A three year project to explore the possibilities and implications of what the “3D Internet” on a mobile would look like and what benefits it could offer has finished, leading the way for future work in the area.
While 3D on mobile might feel a little excessive to some, you only have to look at the number of apps beginning to integrate 3D modelling or mapping, for example, and it’s a short leap to wonder what the whole of the Internet would be like (and how we could navigate it) if it was in 3D.
The Chiru project (officially known as the ‘3D User eXperience for Mobile Network Virtual Environments’) was carried out by the Center for Internet Excellence (CIE) at the University of Oulu in Finland with backing from Nokia, Intel and Tekes, the Finnish funding agency for technology and innovation. It set out with a clear vision: to study and improve the way people interact with 3D information and also looked at things like how data services can be presented in a virtual space and creating design guidelines for 3D interfaces.
“At CIE, our main focus is accelerating the deployment of 3D Internet services and applications. The most important question is to understand how people interact with three dimensional information and what do we need from technology to create a smooth and immersive user experience”, Mika Ylianttila, Director of the CIE, said on Wednesday.
“From the business perspective, the 3D Internet space is a huge opportunity and we are seeing more and more businesses and research being built around 3D Internet. The Oulu area has unique expertise and provides a living lab environment to test and develop 3D Internet technologies and services,” he added.
The ultimate aim for the ambitious project was “to lay the groundwork for the 3D Internet” but also looked at Mixed Reality, also known as augmented reality (AR).
While a number of the findings have perhaps become more obvious than they were when the researchers set out in 2010, it also found that people are far more comfortable using augmented reality in most situations (a normal view of the world augmented with digital information) but preferred a pure 3D model in cluttered situations as it’s less distracting and omits other “disruptive elements” like shadows.
The project looked at several different elements of technology during the study and investigated things like 3D object capture using Xbox Kinect alongside a 3D capturing module for RealXtend Tundra, visual design aspects of UIs and the user overall experience and things like how to connect multiple concurrent 3D spaces with portals.
However, perhaps some of the most interesting research was carried out on the visualization of sensor data which they did by using GPS with mobile WiFi and Bluetooth data (as well as some other wearable sensors) for visualization and content creation.
“GPS data was used for controlling an agent in a 3D virtual environment depicting a real city. Also WiFi and Bluetooth connection data was used to measure pedestrian traffic and demonstrate how virtual cities can be populated according to different types of city zones. Furthermore, accelerometer and proximity sensor data was used to capture and visualize elderly patient activities,” the group said on its project page. You can see a video of the elderly patient activities research here.
In addition to the user-side and design requirements of what the 3D Internet might look like and how it could be built, the study also looked at the technology involved such as seeing what impact 3D content (geometry, surface maps, materials, etc.) had on mobile battery life, as well as trying to formulate a mathematical model so that the demands of any 3D space on battery life could easily be calculated.
Building on the project, the CIE said it will now continue its research with new projects focusing on a Tekes-backed Mixed Reality study. It also said it will run projects and training programs with local authorities to turn parts of their research into businesses.
While research into the area is no longer a new topic and we have seen the increasing use of augmented reality in mobile devices, such as Nokia’s City Lens or LiveSight features, but there is clearly room for future development of the technology and a need to increase awareness among users. Projects such as this, while they might have no immediate practical outcome, do just that and are a vital key to innovation in the space.
From NBCNews.com by Martha White on 6/14/13
TV sports in 3D was supposed to be a slam dunk, but viewers never got the picture. And, then there were those stupid-looking glasses, too.
This week, ESPN acknowledged the future for in-your-face screen action looks dim when it announced it was pulling the plug on ESPN 3D, almost three years after launching it with considerable fanfare.
“I would say the 3D network was dead on arrival,” said David Miller, a senior analyst at B. Riley & Co. “The proliferation of 3D networks had to depend on selling 3D glasses, and no one wanted to buy 3D glasses.”
“The whole problem with 3D TV is it was a solution to a problem consumers didn’t have,” said James McQuivey, a media analyst at Forrester Research.
ESPN and ABC Sports president George Bodenheimer had called 3D a “win for fans” in a statement about the channel’s launch, saying it “puts ESPN at the forefront of the next big advance for TV viewing.”
Unfortunately, it was a big advance nobody really watched. “Due to limited viewer adoption of 3D services to the home, ESPN is discontinuing ESPN 3D,” spokeswoman Katina Arnold said via email.
“Nobody knows more about sports in 3D than ESPN, and we will be ready to provide the service to fans if or when 3D does take off,” she said.
Analysts say that’s unlikely. While movies in 3D have become popular, the technology never got popular enough to make the transition from the multiplex to the living room. “I felt like sports had the best chance,” said Ben Arnold, director and industry analyst at the NPD Group. “It’s probably just a broader symptom of consumers just not being interested in 3D.”
Although sales of 3D TVs are on the rise, he called this a “false positive.” More manufacturers are throwing in 3D capability on smaller and cheaper sets, but people aren’t using the feature. In just two years, NPD research found that the number of people interested in buying 3D TVs within six months dropped by 10 percentage points, down to 14 percent.
3D also debuted in a lackluster economy when prices of conventional flat-screen TVs were plunging. Many consumers went for big and cheap rather than paying a premium for a relatively unknown technology.
And the complexity of that technology isn’t winning 3D TV many fans either. In an era where media consumption is getting easier and more intuitive, 3D TV isn’t. It has a more narrow viewing range than conventional flat-screen TV and requires the viewer to sit upright (no napping on the couch on game day). Plus, people hate wearing the glasses, which can be goofy-looking and uncomfortable.
Nobody seemed to consider how people’s watching habits, particularly with sports, clashed with the technology’s limitations. For instance, a fan couldn’t just invite a bunch of friends over to watch a game: Everyone would have to have their own pair of glasses, and only a few people would be at an optimal angle to the screen to get a good viewing experience.
“It’s just running against the current of technology today,” McQuivey said. “It started to really make 3D unattractive.”
Tracking down 3D programs also isn’t simple. Arnold pointed out that the delivery of 3D content is fragmented. There isn’t a centralized place where a viewer can go to get access to all of the 3D content available to them.
ESPN 3D’s programming mix also might not have been appealing enough to gain traction, some suggest. “I think they would’ve had a shot if they had NFL games,” said Gary Merson, editor of HDGuru.com.
ESPN 3D featured college sports, extreme sports, soccer and more niche offerings. Without more mainstream events, “You probably won’t attract large-enough of an audience to make it worthwhile,” said Eric Wold, an analyst at B. Riley & Co. The cost to film in 3D is incrementally higher because it takes additional cameras and crew, which means a bigger audience — not a smaller one — is necessary to recoup the additional cost.
