Now gamers will be able to use the PlayStation 3’s Blu-ray 3D capabilities to watch a great selection of 3D movies from Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment, including Avatar, Prometheus, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and a newly converted 3D version of I, Robot. Danny Kaye, EVP, Global Research & Tech Strategy, at Twentieth Century Fox, discusses how Fox is adding a third dimension to big catalog titles and explains why 3D TV sales will continue to spike in this exclusive interview.
Why does it seem like just now that we're seeing quality Blu-ray 3Ds head home?
I think it actually started a little earlier and has been gaining momentum over the last year. In 2012 you see some of the hardware numbers getting to a pretty good scale, closing in towards 10 million 3D TVs, over 10 million standalone 3D Blu-ray players and almost 20 million PlayStation 3s. We’re moving past the early adopter and creeping towards mass market with 3D playback thanks to the PS3 and 3D Blu-ray players. 2012 was also the opportunity to get the message out that not only are TVs connected but they have 3D capabilities. It takes some time to penetrate the market with these types of new features. We’re up to six dozen titles of some scale that have 3D on Blu-ray and twice that many numbers in total. Once you get over 100 titles of a new format people notice it on shelves. If they’re one of the 5 to 10 million people who on a 3D TV and a PS3 or 3D Blu-ray player, they try it out. It’s just a matter of waiting until those numbers reach some scale. When you think about it, the period of introduction of 3D has been short in time when you compare it to high def. But we’re always more impatient for the next format. HD took a while to get adopted. By the end of 2013, 3D numbers will be close to double for the number of 3D TVs and 3D BDs.
With high profile titles like Avatar, Titanic and Prometheus, people have associated with these really big theatrical events. It’s not just fan boys that notice what James Cameron and Ridley Scott are doing with 3D. Now that we have enough people with hardware, they’ll begin to try these types of films out in 3D. What we learned a few years ago from the earliest people who got 3D TVs and BDs, when they actually tried the 3D and watched a movie they were very satisfied with the experience. Their attitude before trying wasn’t that positive. It takes an event or the right title to watch something in 3D or connect to the Internet and see what we get.
What have been the challenges of getting adoption of 3D TVs in homes?
The Consumer Electronics industry is growing so rapidly that confusion is inevitable when it comes to things like different features, different price points and competing technologies. The first challenge, in no particular order, is that features like this always come along with relatively higher priced models. 3D TVs were introduced during a recession. There was a slowdown of HD TVs that would carry along with it more rapid penetration of 3D TVs. That led to a choice between active and passive 3D technologies. At the last two CES shows we saw some pretty obvious distinctions between the approach of active versus passive 3D. Passive 3D has been associated with lower-priced TVs. The majority of 3D TVs coming out feature active technology by an 80/20 ration over passive. There the challenge is communicating to the consumer the different quality experience. Only with active are you getting full 1080 HD in both eyes versus half the resolution in passive. But does that matter to many consumers who wouldn’t be able to tell the difference? At the beginning of high def a similar thing happened and the industry struggled between 720 and 1080. Over time, people preferred to 1080p and that won over. Then you have the added feature of real-time 3D that many TVs offer, where you flip a switch and any content you’re watching becomes 3D even though it’s not nearly the quality of professionally produced 3D. With prices dropping on 3D TVs and the quality of active 3D glasses evolving, 3D is growing. If active 3D glasses are just as light and convenient as passive, then why wouldn’t you go that way. But both technologies are important for the industry today.
What role have 3D video games, mostly through PlayStation 3, had in getting some early adopters to upgrade?
Games are probably why a lot of PS3 gamers have upgraded to 3D. When PS3s were first purchased, the original motivation was gaming. But over time we saw that evolve to a movie device, as well. It’s the same thing with 3D. We’re still in a 7 to 10 year re-purchase TV cycle, where 30 to 40 million HD TVs are purchased in the U.S. each year. Consumers buying a second or third HD TV in the house may be for gaming or as a movie device. It’s the natural evolution of the penetration curve. You’re not going to buy the hardware unless there’s conent. Gaming and movies are the best 3D content.
Holiday is always critical to the entire entertainment and consumer electronics industry. Economic indicators are as healthy as they’ve been since pre-2008. We’re seeing the healthiest consumer intent-to-spend in years. This one could be a pretty significant spending season and there are more 3D TVs and 3D Blu-rays available than ever before.
Can you explain the conversion process and technology that Fox used to bring I, Robot home in 3D, when the movie was released in 2D?
It’s great if our major filmmakers choose to film a movie in 3D like Avatar or Prometheus. But I, Robot is 10 years old. If 3D shooting had been done back then, it would have been a perfect specimen for it. There are a lot of 2D to 3D conversion technologies around, some of which were invented for theatrical process. We’ve been looking at these technologies for several years. We found this one in coordination with JVC and adapted it for our kinds of content. We’ve been developing it for a few years. I, Robot was the first title we worked with and it’s been part of the entire process. When you’re watching a movie in 2D, you’re getting one view of the movie to two eyes. In the real world, your right and left eye gets a slightly different image and the brain puts those images together. Through conversion, we take the left eye version and then create a right eye version so your brain can put the depth in. We convert, frame by frame, the entire movie and get a creatively pleasing and eye-pleasing experience that for most consumers, if it’s done right, wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. We’re only going to be doing good 3D conversions with the right material. I, Robot was part of the technology development process, now that it was developed, the next title will give us a better idea of how long this conversion process will take.
There’s no reason we couldn’t do multiple films per year. Right now, we’re looking for the right films for 3D. We, or others, can ramp up the frequency of conversions depending on what the market demands are. The great thing about our process is that even as 3D hardware technologies evolve, we’ll still be able to use this process and it will work across all types of 3D, including active, passive,and autostereoscopic.
What genres make the most sense for a 3D catalog makeover?
That’s a highly debated question. The easy answer is the action genre is the one that maybe is the most natural because of the consumer base that starts off with new technology. The debate centers on if you move the timeline down 10 years, would you want to see sitcoms or news programs in 3D? Are there materials that make sense in 3D? My perspective is a simple one. As a human being with two working eyes I see everything in 3D, so why wouldn’t I want to see all my news and entertainment content in 3D -- as long as it’s equal to what I see when I walk around in the real world.
Can you explain what fans will be getting with the Avatar Blu-ray 3D and how it compares to the extended cut we saw on Blu-ray last year?
We worked with the filmmakers on this project and the current 3D movie is the original theatrical release. The door is open for a 3D extended version.
Partly it’s a matter of timing, when those decisions are made.
What do you think filming a movie in 3D like Prometheus and Avatar directors did adds to the experience of Blu-ray 3D compared to a post conversion movie like Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter?
If you had your preference, shooting natively in 3D is a great thing. But as conversion technology becomes more sophisticate, the average viewer won’t be able to tell the difference. As long as you’re doing it well and are creatively sensitive, you can perfect the conversion process.
How have you seen fans react to some of your recent Blu-ray 3D releases?
Based on what’s happened with Prometheus, where it’s the most deeply penetrated Blu-ray 3D yet – 18% of all disc sales were the 3D SKU, you would expect the same thing to happen with Abe Lincoln: Vampire Hunter for its audience. Avatar 3D has been really healthy in sales as well, which is not exactly a surprise. There’s been a pent-up demand for that. The filmmakers were involved in that. No matter what your experience was in the theater, you’re a captive audience watching Avatar at home on a big screen 3D TV. It’s a spectacular experience.
