3D Broadcast on DirecTV 2010

[Clark Dunbar]

came across this today...... for the 3D footage and programming market - this article was on EnGadget.com

-

DirecTV 3D broadcasts coming in early 2010?
By Richard Lawler posted Dec 28th 2009 7:24PM


Finding itself with a wealth of a additional bandwidth thanks to a new satellite going up today, DirecTV may have already decided its first big addition will be 3D. Citing the always popular unnamed sources, HD Guru says we should prepare for a CES announcement that the bird will be up and running by March beaming down a collection of movies, sports and TV shows in 3D HD, requiring only a firmware upgrade on existing set-top boxes to tune into the new stations. UK satellite provider Sky has already tipped its hand about 2010 3D plans, with a newly freshened HDMI spec expected to ease things along and nearly every manufacturer either already producing compatible displays or planning to announce them in less than a week there's very little doubt remaining about whether broadcast 3D is coming home this year, only how and when.


-----------------

[Mark L. Pederson]

yes. it's a good time to have an extra dimension.

[Lucas Wilson]

came across this today...... for the 3D footage and programming market - this article was on EnGadget.com

Clark,

There is a TON of really exciting Stereo distribution initiatives happening. Several huge events with real dollars behind them are in the planning stages right now. 2010 will be a huge year for stereo distribution to the home.

I am unfortunately bound by some pretty tight NDAs on this stuff, but there are some industry connections being made in the stereo world right now that would really blow your mind. Partners you *never* would have imagined coming together.: )

Lucas

[Clark Dunbar]

Lucas,

here's another 3D Home Distribution company.... http://www.next3d.com/NEXT_3D.html

[KETCH ROSSi]

Clark,

There is a TON of really exciting Stereo distribution initiatives happening. Several huge events with real dollars behind them are in the planning stages right now. 2010 will be a huge year for stereo distribution to the home.

I am unfortunately bound by some pretty tight NDAs on this stuff, but there are some industry connections being made in the stereo world right now that would really blow your mind. Partners you *never* would have imagined coming together.: )

Lucas

Ha ha, funny as I'm in the same exact position, and I have already got a call this morning cause I posted something I shouldn't have.

But as I work to get Ketchframe Public with a S3D front base market, I absolutely agree with Lucas, there is so much mind blowing stuff going on that I just can't stand to not be able to say anything about it.

In the next few weeks I'll be doing some more talks and showings with several CES surprises, and I believe that this will be a WOW year for 3D at a consumer level, never mind at a Commercial level and especially Movies, even so the real Multi Billion dollar industry for 3D will be driven by consumer products, and companies like Sony are big players of it.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Oh crap... can't they put this on hold for an other year. :)

[KETCH ROSSi]

Sorry Roberto, but the movies were already pushing on to this, and after Pace's shots of the Hand held S3D Broadcasted live, that was it, Avatar will help push Motion Picture Studios even further, but the TV part of the S3D was already n motion from quite some time, so ready or not here it comes :~).

As with HD, it will take time to be implemented, then will take more time to be adopted, then will take even more time for the public to start actually using it buy purchasing the actual Hard Ware.

[Roberto Lequeux]

This is the way I see it. I shoot this winter in 2D, or next on 3. But for that I'll have to tinker... I'd rather die than show up and watch a monitor helplessly. I am too much of a producer to have no clue how long things take, what it entails, what it achieves, if it is worth it, and too much of a visual person not to care enough to create alongside the DP.

Stupid 7D is useless now? ;P

There is also shooting 2D and posting the thing... are there severe limits to that approach? Or would those of us seeking a subtle use of the extra dimension be "satisfied"?

[Oliver Koeppel]

...Partners you *never* would have imagined coming together.: )

Lucas

Does that mean, Red and Sony will work together?? Hehe ;-)

[KETCH ROSSi]

Yes 2 conversions are actually been done with great results Roberto, and we really need to see the 2D footage not as FLAT as some described, but instead to what I agree is actually stil 3D images shot with one camera and then making this footage a Monoscopic one instead of a Stereoscopic one as in S3D.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Are Monoscopic and S3D your own terms?

Where could I find red/blue samples of 2D posted into 3D?

[KETCH ROSSi]

Are Monoscopic and S3D your own terms?

Where could I find red/blue samples of 2D posted into 3D?

He he, no Roberto, Monoscopic I first heard some time early 09 during some studies of the 3D media and how their images are perceived by the Retina and how our brain Neurons interpret the surroundings, and how it differentiates what we see in projected images, and how they do extract calculations in order to define Depth, and separation,a swell as distance from each object.