ESPN wouldn’t say how much parent company The Walt Disney Company invested in ESPN 3D, but Miller speculated it might be enough to trigger a write-down.
The future of at-home 3D programming looks fuzzy, and even special glasses aren’t going to bring that picture into focus. “I don’t have high hopes for consumers adopting it,” NPD’s Arnold said.
From The Next Woman Magazine by Rachael Clohesy on 5/30/13
“There is a baseline opposition to any technological advancement – tune it out.”
Jim Chabin, Chairman of the International 3D Society, quote from the 3D Creative Summit in London, March 27th 2013.
Our first contact with 3D was through the delivery of the evaluation trials for an EU project called Saracen. This has designed and developed a peer-to-peer 3D video streaming platform. Our role was to deliver trials of the platform with participants aged between 15-25 years. This group generally adopts new technology more quickly than other age groups.
In order to encourage engagement in the trials we offered free video production training in 2D and 3D. This is what we do, and we know that it is a great hook as these skills provide an ‘edge’ in any tight labour market.
This work resulted in our invitation to speak at the first 3D Creative Summit in London at the British Film Institute. Other panelists included Ang Lee, Richard Attenborough and 3D creators from the Life of Pi and The Hobbit.
However, now that we are skilled in training people to make short 3D content as part of a ‘User Generated Content’ offer there is no looking back. This is a growth industry with an exciting future. There are many people who disagree and dislike this new medium.
Through delivering grass roots 3D training to young people on the brink of their film careers, we know that this group engages with 3D and sees it as an enhancement to their story.
Growth of 3D
In order to back up my claims about the future of 3D you need some stats! Some of this information was taken from Jim Chabin’s speech at the 3D Creative Summit in London in March 2013.
+ The term “3D” is googled approximately 8 billion times per month.
+ In 2012 there were 37 3D films released, from the sublime (Life of Pi) to the ridiculous (Piranha 3DD).
+ 40 3D films will be screened in 2013 (I wait in anticipation for the Great Gatsby).
+ 3D TV Sales accounted for one third of all TVs bought in the UK in 2012 (source BBC online, March 2013).
+ In the US it is estimated that there will be 61 million 3D TVs in homes by 2016 (source:CEA).
+ Evidence of theatrical success is illustrated by the $8 billion+ in takings from 3D films.
+ Avatar is the biggest grossing film of all time: $278 billion.
+ Obama’s State of the Union address was also filmed in 3D.
+ The above figures certainly indicate that the 3D market is expanding but it’s not only in films.
Stereography, which is the depiction or representation of three-dimensional objects by projection onto a two-dimensional surface, lies at the heart of 3D film.
It is also used in a number of other industries including astronomy and astro-physics, embryology, military strategy and training, atomic chemistry and physics and many more.
For those of you (and there are many) who do not like 3D, or the extra costs associated with it (the glasses), the technology is improving.
We are entering the dawn of 3D TVs with no glasses. 4K TVs are ultra-high definition (four times the definition of HD) and 8K TVs are currently being developed. They do not replace 3D TVs but they can produce a better image. They are also a precursor to autostereo TV which is TV where you do not need glasses. At this point 3D TV will be better to view at home not only because of the lack of need for glasses (who wants to watch their favourite show with glasses on – this is after all a communal event?), but also because these TVs will allow you to sit anywhere in the room. Currently the best place to sit to enjoy 3D is right in the centre and at least a few feet away from the screen (tip for when you go to the cinema).
Our Experience
We have produced over 200 short films with over 2,000 people across the UK so were interested to see how incorporating 3D would affect the content that we were producing. As part of the Saracen project we worked with five small groups to produce 3D short films. At first we were worried that the groups would want to produce gimmicky films with explosions and objects flying out into the audience’s eyes but we quickly learned that the groups were approaching this new technology with a much more discerning eye. In fact each of the five groups wanted to find a way to incorporate the 3D element into their film to enhance their storytelling rather than shock the audience.
The outcome was a set of beautifully crafted films ranging from a film about transgendered youths to a documentary about breakdancing.
Young people are used to working with new technology and enjoy the challenge of creating cutting edge media. They all watch 3D films at the cinema and play 3D computer games – 3D isn’t that new or scary to them and as a result they can incorporate it in a wonderful way into the content that they are making. They don’t see 3D as a passing phase but another medium available to them to use and create the type of films that they want to watch – they just need access to the tools that will allow them to do so.
Tips
We have now run two 3D film-making projects (Saracen and the BFI Film Academy) and have learnt lots about the best way to produce short 3D films on a budget. Here are our top 3 tips:
Consider where you will be screening your work.
Different screen sizes mean shooting your subjects using different measurements. It is important to measure the distance from your camera to your subject and furthest object. The measurements can then be easily checked and altered using one of many 3D apps (we used 3DST.) The measurements will be different depending on whether you are shooting for a tablet screen, a computer, a TV or a cinema screen. Think about where you will be screening your work. We encouraged all the groups we worked with to shoot for the big screen as it gives them more opportunities to enter their work into the growing number of 3D festivals and therefore gain a wider audience.
Work with your limitations not against them.
Shooting 3D on a budget comes with huge restrictions. Most film-makers rely on beautiful close-ups to help them tell their stories. This can be hugely difficult using simply the 3D equipment that is available on the high street. Instead find different ways to tell the story and don’t try and replicate all the shots that you would use while shooting 2D. It is a new technology so find new ways to use it.
Create your own 3D language.
Even the experts are still finding out what works and what doesn’t. While at the 3D creative summit we were lucky enough to hear Oscar winning director Ang Lee (Life of Pi) talk about learning to use 3D. He spoke openly about what it is like shooting in 3D for the first time and had some great advice for those who are considering starting to experiment, “3D was like learning to swim …jump in and do it – build your own language.”
Next Steps
This is new territory for us and we plan to maximise our opportunities. There is a need for 3D content and we are developing plans to fill those gaps. We are combining our years of experience as film trainers, arts facilitators and youth leaders to engage the next generation of film talent with this new technology.
Rachael Clohesy is the co-founder, with Alison Wright, of VividEcho, a company providing training on how to produce short videos, launched in 2013. Rachael has 15 years experience in project management, brand development, fundraising, PR, events management and research. In 2007 she co-founded and became the CEO of a small arts charity which was supported by the Arts Council. Two years later she became the youth and community engagement manager at independent production company CTVC, managing a large scale film training project, before launching her current venture.
