A 3D Journey

http://digitalcinemareport.com/thebigpicture_126.html

 

By Nick Dager

May 1, 2008 | Issue #126

 

One of the most highly anticipated movies in years is this summer’s Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D.  The movie, from Walden Media, is the first live-action digitally captured, wide release 3D-feature film in history. I recently interviewed Cary Granat, Walden’s co-CEO about the making  of the movie.

 

Above photo: Left to right, Anita Briem, director Erik Brevig and Brendan Fraser discuss a scene on the set of New Line Cinema’s release, Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D. Photo credit: Sebastian Raymond/New Line Cinema. ©2008 New Line Cinema

 

With such celebrated family films as The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, Bridge to Terabithia and Charlotte’s Web, Walden Media has adopted the latest filmmaking technologies to push the frontiers of the movie-going experience for audiences of all ages. Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D, an action-adventure film was directed by Academy Award-winning visual effects specialist Eric Brevig and stars Brendan Fraser.

 

Almost from the beginning of the project, Granat says, the challenges of making a major movie in digital 3D became clear. Because Journey 3D is platform-agnostic, it can be distributed in several different platforms: Real-D, Dolby 3D, Nu-Vision, dual projector systems and 35mm film.  Each type of venue will require a slightly different “print.”

 

To master the movie, Walden Media built its own digital intermediate suite because it couldn’t find find a facility that could handle 3D-color correction on both eyes simultaneously.  Walden assembled a team of freelance data and color experts and set up a high-powered DI theatre in order to use Scratch software, which was untested and not in mainstream use.  The theatre is now fully equipped to build and color-grade 3D digital cinema in a single pass.  After trial and error, the team was able to maintain the same quality level in mastering that the director had painstakingly achieved during production.  Walden Media now uses Scratch and its new DI suite for all of its productions.  The software has increased the productivity and creative potential throughout the editing process.

 

I spoke with Granat about the challenges.

 

Digital Cinema Report: How did Journey to the Center of the Earth lend itself to 3D?

 

Cary Granat: Journey was one of the first projects put into development at Walden in 2001. The initial idea was to tell the story as if Journey to the Center of the Earth wasn't fiction, but instead a real journey that Jules Verne had taken, or possibly one that a real explorer named Arne Saknumsen had taken that Verne had journaled. Once we hit upon the key hook that the original book was, in fact, based in reality then we knew we had to make it 3D. We wanted to throw the audience into the adventure in a way that was fully immersive and had never been seen before on screen. We wanted 3D to help us turn this adventure to the center of the Earth into a real non-stop ride, not a cheap thrill.

 

DCR: Was it always your plan to shoot the movie in 3D?

 

CG: Yes. In fact, every set piece in the film was conceived as a 3D experience from the beginning. We created a 3D map of the journey itself and then used it as a basis for storyboards, the script, and pre-visualizations of the sequences. The writing process was more difficult because we needed to educate the creatives to re-train their thought process in creating scenes and ideas that would play out in 3D.

 

DCR: What percentage of the movie was shot in 3D?

 

CG: 100 percent.

 

DCR: What was your budget? How much did shooting and posting in 3D add to the overall budget?

 

CG: We don’t disclose production budgets, but shooting and posting in 3D added $1-2 million in production, including the camera package, lighting, bluescreen in 3D, and additional camera crews. Beyond research and development, it added about 30-35 percent to the recurring weekly costs in the post-production budget. Our digital intermediate budget doubled, and our anaglyphic lab costs were completely outside the norm.

 

DCR: How long did shooting take?

 

CG: We shot in 55 days, which was approximately five to 10 percent longer than normal.

 

DCR: What were the biggest surprises for you during the shoot?

 

CG: We faced new surprises every day. Actors had to learn different ways to stand on their mark. The director had to learn to watch his footage on a brand new 3D monitor and to trust visuals that weren't exactly as they were going to be in post-production. Everything had a second layer of "trust" and "interpretation" over it. Thus, the biggest surprise was how well everything came together despite working with completely new technology.

