Version: 2008
  • On MovieTome: See the villain of IRON MAN 2!

October 8, 2007 4:00 AM PDT

Dolby stakes its claim in 3D movie tech

  • 12 comments
Related Stories

Bringing Bollywood to video games

July 26, 2007

3D cinema tech taking on a starring role

May 16, 2007
Related Blogs

Viacom chief: We're sticking with DRM


October 2, 2007

(continued from previous page)

Each technology has its advantages and drawbacks. Dolby 3D's glasses are difficult to manufacture and therefore expensive--$50 right now, though the company expects prices will drop. They must therefore be returned after use and washed in an automated washer. Real D's 5-cent, disposable glasses can be branded with promotional graphics from the movie.

Dolby 3D has an advantage with movie screens. Real D requires theaters to install the special silver screens, which JPMorgan estimates cost $5,500 apiece. Silver screens offer higher reflectivity and work with 2D movies as well, but there's concern that despite advances they suffer from a bright central "hot spot." Dolby 3D uses conventional white screens, which means theaters can move 3D movies to smaller screens as a movie runs its course at a theater.

Real D seems to have the edge for maximum screen size, though--an important consideration given that both cut down the amount of light to less than a sixth of what a conventional 2D movie projects. Dolby is cagey about how large a screen Dolby 3D can use, though executives say it's been used to show movies on 38-foot screens. Real D, though was at 47 feet during debut and this year should reach beyond 60 feet early next year, said Real D president and co-founder Joshua Greer.

Click for chart

Another factor is how well separated the left-eye and right-eye views are, so that light from one doesn't leak into the other. Real D has "ghostbusting" technology to electronically counteract this problem, and it's working to move it from a digital processing step to a real-time add-on. Dolby, though, boasts that its technology requires no ghostbusting at all.

Neither rival is standing still. "Both are to some degree in their infancy," Parry said. "They'll change radically in the next couple years."

3D movie-making: a new nut to crack
Making 3D movies in the first place is another challenge, with production costs somewhere between 10 percent to 20 percent higher, according to various industry estimates. There, too, technology is changing fast, though.

3D filming has been hampered by technical challenges. For live-action movies, two cameras must be closely coordinated, with risks increasing as cameras move or lenses zoom. Computer-generated animations are easier because they're typically already designed in 3D and therefore require only more computer hours to render the second viewpoint.

Pace is one company trying to address the live-action difficulties, and its 3D cameras have won over Doug Schwartz, creator of the Baywatch TV series and now the chairman of Stereo Vision Entertainment, which aims to bring smaller-budget 3D movies to the screen.

"The (3D) camera used to be size of a VW bug. But you can do anything now--handheld, Steadicam, underwater, dollies, zoom, cranes," he said. Also important: technology from Quantel lets directors review the shot immediately, in 3D, on the set.

Tools are still missing from 3D production, though, said Pierre Raymond, president and founder of Hybride Technologies, a visual effects company that's working Journey 3-D, a new take on the Jules Verne's Journey to the Center of the Earth. For example, a standard "rig erase" operation, using computers to digitally erase gear such as wires to suspend actors in the air, is much more complicated than in 2D.

"If do in it 3D, you will erase something on the right eye, and you will not see it. You erase it on the left eye, and you will not see it. When you put stereo glasses on, bang, you see the patch," he said.

Three-dimensional movies are still a novelty, and movies are trying to milk it for all it's worth. "Every time you bring a new technology to market, you will pass the gimmicky stage," Raymond said.

Take Schwartz's work, which is Stereo Vision's first project. Planned for Halloween 2008, Aubrey Blaze Piranhas 3-D features video-game creators who are trapped in Brazilian caves and must reckon with mutant flying carnivorous fish.

"Water is one of best environments for 3D, because things float--they're in the middle of the screen and coming right out at you," Schwartz said. Stereo Vision also is working to exploit the 3D possibilities of restaurant waitresses in South Beach, Miami with a comedy called Hooters 3DD.

But there are limits, even with movies that embrace 3D's shock value. "You don't want to be jarring to the audience," Schwartz said. For example, MTV-style fast cuts from one scene to another are a no-no because audience members must refocus.

Most, including Real 3D's Lewis, expect a more easygoing era to arrive, with 3D used to involve people more deeply in the narrative. "Ideally we want to make you feel like you're part of the movie and less like there are things flying out at you."