From Tech2 India on 4/30/13 by Nikhil Subramaniam
Micromax has announced its first 3D smartphone, the A115 Canvas 3D, adding one more handset to the popular Canvas family. You won’t require any special glasses to view 3D content on the phone. We do not have the entire specification sheet yet, but from what we know, the A115 looks like it is a capable performer.
The Canvas 3D is powered by an unnamed 1GHz dual-core processor and runs Android 4.1.2 Jelly Bean. There’s 512MB of RAM under the hood as well. The 3D content will be displayed on a 5-inch screen with a WVGA resolution (800 x 480 pixels).
The A115 Canvas 3D will be available in black and white
Packed with a 2000 mAh battery, the phone is said to have a talk-time of 4.5 hours. Unfortunately, you won’t be able to shoot any cool 3D images or videos with the phone. It looks like there’s just a lone 5-megapixel rear camera with auto-focus. The front-facing camera is a 0.3-megapixel unit. Connectivity-wise, everything seems to be in place thanks to Wi-Fi support and Bluetooth 4.0.
The company says that you can also convert regular pictures into the 3D picture format. The phone comes with a special ‘Micromax 3D Space’ that has a collection of 3D videos as well as pre-loaded 3D games.
From Smithsonian’s “Surprising Science” by Joseph Stromberg on 3/20/13
The new technology can be packed into a tiny piece of glass, requires no glasses and can project images and video in full color. Image via Nature/Fattal et. al.
Most of the research that goes into producing cutting-edge commercial technology goes on in corporate R&D departments, away from the public eye. Every so often, though, some of that work gets published in a scientific journal, giving us a sneak preview of the capabilities we might see in our smart phones and devices in the years to come.
That’s certainly the case with a study in week’s issue of Nature, in which researchers from Hewlett-Packard detail their new invention: A mini 3D display that can be installed in a millimeter-thick piece of glass and works without special glasses. The system, the researchers say, can project static images or video in a range of colors.
In other words, when you buy a phone (if we’re still calling them “phones”) in ten or twenty years from now, chances are good that it will be equipped with a 3D system like this one, allowing you to see textures and depths-of-view as if you were in the scene rather than through holding a device in your hand.
The system works, as all 3D displays do, by sending a different image to each of our eyes, utilizing the fact that each of our eyes receiving a slightly different view of our surroundings is responsible for the fact that we see the world in 3D in the first place. But this display’s means of accomplishing the feat—and thereby simulating, to our brain, an image with depth—is different from previous ones.
Glasses-based 3D systems use various filtering mechanisms to show each of our eyes a different view. Some have shutters that rapidly open and close for each eye, and are synced with alternating images presented on the screen that are intended for one eye or another. A simpler, more common system (that you’re probably familiar with if you’ve gone to see a 3D movie) involve a pair of glasses with a blue lens and a red one, which cause two differently colored images on the screen to each reach one eye.
The illusion of 3 dimensions is a result of light scattered in many directions, so each of the viewer’s eyes see a different image no matter where they’re situated (part C). Image via Nature/Dodgson
This new display, though, works without glasses, encoding the mechanism in the screen itself. It does this by reflecting light (produced along its edges) with specialized “grated pixels” that project light in several different directions, rather than straight to the eye. When you look at a screen tiled with grated pixels, each of your eyes sees a slightly different image that’s been projected from the screen, creating the illusion of depth no matter where you stand.
But the technology’s real trick is creating this illusion for a relatively broad viewing angle—in this case, one that’s 90 degrees wide. The Nintendo 3DS, by contrast, uses the same pixel-directed technique, but just sends out light in two directions, so it only works for a user located a particular distance from the machine, directly in the center, where the two beams of light intersect (as in part A of the image to the right). Because the 3DS is a gaming device, this isn’t much of a problem, because users typically hold it right in front of them at arm’s length when they play.
The new HP display, though, is intended to someday be part of smartphones and tablets, so the researchers wanted to create a 3D projection that multiple viewers can crowd around and see from a variety of angles. They did this by using grated pixels that can split light in 14 different directions, instead of merely two.
As a result, differently-directed beams of light intersect at a number of spots in front of the display, so a user can be located nearly anywhere in front of it and still have each eye see a different image—and thus get the 3D illusion (as in part C of the image). The current technology does still leave some blind spots, but the researchers say they plan to increase the number of light directions from 14 to 64 in the future, further improving the amount of viewing angles saturated by the display.
Of course, this is a proof-of-concept, not a technology ready for immediate industrial application, so it’ll probably be a little while before we start to see this sort of 3D display popping up in devices on the market. Still, the technology gives us a hint of what researchers are working on for the future—and suggests that R2-D2′s 3D hologram projector isn’t so far-fetched after all.
From Deadline.com by Nikke Finke on 3/24/13
It shaped up as a hot weekend with an extra-strength Saturday and 3 films scoring $20M-plus this weekend. An estimated 13% of K-12 were on school break for the start of the Passover/Easter holidays so family fare ruled. Specifically, DreamWorks Animation‘s PG pre-historic newcomer The Croods (4,046 theaters, including over 3,000 in 3D) led the domestic box office with the widest release. It grossed $11.6M Friday and went up +60% because of the Saturday kiddue bump to $18.5M for a $44M weekend opening. Its ‘A’ CinemaScore from audiences obviously helped word of mouth despite only 64% positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes endangering its multiple. Pic cost $135M. Rival studios point out this is one of the softest of March openers from DreamWorks Animation and believe it could max out around $155M domestic. (2010′s How To Train Your Dragon also debuted to $43M and went on to make $217M all in – but its reviews were 98% positive.) Fact is that in recent years DWA’s films are badly trailing Pixar’s in terms of domestic openings and multiples – and Wall Street is taking note and depressing the share price of this publicly held company. (Katzenberg should blame himself: he personally lobbied theaters to drive up the price of 3D tickets beyond what parents are willing to pay now after the technology’s novelty wore off.)
Distributor Twentieth Century Fox claims this is a “strong opening” for a non-sequel animated film and believe The Croods will really toon up for the next two weeks when kids are on vacation everywhere. Then again, this is the first DWA release by Fox after Jeffrey Katzenberg switched distribution from Paramount so all the execs are relentlessly upbeat. “Terrific opening for DreamWorks Animation/Fox and the beginning of a great partnership,” one suit gushed. Film isn’t exactly The Flintstones in terms of comedic campiness for animation, but TV ads succeeded in making this pic look pleasantly palatable to parents and kids. Directed by Chris Sanders & Kirk DeMicco, and produced by Kristine Belson and Jane Hartwell, voice cast includes Nic Cage, Emma Stone, and Ryan Reynolds none of whom are considered marquee names these days. About 25 overseas markets opened for previews last weekend but only 5 of the top markets (UK, Russia, Germany, Brazil, Mexico). Rival studios claim it’s telling that Fox kept the grosses quiet. But the studio says The Croods will add a big number this weekend to the $16M already in the international till.
