News Stories

The Business of 3D

It’s no secret in the industry that 3D production is expensive, but, at Sports Business Journal’s Sports Media Technology Conference this week in New York, attendees found out just how much it costs.

“It was about six times the cost of a normal game,” Ray Hopkins, COO of the YES Network, reported. “And we do 14 cameras for a normal Yankees game. From a cost perspective, it’s somewhat prohibitive. You need a separate truck, separate technical personnel, announcers, cameras.”

Added Jerry Passaro, SVP of network operations and distribution for MSG Media, “the biggest deterrent is the cost.”

Alternative Production Methods
To alleviate some of those costs, ESPN is working toward being able to use one production team to produce both a 2D and 3D broadcast of a game, and the NBA has done some experiments with single-camera 3D.

“At that point, our intention is to give you a courtside seat, with everything that comes with that,” explained Steve Hellmuth, EVP of operations and technology for NBA Entertainment. “You’ll see the referees walking in front of you, the play going down to the other end of the court and coming back to you. I’ve watched entire NBA games from a single 3D camera, and it’s a great experience. That’s one way people can experience 3D without the huge fees required for multiple-camera events.”

Such a solution also works for events where the main cover camera — say, on the 50-yard line in football — does not offer much depth because it must be placed so far away from the field of play. Another option to bring costs down is to incorporate selected 2D cameras into a 3D broadcast. For CBS’s production of the Final Four, the production team used a 2D aerial camera that gave a big-game look to the broadcast and was upconverted to a makeshift 3D using the switcher.

“From overhead, you don’t really get that 3D effect anyway,” explained Ken Aagaard, EVP of engineering, operations, and production services for CBS Sports. “I mixed that into the 3D feed because you want to make the event look important. The dilemma that we all face is, you have to be able to show the three dimensions but also show the ball going into the hole. There’s an interesting dynamic there that we all struggle with.”

Is 3D Like SD to HD?
Mark Hess, SVP of advanced business and technology development for Comcast Cable, said the good news is that, this time around, the distributors are 3D-ready; with HD, they were not. However, without turning 3D into a business, Passaro said, the medium has a limited future.

“Affiliate revenue will make it a business,” Hopkins added. “We’ve seen this movie before, in HD. When the parent companies call and say we want games in 3D, that’s when we’ll get it done.”

Although some are quick to liken the SD-to-HD transition to today’s HD-to-3D jump, others are not sure that the parallel is quite equal.

“I don’t see 3D being like SD to HD,” Aagaard said. “I see 3D being more of a niche. Hopefully, it will be a big niche. For us, the manufacturers have been paying for the party as it relates to production costs. When that well goes dry, where is that revenue really going to come from?”

Varied Demand for 3D Content
The other important question to ask is where does the demand for 3D come from?

“When I grew up, I was my dad’s remote control,” Hess said. “We all sat there as a family and watched TV. Now my wife’s doing something on her laptop, my daughter’s on her phone — it’s difficult to get a group of people together and really enjoy a 3D experience.”

Internationally, however, there may be additional opportunities for 3D production.

“We’re starting to engage with our international licensees about delivering 3D,” Hellmuth said. “Canal Plus did a six-camera 3D telecast of FC Barcelona versus the Lakers, and it looked really good. There will be some interest in cinemas for the NBA, especially in Asia, some distribution via computer, and then potential for the league for compilation DVDs. There’s no single wow factor here, but it’s just beginning.”

Added Chuck Pagano, EVP of technology for ESPN, “once you get more of a complement of programming together, you start to create business models that make sense.”

by By: Carolyn Braff, Managing Editor

source: http://sportsvideo.org/main/blog/2010/11/17/sbj-smt-the-business-of-3d/

Panasonic To Start Selling 103-Inch 3D Display For $100,000

Are you a fan of big displays, and maybe 3D? And do you happen to have $100,000 to spare? Then the TH-P103MT2 might be something for you, a 103-inch plasma screen Panasonic announced [JP] today for the Japanese market (yes, that’s the retail price). It’s based on a 103-inch TV showed back in 2008 (the TH-103PZ800), but this new model comes with 3D on board.

The monster screen features full HD resolution, a contrast ratio of 5,000,000:1 (native), and four HDMI ports, but do not expect speakers or a tuner here. It’s sized at 2,412×871×1,748mm and weighs a whopping 321kg.

In Japan, Panasonic will start accepting orders from tomorrow (no word on international availability at this point). Oh, and you have to add transportation and set up costs to the $100,000 price tag, Panasonic says (they throw in one pair of 3D glasses though).

by Serkan Toto

source: http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/11/17/panasonic-to-start-selling-103-inch-3d-display-for-100000/

< PREVIOUS ARTICLES NEXT ARTICLES >

Specification for Naming VFX Image Sequences Released

ETC’s VFX Working Group has published a specification for best practices naming image sequences such as plates and comps. File naming is an essential tool for organizing the multitude of frames that are inputs and outputs from the VFX process. Prior to the publication of this specification, each organization had its own naming scheme, requiring custom processes for each partner, which often resulted in confusion and miscommunication.

The new ETC@USC specification focuses primarily on sequences of individual images. The initial use case was VFX plates, typically delivered as OpenEXR or DPX files. However, the team soon realized that the same naming conventions can apply to virtually any image sequence. Consequently, the specification was written to handle a wide array of assets and use cases.

To ensure all requirements are represented, the working group included over 2 dozen participants representing studios, VFX houses, tool creators, creatives and others.  The ETC@USC also worked closely with MovieLabs to ensure that the specification could be integrated as part of their 2030 Vision.

A key design criteria for this specification is compatibility with existing practices.  Chair of the VFX working group, Horst Sarubin of Universal Pictures, said: “Our studio is committed to being at the forefront of designing best industry practices to modernize and simplify workflows, and we believe this white paper succeeded in building a new foundation for tools to transfer files in the most efficient manner.”

This specification is compatible with other initiatives such as the Visual Effects Society (VES) Transfer Specifications. “We wanted to make it as seamless as possible for everyone to adopt this specification,” said working group co-chair and ETC@USC’s Erik Weaver. “To ensure all perspectives were represented we created a team of industry experts familiar with the handling of these materials and collaborated with a number of industry groups.”

“Collaboration between MovieLabs and important industry groups like the ETC is critical to implementing the 2030 Vision,” said Craig Seidel, SVP of MovieLabs. “This specification is a key step in defining the foundations for better software-defined workflows. We look forward to continued partnership with the ETC on implementing other critical elements of the 2030 Vision.”

The specification is available online for anyone to use.

Oops, something went wrong.