Previous page
Page 1 | 2

See more CNET content tagged:
Dolby Laboratories Inc., 3D, movie, movies, viewer

Add a Comment (Log in or register) (12 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
$3.50 More per ticket?!
by DatabaseDoctor October 8, 2007 6:22 AM PDT
The people in Hollywood must be smoking some very potent stuff these days. The public is screaming about ticket prices and concession prices already. That could be a contributing part of the problem of low ticket sales. Another part may be the junk that comes out of Hollywood these days. So how do you combat that? How do you get people coming out to the theater again?

Produce the same junk but in 3D and charge people $3.50 more! What a great idea! Let's repackage the junk we've been force-feeding the public and charge them more for the privilege of being abused! Wow. Genius. Morons.

How about stop paying those self-important actors 20 million per picture for a few weeks work and pass the savings onto the public? There's a concept. Fiscal responsibility. Drop ticket prices by $3.50 for 2d movies and keep the same rate as now for 3d movies. I bet there would be a lot more people going to movies and buying more concessions but don't get me started on $6 for a soda!
Reply to this comment
What's really amazing...
by Neo Con October 8, 2007 7:03 AM PDT
...is that, despite the constant increases in per-ticket cost, the year-over-year revenue continues to drop! The number of actual tickets sold must be absolutely abysmal these days. Good thing they never report that figure -- they always just report the income of the films, a meaningless measure considering the ever-changing prices per ticket.

It's easy to see that Hollywood has no concept of economics. They think companies can just raise prices whenever they want (e.g. oil companies) without any consideration for supply and demand and that raising taxes actually increases government revenue when, in fact, the opposite is true!
View reply
3.50!!!!!!!!
by lizardo_manson October 8, 2007 8:38 AM PDT
No way i will pay 3.50 more..and that is for now, that's mena that so soon as we cant expect they will high and hight the price with dumbs excuses. No sir, i can pass it and keep watching movies in my home or regular dolby digital sourround sound theaters.
What if you're blind in one eye?
by ballssalty October 8, 2007 10:13 AM PDT
I don't mind making 3D movies but if this becomes the norm and a regular version isn't available, my movie watching days are over. I can't see in 3D if each eye needs to see a different image.
Reply to this comment
No problem for you
by Shankland October 8, 2007 10:50 AM PDT
With either Dolby 3D or Real D, you should be able to watch just the left-eye or right-eye channel and it'll be fine, though of course it'll be only in 2D and you'll still need the glasses.
sue?
by gggg sssss October 8, 2007 4:50 PM PDT
Of course you coudl sue, like they did against Target because their website did not accomodate the blind. Now the one-eyed can sue as well.
It will works for you too it's just not 3D
by 3DCC October 9, 2007 7:11 AM PDT
The current glasses technologies block the right and left eye respectively.If you can only see out of one eye you will see the image normally out of your working eye. The down side of this all is then the added cost of having to see a movie and wear glasses at the same time. This is definitely a bummer.
The Past
by DemiHampster October 8, 2007 10:14 AM PDT
If the past is any indication, then it will all be about marketing
and the licensing of inferior technology. Dolby Labs is truly the
Microsoft of the media technology world.
Reply to this comment
3D movies and Buggy Whips!
by wtortorici October 8, 2007 12:31 PM PDT
Itseems the movie houses are the same mind set that buggy whip manufactures had when the public started buying more cars than buggys.

Why spend $15 or $20 to see a novelty movie that wouldn't make a B movie rating?
Reply to this comment
It worked for me...
by fr33_loader November 24, 2007 1:42 AM PST
Its been a while that I have been to theaters. The idea of watching
the full movie in 3D was driving factor for me go out and watch
"Beowulf" otherwise I would have just usually waited for it to come
out in DVD and rent it. The big TV's and good home theater sounds
is their main competition. Full movie 3D is their advantage right
now and I am willing to shell out that money for a different
experience. At least until 3D becomes a norm for home movies
then Im back on my coach, PJ's and microwave popcorn.
Reply to this comment
(12 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

Latest tech news headlines

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

More feeds available in our RSS feed index.

Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

Dow Jones Industrials (-0.91%) -93.79 10,197.47
S&P 500 (-1.03%) -11.27 1,087.24
NASDAQ (-0.83%) -17.88 2,149.02
CNET TECH (-0.46%) -7.19 1,572.60
  Symbol Lookup
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right