Quality, Not Quantity

I recently had a very unpleasant 3-D experience. While at the Los Angeles Auto Show, I spotted a 3-D exhibit at the Mazda booth. Mazda had several passive 3DTVs mounted at the center of their booth, with two pairs of headphones and polarized glasses each. On screen, you could select to view two different 3-D presentations showing Mazda’s new car features. I pressed the button for the first video, and watched one of the best examples of how NOT to shoot a 3-D video. Close ups shot with too wide an interaxial, shots with major divergence, serious window violations, and lots of wide shots that looked like cardboard cutouts of cars. Every cut was jarring as the depth jumped all over the screen. None of this was helped by the fact that the headphones were tethered to the display below each screen, and forced viewers to stand only 3 feet away from a 50-inch TV. I watch a lot of 3-D, and this still hurt. The first video ended, and I hesitantly clicked to select the second one. This one was clearly not shot in 3-D, and appeared to have been run through an “automatic” conversion process, as it exhibited depth, but not very realistically, and in all the wrong places. Needless to say, I was very disappointed with Mazda. How many thousands of people watched these painful videos over the ten days of the auto show?

Sadly, the weakest link in the 3-D chain seems to be quality control. Digital technology has made it very easy to create 3-D images, and digital technology has made it very easy to screw up 3-D when people get lazy. At LA 3-D Club meetings, we have seen a huge surge in the number of entries in our digital photo competitions - greatly thanks to the availability of the Fujifilm W1 and W3 cameras - and we have seen a great increase in the number of entries with window violations and other stereo problems. It has become too easy for club members to simply point, shoot, and upload, using the small autostereoscopic screen on their cameras as their only guide. Without people taking the time to plan the depth prior to shooting, or to examine and adjust images before uploading to competitions, we have seen an observable drop in the overall quality of our entries.

In the same way, the use of simple to operate 3-D video cameras, such as the Panasonic 3DA-1 and the Sony NX3D1, by people who haven’t taken the time to learn these camera’s strengths and weaknesses, have led to a lot of professional videos that have very poor 3-D. I have been consulting for a major distributor of 3-D content, providing QC on videos prior to release, and have been finding many problems like those in the Mazda videos. In fact, I’ve also had to flag a few very high profile projects as unwatchable due to problems in the ways they were shot. Another big error that I’m seeing is the accidental editing of pseudostereoscopic shots into projects. It seems that editors are having a hard time keeping track of which clips are left-eye and which are right-eye, and I can only assume that many editors never get to see their work in 3-D as they edit, so they don’t realize their mistakes.

Theatrical exhibiton also has it’s share of problems due to a lack of QC. Who hasn’t been to a screening where the projector lamp is too dim, or the screen masking is cutting into the picture, destroying the floating windows? Last month I went to one theater to see a 3-D movie, and the digital projector was set to the wrong aspect ratio, stretching the image, and increasing the parallax. I complained to the projectionist, and was told that the movie had been shown that way for weeks. At another theater, I was greeted by the ticket seller who said “Now the movie is 3-D, is that okay?” as if knowing that fact might deter me from wanting to buy a ticket. Once in the auditorium, as the trailers played, I could see that the RealD polarizer was out of position, and was cropping off the side of the picture. Again I complained, they were clueless and had been showing the movie this way for a week. Several minutes later I watched through the projection port window as a pair of hands grabbed the Z-Screen frame and tugged on it until it moved an inch to the right. This fixed the cropping, but must have misaligned the optics in the polarizer, as there was now a slightly doubled image on part of the screen. I should have also complained about that, but I know no one would have understood me.

It’s very disheartening to see so much sub-standard stereo due to lack of information and education, and in many cases due to laziness. We need to take a stand for quality in 3-D creation and for quality in 3-D presentation, whether it’s in amateur photography or professional filmmaking, otherwise the quantity of bad stereoscopic content will bring about 3-D’s demise again.

Stepping off my soapbox now.

WOW!

OK Go's "All Is Not Lost" is a Grammy nominee for Best Music Video! I am so proud of my extremely talented friends, and so thrilled to have been the 3-D part of the team.

A Couple Of Reasons To Be Optimistic

I recently attended two 3-D movie screenings on the same day. They were two very different movies, and two very different audiences, but they did share something in common - well known directors who have just made their first 3-D films, and are very enthusiastic about using stereo.
 

