Journey to the Center of the Earth, directed by Eric Brevig — a filmmaker with a VFX resume that includes Total Recall, Men in Black, and Pearl Harbor — might not have the same impact as The Jazz Singer (the first feature-length “talkie,” in 1927) or Becky Sharp (the first three-strip Technicolor feature, 1935), but as the first live-action VFX-driven feature film to be released in the 3D format, it can’t help but break new ground. As production shot with the Cameron/Pace Fusion 3-D camera system — essentially two customized Sony F950 HDCAMs outfitted to work in tandem for stereo photography — the editorial team had to figure out techniques for stereo playback of dailies, getting 3D footage out of a very 2D Avid system, and assembling and exhibiting a 3D director’s cut for the studio executives. F&V talked to editors Paul Martin Smith and Dirk Westervelt, 3D consultant and VFX editor Ed Marsh, and HD engineer Fred Meyers about pulling everything together in production and post. Read the story, below, and check out our Q&A with Meyersabout what it takes to make a 3D production work.
Comments (7) for "When the Movie is 3D, But the NLEs Are 2D"
1.
This is an interesting approach, but it appears to be quite cumbersome and expensive. Editing a 3-D production in 2-D, and then correcting the errors later, would be somewhat analogous to mixing a 5.1 audio recording by listening to only one channel, and then correcting the errors in a remix. It can be done, but why? Stereoscopic 3-D productions should always be edited while viewing the content in the form that the key audience is expected see. You are still editing the storyline just as you would do during a flat 2-D production, but you are also instantly seeing if the cuts make sense in 3-D as well.
Posted by John A. Rupkalvis on Thursday, July 10, 2008 @ 05:20 PM
2.
I hope that consideration was given to the soundtrack, especially for Home Theater in 3D. With all the power that 3D can bring to image, 7.1 surround (HDMI 1.3) can do for the audio. It allows the audio to occupy the same space as the listener. We have completed several titles in this format, 3D is the wave of the future for Home Theater. Lets make sure the audio can stand up to the picture. We need to work together to support this technology for the sake of our art and the public.
Posted by Robert Margouleff on Thursday, July 10, 2008 @ 06:04 PM
3.
Paul and editorial team did wonderful job. But it can be done easier with dirty trick like one we did. We used Final Cut Pro and QuickTime player and Matrox Trip Head2Go to project 3D in 720p twin projector. Steps are as follows:
Merge left and right images as single clip using any QT codec of choice.
edit in FCP.
export the timeline as reference and it will take minutes since we are not recompressing.
play the edited movie in QuickTime player and playback using Matrox Triple Head2Go which has single DVI convert to triple DVI which can be connected to twin projectors.
Using polarised screen and polariser for 2 projectors in front you can watch nice 3D movie.
Our left and right eye clips are merged to form 1920 X 540 (Left eye 960 X 540 and Right eye 960 X 540)
The above workflow is out of my own idea with existing tool to review 3D and the workflow used for Journey is great and no comparison to mine.
Posted by Gopal Balaji on Thursday, July 10, 2008 @ 10:42 PM
4.
Thanks for all the comments. Robert, the subject did come up in interviews but it didn't make it into the story. The bottom line was editorial was hoping the sound mix could be done with reference to 3D playback, partly because they thought you could get away with a more "experimental" or unconventional soundscape if you were marrying it to 3D images. In the end, for budgetary reasons, that didn't happen. It's always a compromise, I suppose!
Posted by Bryant Frazer on Friday, July 11, 2008 @ 08:20 AM
5.
story doesn't gel with what I heard... They spent 9 months doing temp and then only 3-4 months to do the finals... The director could never make up his mind. And they didn't pay their (Meteor Studios) staff at the end of the show.
Posted by reality on Tuesday, July 15, 2008 @ 12:38 PM
6.
Story is quite true, 'reality.'
Schedule was 2 years from production to release. So you see, your timeframe for temps was well outside the director's cut.
I would add that some previs type temp plates were done, very effectively, by David Dozoretz and his crew at Persistence of Vision, even in 3D for some shots, during the director's cut phase.
Also, to be clear, after filling in most BGs we did opt to leave a few shots bluescreen for the director's cut screening. As far as the VFX process, and Meteor, it was a long hard slog for everyone involved. 3D at this level of complexity just isn't easy, as everyone involved can attest to. Some of us probably underestimated the difficulty going in. If our director hadn't been tenacious, the final movie would have suffered greatly. Also suffering would be the viewers' eyes.
If staff at Meteor weren't paid that is truly awful. I wouldn't go blaming the director for that.
Posted by Dirk Westervelt on Saturday, July 19, 2008 @ 06:08 PM
7.
I disagree with those who say, cut it in 2-D, then do the 3-D version. 3-D is not an “add on”.
I applaud the screening of 3-D dailies. I feel it is important to see a movie on a big screen, like the days in old Hollywood, and for 3-D, the screening MUST be in 3-D.
There are simpler ways of cutting in 3-D as you go. For an FX driven film like “Journey” it is a bit more complicated, but I’ve cut 8 3-D video shorts using Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0. If you have the Pro 2 Suite, there is a built in “3-D filter” in the effects menu. You simply edit dual stream (Left eye on one video track, Right eye on the other). To see the 3-D at any time, just drop on the 3-D filter and see the video in anaglyph right there on the monitor. No guessing, except for issues of “scale”. It is a smaller image and needs to be checked on a big screen before finalizing. I use a Maximum Divergence chart to check for divergent errors on the small screen.
I believe Adobe Premiere Pro is limited to 1080i or 720p, but for 2K outs, this should be adequate. The FX generation would have to have similar workflow to what you describe (off line), but the integration could be viewed in 3-D as the shots were completed and plugged into the time line.
Posted by Tom Koester on Friday, July 25, 2008 @ 03:43 PM
Post your comments below