Peter Schlessel’s FilmDistrict enjoyed its biggest distribution opening yet with #2 Antoine Fuqua’s R-rated action thriller Olympus Has Fallen (3,098 theaters). It grossed $10M Friday and $12.8M Saturday for $30.8M its first weekend. Pic scored an ‘A-’ with audiences which helped word of mouth. That’s a relief because the movie’s cost of $70M is one of the bigger budgets this small indiefilm company has ever released. Plot of the White House takeover by terrorists is newly plausible considering sequester spending cuts meant the U.S. government couldn’t even afford White House tours anymore because of Secret Service staff shortages. No surprise that the film did publicity at the recent CPAC convention for conservative politicos. FilmDistrict acquired distrib rights from Avi Lerner’s Millennium Films which produced and financed. The film was tracking strongest with males ages 18-plus and overperformed its expected high teens. Director and producer Fuqua with Mark Gill assembled a solid cast of Gerard Butler (who also produced and desperately needed a box office hit), Morgan Freeman, Aaron Eckhart, Angela Bassett, Melissa Leo, Ashley Judd, Robert Forster and Rick Yune for the script by credited writers Creighton Rothenberger and Katrin Benedikt.
Disney’s holdover Oz The Great And Powerful (3,805 theaters) is still going strong at #3 with $5.7M Friday and a +80% Saturday kiddie bump of $10.2M for another $23M through Sunday and $178.5M domestic cume. And #4 is Sony/TriStar’s holdover pickup The Call (2,507 theaters) with $9M weekend (-47% from a week ago).
Right now for #5 is Focus Features’ Tina Fey/Paul Rudd new low-budget comedy Admission (2,160 theaters) which grossed $2M Friday and $2.8M Saturday for as soft as $6.6M this weekend. Audiences gave it a mediocre ‘B-’ CinemaScore which didn’t help. Oh, Tina, Tina, Tina. You’re the funniest woman on the small screen in my opinion. But Red States may be holding a grudge over your SNL Sarah Palin impressions. And surely you can do better on the big screen than pairing with Paul since he’s box office poison. Pic underperformed studio expectations and barely met the low end of tracking. Even Focus admits grosses are soft despite its middling release and modest $13M cost. Because it’s a $30M-plus P&A pricetag just to open any pic these days. Focus saw a weekend that not only starts the waiting period for college acceptance letters but also had few moviegoing options for adult females aged 25+. ”There is also an opportunity to play well through the next few weekends as the older end of our female target 35+ also tends to patronize films in the 2nd and 3rd weeks of release,” a Focus exec told me. Hard to believe this convoluted script based on the Jean Hanff Korelitz novel adapted by credited screenwriter Karen Croner was so clumsily directed by one of my favorites, Oscar nominee Paul Weitz (About A Boy, In Good Company) who also produced. Low-brow TV ads didn’t help the pic any by failing to hint at moments of poignancy no matter how misplaced. Meanwhile Fey, Weitz, and everything else about the film were tagged with poor reviews.
And #6 is A24′s Spring Breakers (1,104 theaters) grossed a strong $1.9M Friday and $1.6M Saturday with $4.5M for the weekend in expanded but still small release. Quirky yet iconoclastic writer and director Harmony Korine’s R-rated hallucinatory dramedy stars James Franco with Disney/ABC Family princesses trying to shed their virginal images – Selena Gomez, Ashley Benson and Vanessa Hudgens – all with Korine’s wife Rachel hellbent on a Florida vacation to the dark side. It scored the top limited opening of 2013 last weekend based on per screen averages from 3 theaters in NYC and LA. But it’s no arthouse film nor Beach Blanket Bingo. Instead this cheaply made ($2M cost) seamy sexploitation encouraging drinking and drugs and violence is from the distribution outfit backed by Guggenheim Partners which owns The Hollywood Reporter and made sure the celebrity sheet cravenly hyped every angle of the lurid film and its cast and their SXSW appearance and theatrical opening. A24 acquired domestic rights from Annapurna Pictures whose Megan Ellison tellingly didn’t take a producer credit. (Probably because she was too embarrassed.) Love Streams Agnes B Productions and Muse Productions financed and produced.
The weekend is way down (-33%) from last year because the Top Ten total won’t even equal the $152.5M opening of The Hunger Games. Based on weekend estimates:
1. The Croods (DreamWorks Animation/Fox) NEW [Runs 4,046] PG
Friday $11.6M, Saturday $18.5M, Weekend $44.0M
2. Olympus Has Fallen (FilmDistrict) NEW (Runs 3,098] R
Friday $10.0M, Saturday $12.8M, Weekend $30.8M
3. Oz The Great and Powerful (Disney) Week 3 [Runs 3,805] PG
Friday $5.7M, Saturday $10.2M, Weekend $23.0M, Cume $178.5M
4. The Call (TriStar/Sony) Week 2 [Runs 2,507] R
Friday $2.6M, Saturday$4.0M , Weekend $9.1M (-47%), Cume $31.3M
5. Admission (Focus Features) NEW [Runs 2,160] PG13
Friday $2.0M, Saturday $2.8M, Weekend $6.6M
6. Spring Breakers (A24) Week 2 [Runs 1,104] R
Friday $1.9M, Saturday $1.6M, Weekend $4.5M, Cume $5.0M
7. The Incredible Burt Wonderstone (Warner Bros) Week 2 [Runs 3,160] PG13
Friday $1.3M, Saturday $1.9M, Weekend $4.4M, Cume $17.4M
8. Jack The Giant Slayer (Warner Bros) Week 4 [Runs 2,560] PG13
Friday $765K, Saturday $1.4M, Weekend $3.0M, Cume $59.1M
9. Identity Thief (Universal) Week 7 [Runs 2,166] R
Friday $760K, Saturday $1.2M, Weekend $2.6M, Cume $127.8M
10. Snitch (Summit/Lionsgate) Week 5 [Runs 1,807] PG13
Friday $545K, Saturday $910K, Weekend $1.9M, Cume $40.4M
From FierceWireless by Phil Goldstein on 3/7/13
A little more than two years ago, at Mobile World Congress 2011, LG Electronics took the wraps off the LG Optimus 3D, which, as LG’s promotional material put it, was “a stunning super-smartphone with unparalleled 3D performance.” The phone was released at the height of the consumer frenzy around 3D TVs, which came a little more than a year after 3D film Avatar broke box office records, spurring a rush of 3D films and interest in the technology.