S3D, I have been using this shortened term also since early 09, but now I see it all over the place, but I also can't take credit for it, as it is nothing but a short for " STEREOSCOPIC 3D".

Stereo 3D has been around for several decades, and now just in the verge of its explosion, which IMO this time will not be just an other hype, and died out as it did several times already do to lack of technology and material to support it.

2D images converted to 3D is a very complex POST procedure, to literally make any movie such as Titanic and or Lord of the Rings per example, be POST Processed to then be viewed in S3D, this is a very long and not only time consuming process, but very Mathematical in how it operates and how each desire subject in each shot of each scene gets literally separated by way of drawing, so to be able to manipulate and create a exact matched second image moved off its Parallax to then create the S3D illusion. One of the companies that does this is In-three and they called this process "Dimensionalization" which works on a pixel by pixel base structure.

One last thing I like to pint out Roberto is that the well known and classic red/blue 3D, is actually the cheapest and worst solution of the bunch, and in fact when tethers showcase their 3D movies with it, I simply don't go.

Today's technology allow for far greater Projection and visualization of S3D subjects by the use of Polarization and shutter glasses, of various uses, each specifically design to be used with a On projector Polarized lens, and or Silver Screen with special material in order to achieve a better reflection of light to compensate the light fal coming form the use of Double polarization, in front of the projector and with use of glasses, were others such as ExPand use Shutter IR glasses systems to allow for use of standard screens, etc. the list goes on, but red/blue will soon died out as the cost of Polarized systems will drop and better incrementation of its use will be placed.

[Roberto Lequeux]

What? You have to rotoscope everything? Hahaha... forget it. I'd rather shoot HH with two IMAX. I asked for Red Blue cause I figured that is the only one to view on my monitor, just to get a sense of what it might look like. But this posting 2D into 3D idea is out for me. It would be far easier and better to shoot with two cameras.

I guess I should start calling some post houses and asking for quotes for 3D 2k finishing from 4/4.5/5k .R3D.

The edit I suppose would be done in one of the two streams and recreated on the second. We'd check for consistency and possible issues with the two streams and then have a post house do out VFX, 3D work and grading. I suppose VFX will have to be rendered twice, though 3D CGI environments and elements wouldn't need to be designed twice, but only have a little more care put into their design taking into account the additional coverage. Right?

[Mark L. Pederson]

What? You have to rotoscope everything?
No. Some new technology uses 2D planar tracking combined with advanced edge detection and optical flow technologies - but figure $15,000 + a minute.



I guess I should start calling some post houses and asking for quotes for 3D 2k finishing from 4/4.5/5k .R3D.
Happy to help you out with that.




The edit I suppose would be done in one of the two streams and recreated on the second.
That is one option - editing in 2D and conforming in 3D - however - I strongly advise editing in 3D - because there are many edits and "depth cuts" that can effect the edit creatively - that are only visible in 3D. Avid MC4 has great for stereocopic editing - however, at this moment in time, there are several "deal breakers" for getting your media into the Avid in stereo. Neo3D is the FCP editing option - which gives you the ability to make TONS of adjustments in active meta-data while editing.



I suppose VFX will have to be rendered twice, though 3D CGI environments and elements wouldn't need to be designed twice, but only have a little more care put into their design taking into account the additional coverage. Right?

Foundry's OCLUA 2 has powerful tools for rendering and creating VFX in 3D. Bottom line - 3D is "hot" right now - not very many post houses are doing it - so you will pay a premium.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Happy to help you out with that.

Already in my list Mark, for this and an other somewhat more special scenario.


That is one option - editing in 2D and conforming in 3D - however - I strongly advise editing in 3D - because there are many edits and "depth cuts" that can effect the edit creatively - that are only visible in 3D. Avid MC4 has great for stereocopic editing - however, at this moment in time, there are several "deal breakers" for getting your media into the Avid in stereo. Neo3D is the FCP editing option - which gives you the ability to make TONS of adjustments in active meta-data while editing.

Yes! I had already arrived to this conclusion before, thank you for pointing this out. I wouldn't consider doing it any other way. I am trying to grasp 3D a bit too fast so I am somewhat stumbling over myself while trying to get up to speed. I agree wholeheartedly.


Foundry's OCLUA 2 has powerful tools for rendering and creating VFX in 3D. Bottom line - 3D is "hot" right now - not very many post houses are doing it - so you will pay a premium.

