By Gordon Meyer
P3GizmoGuy@gmail.com

Earlier this week, I attended a meeting of the International 3D Society at RealD’s screening room in Beverly Hills to catch a screening of the Sand & Sandal epic “Immortals,” which I had missed during its initial theatrical run. 

Considering who was hosting the event, I erroneously assumed that “Immortals” was shot in native stereoscopic 3D to begin with.  I was wrong.  Although that was the original plan, it seems that the additional logistics involved in shooting 3D native were slowing down production considerably and the film’s director, Tarsem Singh Dandwar, likes to shoot fast.  After a few days of shooting with 3D rigs, the delays led to the decision to abandon the 3D rigs, shoot conventionally and then convert.

While the conversion was farmed out to several companies, the lion’s share was done by Prime Focus World’s facilities in Hollywood and Mumbai.  As an aside, this is the same company that handled the 3D conversion for “Star Wars Episode 1” that Lucasfilm and Fox released theatrically in February. 

The discussion following the screening provided fascinating insights into the art and craft of 3D conversion.  In spite of the fact that many home 3D flat panel displays offer real time 2D to 3D conversion, as do at least three Blu-ray player programs for PCs that I’m aware of, there’s a lot more to doing a successful conversion than simply applying a computer algorithm to automatically simulate a stereoscopic image.

For many, it begins with the decision as to whether to do a “two eye” or “one eye” conversion.  With the latter, the digital technicians treat the existing footage as the left eye image and then extrapolate what would have been captured by the camera representing the right eye.  For “two eye” conversions, the original footage is considered a composite center image (kind of like a ghost center audio channel when listening to two speaker stereo) and the technicians then extrapolate both left and right images from that center image, generally resulting in a more realistic final result.  Whether it’s a single eye or dual eye conversion, background imagery that would otherwise be obscured by objects in the frame needs to be painted in, frame by frame.

One of the things that panelists from Prime Focus spoke of with pride was the way they digitally sculpted objects (especially characters) to give them dimensionality.  I’ve seen a number of 3D conversions that reminded me of the old View Master slides we used to play with as kids.  Sure, there was depth, but it was basically a series of flat images floating in front of each other.  Digital sculpting technologies mean that, when you’re looking at a human face, for example, the stereoscopic image reveals the natural contours of the face. 

Using just these examples, is it any wonder that 3D conversion can cost as $100,000 per minute or even more?  For “Immortals,” making an educated guess using industry standard figures, that conversion added at least $11 million to the cost of making the film.  Mind you, overall, the conversion was very well done, but mightn’t have looked and felt better to audiences had it been shot stereoscopically to begin with?

If you talk to 3D heavyweights like Jim Cameron or Michael Bay, there’s no question.  If you’re going to present a movie in 3D, it’s always better to shoot it that way to begin with.  But then you have filmmakers like Tarsem Singh and Tim Burton who shoot in 2D and then convert because they believe they have more flexibility with 2D cameras than with often cumbersome 3D rigs that have to accommodate two cameras.   

During the post screening milling about in the lobby that so often accompanies these events, I casually polled several of the 3D experts present about Singh’s experience.  They pretty much confirmed what I suspected to begin with. While there are more moving parts involved in 3D production than 2D, with proper preparation and planning, including a 3D savvy camera crew and seasoned stereographer, it’s absolutely possible to do a shoot in 3D almost as quickly as 2D. For some reason, I flashed back to my childhood and my time as a Boy Scout.  Seems their motto is just as valuable now: “Be prepared.”

P3GizmoGuy@gmail.com

The recent box office success of “Avatar” once again brings up the issue of 3D as a long-term format both theatrically and on home displays.  Lots of pundits have been predicting that “Avatar” will do for 3D what “Star Wars” did for Dolby Stereo - and they may well be right!

3D has been around since the old stereopticons of the 19th Century and on the big screen (off and on) since the 1920s.  While consumers clearly enjoy the immersive qualities of 3D, its implementation has often been a major headache - literally - in previous implementations of the technology.

Although glasses are still necessary for most 3D motion picture and video displays, I have seen prototypes of 3D plasma displays at various trade shows that work without glasses.  Even though those technologies still have a way to go before they’re truly ready for prime time, they prove that it’s just a matter of time before we get good 3D without glasses.

In theatres, 3D seems to have finally come into its own.  I saw preliminary footage of Bob Zemeckis’ take on “A Christmas Carol” last May in 3D and was blown away by how effectively he used the format, not to mention the way current 3D projection technologies from Dolby and RealD eliminate the double images and eye strain I experienced with older 3D systems.  After almost 90 years, 3D in movies looks like it’s finally ready, and just about every major studio has 3D releases on its slate for 2010.

Now the reality of the business is that as important as a successful theatrical run is, it’s the DVD/BD release where a huge portion of the profits come from.  That means the studios have a vested interest in bringing the 3D experience into the home in ways that compare favorably to the theatrical experience.  Well, the Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) have given the studios and consumer electronics industry their 2010 Christmas present a year early by announcing the standards and specs for 3D Blu-ray discs.

3D was a big topic of discussion at last month’s Blu-con Blu-ray conference held in Beverly Hills.  In fact, many of the panelists talked at length about how 3D will be one of the features that will help insure the longevity of the BD format because of its ability to deliver full 1080p resolution to both right and left images without compromising quality.  Although the final specs were still being refined, it was predicted that the BDA would formally announce those specs before the end of the year and they kept that promise.

Here’s some of what this announcement means.  First of all, the specs are display agnostic.  They can work with a manufacturer’s choice of display technologies, be it plasma, LCD, DLP, CRT or whatever acronym you choose.  The type of glasses you’d use - or even lack of glasses when the technology presents itself, is also open as far as the BDA’s specs are concerned.  And now that the formal specs have been announced, we’ll see plenty of prototypes for both 3D ready TVs and 3D capable Blu-ray players on display at the upcoming Consumer Electronics Show with live product likely to be in stores next summer.

Don’t be surprised if Fox holds off on the DVD/BD release of “Avatar” until they can put it out in 3D on those new products.  And don’t be surprised if lots of folks invest in 3D TVs and BD players just to be able to see “Avatar” in 3D in their homes.

So how good does the home version of 3D look?  Panasonic ran a 10 minute demo reel at Blu-con that blew me away.  And let me tell you here and now, even though “Avatar” is getting the attention, from what I saw at that demo, it’s actually going to be sports that ultimately becomes the killer app for 3D in the home.

Initially, home delivery of high def 3D content is going to come almost entirely from Blu-ray.  But it’s only a matter of time before the technology comes out that will enable broadcasters to get on the 3D bandwagon and then watch out!  It WILL be the standard, just as 40 years ago we saw the transition from black & white to color TV and we’re now watching a similar transition to HD from standard def.  I predict that within 3-5 years of the first HD 3D broadcast, 3D will become the standard.  And in all likelihood, the broadcast specs will be backwards compatible with the just announced BD specs because the hardware manufacturers will already have that technology in place.

The future is in 3D.  Now’s the time to master its possibilities beyond the novelty of having spears hurtled past you as in the 3D flix of old.