Yet two years later, the Optimus 3D looks less like a herald for an era of 3D smartphones and more like a cautionary tale of carriers and OEMs putting too much emphasis too soon on a still-developing technology. Other 3D smartphones followed, including HTC’s Evo 3D, yet analysts and even carrier and handset representatives agree that the 3D content ecosystem was not strong enough to support continued development of 3D phones.
“Wide 3D acceptance is still some years away,” said Dr. Henry Nho, LG’s chief research engineer and the lead engineer on its Optimus 3D and Optimus 3D Max phones.
The 3D push
The impetus behind including 3D screen and video capture technology in smartphones had less to do with the 3D ecosystem and more to do with the expanding capabilities of smartphones, especially the advent of dual-core mobile processors in 2010.
“I remember sitting in a meeting, summer of 2010, where both the engineering and product planning teams were present, and we were literally going through a list of ‘exotic’ things that we wanted to do but [had never been] on a smartphone,” Nho said. He also noted that the company’s development of its “NOVA” display made 3D on a smartphone possible because LG had worked to get the display to be bright enough.
 |
| HTC Evo 3D |
Similarly, work on the HTC Evo 3D began in early 2010, according to Trevor Van Norman, Sprint Nextel’s (NYSE:S) director of product marketing. He said Sprint and HTC, which declined to comment for this article, got together “to define the initial concept as part of our regular portfolio planning process.” He said the companies wanted to build on the success of the Evo 4G, which Sprint launched in June 2010 to record sales. “So there was an interest in delivering super phone capabilities and improve on the original (better processor, display, battery, etc.),” he said.
Carriers seek differentiation
Above all, the carriers were seeking differentiation. Sprint announced its support for the Evo 3D in March 2011 and launched the gadget in June, around the same time that AT&T Mobility (NYSE:T) threw its support behind the Optimus 3D, which it rebranded as the LG Thrill 4G.
Van Norman said Sprint “wanted to differentiate in the market with features that were relevant and evolutionary for the mobile space, and 3D was a differentiator.” He also noted that the carrier wanted to tack onto the evolution of the home media market, which was filling up with 3D TVs from LG, Samsung Electronics, Sony, Toshiba and others.
“We really did our research, studying key market trends and how to leverage those to differentiate Sprint in the marketplace,” Van Norman said. “3D was a trend the marketplace was seeing everywhere from movie theaters, television shows and even sporting events so we wanted to leverage this trend and in fact accelerate it.”
The Evo 3D was the first device in the United States to sport a qHD 3D display, delivering a “glasses-free” 3D viewing experience. The phone captured 3D video in 720p via dual 5-megapixel cameras, and it was able to play it back in 1080p. Sprint cited these potential use cases for the Evo 3D’s screen and 3D capture technology:
– “Real estate agents can create and share 3D virtual tours of homes that let out-of-town buyers ‘walk through’ the house and truly experience the listings before they can see them live;”
– “3D mapping of terrain will help build new and exciting features for navigation, and hikers will be able to get aerial views of the topography of rivers and mountains while in the backcountry;” and
– “Families can ‘relive’ the excitement of their vacation and feel like they are there again.”
AT&T also talked up the LG device’s 3D technology, especially its rear-facing, dual 5-megapixel stereoscopic 3D cameras. AT&T also said the phone would access to a “portfolio” of 3D content, including “preloaded 3D games, the Gameloft 3D Store, preloaded YouTube 3D, access to 3D movies from mSpot and more.”
“While consumer demand for 3D is relatively nascent, LG Thrill 4G both does 3D right and is also a superlative smartphone,” Jeff Bradley, AT&T’s senior vice president of devices, said in a statement at the time. AT&T declined to comment for this article.
AT&T’s first commercial for the LG Thrill 4G.
LG said it was pleased with the response to its 3D smartphones. Nho said that to date LG has sold more than 1 million Optimus 3D smartphones, and more than half a million of the follow-up model, the Optimus 3D Max, which was exclusive to the South Korean market. “Maybe not the next big trend in smartphones, but we were satisfied with these figures,” he said.
Van Norman said the reaction to the Evo 3D from analysts and bloggers was positive–he said they were “very impressed with not only the glasses-free 3D experience but also its form factor, hardware and software.” Indeed, reviews at that time largely bear that out, though some griped about the phone’s battery life and call quality. Van Norman declined to provide sales figures for the Evo 3D.
Despite not reaching eye-popping sales figures, Nho said LG is proud of what it achieved on the Optimus 3D. “Years of expertise in camera technology and vertically integrated business structure enabled us to introduce the world’s first 3D device with our own technology and sell seven digits worth of them,” he said. “I don’t think many companies in this industry could have done what we did.”
Lack of a content ecosystem bites
 |
| LG Optimus 3D |
Indeed, not many companies tried. As this slide show attests, there have only been a handful of viable 3D smartphones outside of the Optimus 3D and Evo 3D, including the Sharp Galapagos 003SH for Japan and the Samsung W960 AMOLED 3D in South Korea. Yet amid a flurry of speculation ahead of the launch of the Galaxy S III in the spring of 2012, Samsung went out of its way to declare that it would not be brining 3D screen technology to its upcoming smartphones.
Why the reticence? The general consensus is that there wasn’t a strong content ecosystem to support the devices.
Current Analysis analyst Avi Greengart noted that the only mobile device with a 3D display that has achieved any level of major commercial success is the Nintendo 3DS. He said the reason the device was successful is because there is a great deal of custom, 3D content for that platform.
“It was seen as a gimmick,” he said, referring to 3D smartphones. “For most of the things you do with the phone it was step backward.”
Reticle Research analyst Ross Rubin also noted the lack of a content ecosystem for 3D phones, especially in terms of games for Android. “You need a virtuous cycle, and that failed to develop,” he said. “There was not strong developer support and there was not broad adoption across high-volume Android handset vendors. The apps didn’t appear, which failed to create demand for Google to build support [for 3D] into Android.”
Sprint’s Van Norman said that the carrier is always focused on software innovation and working with brands to meet its customers’ needs. Right now, he said, Sprint has “not necessarily seen the right products or seen 3D as a critical platform for differentiation currently in the market.” He also cited a weak content ecosystem as a reason for the lack of momentum. “Content developers and studios have been slow to evolve 3D content in television/video, mobile and online,” he said.
“We are continuing to develop new 3D technologies internally but in this business, timing is everything,” LG’s Nho acknowledged. “We’re convinced 3D is here to stay but we were probably too early. We can afford to wait and see how the market develops but right now, the focus is still on processor speed, display resolution and battery life.”
