually terrible.
    I have been in Tv Engineering for 40+ years. I think 3D Tv will be here as a gimic for a long time. If some one can get it to look like the current HD pictures, I am sure it will sell.
    Like early color, digital Tv and HDTV, many more improvements must be made.
    I am now waiting for a good Hologram system! Tv in the round!
    Chuck Pharis, Video Engineer.
    chuck@pharis-video.com
    comments welcome

  • http://www.blulaserdigital.com Mark Burnett

    Moviemaking is expensive and competitive. Executives at major studios do not greenlight millions of production dollars without extensive research and they watch the pulse of ticket buyers as if their jobs depend on it. 3D is a part of the natural evolution of entertainment – people will continue to innovate (thank you, risk takers) and the market will reward brilliance with dollars and small statues. 3D will evolve and thrive on its own merit, and on the voting power of millions of average people. You still need a good story in front of the lens, whether it is one lens or two.

  • David

    It’s so easy to be negative. I have been attending NAB for 20 years and have heard it all. I remember how some people said hi def was 20 years away from now. I remember that the biggest joke on the floor was Final Cut Pro. Everybody laughed at Apples pathetic software based editing solution, when you could be 10′s of thousands for juiced up hardware.

    Most people can’t see further than their nose but this doesn’t change the fact that new technologies will prevail.

    Just look at RED. I’m sure Sony, Panasonic et all never took them seriously!

    Panasonic’s 3D work flow was, in my view the hit of the show and portends a new era in dooable 3D. Look to the light my friends!

  • Chris

    Bravo! This is a thoughtful and well written analysis of a complex issue on both creative and technical fronts.

  • Craig Tollis

    Bryant,

    I’m a big fan of 3D – I’ve shot still photos in a variety of stereoscopic formats and written software to generate stereograms and other 3D images – but I think you’ve hit it right on.

    Hollywood has a variety of reasons it wants 3D to be the next big thing. Partly, the industry needs a compelling reason to get people away from their home theatre systems or internet downloads, and back into the cinema.

    But they’re also hoping for a magic bullet that will transform any half-baked production into a money spinner. For the last 3 decades the industry has relied heavily on advancements in animation, CGI and visual effects to make this year’s movies bigger and better than last year’s. Now that’s hit a plateau they’re looking for something else.

    I’m glad to see this technology getting out there. The hype is making the reality seem like an anticlimax, but, really, it’s pretty cool that good looking 3D is coming to a theatre near you.

    Like any “effect” it will work for some movies and not for others. The question will be, what does it add? Is it motivated by the subject matter or just a gimmick? James Cameron’s 3D IMAX documentaries are really impressive. Will it be worth it for narrative?

    C.

  • Bruce B.

    Yes, the original House of Wax had a scene where a man batted balls into to the audience, and this emphasized the power of 3d, even if it contributed little to the movie. Interestingly the recent 3d giant Monsters vs Aliens included a scene with batted balls into the audience. The director claims it is a tribute to that great paddle ball scene from the original. 3d is here to stay. I saw an exhibitor trying to do pseudo 3d without glasses at NAB (JVC I think) and you know what, it was sort of effective.

  • http://www.isee3d.com Allan G

    Thank you Bryant for providing the forum, but we beg to differ. 3D is the next wave and we own the Technology to prove it. We are in the process of building prototypes using our patented Single Lens 3D video image capture technology, which we believe resolves all the issues that people are experiencing with 3D viewing today. Technical issues such as zoom, close ups, and exorbitant editing costs are all correctable.
    AllanG
    http://www.ISee3d.com

  • http://www.3dstereomedia.com Steven Bradford

    I have both a fair amount of cynicism and slightly more hope about the current 3D boom. I’ve been shooting 3D video since 1991, and it seems like we may finally see a breakout into the wider mass audience that we haven’t seen before.

    The big difference between this boom and previous ones, is that this one has legs. We’ve had a number of very successful theatrical films over a number of years now. The previous booms busted in less than a year. We still see 3D films doing better than their 2D versions.