And here is the kicker. Still, the wise thing with so many elements pushing behind 3D going mainstream is to take a very close look at 3D production.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Well Roberto Mark has given you good options and answers, what He meant is "OCULA 2" a Plug in for NUKE, which is a great solution, also Assimilate Scratch is good, and more and more I'm been pulled to the Pablo system, as I visit each Post house in Hollywood and Burbank area, I will know more about once I finish my tours with PaceHD, LightIron, as well as ET, In-Three, and 3Ality Digital as part as my ongoing research for the shooting of my first Movie in S3D "Rape of a Beauty".

I like add that if you do decide to go with a conversion method, be sure to carefully choose your post house, and most importantly this does not necessarily means that you are just done dealing with the S3D issues, as if that is your intended media from the beginning, then you need to Compose the scenes with that in mind, literally from the Script it self, in including Depth charts that you like to achieve, lighting the scenes differently, as well as creating multi layers, so to have a better depth cue to work on in post during the separation of your subjects, as well as giving a better Post option when recreating the Double images stacks, extracting as much info as possible from the scenes as to allow to separate the various layers and enhance the S3D illusion from that single Monoscopic footage.

One other factor when knowing from the start that you will do a conversion to S3D is to shoot at Shorter Focals and stopped down, not eliminating the Shallow DOF but limiting it as not to be Extreme Shallow DOF, not talking T22 here but shoot T4 instead of T2.8, and T2.8 instead of T1.8, unless it really is part of an important moment in the story were almost absolute separation is needed, which also has a good but not so pleasing effect, and light your scenes avoiding Strong hi lights at all costs, as well as reflection, which in Monoscopic make sense and bring good effects, were in S3D cause Disparity issues and problems to be solved.

One other extremely important factor to consider when shooting from the beginning with S3D in mind is that you CAN NO LONGER shot extreme close ups of any subject were they take up the entire frame, you need to always leave room on all sides, left, right and top, which will be vital to your S3D conversion, and you can crop them for the 2D release.

The last thing I can say about Conversion is this, once you have done the budget for your film, try and see how much more would it be to shoot directly in S3D with the help of Pros, and if it comes to less then 15k per minute, well there you go, shoot S3D from the start, other wise shoot Monoscopic, with one camera set up and then Convert, but the Minimum average of 15K per minute of the Conversion will be added to the original cost of the Production already assumed by making the film in 2D.

[Rudi Herbert]

Well,

It will ALWAYS be cheaper to shoot in 3D than to convert 2D material to 3D later down the road. Without a doubt. The 3D will also look better, more natural and organic. A side-by-side rig is the actually very cheap, the only extra expense being a second camera and a second lens, or set of lenses, both of which can be rented usually at 50-75% of the single unit retail in most places. So, if wanting the option of either 2D or 3D, then acquiring in 3D is the way to go. As for learning he ropes of 3D, it is not as difficult as it sounds, it is in fact and for the most part, quite simple. There are all sorts of rigs out there that achieve the stereo effect with varying levels of sophistication, but James Cameron uses the side-by-side one, basically two cameras mounted side by side (you don't say?!) and you can see what great results it produces on Avatar.

I keep telling people, you wanna learn 3D, go out and shoot it! I just bought a couple of little Canon HF-S10 AVCHD cameras, with full 1080p sensors, put them together side by side, and started shooting 3D, that simple. The cameras cost $900 each. Once you're done shooting, you can edit in 3D on FCP or Premiere (my choice) with Cineform Neo3D or Prospect 3D. You have every possible adjustment you'll ever need, and you can output any type of 3D used nowadays, including the much maligned blue/red anaglyphic, which is great for monitoring since you can view it on any monitor. This software can also take r3d files, and any other digital format, so it is pretty much camera agnostic. Neo 3D is $3000, not cheap, but it gives you EVERYTHING you need for 3D production, so it is in fact, a steal. So, for $5K, I've been getting my hands wet in 3D so to speak and have lined up a couple of gigs already that will amply pay for the investment. Now, the little Canon cameras are not RED, but, and this is a very important "but", they have allowed me to understand the specificities, whims, do and don'ts of 3D, and there are many, both for acquisition and post, so that if and when I decide to shoot 3D on RED, as I likely eventually will, I'll have an invaluable amount of experience as to what can and can't be done and how to go about achieving my desired look and feel.

My point? The tools are out there for anyone to start learning how to work in 3D, so, if this technology figures in your future, then avail yourself of these tools and do what all the experts did to get to where they are today, learn, learn, learn...