Both Nho and Van Norman said that working on 3D phones showed their respective companies could innovate and that the action helped elevate their brands. Greengart too noted that trial and error is crucial in the mobile industry. “I think you need to do a better job around software and support,” he said.
Subscribers of Google’s Fiber TV service who own a 3D TV and glasses can now opt to watch a couple of new channels in 3D.
Announced yesterday, Google has launched 3net and ESPN3D.
Subscribers to the Google Fiber Gigabit + TV Plan will automatically receive 3net, which will offer documentaries, family entertainment, concerts, lifestyle and cooking shows, and scripted series, all in 3D.
Sports fans who want to catch their favorite teams in 3D can grab ESPN3D for an additional $5 per month with their Gigabit + TV plan. Subscribers can call Google Fiber to sign up for ESPN3D.
Launched last July, Google Fiber TV is offered at an additional cost as part of the company’s Gigabit Internet service. Users can subscribe to the high-speed Internet alone for $70 a month or opt for TV and Internet for $120. A lower-speed Internet service is also available at no monthly cost but with a one-time installation fee of $300.
Google Fiber TV offers an interactive search that lets you track down programs on your TV as well as your DVR. The DVR offers up to 500 hours of storage, all in 1,080p high-definition format. Subscribers can record up to eight shows at a time.
But few people can sign on to Google Fiber at this point. So far the service is limited to just two cities — Kansas City, Kans., and Kansas City, Mo. Three other cities in Kansas and two more in Missouri are next on the list. As such, the service is definitely still in beta mode.
Why offer 3D channels at this point? Google’s head of product management, Larry Yang, said in a blog that such new features will make TV watching a better experience:
We’re committed to making these qualities that you’ve come to expect from Google Fiber TV better and better. And, thanks to the amazing capacity of Fiber, we can also include some new experiences and tools that will make watching TV even cooler. For example, 3D channels.
But I can’t see such a move making Fiber TV that much more appealing.
3D TV adoption has been weak due to the higher cost of the televisions and the inconvenience of wearing 3D glasses. The number of 3D TV owners in Google Fiber’s limited test markets is unlikely to be very high, which begs the question of why Google is going the 3D route.
From the LA Times by Noelene Clark on 3/6/13
A page from “The Joyners in 3D,” by R. J. Ryan and David Marquez. (Archaia)
Young artists looking to break into comics might want to take a page from David Marquez. Based in Austin, Texas, the illustrator is one of the industry’s fastest-rising stars, working alongside veteran writer Brian Michael Bendis on such titles as “Ultimate Spider-Man” and “All-New X-Men” and working in his second graphic novel, “The Joyners in 3D,” after arriving on the comics scene only three years ago.
Soon after college, Marquez got his start as an animator for Richard Linklater’s 2006 rotoscoped film “A Scanner Darkly.” His first graphic novel “Syndrome,” co-written by Daniel Quantz and R.J. Ryan, was released by indie publisher Archaia Entertainment in 2010, soon followed by “Days Missing Vol. 2: Kestus” in 2011. His work earned him a nomination for the Russ Manning Most Promising Newcomer award, given out each year at the prestigious Eisner Awards, and drew the attention of Marvel Comics.
Marquez made his big break into superhero comics with Jonathan Hickman’s “Secret Warriors,” soon followed by “Fantastic Four: Season One.” His work on “Ultimate Spider-Man” was widely praised, and he returns to the title this May for a highly publicized story line in which young web-slinger Miles Morales is rumored to be giving up his super identity. In the meantime, Marquez’s “All-New X-Men” run wraps up with issue No. 8. The comic, which features the first meeting of the original X-Men and the Avengers, hits stores today.
Hero Complex caught up with Marquez to talk about “Ultimate Spider-Man,” “All-New X-Men” and “The Joyners in 3D,” which reunites Marquez and his “Syndrome” collaborator R.J. Ryan.
HC: Can you tell us a little about how you got your start in the industry? Did you study art in school?
DM: I graduated about 10 years ago. I actually went to [the University of Texas at Austin] on an academic scholarship. I had planned originally to go into teaching. I was going to go to grad school to get a Ph.D. in either political science or history, because I majored in history and government. And while applying for grad school — I got into a few — I realized that it wasn’t really what I had expected it to be in terms of the life of being a grad student. So I delved back and was looking to be a history teacher and tried out on a whim for an animation position, because I’d always drawn. And I got the animation position on “A Scanner Darkly,” which was made here in town, and that kind of converted me to an art career.
HC: Had you received any formal training?
DM: I took some art classes in high school and some summer classes when I was in elementary and middle school, but with the exception of those, no. I’ve always been drawing. If you go back and look at all my college notebooks. They start off all nice and cleanly organized, but then they become just sketchbooks after the first or second week.
HC: How did you begin working with R. J. Ryan, your collaborator on “The Joyners in 3D”?
DM: We became friends during “Syndrome,” during the production of that book. I had been trying to break into comics since right after college when I was working on “A Scanner Darkly”. That was 2005-ish. I had been going to conventions and not really making much headway, and I was practicing at home during my time off from work. And towards the end of 2008, beginning of 2009, I had been posting my art online on these various discussion forums where a lot of these burgeoning talents congregate, and R.J. — who goes by Josh with friends — came across own of my drawings, brought it to the guys at Archaia and Fantasy Prone and sold them to me basically as the artist, having never spoken to me or anything, but just based on this one Batman sketch that I had done that he thought spoke well to whatever potential talent I had. … The guys who were going to be paying for the book, they approached me, and then he and I started working together on “Syndrome” with another writer, Daniel Quantz. The three of us became friends.
HC: So how did “The Joyners in 3D” come about?
DM: This has been a long-developing passion project. … Josh and I as we became really close friends started talking about doing more work together. And we bantered around a half dozen potential projects, and we settled on “Joyners.” Even when we knew that this was the story we wanted to tell, it developed and change quite a bit from that original seed of an idea about a scientist and his family, essentially. It started becoming much more of a deep, dark family drama, and moving to the idea of drawing in a very different style than in my traditional, mainstream work. … [It’s] the story of a family of the future falling apart. It’s very much riffing on the concept of “The Jetsons,” even in terms of the names of the characters. The patriarch of the family is George Joyner. And then he has his wife and his kids, and he is basically the chief technology officer of a large, Apple-computer style company in 2060s Monterey, Calif. We’re playing pretty strongly with a lot of visual motifs as well as the Jetsons-style ’60s idealized future. We have flying cars and cities and buildings in the sky and all that kind of stuff. But we’re also somewhat satirizing the idea of utopia, in a sense that yeah, you have a future where everything is bright and clean and shiny, we found the solution to pollution and poverty and hunger and all these things, but ultimately, humans are still flawed. So in addition to just kind of playing with the idea of a family in the future, there’s also an Icarus style hubris story, where ultimately George and his whole family’s flaws come back, and they have to pay for what they’ve done.