    For video, we still need some things for it to really take off. A reasonably priced HD camera that is easy to use to create at least 85% of shots, to change quickly from one setup to another,– that is reconverge, re focus, and change focal lengths. Something similar to Ikegami’s groundbreaking LK33 18 years ago, or 21st Century’s modified DVX100s?

    But more importantly, an easy to use standardized system for synchronizing shuttered glasses for Blu Ray playback would help a lot.

  • Jim Krisvoy

    I stand corrected on the Starlog issue.; I happen to be more famililar with Dan’s book. It’s great to see a lot of discussion about where 3D may or may not be going. Having seen 3D as a kid in the 50′s (in LA where the projection had a better chance of being acceptable); getting out of bootcamp in 1987 to see Arch Oboler’s THE BUBBLE in single strip, having been in the middle of and getting a first hand and discouraging view of the major technical and, for the most part, creative and artistic flop of 3D in 1983, I’ve always been encouraged by those who continued to go out on a limb and move forward with the medium and the technology to make it happen. Currently, Digital production (there are many talented DP’s and technicians out there that are more than familiar with 3D production )and Digital projection ,which can and should be as fool proof as possible. should allow creative film makers a greater freedom of expression with this medium…and its only a matter of time before 3D becomes commonplace – although, In my opinion, it will depend on the quality of the product and proper application of 3D to gain full acceptance of the paying public. For myself, I remain optimistic.

  • http://- marvin kantorowitz

    i am 78,and projectionist,the 2 reel system,till arch obler “sthe buble was very heavy to load films,in the machines,in sync,but it worked great,and a great tecnoligy went to wast on house of wax,crap,movies.it culda been somthing,as marlon said,but only to fill thea. seats,when tv came in,now its still the same,crap movies,to fill the seats,again,with lousy tv shows,too,no less,when will we learn,to make great storylines,that you dont have to throw the actors,and everything else out of the screen.did anybody hear of writing gone with the wnds,high,quality movies,for the new,3d? not yet,thats on the mkt. and yes 3d tv,no glasses,toshiba,tv,sets,will blow the medium out of the water,if somebody,is creative enough,to create,great,3d,movie,etc,content. but not yet,it seems,more junk,is on the horizen,seams to me.and the sets are there,as i saw,them 3 years ago,in the las vegus show. great content is needed,and,MONEY,since,it cant shoe on present,lcd screens!tis a problem!! might be my grand kids media! i still shoot 3d slides,using,the stereo realist,35 mm,duel slide medium,that kodak,made a lot of money,years ago,mounting slides.and my projector is,bell an howell,dueal projection system,w/semi auto load,system,and silver lenticular screen,wit 100,poloroid,glasses,realy makes a great show,combo,of home typ eqpt. in the 50-60′s.i am waiting for an easy,digital 3d system,for home use?also,for my grand kids,i think! i love great 3d images! stay well all! mk1931@juno.com.

  • http://www.lifeway.com Scott Allen

    I, too, was impressed with the Panasonic workflow shown for 3D. The demos were also quite impressive and provided me with my only jaw-dropping moment of NAB, as well. While long-form 3D content will likely be a niche business, the technology does open the door for some exciting new ideas.

  • Roy Watts

    I produced a 20 minute 70mm 3D project for Iwerks Entertainment back in 1995. Titled “Haunts of the Olde Country” and directed by Keith Melton.
    A theatre was specially built at Busch Gardens in Williamsburg Virginia.
    The project was extremely experimental, with numerous in house effects, including a live witch, steam, rain, confetti, and streamers, with a full multi stereo sound system, all worked well and thrilled the audiences.
    However at the time we worked on the project we found that there are only so many things that can come off the screen and hit you in the face, after that it becomes very repeditive.
    Audiences,especially children find it very tiring to sit for over 45 minutes with the glasses on unless the story is so absorbing, they lose all track of time.
    The exception being the use at a Rock concert where it really does bring the event into another dimension.

  • http://www.sdt750.net Mike the 3D HD guy

    This new Panasonic 3D Camcorder looks set to open a few eyes to the 3D potential we’ve all known about… kinda makes our virtual dreams a real possibility