News Stories

3D content gap is an economic problem

2.12.2012

[TV Broadcast Europe]

By most accounts there is just not enough 3D content for 3DTV to take off. Or perhaps there are not enough 3DTV displays out there for advertisers and broadcasters to create 3D content. Either way there is a chicken and egg dilemma which a recent panel at CES set out to address.

Tom Cosgrove, president and CEO of 3net said: “There was considerable hype three years ago that 3D will take over HD. That was never going to happen. By the end of the year 10-14m households in the US will have 3DTVs. Already there are 90 million 3D device displays globally. The reality is that this is a business that is going to stay but the onus is on us as producers to innovate content but we have to narrow the gap in economics between 2D and 3D.”
Bryan Burns, vice president of strategic business planning, ESPN is also of the opinion that 3D is here to stay: “The situation today is much like 2002-03 and the introduction of HD – it’s an evolutionary process,” he said. “Clearly the highway has been built. A higher percentage of consumer electronics screens will have 3D inside them. When that base of displays enters the marketplace it is up to content producers to drive usage in the home.
“However you can’t make the 2D show suffer. You can’t have separate footprints for 2D and 3D broadcasts, so for us, 5D is a way to get two shows out of one that doesn’t cost you as much. [ESPN aired its first live 3D (shot simultaneously in 2D) studio show from the Las Vegas Convention Centre].
Bob Zeitter, executive VP and CTO, HBO, said: “When we started a 24-hour HD network, most of our programming was in true HD. We were able to go back and take films that were aired on TV and remaster them in HD. You can’t do that affordably in 3D. We are currently running about twelve 3D movies a year – that volume clearly needs to grow – but there is not a cost effective way to go back and convert that content.”
…
“The economics of feature film and TV production are vastly different. If a feature costs $150m for a two-hour movie, that’s $75m an hour. Scripted TV varies from $500k an hour to $5-6m an hour. So the cost of going from 2D to 3D is more easily absorbed in a more expensive project. If it takes us 12 days to produce one episode you can’t make it take 15 days because adding 3D seriously impacts the cost.”  …

Luxurious cinemas mushroom in Hanoi

2.11.2012

[VietNamNet]

Six years ago, Hanoi did not have just a single cinema that meets international standards, but now the number of modern box offices is five.

In late April 2006, the first MegaStar cinema complex in Vietnam inaugurated in Hanoi, with eight projection rooms. The appearance of this cinema, with American investors, has made a great change in Vietnam’s movie market. Most importantly, it has helped form a new habit: enjoying movies at box offices, not on television.

Though the ticket prices are high, compared to Vietnamese average incomes, and increase annually, MegaStar has drawn a large number of audiences. MegaStar has become a big rival of other cinemas in Hanoi. Some cinemas had to close and the remaining have had to upgrade their facilities to compete with the new rival.  …

Read the full story here: http://english.vietnamnet.vn/en/arts-entertainment/18677/luxurious-cinemas-mushroom-in-hanoi.html

< 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.