HC: Why 3D?
DM: The 3D came pretty early one, but the impact of doing it in 3D changed the nature of the project pretty dramatically. … I think Josh was the one who first brought it up. It was kind of during the first wave, the first year or two of 3D coming back and becoming a bit of a fad in film. “Avatar” had come out, and all of that. Josh had been having conversations with a producer friend who’d worked on the 3D “Jackass” movie, of all things. There’s definitely a difference between 3D done well and 3D done poorly in film, and I think it’s pretty obvious to see when you’re comparing the two, and it got him thinking about the lack of ambitious 3D in comics. I’m not going to say there’s none, but in general, 3D has been a gimmick 99-point-whatever-percent of the time with comics, at least recently, with little thought into how to use it in an innovative fashion, or how to integrate more into the overall storytelling and narrative, and not just be an excuse to have a dude punching through the page at you.
HC: So you do all of your own 3D rendering?
DM: I do, and that was a decision that was made fairly early on, but at first we weren’t sure how we were going to tackle the technical aspect of doing the 3D. There are number of people who will do the conversions … but in doing the research on 3D, and being a bit of a control freak, I decided I wanted to tackle that myself, if nothing else than for just the technical challenge of learning how to do it. And also being a bit of a control freak, I liked the idea of — if the purpose of doing the book in 3D is really to marry the narrative with the 3D, just having the 3D help tell the narrative, help sell the narrative, the more control I had over how the 3D looked, the happier I think I would be in the overall execution and the overall telling of the story.
HC: Did it make your work as an artist a more involved process?
DM: For my mainstream work, I work primarily digitally. Not exclusively, but primarily. And the fact that I have this digital work flow allows me a lot more freedom in working on any given page. It also allows me then to cater the art as I’m producing it to the 3D conversion process which happens at the end. As a very simple example, when I’m drawing, I typically work in layers. So I always have the foreground, the middle ground and the background separated out from each other. On a normal page, that means if I need to change someone’s clothes, or I drew the hand wrong, or something, I can edit that one aspect of the page without messing up the background or anything else in that panel. So working in 3D, it’s very simple then to take those layers and then start using those to sell the 3D effect and to move into that step of the process since they’re already separated out.
HC: Meanwhile, with Marvel, the response to your work on the Ultimate comics has been so positive.
DM: It’s been really, really rewarding. While I’ve been working in comics for three or four years, I’ve really only been in front of a decently sized audience for about a year now. And at that point, no one knew who I was, and there was a lot of skepticism about me coming on following a very successful and well-received artist in Sara Pichelli. And it’s been very rewarding that people’s skepticism has been overcome, and they seem to be pretty receptive now to my art.
HC: When you came on after Sara, you were basically an unknown name, and there was a lot of skeptical chatter on comics blogs. Did you feel a lot of pressure taking on such a big title?
DM: Absolutely. I’m still fresh enough that I will Google to see what people have been saying about the work. And considering some of the vitriol people get, I’ve been very fortunate that people in general seem to like it. But it’s a ton of pressure, absolutely. My first project was working with Brian Bendis, who is one of the biggest names in comics, so I knew that he and the rest of the folks in the Ultimates office were taking a chance on me as a fairly untried, youngish artist. There’s pressure to perform, not only because I didn’t want to get bad feedback from them, but also to make sure that I was paying back the investment that they had made in me by offering me such a high-profile project [“Ultimate Spider-Man”]. Originally, I was only going to be on for three issues, but after the first issue, they chose to keep me on considerably longer. I think I was on for nine issues, on my first run of issues. I’m going back and drawing more of it now. And then I’m coming back on for another arc starting with issue 23.
HC: There’s a lot of excitement for that May issue. What can we expect from Miles?
DM: I can say what Brian has said publicly, which is that this takes place after the Venom storyline. Sara Pichelli’s been drawing those four issues., up to issue 22. Something really big happens, leading to the big tease that we’re doing, which is that Miles doesn’t want to be Spider-Man anymore. So I did the cover for 23, which is an homage to John Romita‘s famous scene of Spider-Man dropping the costume in the trash can. What Brian has said, and I can say it as well, is there’s a time jump. Issue 22 happens, really big impact on Miles’ life, and then a considerable amount of time will pass before 23 starts. So we’re picking up after x amount of time, seeing all these changes that have taken place with him and with his life, his whole world completely shaken by what happened, and him still trying to pick up the pieces.
“Ultimate Spider-Man” artist David Marquez pays homage to John Romita’s iconic splash page in Stan Lee’s 1967 “Amazing Spider-Man” No. 50. (Marvel Comics)
HC: Peter Parker is such an iconic character that fans can recognize the same Spidey movements and poses from artist to artist. Did you try to break away from those poses for Miles?
DM: It was a challenge, certainly. One of the earliest conversations I had with Brian Bendis as I was coming onto the project was he definitely had in mind Miles moving very differently. And that’s something you saw in Sara’s work, and I definitely tried to push pretty strongly in my own. And it comes down to exactly what you’re saying: Peter Parker is Peter Parker, and we all kind of know what Spider-Man looks like. But Miles is a completely different character. He’s younger, I think he’s 13 when he first starts out being Spider-Man, whereas Peter was like 15. And so his body is sized differently, and he doesn’t have the training Peter has, either, or just the experience. We always wanted him to seem a little bit out of control. He’s patterning himself after watching all these videos of Peter, and trying to learn how to be Spider-Man based on that research. But he’s figuring it out in these early adventures. And hopefully he always looked a little bit like you weren’t quite sure if he’d land properly or not.
HC: With that time jump, are you going to have to age him up for the next one?
DM: He will be older. I can’t say how much older, but enough time will have passed that people will notice, definitely.
HC: You’re getting to do the same kind of thing in “All-New X-Men” — drawing both adult versions and younger versions of these characters.
DM: Yeah, I mean I never would have expected myself as I kind of started developing as an artist as somebody who would enjoy drawing teenagers so much. It’s kind of become one of the things that I do. People seem to be responding pretty well to the “X-Men” work that the teenagers look like teenagers, which is something that I put a lot of effort, wanting to make sure that when you look at the younger Angel and the older Angel standing side by side, it isn’t just the design of the wings that differentiates them. The younger ones have a little more baby fat in their face, or just softer features or just look younger. Individual characteristics lead to that. And drawing Miles as well — I’ve started drawing issue 23 now — it’s so much fun drawing him and the cast, because teenagers are so emotive, and they wear everything on their sleeve, even when they think they’re trying to hide what’s going on, whereas adults can be moody and withdrawn. If a kid is moody and withdrawn, they’re acting out. It’s a whole lot of fun.