 

We also developed a system to watch the dailies in 3D. With much help from all of our production and post technicians, we were able to set up a screening room just off stage. And we were able to literally take the 4:2:2 tapes out of the recording decks and to the screening room to view dailies from the morning shoot at lunch and then footage from the remainder of the day after we wrapped. The room itself was equipped with two 2K projectors and a 30-feet silver screen. This made it possible for all department heads to quality check, critique and discover any issues (ghosting, vertical/horizontal misalignment, etc.) with the 3D shooting, so that they could correct it immediately. This was an invaluable tool for the filmmakers so that we didn't have any surprises in the post-production process.

 

DCR: Please describe the post-production facility that you built for Journey.

 

CG: We set up four Scratch workstations in the middle of a large, old screening room in Hollywood. We used a double projection system with NEC 2K digital cinema machines and a 25-foot silver screen. We hired our own team: a digital mastering supervisor, a data wrangler, a compositor and a colorist. We then loaded our right eye and left eye HD masters onto a massive hard disk array called Facilis Terablock. We did all of our own VFX reviews and compiled and color-corrected the entire film. It was a necessity because no vendor could provide mastering and color in stereo.

 

The facility turned out to be a great luxury and allowed us to spend great lengths of time there as opposed to a place that charged by the hour. What at first seemed like a costly and complicated technological trap turned out to be an elegant solution. It was a pleasure for the director Eric Brevig, and it allowed the creative team to visit for repeated high-quality 3D screenings and provide ongoing notes.

 

DCR: Talk about the actual process of editing Journey.

 

CG: The editing process was fairly standard and was completed on Avid Meridians. We cut in 2D and conformed HD for our 3D screenings. Most of the time it was a small crew. Editorially, the film is straightforward and linear – it is an exciting narrative journey after all – but we did continually watch it in 3D and maximize the 3D moments as we went along.

 

DCR: How long did/will post take?

 

CG: The length of post was about 15 months.

 

DCR: You've described the movie as "platform agnostic" meaning it can be distributed in several different platforms including Real-D, Dolby 3D, Nu-Vision, dual projector systems and 35mm film Please discuss how you were able to achieve that.

 

CG: We mastered the movie as DPX files—two files, right eye and left eye, for each frame. The files were then processed for the different server configurations necessary for each of the 3D digital platforms. For example, Real-D required a special ghostbusting pass. The difference between each of the files was minimal, but we still spent considerable time loading drives containing the proper formats and then quality checking each pass.

 

In the case of 35mm film, we painstakingly tested all available anaglyphic and non-anaglyphic film solutions. After many months, we picked the best of the bunch—a [trademarked] process called Trioscopics, which we are debuting.

 

DCR: What technologies, if any, would make posting 3D easier?

 

CG: It would have been easier to view cuts in 3D immediately after they’re made, without using a traditional HD conform. Now that we have Scratch working, we would insist on using this powerful tool for 3D screenings right out of editorial. Instant 3D Avid cutting is theoretically possible, but doesn’t make sense on a film where every other shot is a VFX shot. Many VFX shots are temporarily composited in the Avid. Having to do that manually for two eyes slows down the editor too much. Scratch, however, will speed up our 3D screening process greatly. Next time we do this, Scratch will be able to facilitate VFX review in context. After daily prep by the VFX editor, final effects shots can be seen in and out of their place in a scene with the touch of a button.

 

DCR: There is currently a debate between those who believe that 3D is a passing fad yet again and those who believe that digital 3D has staying power this time. Admittedly Journey hasn't been released yet so you can't speak from the perspective of knowing the financial return. But in other ways, in particular creative, as a filmmaker will you work in 3D again?

 

CG: People are always looking for new forms of entertainment and new viewing experiences. We’re finally at the point where exhibitors recognize the box office impact of 3D films and the financial imperative of quickly committing to the digital 3D process. Exhibitors saw the value of 3D with the success of Hannah Montana ($65-plus million U.S. gross to date). For exhibitors, 3D is an important weapon in their battle against increasingly sophisticated home entertainment systems and Internet movie downloads.

 

Creatively, we are always striving to adopt the latest filmmaking technologies to broaden the frontiers of the movie-going experience for audiences of all ages, while displaying fiscal discipline in our approach. While we are actively considering future projects in 3D, there are no immediate plans in the works for another 3D feature film.