Martin Scorsese discusses Hugo

First, I went to a film industry screening of Hugo, the new narrative feature by Martin Scorsese. The movie itself is a stunningly beautiful love letter to early cinema, and in particular to the films of French silent film pioneer Georges Méliès. The production design by Scorsese's longtime collaborator Dante Ferretti is just gorgeous, combining the dreamlike period look of 1920's Paris with recurring themes of clockwork gears and steam powered machinery. And the film makes great use of stereoscopic depth to create atmosphere and bring the imagery to life in a way that totally supports the story. A highlight of the screening was the Q&A that followed with Scorsese and his principal crew. When an audience member asked Scorsese whether he thought 3-D had a future, or was just a fad, Scorsese answered with a brief lesson in film history. He reminded us that from the time pictures started to move, people wanted color, sound, big screens and depth. He explained that while Technicolor was perfected in 1935, it still took another 30 years for color to become the standard for use in more than just musicals and comedies (apparently, in the 40s and 50s, the studios felt that color wasn't appropriate for drama). He said that 3-D is regarded in a similar way now, but that filmmakers and people working in 3-D will get more inventive with it, and that ultimately he sees 3-D as another element he can use to tell a story. He pointed out that he was looking out at all of us in the theater in 3-D, that we all see the world in three dimensions, and that he looks forward to an eventual future where holographic actors can actually walk into the audience.
 

Wim Wenders introduces Pina

Right after the Hugo screening, I rushed over to the AFI Fest showing of Pina, director Wim Wenders 3-D documentary about the work of choreographer Pina Bausch. Bausch was a vanguard of modern dance, who died unexpectedly in 2009, and Wenders' film is a tribute to her vision and inspiration, as presented in dance by the members of her company. The film is truly amazing, and in my opinion is one of the finest examples of immersive stereoscopic filmmaking to date. Wenders' camera captures the dancers’ motion and puts us there with them, both on the stage and out in the world, allowing the audience to be more than simply observers. We share the dancers emotions, their yearning, and their love through their movements and through a brilliant use of space. Wenders was asked why he chose to make his film in 3-D, and he explained that he actually spent 20 years trying to make a film with Pina Bausch, but felt that he was never able to properly capture a true representation of her dancing, that it never looked the way he wanted it to on the screen. He said that he had given up until, in 2008, he saw U2 3D in a theater and realized that stereoscopic 3-D would give him the language he was missing. 3-D would allow a level of engagement that he couldn't get in 2-D. Pina could only be made in 3-D. And the audience at the screening seemed to agree. Even a self-proclaimed 3-D hater in the crowd stood up and told the director that this was the one film that should be 3-D. Personally, I was so moved by Pina, that I went to see it a second time two days later.

I came away from these two films with several thoughts. First, I have been suggesting for some time that while there has been a lot of discussions and industry workshops on 3-D technology, there needs to be more education on 3-D aesthetics. I strongly believe that good stereo is as much about the composition of objects in the frame and the volume of the empty space between them, as it is about setting proper interaxial and convergence. And these two films are great examples of that concept. Second, having shot several dance related music videos myself, I have been advocating that filmmakers wanting to work in 3-D should consult with choreographers to develop their blocking, because choreographers "get it" - they compose movement in space, they think in depth and volume, they understand the language of 3-D (architects also "get it", and would probably make good 3-D filmmakers). And third, I have a renewed hope that we will finally start to see 3-D films coming from Hollywood that are designed for stereo, where the depth is so integral to the storytelling that audiences will finally see stereo not as a gimmick, but as a necessity. It was great to hear Martin Scorsese embracing 3-D as another tool in his filmmaking palette. And after my second viewing of Pina, I approached Wim Wenders and thanked him for making a film with the potential to show a very wide audience that stereoscopic 3-D film is an artistic medium. He high-fived me.

From the Make: Blog

I was featured on the Make: blog! This video is from the May 2011 Maker Faire.


http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2011/11/3-diy-eric-kurland-video.html

Back to the Future

I’m writing this from the future. Really! I’m currently in Seoul, South Korea, where I am on the jury for the Seoul International Extreme Short Image and Film Festival’s 3-D category. The organizers of this festival, which celebrates all forms of short film, attended our 8th Annual LA 3-D Movie Festival back in May (where their submission “27 Years Later” was awarded the Jury Grand Prize), and very graciously invited me to attend their festival as their guest. So I am in the future - sixteen hours ahead of Los Angeles. Of course I’m not really able to see events that are yet to come; no winning lottery numbers or horses, and only my best guess as to where 3-D is headed.

At the end of last month, quite a few people were very interested in discussing the future of 3-D. The 3-D Entertainment Summit, held in Hollywood from September 20-22, was an opportunity for the stereoscopic motion picture and television industry to gather to discuss the state of 3-D cinema, television, mobile and internet. Conference highlights included a “state-of-the-industry” presentation that showed 3-D cinema continued to grow over the past year, with some 30,000 digital 3-D screens now installed in theaters worldwide; panel discussions on  3-D storytelling, distribution, and creating content for personal mobile devices, such as phones, tablets and handheld games; and a keynote presentation by James Cameron, still very bullish about the future of 3-D. Cameron voiced concern that the studios may scale back their 3-D production due to recent box-office disappointments, but felt confident that 3-D televison broadcasts would create a growth market for 3-D content creation. He also talked about lessons learned from the making of Avatar and the upcoming conversion of Titanic, admitting that if he were making Avatar today, he would be less conservative with the depth. Cameron said that the 3-D experience will continue to improve as artists take the reins of stereo from the technicians.