A page from “All-New X-Men” No. 8, by Brian Michael Bendis with art by David Marquez. (Marvel Comics)
HC: Was there anything you learned doing “Ultimate Spider-Man” that you took with you to “All-New X-Men”?
DM: Absolutely. I think I grew a whole lot as an artist moving from “Fantastic Four” Season 1, which was my project before “Ultimate Spider-Man,” to the end to my first run of issues. I’m not sure that I can articulate in details what those changes wore, but I think I had a much stronger grasp of composition and layout in general. … In general when doing art or any kind of craft, you learn the rules so you can perform it well. At a certain point, though, you start having fun by breaking the rules in certain ways, and seeing what the results are, having the foundation laid down. And I think by the time I started on “All New X-Men,” I was willing to experiment in new ways with my art, whether that’s the way I compose a page, the angles that I choose when drawing a panel, even just little stylistic flairs in terms of the way I draw the characters. And working with a completely new cast with the X-Men as opposed to the Spider-Man cast, it gave me an opportunity to explore drawing in different ways and rendering in different ways and composing in different ways.
HC: Do you see your three issues on “All New X-Men” expanding into more, the same way it did with “Ultimate Spider-Man”?
DM: I mean down the line, perhaps, and I’d definitely love to work on that book some more, but for the time being, I’m back on “Spider-Man” for another substantial run. I’m not sure what the total number will be, but for the short term, the majority of this year, I’ll be drawing “Spider-Man.”
From TechRadar by Patrick Goss on 3/5/13
Sky 3D – heading towards 500,000 UK homes
Sky 3D has been the UK’s only dedicated 3D television channel since its launch in 2010 and TechRadar caught up with Sky 3D head John Cassy as Formula 1 was given the 3D treatment in a one-off experiment.
Cassy – a former journalist who previously headed up Sky Arts – talked extensively about the progress of 3D, the coming of UHD television and the growing role of on-demand.
TechRadar: Can you update us on how Sky 3D has progressed since its launch a few years ago?
Cassy: We’re in very good shape really. We went on air in October 2010 and since then we have grown very well, if you look at where the launch of HD was at this stage in its life, we’re not far away. If you were to speculate at the number of homes that have 3D, the figure that often surfaces [400k] is about right.
And how many of those homes are actually watching 3D?
Cassy: It’s driven by events as much as anything. We’ve evolved our strategy to focus on the key events so, as an example, Sunday [had] F1 testing, then over to the North London derby and then Got to Dance – the Sky One’s reality show – that’s three different big shows, all live and all in 3D.
And all different audiences as well, we’d imagine.
Cassy: They are distinctive enough. Movies are one of the other key areas and we’ve had a series of landmark documentaries voiced by Sir David Attenborough like the Penguin King, Meerkats 3D and Galapagos 3D. The latter did very well for us in 3D and it’s one of the special treats.
Meerkats good in 3D but not at noticing cameras
It’s value add for your audience as much as anything, isn’t it?
Cassy: The thing is, at Sky we are very aware that people choose if they want to be one of our customers, and we’ve got to basically make sure we are always giving them value and 3D is one of a number of ways we can give them value. When we talk to them they love the 3D experience and they would like the chance to see something in a completely different way; Formula 1 is another illustration of this.
TechRadar has been following Sky 3D since that very first journalist briefing, what does the addition of Formula 1 bring for the sport and for the technology?
Cassy: The Formula is very much a one-off, it’s a chance to do something we are all very excited to try. Formula 1 management have been great in enabling this to happen. I’m interested to see it myself. What we’ve done in 3D is we have tried to pick out the big interesting events, like the Ryder Cup where we partnered with Cameron Pace, James Cameron’s company. We did a few days of coverage there and, not only is golf amazing in 3D, but the Europeans staged one of the greatest comebacks ever. We hope that [Formula 1 in 3D] will offer an interesting new way of watching.
John Cassey with Anthony Davidson at the 3D F1 event
One of the big trends in the last few years is 4K and Ultra HD. Sky was a pioneer of HD and 3D in the UK, can we expect to see that kind of step up to UHD?
Cassy: From our point of view, Sky always has been, and we hope always will be, at the front of TV innovation in the UK. If you look at what drives TV development, it’s better picture and better sound, so we went from silent and black-and-white, to sound and black-and-white, to colour, to digital, to HD and now 3D and so there will be future technologies. We have a watching brief on Ultra HD and 4K. Actually what we have been doing, the Attenborough shows have all been filmed in 4K – and in some cases 5K – so they have been captured and future-proofed in a sense, as far as we can. But we’re playing around with it.
And UHD obviously has some real benefits for 3D as well…
Cassy: There are very clear benefits that 4K gives 3D. The resolution is better and also it could help in glasses-free 3D because it enables that whole resolution and picture quality.
Glasses-free 3d – a matter of if and not when
And have you actually seen a glasses free 3D television that impresses you?
Cassy: I have, but it’s under NDA so I can’t talk about it! For my mind, high quality glasses-free TV at a price that the average house can afford is a matter of when and not if. It’s going to happen, it’s just a question of when and the technology we see – we have as much of this as we can – is definitely coming along. It’s a bit of a way off but it’s coming along.
It’s nice from a tech perspective to hear Sky saying it wants to continue being an innovator – how important to you think that’s been to the company?
Cassy: I think it’s really important. From the start when Sky launched there were four channels in the UK and one of the things did was broaden that choice out massively. So it meant you get more sport, if you wanted music channels you could and so on. Consumers wanted more choice and that was one of the first innovations we brought.
We also know that if you operate in a county where the free offering is very strong like the UK you have to make sure that if you ask people to pay, you offer something really amazing. You have to ask ‘what are people looking for now, or might want tomorrow?’ and introduce them in a way that people can continually afford until it’s worth paying for.
A lot of major TV companies, including Sky, are banging the drum about linear television still being dominant for some time to come. Do you feel like the on-demand stuff like Sky Go Extra will start to change our viewing habits?
Cassy: This is getting out of my territory but Sky Go and Sky Go Extra have been very big for us, increasing numbers. The ability to pay for subscription and take it away from your main TV set is really really important.
Dropping back into something more familiar: 3D has been mainly a linear offering so far. Can you see more 3D content appearing on-demand?
Cassy: Yes. We have done a bit of on-demand and we are always looking to give the customers more ways to watch. So we’re looking for opportunities.
423 Digital, Inc. 