I do not intend all my blogs to be about 3D, but two days at the excellent 3D Creative Summit, organised by Ravensbourne, has provided a number of useful ideas on which to ruminate.
For me, the event started off badly when Jim Chabin of the International 3D Society implied that Christopher Nolan did Warner Bros a disservice because a 3D release of The Dark Knight Rises would have raised $300 million extra box office dollars through surcharged tickets. I know film is a business, but I’m glad that isn’t the only thinking behind 3D.
Fortunately the rest of the two days was about creativity. Ang Lee and David Conley of 20th Century Fox gave a memorable account of the 3D visual effects in Life of Pi, while Phil Oatley of Peter Jackson’s Post Production House Park Road Post offered an overview of the extraordinary but incomprehensible (to me) technology which went into production and post production on The Hobbit. Further showcases by Dreamworks, Disney and Aardman made it clear that 3D cinema represented a merger of art and technology.
The emphasis on the TV panels was far less on bit rates and digital thingamabobs. Amongst those appearing were John Cassy, Head of Sky3D, Kim Shillinglaw, head of BBC 3D, Steve Smith, Director of Football at Sky and responsible for Sky’s 3D football coverage, Anthony Geffen of Atlantic Productions, producer of Sky’s 3D wildlife documentaries, and the writer and presenter of those programmes, Sir David Attenborough (who was every bit as charming and lovely as you’d expect). Also contributing were Julian Jones and Declan Lowney, directors of Sky 3D’s Inside the Mind of Leonardo and of the BBC’s Mr Stink respectively.
From the discussions a number of main themes emerged. The first is that 3DTV is very much in the early stages of its development and that few people are watching. The second is that the future is not yet clear. The BBC’s two-year 3D trial is coming to an end this year, having encompassed amongst other things Strictly Come Dancing, Wimbledon, the Olympics, Last Night of the Proms, plus Mr Stinkand Doctor Who. The variety of genres shows that the BBC has seen this as a testing ground to see what kind of 3D programming attracts audiences, test out the equipment, build expertise and industrial relationships, and to explore the aesthetics of 3D. As Kate Shillinglaw said, the remit of the BBC is not to sell 3D, but to make sure the BBC can deliver if it’s what the people want. After two years of experimentation it clearly can be delivered, but the jury’s out on whether anyone wants it and the BBC’s Andy Quested noted that audiences are falling with each new 3D programme. There’s no indication to suggest that the BBC’s 3D trial won’t continue, but no guarantees either and if it doesn’t it will be a significant blow for the UK 3DTV industry, leaving Sky 3D virtually alone in the market.
As stated in my previous blog, Sky is changing its packages so that customers no longer need pay top price to get it. Subscribers to Sky Sports will be able to see 3D sports, while subscribers to Sky Movies will be able to see 3D films. This strikes me as an illuminating strategy. At present, 3D is premium; special. With these changes Sky is switching the emphasis away from 3D as an entity in itself, towards it being another way of experiencing other content, such as football, movies or nature shows. John Cassy, in response to a question about advertising, said that that 3DTV needs to sell content on stories rather than on the 3D wow factor. Steve Smith, discussing football coverage, talked about 3D serving the narrative of the game. Likewise Julian Jones, director of Inside the Mind of Leonardo, talked about how when it was first decided the documentary would be in 3D he envisaged things flying around Leonardo’s head in a gimmicky way. As he learned about 3D he quickly abandoned this in favour of a different approach, ensuring that the 3D was led by the editorial content of the programme, not the other way round.
Nowhere is the synergy between 3D and content more evident than with Attenborough’s documentaries. The content of each one is carefully chosen so that it is served by the technology on offer. Flying Monsters 3D (2010) dealt with dinosaurs because 3D cameras were bulky, new, and prone to break down, and the advantage of CGI animals is that they don’t run off unless you want them to. Kingdom of Plants (2012) had to wait until 3D macrophotography was possible, while Galapagos 3D (2012) utilises all the techniques learned on the previous shows. In other words, Sky’s move represents on an economic level this aesthetic desire outlined by programme makers to integrate 3D with the editorial content of the programme.
There’s a (slightly) tongue in cheek argument to be made that UK 3DTV is, without knowing it, at the vanguard of 3D development. Translated into cinematic terms, Sky’s new access strategy is the equivalent of scrapping the 3D surcharge. Given the 3D screens and digital projectors which cinemas installed have probably been paid for by now, and we all bring our own glasses (or pay for a pair if we don’t), why do we pay more for 3D screenings? Wouldn’t people see more 3D films if they cost the same? Sky’s figured that out. While 3D cinema is mainly blockbusters and animation, the BBC and Sky are experimenting with different genres to see what the public wants. Meanwhile Ang Lee has won an Oscar for doing on film what TV figured out in 2010; integrating 3D into a story and using it to create intimacy, rather than spectacular distance.
It’s a shame that hardly anyone in the UK is watching 3DTV because, if you immerse yourself in it, it’s really rather interesting.
Simon Brown is Director of Studies for Film and TV at Kingston University. His main research areas are early cinema, British cinema and contemporary American television, and he has published pieces on shows as diverse as Dexter, Alias, Supernatural and The X-Files.