The 3-D Entertainment Summit also included a 3-D trade show, featuring booths and demonstrations from a wide range of companies, from production and post solutions, to electronics manufacturers, to companies that make designer 3-D polarized sunglasses. Thanks to the generosity of our friends at Strong/MDI Screen Systems, the LA 3-D Club was able to have a presence at the event. Benoit Maillout, of Strong/MDI, was unable to attend, and offered me the opportunity to operate his company’s table in his absence, and promote the club. There was quite a lot of interest from attendees, many of whom were learning of the club for the first time, and were enthusiastic to hear about our organization and how we bring together stereoscopic still photographers, filmmakers, and CGI artists; welcoming both amateurs and professionals to come together to share their knowledge and their images. SCSC member Shannon Benna joined me at the table to promote the launch of her new group, Stereo Sisters, a community for women working in 3-D.

So here I am, one week after the summit, sitting at a computer on the other side of the international date line, preparing to attend several screenings of international 3-D short films. And I can see that the current trend toward 3-D is truly a global occurrence. Many of those 30,000 3-D screens are in Asia and Europe, and independent artists from around the world are creating volumes of new stereoscopic content in a wide variety of media. I may not be able to see exactly what the future holds, but I hope it’s so bright, I gotta wear shades. Polarized 3-D shades, of course.

One For The History Books

On Friday, August 26th, the LA 3-D Club teamed up with the Echo Park Film Center to present a special 3-D screening of the 1953 movie Robot Monster. The EPFC is a media arts cooperative dedicated to providing equal and affordable access to film/video education and resources. Throughout the year they offer free filmmaking classes for teens and seniors, and affordable workshops for adults, on many subjects including narrative and documentary filmmaking, digital editing, and 8mm and 16mm film (in March I taught a class there on 16mm Bolex 3-D). They have a film and video lending library, and camera and projection equipment available for rental. They hold regular screenings of all kinds of independent films, and they own a veggie-powered school bus known as the Filmmobile, an eco-friendly cinema and film school on wheels. During the summer months, the Filmmobile presents showings of classic movies at the locations around LA where they were shot, and our joint screening of Robot Monster was held in the Hollywood hills at the gates to the famous Bronson Cave, used in the film as Ro-man’s headquarters. Everyone in attendance had a good laugh at director Phil Tucker’s seriously bad dialogue, and it was great to see this 50’s 3-D stinker with an appreciative audience. I even put in a special appearance as Ro-Man

In order to show this movie, I had to reformat an old field-sequential dvd recording of a 1990’s era 3-D broadcast, as Robot Monster isn’t available on Blu-ray, and it got me thinking about the fact that most of the stereoscopic movies from the 1950s are not currently available in any 3-D format. In fact, aside from the two 3-D Expos held in 2003 and 2006 at LA’s Egyptian Theater, most people who weren’t around in the 50’s have never had an opportunity to properly watch these pictures from 3-D’s “Golden Age”. I would think, and hope, that with the advent of D-cinema and 3DTV the studios would look at their back libraries and re-release this content. It would seem like a no-brainer to take such classic films as House of Wax, The Creature From The Black Lagoon, Kiss Me Kate, and Dial M For Murder, and re-release them to a new generation. Unfortunately, the studios have not yet made these films available, nor have they announced any intentions to do so.

It really is a shame. Hollywood is trying very hard to produce good 3-D motion pictures, and everyone seems to be starting from scratch, trying to reinvent the wheel, and mostly disregarding the 3-D of the past as too primitive to be of any value. But I think there is a lot that could be learned from studying these films, and the methods used in their production. Yes, 60 years ago the camera rigs were big and cumbersome, their wide interaxials made it difficult to shoot close-ups, and the language of 3-D cinema was only in it’s infancy. Still, many of the films of that era demonstrate a brilliant use of the medium, their makers finding ingenious ways to work within the limitations of the technology to make beautiful images and tell amazing stories. I wish that it were mandatory that every filmmaker embarking on a 3-D project watch the 1953 movie Inferno, starring Robert Ryan and Rhonda Fleming, directed by Roy Ward Baker. This film demonstrates what well executed 3-D can bring to a serious drama - gorgeous stereoscopic expanses of desert, claustrophobic moments punctuated by a character’s inner monologue, and the great action of a climactic struggle during a raging fire. Today’s filmmakers need to be able to study and reference this and all of the other other classic 3-D films in order to see what worked, and what didn’t, and learn from those earlier efforts for 3-D cinema to have a viable future. After all, as philosopher George Santayana wrote in 1906, “when experience is not retained...infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Don't ask why, just enjoy...